Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Initiative

Feasibility Study – Final Report

March 31, 2011

by

with Rod Bilz, David Andersen and

for

Project Contacts

Shaun Karsten Kinghorn Trail Project Coordinator Phone: 807‐629‐4817 Email: [email protected]

Sarah Lewis Economic Development Officer, Town of Nipigon Phone: 807‐887‐3135 (ext 26) Email: [email protected]

Sarah Clowes Economic Development Officer, Town of Red Rock) Phone: 807‐886‐2704 Email: [email protected]

John Cameron Tourism Development Officer, City of Thunder Bay Phone: 807‐625‐3231 Email: [email protected]

Kirsten Spence Ontario Trails Coordinator, Trans Canada Trail s Phone: 705‐746‐1283 Email: [email protected]

Dave Harris Reeve, Dorion Township Phone: 807‐857‐2289 Email: [email protected]

Alana Bishop Councillor, Municipality of Shuniah Phone: (807) 977‐1436 Email: [email protected]

Rick MacLeod Farley Principal Consultant, MacLeod Farley & Associates Phone: 519‐370‐2332 E‐mail: [email protected]

Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Contents

1. Executive Summary...... 1 2. Trail Initiative Context ...... 5 2.1 The Proponents – Nipigon to Thunder Bay ...... 7 2.2 The Trans‐Canada Trail...... 8 2.3 Trail Towns and Business Attraction, Retention & Expansion (BARE) ...... 9 2.4 North of Superior Regional Tourism Evaluation ...... 11 2.5 Thunder Bay Tourism ...... 16 3. Trails Research...... 20 3.1 Best Practice in Destination Trails Development & Marketing...... 20 3.2 Studies of Trail Economic Impacts and BARE Results ...... 26 3.3 Trail Cost Norms – Construction & Operations...... 33 3.4 Trail Governance & Management Best Practice...... 37 4. Project Concept for the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail...... 41 4.1 Inspiration & Direction...... 41 4.2 Trail Type & Uses...... 45 4.3 The Route ...... 48 4.4 Trail Governance & Management ...... 71 5. Feasibility Factors – Findings and Assesments...... 82 5.1 People – Our Findings & Assessment...... 82 5.2 Place – Our Findings & Assessment ...... 91 5.3 Market – our findings and assessment...... 101 5.4 Financials – Our Projections & Assessment ...... 109 6. Feasibility Assessment Conclusion ...... 122 7. Next Recommended Steps ...... 123 8. Annex ...... 124 GAP Trail Towns Brochure...... 125 Newspaper Article – The Unexpected Growth of Business … ...... 132

MacLeod Farley & Associates page ii Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

1. Executive Summary

The potential Kinghorn Rail Trail project is being pursued by Nipigon, Red Rock, Dorion, Shuniah and Thunder Bay. These five communities initiated this Feasibility Study as well as a bridge engineering study which will take place this spring to assess the existing bridges along the route. The five noted communities have established an Ad Hoc committee and a Working Group to pursue the project. MacLeod Farley & Associates were hired to undertake a Feasibility Study in February and March 2011.

The proposed Kinghorn Rail Trail is envisioned as part of the Trans Canada Trail which is scheduled to stretch from the Atlantic to the Pacific by 2017. For the local communities and the region, the potential Kinghorn Rail Trail could become a significant asset for tourism, recreation, health and for business attraction, retention and expansion.

The Feasibility Study Assignment

Our feasibility assessment work consisted of three steps as follows: Step One: Orientation and Initial Research Step Two: Concept Development Step Three: Feasibility Assessment

Step One was completed on schedule on February 26. This included an Initial Research Report dated February 25, 2011.

Step Two (Concept Development) was completed on schedule on March 12. Concept development is central to our approach. We understood the initial concept to be the potential establishment of a trail on the existing CN rail bed which could become part of the Trans Canada Trail system and which would generate economic development benefits. Within our assignment, we have spent a considerable focus on joint concept development with the proponents and involved parties. This has resulted in an exciting and worthwhile project concept.

The work on Step Two included tours of the proposed Kinghorn trail on February 28, project planning sessions and ‘Open House’ events in Nipigon on March 1, and in Thunder Bay on March 2, project meetings on March 3, 2011 and follow‐up concept development work. Step Two led to the current project concept designed to create a ‘destination trail’ capable of attracting trail users from considerable distances in order to maximize benefits for business attraction, retention and expansion and for broader community economic development.

Step Three began on March 14, 2011 and is now complete. This work has included an extensive review of existing trails and case studies, further work on concept development, and viability assessment of people, place, markets and financials. The project concept has been deemed viable in all four respects and overall. This Final Feasibility Study report is the final deliverable required for this assignment.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 1 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Preamble to the Project Concept

The Terry Fox Courage Highway from Nipigon to Thunder Bay marks the final steps in Terry Fox’s courageous Marathon of Hope in 1980. The final steps of Terry’s run took place on September 1, 1980 in Shuniah Township, just east of the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre which overlooks Lake Superior.

In helping to develop the project concept for the Kinghorn Rail Trail from Nipigon to Thunder Bay it struck the authors of this report that there could be no greater inspiration, and no more suitable namesake, than Terry Fox. This idea was proposed during the Joint Planning Sessions the week of February 28 – March 4 in Nipigon and Thunder Bay. The idea was warmly and respectfully received and the concept was then jointly developed further by all those involved. Establishing this proposed rail trail in honour and celebration of Terry Fox can only be pursued, over time, with the approval of the Terry Fox Foundation and with the approval of Terry’s mother Betty Fox.

The Project Concept developed thus far is subject to changes and improvements by the proponents over time. No single element or aspect of the project concept is ‘set in stone’.

Project Concept: The Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail

The Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail is conceived as a destination trail venue that will celebrate the legacy of Terry Fox and help raise funds for the Terry Fox Foundation. Year round, the trail users from far and wide will be inspired and educated through signage, activities, programming and events. The trail will also celebrate the heritage of Lake Superior and have a considerable impact on growing existing businesses and establishing new ones throughout the trail region.

The Terry Fox themed trail experience design, signage and marketing will create demand for guests to come use the trail throughout the year. Users will enjoy the inspiration, education and active trail use at any time they choose to visit and in whatever manner mode is appropriate from non‐motorized summer and assisted accessibility use in the summer (walk, hike, motorized scooter, stroller, run, bike, horseback, etc.) to winter snowmobile use (east of the Mackenzie River).

In addition to providing a major link in the Trans Canada Trail, the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail will provide important linkages to other existing trails and loops (such as the Sleeping Giant Provincial Park trails network), and, in particular, will provide an important direct and safe route for snowmobilers who currently must use a 200km back‐country trail to travel between Thunder Bay and Nipigon.

The Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail will be an attraction and special events venue on a year round basis. A range of special events are anticipated that will use the entire trail or appropriate sections.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 2 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

It is envisioned that the trail will host a variety of outdoor events such as the annual Running with the Giant Marathon, adventure races, cycling races, triathlons (iron kids, try‐a‐tri, sprint, Olympic, 70.2 Ironman or full Ironman), dog‐sled races, cross country ski races and more. Many of these events could be developed from existing events in the region, if desired, and other new events could be developed locally or with outside partners.

A marquee 3‐Day Annual Terry Fox Marathon Event is pictured as the flagship event for the trail. This would be a major running event held for and organized with the Terry Fox Foundation as part of the nation‐wide Terry Fox Run events held every September. Each day of the three day event will feature a marathon distance (42 km) run in honour of Terry Fox. This three day event will gain national and international prominence and attention which will result in increased trail usage year‐round.

The trail route stretches 111 km from the Eastern Trail Head at Gapen’s Pool in Nipigon to the Western Trail Head at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre. Staging areas are envisioned for the Pass Lake Trestle and Red Rock with intermediate and basic access points spread approximately every 6 km along the length of the trail. Terry Fox themed fitness and education challenge nodes will be provided as well as Accessible Parks at the Trail Heads.

The development of the project concept and the overall feasibility assessment has benefited from extensive research into other trails across Canada and the United States including the Great Allegheny Passage, cycling trails in New Brunswick, Quebec and Maine, the Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance, the Victoria Rail Trail (Kawaratha Lakes) and Kettle Valley in B.C.

Feasibility Factors Assessed

Within this report, the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail has been assessed in terms of people, place, market and financials. The conclusion in all four areas is a positive conclusion.

The financial assessment has included detailed preliminary budgets for this $20 million project, the identification of anticipated funding partners, preliminary operating budgets and revenues at about $250,000 per year, as well as detailed economic impacts and more specific impacts with regards to business attraction, retention and expansion.

For the proponent communities and for the funding agencies who will invest in the capital project, the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail is envisioned as an important strategic investment opportunity to establish a unique, world‐class destination trail venue that will generate tourism demand, attract and build small businesses, create on‐going employment and generate increased tax revenues.

Given the tremendous potential of the proposed Terry Fox themed destination trail, in this unique iconic location, it is our professional opinion that the capital budget investments will generate significant financial and other returns for all investors.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 3 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The Feasibility Conclusion

We have found the project to be feasible with regards to all four factors considered (people, place, market and financials).

The overall conclusion of this report is that the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail is a worthwhile project concept that is feasible.

It is our professional opinion that the project is worthy of proceeding to Business Planning as the project has merit for the project proponent communities, for Northern Ontario, for Ontario and for Canada.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 4 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

2. Trail Initiative Context

Since 2010, the Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Tourism Project has been focused on the potential creation of a multi‐use recreational trail extending from Thunder Bay to Nipigon along the CN Kinghorn Line railway bed, which would also from part of the Trans Canada Trail .

The 2005 release of the provincial Ontario Trails Strategy recognizes significant growth in all types of recreational trails uses, and the health and economic benefits of a broad range of trail types. It identifies ways for the provincial government to work with municipalities and trail partners to develop and promote Ontario’s network of trails.

The proposed Kinghorn project trail infrastructure, operations and profits will link, and benefit five participating municipalities, from Thunder Bay to Nipigon, including Red Rock, Dorion and Shuniah, through the provision of employment and other economic opportunities.

Building upon the current tourism branding of Lake Superior and Thunder Bay, this potential new multi‐season destination trail project will complement municipal strategic plans for tourism in the region as well as two national initiatives – the establishment of the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area, and development of the Trans Canada Trail through Northern Ontario. Parks Canada and Trans Canada Trail have recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding, indicating future partnership.

The proposed Trans Canada Trail route using the abandoned CN rail line passes along the shore of the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area (LSNMCA) in the area east of Sleeping Giant Park and south of Nipigon. The LSNMCA has indicated that the visitor appreciation and experience of the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area will be from the adjacent shorelines on land. At more than 10,000 square km, the conservation area is the largest freshwater protected area in the world. Its boundaries extend from Thunder Bay Cape at the tip of Sleeping Giant Provincial Park in the west, north to Gapen’s Pool in Nipigon, east to Bottle Point just beyond Terrace Bay, and south to the mid‐lake Canada‐U.S. border.

Trans Canada Trail Ontario (TCTO) has identified trail development in North‐western Ontario as a priority for the current year and is providing seed money to this project. TCTO has hired Shaun Karsten as a project intern with support from the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corporation to assist with the CN Kinghorn Line Rail Trail Feasibility Study and with the development of a Regional Trails Group.

This proposed trail is a cutting edge concept that is part of a new trend in recreational tourism. It is expected that the Kinghorn Trail would provide a transportation corridor for potential recreation uses including to hiking, biking, cross country skiing, and snowmobiling. The proposed Kinghorn Trail would also create a ‘backbone’ for a broader regional trails network with a potential for business and tourism investment.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 5 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Map showing project location within Ontario

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 6 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

2.1 The Proponents – Nipigon to Thunder Bay

The potential Kinghorn Rail Trail project is being pursued by Nipigon, Red Rock, Dorion, Shuniah and Thunder Bay. These five communities have initiated this Feasibility Study which as well as an engineering study which will take place this spring to assess the existing bridges along the route.

The five noted communities have established an Ad Hoc committee and a Working Group to pursue the project and hired MacLeod Farley & Associates to undertake a Feasibility Study in February and March 2011.

The proposed Kinghorn Rail Trail is envisioned as part of the Trans Canada Trail which is scheduled to stretch from the Atlantic to the Pacific by 2017. The national Trans Canada Trail organization is not a project proponent. However, Trans Canada Trail is an active supporter of the project work to date and is a potential funding source should the project proceed.

The Working Group members are as follows: Sarah Lewis (Economic Development Officer, Town of Nipigon) Sarah Clowes (Economic Development Officer, Town of Red Rock) John Cameron (Tourism Development Officer, City of Thunder Bay) Shaun Karsten (Kinghorn Trail Project Coordinator) Kirsten Spence (Trail Coordinator – Ontario, Trans Canada Trail s)

As part of the Feasibility Study effort to date, there has been outreach to Red Rock First Nation and to Fort William First Nation to share information on the project and invite participation. As well, the Working Group has plans to make contact with other Aboriginal groups in the region to determine any interest in future project involvement. It would be ideal for the Working Group to follow up this initiative over time.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 7 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

2.2 The Trans‐Canada Trail

The Trans Canada Trail (TCT) is the best nationally known brand for trails in Canada. From east to west, it will be 22,000 kilometres in length once it is finished. It is a shared use recreational trail that winds its way through every province and territory, from the Atlantic to Pacific to Arctic Oceans. When completed, it will be the world's longest recreational trail, linking close to 1,000 communities and over 33 million Canadians.

The Trans Canada Trail is a federally registered charitable organization. It does not own or operate any of the trail sections that are registered as part of the Trans Canada Trail. In British Columbia, Quebec and Ontario separate organizations have been incorporated to coordinate the development of the TCT. In most provinces and territories the provincial trails organization is the official partner that is responsible for coordinating the construction and management of the TCT in their region. Two exceptions are Saskatchewan and the Yukon where the provincial / territorial snowmobile associations are the partners.

Most provinces have adopted a volunteer community group model whereby local not‐for‐profit organizations assume responsibility for building and maintaining a section of the trail that is typically 10 - 20 kilometres in length. In order to register a section of trail as part of the TCT, written landowner permission is required. Also, the local trail group must ensure that the TCT has been named as an additional insured on their general liability insurance policy. In many cases the Trans Canada Trail provides a backbone or connectivity for regional trail networks. Its development was a stimulus for the creation of a number of new provincial trail associations and hundreds of new local trail groups.

The Trans Canada Trail is currently about 70% complete if one includes water routes and road links. Up to November 2010 there were over 8,600 kilometres of operational managed trails which make up about half of the total kilometres of registered trail. The other half included 3,438 kilometres of water routes and 4,764 kilometres of road routes. Almost 86% of the managed trails that comprise operational sections of the TCT are located in rural regions of Canada.

There are six preferred trail activities on the Trans Canada Trail: walking / hiking, cycling, horseback riding, cross country skiing, snowmobiling and canoeing. Winter motorized use (snowmobiling) is permitted on about half of the length of the managed trails portion of the Trans Canada Trail other than water and road routes.

In 2004 the Trans Canada Trail obtained $15 million from the Canadian Government to assist with funding for construction of the trail. This money was invested in trail construction through 2011. In October 2010 the Canadian Government announced a new $10 million contribution to assist the TCT to reach its completion goal by 2017.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 8 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

2.3 Trail Towns and Business Attraction, Retention & Expansion (BARE)

The proposed Kinghorn Rail Trail is being viewed as a valuable economic opportunity for the associated communities. In order to ensure that the communities and local entrepreneurs benefit from the potential increase in traffic through their areas, the initiative is benefiting from the “trail town” model from Pennsylvania.

Across Canada, trails have become a fundamental component of a community, no different than water, sewer or transportation services. All levels of government are recognizing the significance of trails, developing trail master plans, linking communities and neighbourhoods together, and creating recreational opportunities for their residents.

Beyond local resident usage and benefits, some communities are pursuing ‘Destination Trails’ which are unique trails capable of attracting users from considerable distances regionally, nationally or internationally. Successful Destination Trails can be core trip motivators or supporting attractions for destinations.

Any trail, long or short, is a valuable asset to a community. It provides free recreation for people of all ages and fitness levels, and offers opportunities to study nature or local history. Long‐distance trails, such as the proposed Kinghorn trail, can be used to attract travelers from outside the local community as well as nearby residents. Studies show that the longer a trail is the farther people will travel to visit it, the longer they will stay, and the more money they will spend. As well, a day‐tripper will spend four times as much as a local user will spend, and an overnight visitor will spend twice the amount that a day‐tripper will spend.

A “Trail Town” is a destination along a long‐distance trail. Whether on a rail trail, towpath, water trail, or hiking trail—trail users can venture off the trail to enjoy the scenery, services, and heritage of the nearby community with its own character and charm. It is a safe place where both town residents and trail users can walk, find the goods and services they need, and easily access both trail and town by foot or vehicle. In such a town, the trail is an integral and important part of the community.

A Trail Town is a vibrant place where people come together. They may do those at places like bike shops, ice cream parlours, casual restaurants, grocery stores, and at other local shops. Trail Towns are known for having wide sidewalks, clean streets, bike racks, and benches at convenient locations. It has places to rest for the night. It generously meets sthe need of both the trail users and the town residents. A Trail Town is a friendly place that encourages trail users to visit and welcomes them with warm hospitality. Trail users want to explore interesting places in their travels and will need services that your town can provide.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 9 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

A trail town approach to developing a destination trail is undertaken in order to maximize the trail impacts on business attraction, retention and expansion (BARE). An effectively implemented trail town model will result in:  The attraction and launch of new businesses in the trail towns and along the trail  The retention of existing businesses  The expansion of new and existing businesses  A more effective and more attractive trail with a greater number of amenities and services, which then leads to further benefits for BARE.

A prime example of the Trail Town concept in action is the program initiated by The Allegheny Trail Alliance in Pennsylvania. The Great Allegheny Passage is a 132‐mile rail‐turned‐trail that has become a main thoroughfare for cyclists seeking winding rivers, peaks and valleys, and heritage‐soaked towns. At last count, the Passage hosted nearly 350,000 visits, generated $7 million in direct spending, and spurred more than 30 new businesses in Somerset County alone. As they say:

These days, biking is more than pedaling, a trail isn't just a path, and a town isn't an obstacle, but an opportunity for adventure. Today's cyclists frequent restaurants, bike shops, grocery stores, pubs, small town shops, laundromats, and delis. They seek a touch of luxury in the form of B&Bs, massage therapy, art galleries, wineries, and visits to sites. Source: http://www.progressfund.org/main.htm

Basic elements of a Trail Town strategy include:  Enticing trail users to get off the trail and into your town  Welcoming trail users to your town by making information about the community readily available at the trail  Making a strong and safe connection between your town and the trail  Educating local businesses on the economic benefits of meeting trail tourists’ needs  Recruiting new businesses or expanding existing ones to fill gaps in the goods or services that trail users need  Promoting the “trail‐friendly” character of the town  Working with neighbouring communities to promote the entire trail corridor as a tourist destination.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 10 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

2.4 North of Superior Regional Tourism Evaluation

Any new tourism attraction builds, in part, upon the existing strengths and weaknesses and marketability of the surrounding region. The Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture utilizes a ‘Premier Ranked Tourist Destination Process’ for regions to evaluate their tourism marketability and their potential within the tourism marketplace.

North of Superior Tourism Association (NOSTA) and Tourism Thunder Bay recently underwent this process which led to a 2008 report called the Premier Ranked Tourist Destination Final Report: North of Superior Tourism Region.

The region was evaluated in three dimensions:

Summary of Premier Ranked Tourist Destination Final Report Findings for North of Superior / Thunder Bay

1. Product

a. Core and Supporting Attractions

 The region has numerous appealing natural and built/managed Core Attractions catering to all market segments and offering, to some degree, year‐round experiences. All of the Core Attractions are linked physically or historically to the region  The region’s Supporting Attractions complement the Core Attractions and offer opportunities for supporting the development of packages and themed routes  Weaknesses in the Core Attractions base include the absence of a Core Attraction in the region itself (outside of Thunder Bay) and a lack of products that can attract visitors in the winter season

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 11 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

 Key opportunities include the development of more festivals and events such as Aboriginal festivals and pow wows as well as the opportunity to develop more learning experiences to complement and extend visits b. Quality and Critical Mass

 By far the greatest percentage of visitors (65.9%) stays longer than a day  The region offers a range of memorable experiences, creating core and on‐theme activities sufficient to sustain tourist interest on a year‐round basis, though primarily in the spring and summer months  While the region offers a range of dining options, most of the higher end experiences are located within Thunder Bay  The region has a number of accredited chefs, however, offering some possibilities to expand the dining offerings  Cultural experiences are more equitably distributed throughout the region  Operators primarily offer "relaxation" but are less inclined to provide opportunities for learning c. Satisfaction and Value

 98.2% of visitors said that they found the region to be hospitable and friendly  Today’s consumers are increasingly demanding quality and demonstrated value. Because North of Superior is more expensive to get to than many other destinations, marketers need to be clear about the value proposition offered to the target markets, emphasizing what is unique and most appealing d. Accessibility

 While vast and remote, Thunder Bay’s position at the centre of Canada offers opportunities to entice those on a cross‐country trip to visit  91.8% of visitors feel that it is easy to travel within the region. Of those who had concerns about travel in the region, comments tended to centre around the following issues: o Delays due to highway and related construction o Not enough (or in many cases not clean enough) rest stops / pull over areas / washrooms o Not enough paved areas for bicycling o Inadequate number of passing lanes o Lack of four‐laned highways o Lack of chain accommodations o Lack of travel centres or not enough travel centres open later

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 12 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

e. Accommodations Base

 The region offers a range of accommodations options but, again, most of the higher end options are found within the City of Thunder Bay

2. Performance

a. Visitation

 The region does not attract a significant share of the total visits to Ontario which included activities relying on the destination’s core attractions classes. This is due to a number of factors, including the region’s isolation from major population centres  The region is, however, an important component of what Ontario can promote to potential visitors, offering authentic outdoor and cultural experiences  The majority of the visitors to the North of Superior region in 2004 were from Ontario, accounting for 67% of the total visitation to the area that year. U.S. visitors accounted for 24% and visitors from other Canadian provinces accounted for 8%  The top five markets to visit the region were Thunder Bay District (49%), Minnesota (7%), Michigan (5%), Wisconsin (3%) and York Regional Municipality (includes Richmond Hill, Newmarket, Vaughan, Aurora)  Business visitors to the region in 2004 contributed 4% of the total visitation. While Thunder Bay currently attracts significant numbers of meetings and conventions and is attempting to capture more with a focused strategy, the region lacks the capacity to host many of these types of events  The region's offering draws from multiple market segments, attracting visitors with different visitor profiles  While the region is a four‐season destination to some extent, visitors are most likely to arrive in the summer months (44%) b. Occupancy and Yield

 Guest visits and expenditures make a net positive and significant contribution to the economy of the North of Superior region. Same‐day and overnight visitors spent $232,107,899 in the North of Superior Region on tourism related expenditures/categories including lodging, food and beverage, transportation, entertainment, and retail during 2006  Spending by both overnight visitors and day trippers is higher than the provincial average. Spending by those on day trips in the region in 2006, for example, was $183.87 compared to $97.18 for the province. Total spending is, however, much lower than the provincial total. Total visitor spending in the region in 2006 was $232,107,899 compared to $17,694,051,216 for the province

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 13 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

c. Critical Acclaim

 North‐western Ontario (and to a somewhat lesser extent the North of Superior region) has long been considered a "must see / must do" location for fishing and hunting products  The region has also gained recognition through the Lake Superior Circle Tour. In addition, Lake Superior itself is a widely‐recognized icon as the world’s largest freshwater lake and the home of the legendary Sleeping Giant, a People’s Choice Winner in the CBC’s recent Seven Wonders of Canada contest  Destination imagery of, and/or text about the North of Superior region or its Core Attraction(s), is used in promoting Ontario  The Canadian Tourism Commission does not list any Northern Ontario experiences in its "Top Things to do in Ontario" section and does not, in fact, appear to discuss Northern Ontario anywhere on its site  Two of the region’s attractions, Fort William Historical Park (Thunder Bay) and Amethyst Mine Panorama (Dorion) have been ranked "Best in Class" or "Top Tier" in consumer or industry rankings

3. Futurity

a. Destination Marketing  Visitors say the region has many strengths including: . Natural beauty, Sleeping Giant, landscapes, scenery, nature, outdoors, forests, Lake Superior . Fishing/hunting . Aboriginal culture . Outdoor recreation . Snowmobiling  Travel to the region has recently been declining but future demand for Northern Ontario products has been predicted in several reports  The regional DMO is North of Superior Tourism Association, funded at a level of $450,000 with about 45% allocated towards marketing/communications.  North of Superior Tourism Association is currently finalizing its 2009‐2011 Regional Strategic Business Plan and Marketing Plan. The focus of this plan is primarily on marketing, tracking and membership recruitment.  There are also numerous municipal DMOs in the region including Tourism Thunder Bay  In order to assess the progress of the marketing plan, NOSTA has established a marketing measurement system  68% of tourism operators in the North of Superior region provide customer service training programs

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 14 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

b. Product Renewal

 33.5% of the businesses who responded to the survey reported that their business had decreased but considerable reinvestment and new investment is nonetheless still occurring in the region to enhance, revitalize or develop facilities relevant to the quality of the tourist experience  The largest percentage had invested between $10,000 and $50,000 in the last two years  A considerable number (8.1% and 11.3% respectively) had invested over one million dollars  There are numerous examples both in Thunder Bay and the region of the Core Attractions making investments to enhance their appeal to visitors and their ability to attract new visitors c. Carrying Capacity

 66.3% of all tourism operators surveyed say that they have enough of a trained labour pool to support their business over the longer term  Guest surveys confirm satisfaction with hospitality and service; 98.2% of visitors surveyed assessed the region as being "hospitable and friendly"  Carrying capacities of the natural systems that sustain local ecosystems and quality of life are not overwhelmed by destination visitation particularly in light of the fact that visitation has been in decline recently  In addition, it is widely believed that there are no current issues around water treatment and delivery, sewage treatment and trunk and road, transit (where offered), parking and trail capacity to accommodate current and projected levels of visitation, at least in the short to mid‐term  Overall overcrowding, overuse, diminished quality of the environment or diminished quality of the guest experience are not being raised as issues by guests surveys or by managers of facilities and resources  Visitors to the region have expressed concerns about some aspects of the region’s infrastructure including roads and rest stops  There is considerable political will throughout North‐western Ontario, including the North of Superior Region, to develop tourism. This is evidenced by the recent creation of the North‐western Ontario Regional Tourism Council under The North‐ western Ontario Common Voice Initiative

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 15 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

2.5 Thunder Bay Tourism source: City of Thunder Bay 2010 Tourism Strategy

Tourism Thunder Bay has a strategy to successfully position the city as one of Canada’s best outdoor cities and a leader in urban sustainable tourism. Tourism Thunder Bay is built, in part, upon the City’s strong Superior by Nature brand, taking advantage of the City’s unique location on the shore of the world’s largest freshwater lake while being located just minutes from the world’s largest boreal forest.

Since the spring of 2009 they have been operating a highly effective It’s in our Nature campaign. This has resulted in positive benefits for local attractions and stable hotel and border crossing performance.

Recognizing current trends in tourism that see outdoor activity as the single most important travel motivator for the North American markets, the city has built strong relationships with the region and with outside agencies such as Ontario Tourism Marketing Partnership Corporation, Parks Canada and Ontario Parks. They have capitalized on the iconic natural environment located on the door step of the city and have encouraged avid outdoor adventure seekers to consider the city as a gateway or “base camp” for their exploration. The overall outdoor theme has been successfully woven into the urban visitor experiences and into the conference and sport tourism segments as well.

Thunder Bay’s Tourism Strategy combines pragmatic approach to segmentation and market focus while allocating resources annually to develop new markets through highly leveraged partnerships. The city’s strategy is based extensively on consumer research in all segments, leading with the best and most iconic experiences and matching those experiences with the appropriate travel markets. There is a significant emphasis on avid experience seekers versus the traditional geographic destination seekers, and this market is being strategically grown through innovative campaigns utilizing strategic web and experience based print media.

Tourism Thunder Bay continues to lead Canadian municipal tourism organizations in the integration of Web 2.0 technologies into its marketing and communications strategies, including social platforms and blogs.

Leisure The 2010 focus was on a number of sub categories within the leisure market that deliver the best possible opportunities for the city to grow its tourism economy. The Leisure market focus shifted more towards experiential based markets than geographic, linking some of the city and region’s iconic experiences to the specific markets, utilizing web and print based targeted media and travel media support. This recognizes consumer travel motivations and targets avid “trophy” experience seekers more likely to pick the city because of its experiences rather than strictly its geographic proximity to their home.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 16 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Leading the 2010 tourism campaign was a pair of contest based experiential campaigns. “Seven Days with the Giant” enters its third year as a viral online campaign that generates interest among the North American sustainable tourism adventure seeker by offering a week long trip for 4 to Thunder Bay for an $18,000 experience.

With respect to the massive regional angling market, Tourism Thunder Bay has partnered with OTMPC and Porter Air to deliver the Canada’s Great Outdoors begins in Canada’s Great Outdoor City campaign, encouraging avid outdoor markets to consider Thunder Bay as a gateway city and to utilize Porter’s new flight services from Midway connecting to Thunder Bay.

Touring The city’s position on the Lake Superior Circle Tour draws upon a market of over 35 million North Americans (11 million of which are passport holders) who live within the 12 hour drive of the city. An increased partnership with AAA and CAA has shown increases in traffic among auto travelers, a steady demand in the RV market and growth in the motorcycle touring market. New partnerships currently being fostered with OTMPC and Motorcycling Canada will assist in growing promotional campaigns to expand this growing market trend. Tourism Thunder Bay is also an active partner in the North of Superior Marina Marketing Association with a goal to increasing recreational boating, yachting and super yachting around the community.

Gateway Capitalizing upon the city’s strategic location along the Trans Canada, head of the seaway, head of the I‐35/highway 61 corridor and Thunder Bay International Airport, Tourism Thunder Bay has developed a highly leveraged partnership with OTMPC and Porter Airlines to draw avid outdoor adventure seekers to the region through the city, creating programs and incentives to encourage increased retention within the community. This year’s “Canada’s Great Outdoors Begins in Canada’s Great Outdoor City” campaign reaches into the Chicago metropolitan market from January to June 2010, rebuilding brand awareness into a market once bountiful to the Thunder Bay market but suffered declines after 2001 due to budget reductions and a mistaken belief that the US market would not travel post 911.

Visiting Friends & Relatives (VFR) With over 26% of visitors coming to the city, Tourism has development inroads with the local community to place information into the homes of local residents and encourage them to act as Ambassadors. An expanded Visitor Experience publication and web presence combine to create tools for local residents to access. The placement of materials in local retail and grocery outlets during peak VFR times has proven to drive new business to local attractions.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 17 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Group Touring Tourism Thunder Bay’s newest asset, a Transport Canada certified passenger marine terminal, is located minutes from down town Thunder Bay and has already seen 12 vessel visits, with an additional 14 confirmed through to 2012. Tourism Thunder Bay is a regional leader in the development of the Great Lakes expedition cruise shipping market with a goal of creating new infrastructure and linking existing community assets to be positioned as a hub as this growing trend in cruising takes note of the Lake Basin and assets such as the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area.

The tourism division is currently working with a number of tour operators with access to the European outdoor adventure markets, promoting wildlife safari’s, fly in angling, equestrian and motor sport touring packages that utilize Thunder Bay as the hub, ensuring local transportation, accommodation, culinary and retail partners benefit.

Meetings, Conventions and Incentive Travel (MC&IT) The city’s strategic location as a regional service hub for health sciences, education, Aboriginal business, mining, government and transportation, combined with the exceptional airlift capacity of Thunder Bay International Airport, creates a unique strategic advantage to the traction of meeting, convention and incentive travel markets to the city. With a current single room capacity of 600 persons and over 165 meeting rooms in the community, the city is well positioned to continue the trend towards small to medium convention hosting that draws primarily upon the regional market. Strong representation from Air Canada Jazz, Westjet, Bearskin and Wasaya Airlines as well as recent additions to the airlift capacity to the city from Porter and Delta Airlines, increase the city’s strategic advantage as a host for Provincial, National and International corporate events.

Sport Tourism Tourism Thunder Bay released a new sport tourism strategy in 2009 that focuses strongly on going product development around bidding for new events, supporting the development of new local sport tourism events and financial support towards new and recurring sport events. As a regional hub, the city plays host to dozens of regional tournaments annually, spanning hockey, baseball, soccer, football, golf, curling and running. The City strategy supports a minimum of one new bid annually and the development of a minimum of one new event. The city capitalizes upon its impressive recreational infrastructure and one window approach to city services as a key driver in attracting new events. The results of efforts to date have resulted in the 2010 World Junior Baseball Championships and the 2011 Ontario Winter Special Olympics being held in the community. The City is a founding organizer and presenting sponsor of the inaugural 2010 Miles with the Giant – Thunder Bay Marathon which attracted 846 athletes from locales including Kenya, Sweden, the US and Canada.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 18 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Media Support Tourism Thunder Bay continues to play an aggressive role in the development of media relationships with experience focused travel media, generating approximately $750 000 in annual earned media in web, radio, television and print based media outlets. Recent efforts have resulted in articles appearing on CNN.com/travel, Up! Magazine and Lake Superior Magazine.

The City participates in the Ontario’s North marketing collective to focus leveraged resources towards group travel, travel media and leisure touring markets in southern Ontario, Manitoba and U.S. border states that benefit all five members.

Visitor Services Tourism Thunder Bay continues with its management of its two main tourism information and fulfillment centers.

The Terry Fox Centre, open 360 days annually continues to be the main consumer contact centre. This centre is on the site of the Terry Fox Monument, commemorating the location where, in 1980, Mr. Fox was forced to end his cross Canada run to raise funds for cancer research. Given the global significance of this site, it attracts in excess of 67 000 visitors annually. The centre also processes over 15 000 telephone and email visitor information requests and 33 000 conference delegate packages annually.

The City also participates in several visitor contact centre partnerships in the United States. The City’s information is featured in the Grand Marais Visitor Centre through a reciprocal partnership program and in the Fort William Historical Park Canada Gateway Centre, located on highway 61 south of Grand Marais.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 19 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

3. Trails Research 3.1 Best Practice in Destination Trails Development & Marketing

Great Allegheny Passage (GAP) Rail Trail

One of the most successful examples of destination trail development and marketing is the Great Allegheny Passage (GAP) centred in Pennsylvania. The GAP rail‐trail offers 135 miles of hiking and biking between Cumberland, MD, and Duquesne, PA, near Pittsburgh. In 2007, it was the first trail to be named to the Rails‐to‐Trails Conservancy’s Hall of fame. In 2009, it was named one of”10 Great American Bike Trails” by Forbes Traveller.

In 1978, the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, on behalf of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, purchased 26 miles of the railroad in the Yough Gorge from Connellsville to Confluence. Nine miles of trail from Ohiopyle to Ramcat, near Confluence, were opened in 1986. This was the best possible advertisement for the rails‐to‐trails movement; people flocked to it by the thousands, then hundreds of thousands.

Rail trail groups formed all along the corridor and it became apparent that a continuous trail was possible from Pittsburgh to Cumberland to Washington, DC. A Trail Summit was held in September, 1995. The consensus of the Summit was that the contiguous trail organizations should unite and the Allegheny Trail Alliance was born.

In 2001, the trail was christened the Great Allegheny Passage with its now logo, and later in the year 100 continuous miles were opened from Meyersdale to McKeesport. The GAP trails are very user friendly, and offers level walking and riding for people of all ages and experience levels. GAP has an extensive marketing program and a strong internet presence.

Trail Grade and Surface The trail has a packed crushed limestone surface for a smooth ride. Built mainly on abandoned rail beds, the trail is nearly level with the average grade of less than 1%. The steepest eastbound grade ‐ 0.8% ‐ is from Harnedsville to Markleton and Garrett to Deal. The steepest westbound grade is from Cumberland to Deal at 1.75%. Near the Big Savage Tunnel, the trail crosses the Eastern Continental Divide. From that point going east, the trail drops 1,754 feet in 24 miles to reach Cumberland and, going west, it drops 1,664 feet in 126 miles to reach Pittsburgh.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 20 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

GAP rail trail maps

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 21 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Great Allegheny Passage (GAP) web site

GAP has an impressive and comprehensive web site. GAP offers information to its users on trail conditions, events, rides, on‐line maps and retails GAP merchandise. Please see www.atatrail.org.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 22 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Saint John River Cycling Trail & Québec’s Route verte for cyclists

The St John River Valley Cycling route follows a 467 kilometre long corridor that traverses the Province of New Brunswick from north to south beginning in the Edmunston area and ending at the city of Saint John. The route uses existing trails, secondary highways and local municipal roads.

In its Master Plan, the project is gauged in terms of its “project leadership” – in terms of those qualities required to attract attention in the market, through media, word of mouth, effective advertising and increasingly though social media and web based discussions, references etc.

To assess what a market leader in the cycle tourism market might be like, the planners reviewed the top 7 cycle tourism destinations in Canada as listed by the Destinations Canada web site. These are:

 Confederation Trail (PEI)  Kettle Valley Railway Trail (BC)  Avalon Peninsula (NL)  Gaspé Peninsula (PQ)  Véloroute des Bleuets (PQ)  Gulf Islands (BC)  Golden Triangle (BC)

The resulting evaluation of these products in terms of “market match” looks at the three core factors that are considered essential criteria needed for bicycle tourism: 1. Beautiful scenery that is continuous and varied throughout the route 2. Roads and pathways that are bike friendly. 3. Unique cultural environment with interesting historical and heritage characteristics

It is not surprising, given these criteria, that three of the top destinations are in BC, and most involve either mountains or large bodies of water.

In comparison to these top cycling destinations the Saint John route came out relatively favourably, and it may be assumed then that the Kinghorn route is at least as good a “market match.” Certainly it can hold its own when it comes to scenery and to cultural and heritage characteristics. And, with the completion of the rail bed conversion it will rank with the best in terms of bike friendliness – much more so than other routes that are dependent on roadways.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 23 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

It should be noted as well that the two Quebec trails mentioned above are part of that province’s “Route verte,” which comprises 4,000 kilometres of bikeways linking the various regions of Québec. A powerful catalyst for the development of cycling, the Route verte carries on a tradition that has led to development of the world’s greatest cycling routes:  Denmark’s national cycle routes;  the National Cycle Network in Great Britain;  the Danube and Rhine bikeways (crossing five countries);  the greenways and bikeways developed in the United States by the Rails‐to‐Trails Conservancy and Adventure Cycling, and in Europe through the Eurovelo initiative.

The north end of the Saint John trail is also being treated as an extension of the adjacent Route verte.

The proponents of the Saint John Trail and the Route verte route and others recognize that cycling is a fast growing pursuit among recreational tourists.

The “cyclotourist” marketplace has been segmented by the Route verte proponents in this way:  Athletic cyclotourists: tourists who travel primarily to cycle.  Vacationing cyclotourists: tourists for whom cycling is one of several activities.  Excursionists: people who take trips over 80 kilometres long but lasting less than 24 hours (without an overnight stay).  Route‐side residents: people who live near the Route verte.

The emphasis that Quebec has placed on promoting cycling has had a significant impact on the habits of its citizens, so that:  Over 2.5 million cyclists in Québec use their bicycles at least once a week, which represents one out of three people between the ages of 18 and 74 (1.8 million adults), and two out of three of those aged 6 to 17 (750,000 children).  Québec has proportionally almost three times as many committed cyclists as the United States but only half as many as the Netherlands and Denmark.  On average, Québec cyclists pedal 54 km per week during the summer, for a total of 785 km per year; in 2005, they passed the mark of two billion kilometres cycled!

Cycling is among the most popular leisure activities in Québec:  cyclists spend an average of 3.8 hours per week on their bikes.  their main reasons for doing so are pleasure (90% of cyclists), exercise (89%) and the opportunity to engage in an activity as a family (81%)  Québec had over 91 active cycling clubs with upwards of 11,000 members in 2005.  62,000 people took part in one or several of the 41 one‐day outings for the general public, while another 6,500 cycling enthusiasts registered for 12 athletic outings, including 8 increasingly popular competitive events.  the total number of kilometres covered by the various participants remains as impressive as in 2000, with five million kilometres cycled in 14 regions of Québec.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 24 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

 competitive cycling comprises at least 129 clubs and 7,000 racers. Road and mountain‐ bike specialists combined, this group participates in 300 events on an annual basis in Québec.

Bicycle Tourism in Maine

The State of Maine also recognizes the positive economic impact its bicycle routes have on its economy. Maine commissioned an extensive study of cycling in 2001. Of the many findings of its study, Bicycle Tourism in Maine: Economic Impacts and Marketing (2001), those most relevant to the Kinghorn project include:

 Bicycling was an activity for 5 percent of those that took an overnight pleasure trip to Maine

 Bicycling was an activity for two percent of all those taking day trip visits to Maine

 Bicycling is an important sector of the existing tourism market in Maine. It is a primary activity for a significant number of tourists and complements other activities and attractions by a very large number of tourists.

Surveys, conducted to support this study, estimated the spending by cycle tourists. The surveys found that:

 tourists that considered cycling as just an activity and not the main focus of their vacation spent an average of $25 per day related to cycling, on the days where cycling was an activity

 cycling tourists that were on full day or multi‐day tours spent an average of $55 per day if they were on self guided tours and $115 per day if they were on guided tours

 The study used an expenditure multiplier 1.84 to estimate the direct and indirect economic impact of the cycling expenditures. In other words, $1 of expenditure by a cyclist had an impact of $1.84 in total economic activity.

Source: Saint John River Cycling Trail Draft Master‐plan, 2008

All the above information is important in two ways for the Kinghorn project: 1. there is a potential demand from Quebec cyclotourists to experience the Terry Fox Courage Trail, and 2. there may be similar opportunities in Ontario markets and in US markets south of Thunder Bay as cycling continues to make gains in popularity.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 25 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

3.2 Studies of Trail Economic Impacts and BARE Results

Recent studies in Canada and the US indicate that trails of all types have significant economic benefits for local communities that support them. There us a strong business case for public investment in trail infrastructure.

Business attraction, retention and expansion is a major driver for the Kinghorn initiative. Economic impacts of trail initiatives comparable to the Kinghorn project are well documented in two highly relevant instances. Information in this section has been excerpted and/or summarized from three economic impact studies:  The 2004 Trans Canada Trail Ontario “Economic Impact Analysis”  The 2009 “Great Allegheny Passage Economic Impact Study”  The 2001 “Bicycle Tourism in Maine: Economic Impacts and Marketing”

2004 Trans Canada Trail Ontario Economic Impact Projections Study

The economic value of trails was demonstrated in great detail by the 2004 “Trans Canada Trail Ontario Impact Analysis” prepared by Price Waterhouse Coopers. This report analyzed actual trail economic impacts and then made projections for trail user expenditures and impacts over the length of the proposed Trans Canada Trail that will reach from coast to coast.

The projected economic benefits quantified in the 2004 report include those generated for regional specific and Ontario overall economies as a result of the one‐time construction costs, the annual local and non‐local (i.e. visitor) user non‐durable expenditures, trail maintenance costs for the Trans Canada Trail in Ontario and user expenditures for durable goods (e.g. equipment, clothing) associated with activity use on the Trail.

This report demonstrated the economic benefits of both motorized and non‐motorized trails in terms of direct, indirect and induced spending associated with trail activities (products and services, rentals, accommodation, and other tourism‐related business), associated tax revenues collected and employment generated in related business and service sectors.

Research on the benefits of the Trans Canada Trail currently constructed in Ontario indicates that each kilometre of long‐distance trail provides the following benefits:  supports 10 full‐time jobs;  generates $256,000 in total tax revenue on a recurrent basis;  yields one‐time construction related tax benefits of $50,000 per kilometre built.

Their research also showed that property values on or adjacent to trail networks increase in value, generally selling higher than those located further away.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 26 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The 2004 report also looked at taxes generated by trail development and operations. The provincial government is the largest beneficiary of taxes generated by trail‐related spending activity (49.5%), followed by federal government (37.0%) and municipal government (13.5%).

North‐western Ontario – Projected Impacts of the Trans Canada Trail (TCT)

The Price Waterhouse Coopers report looked specifically at the positive economic impacts expected for North‐Western Ontario. The following figures are from their report which drew from various sources such as Environics survey for actual trail users in the region (existing trails), Statistics Canada Canadian Travel Survey and International Travel Survey, information from regional TCT Ontario reps, and previous economic impact studies for non‐local users. Here are the projected impacts based on completion of the Trans Canada Trail in Northwestern Ontario.

Projected Trans Canada Trail usage (# of user days) in the Thunder Bay region:

hikers: local – 721,840 non‐local – 9,817 total – 731,656

cyclists: local – 577,356 non‐local – 3,756 total – 581,112

snowmobilers: local – 253,048 non‐local – 14,562 total – 267,610

cross‐country skiers: local – 27,492 non‐local – 1,241 total – 28,733

total user days: local – 1,579,735 non‐local – 29,376 total – 1,609,111

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 27 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Annual Projected Expenditures (non‐construction) for Thunder Bay region:

non‐durable expenditures $45,485,231 expenditures on durable goods $10,737,625 trail maintenance $ 1,342,515 total of all recurrent expenditures $57,565,371

Projected Tax Impacts of the Trans Canada Trail in North‐Western Ontario

Projected taxes generated for non‐durable expenditures:

federal – $6,519,846 provincial – $15,674,487 local – $4,280,637 total – $26,474,970

Projected tax impact of expenditures on durable goods:

federal – $1,944,386 provincial – $1,264,575 local – $262,817 total – $3,471,778

Projected tax impact of trail maintenance:

federal – $292,640 provincial – $247,191 local – $76,840 total – $616,671

Projected total tax impact of all recurrent expenditures:

federal – $8,756,872 provincial – $17,186,253 local – $4,620,294 total – $30,563,419

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 28 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

BARE Results Generated by the Great Allegheny Passage (GAP) Rail Trail & the GAP Trail Town Program

The GAP Trail Town Program is an economic development and community revitalization initiative for businesses along the Great Allegheny Passage trail. The Allegheny Trail Alliance (ATA) developed the Trail Town concept with funding support from Pennsylvania's Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and planning and fund raising assistance from The Progress Fund. The pairing of the ATA with The Progress Fund (comparable to our Community Futures Development Corporations) has proven highly effective. This lender has support a various business expansions and new business start‐ups along the trail.

The GAP Trail Town Program goals are: 1. Retain existing businesses 2. Expand eand increas revenues of existing businesses 3. Recruit sustainable new businesses 4. Adopt the Trail Town vision of revitalized trailside communities along the Great Allegheny Passage and integrate its concept of a visitor‐friendly environment into overall community planning

The Progress Fund’s Trail Town Program, along with the local Visitors Bureau and the Allegheny Trail Alliance (ATA) contracted a firm to conduct three phases of research aimed as discovering the economic impact that the completion of the trail has had on the trail towns and businesses located near or along the trail:  Phase I, economic impact research among businesses located on and around the trail (completed in 2008)  Phase II, marketing research among trail users (conducted throughout 2008)  Phase III, follow‐up economic impact research among businesses (completed in 2009).

In summary, the findings of the economic impact studies are as follows:  On average, business owners indicated that one‐quarter of their gross revenue was directly attributed to trail users and two‐thirds reported that they experienced at least some increase in gross revenue because of their proximity to the trail. Over one‐ quarter of all businesses that were surveyed mentioned that they have or plan to either expand their operations or hire additional staff because of the impact of the trail.

o Generally speaking, lodging/hotel establishments and outdoor/trail related businesses reported the largest increases in their estimated annual revenue compared to the other business types. o On average, businesses located in Fayette County, Somerset County, and Allegany County, MD provided the highest estimation in regard to the percentage of their gross annual revenue that could be directly attributed to the trail.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 29 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

GAP 2008 – economic impact results highlights

 In 2007, it was projected that trail businesses on or around the trail received $32,614,703 in receipts and paid their employees $6,273,927 in wages to accommodate trail generated business. o These receipt projections were four‐times larger, and the wage figures were over six‐times larger, than the levels reported in 1998 ($7,960,546 and $984,778; respectively).  Trail attributed receipts for 2007, calculated only among those businesses surveyed in Phase I, totalled $11,990,990 and these trail businesses contributed to their local economies by paying $2,078,956 worth of wages to their employee’s for attending to this consumer group.  Respondents indicated that one‐quarter (25.5%) of their 2007 gross revenue could be attributed to trail users and nearly two thirds (64.4%) reported that they experienced at least some increase in gross revenue because of their proximity to the trail.  Within the next year, about one‐third (32.4%) mentioned that they have or plan to expand their business operations and/or services they offer because of the impact they felt from the trail. o Expansions/additions to facilities and/or services were reported by outdoor/trail related businesses, restaurants, and lodging/hotel establishments most often.  The most popular expansions/additions to facilities and/or services were: o Increasing advertising efforts (in publications and along the trail) o Offering shuttle service for customers o Providing bike parking/accommodations o Increasing staff

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 30 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

GAP 2009 – economic impact results highlights

The significant positive economic influence that was demonstrated by the findings in the previous phase was confirmed once again in 2008. Overall, respondents reported a slight increase in estimated gross revenue from 2007 to 2008 (4.6%) and excluding retail, slight to significant increases were reported among each of the remaining business types.

 Increases in receipts were most dramatic among lodging/hotel establishments (22.7%) and outdoor/trail related businesses (20.4%). Furthermore, considering the average wage expenditure used in receipt calculation*, the 2008 businesses are stimulating local economies by putting $2,293,234 worth of wages back into the surrounding trail communities through their employees.

Similar to 2007, respondents indicated that approximately one‐quarter (23.3%) of their gross revenue could be attributed to trail users and two‐thirds (66.4%) reported that they experienced at least some increase in gross revenue because of their proximity to the trail. Not surprisingly, although slightly lower than 2007, over half (51.7%) of the 2008 respondents reported that the trail had at least some influence on their choice of a viable location for their business. The trail’s positive impact was not only displayed through trends in revenue and reported influence on choosing a location, although slightly lower than the level observed in Phase I, nearly one‐quarter (23.3%) of the Phase III respondents reported that they have or plan to expand their operations within the next year because of impact felt from the trail.

 Similar to Phase I, this figure was again driven primarily by outdoor/trail related businesses (37.5%) and restaurants (32.4%).

Moreover, Phase III respondents mentioned investing more heavily in advertising (specifically in publications and/or by actually placing signs on the trail), offering shuttle services for customers, providing bike parking accommodations (such as bike racks/storages/garages) and increasing their staff. Overall the trail is not only positively affecting these businesses and towns on the whole, but is doing so noticeably enough that it is motivating the individual businesses to expand their marketing and client services with good success.

The study authors thought it worthwhile for GAP could attract even more additional business to the trail towns and/or encourage currents businesses to further embrace the trail system and its possibilities, by increasing communications and promotions about the successful impacts to that date with business attraction, retention and expansion. They encouraged a variety of possible techniques including business testimonials for trail books/magazines and relevant websites and message boards.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 31 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

A Summary of BARE Impacts from GAP

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 32 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

3.3 Trail Cost Norms – Construction & Operations Trail Construction Costs in General Trail development cost estimates can very according to final design elements. At the base level is the cost of refurbishing the rail bed to meet trail standards for general usage (e.g. summer hiking, biking; winter snowmobiling). Basic refurbishing includes any required grading of the surface ballast, adding ‘A’ or ‘B’ gravel, and adding a compacted layer of 5 cm stone dust or fines. Some parts of the trail (those within urban areas, for example) may want an asphalt surface. The 2004 TCTO Economic Impact Analysis included tables detailing the costs of various trail designs. Estimated costs from that study related to trail construction are included below (do not include amenities such as signage, benches, etc.)

Rail Trail – 3.5m wide asphalt

General Description & Assumptions: 2  6.0m RoW (6000m /km) 2  3.5m asphalt (3500m /km)  assumes minimal obstructions and only minor grading required along length of RoW  centre line painting  constructed within 10km of urban centre

Cost Estimates:  site grading, levelling and compaction 9,000/km 2  3.5m wide asphalt path ($30/m ‐ including granular base) 105,000/km  culvert/drainage structure upgrades (5/km) 4,000/km total – trail only 118,000/km

Rail Trail – 3.5m wide granular

General Description & Assumptions: 2  6.0m RoW (6000m /km) 2  3.5m granular (3500m /km)  assumes minimal obstructions and only minor grading required along length of RoW  constructed outside 10km radius of urban centre

Cost Estimates:  site grading, levelling and compaction 9,000/km 2  3.5m wide granular path ($15/m ‐ including granular base) 52,500/km  culvert/drainage structure upgrades (5/km) 4,000/km total – trail only 65,500/km

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 33 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Trail Operational Costs in General

Trail maintenance is one of the major operational costs and is a reflection of the trail design, use and environmental conditions. A well‐designed trail that carefully limits the usage will have significantly lower maintenance costs. For example, the Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance indicated that their annual cost for trail maintenance for trails without ATV use was less then 50% of the costs for trails with ATVs.

The Rails to Trails Conservancy also produces an excellent document entitled, Rail‐Trail Maintenance and Operation – Ensuring the future of Your Trail (2005). Trail ownership is often tied very closely to trail maintenance. Some of the most successful trails are owned by some sort of government entity but are maintained by a not‐for‐profit trail organization. In the case of the Kinghorn Rail Trail, the ownership of the corridor will remain with CN but there may be an opportunity for a shared municipal responsibility for the lease agreement while a volunteer‐ based not‐for‐profit trails organization looks after the maintenance of the trail. This creates a very beneficial partnership since the not‐for‐profit group can avoid liability issues of land ownership or lease agreements and the municipal partners benefit from lower costs for maintenance in part through the use of a volunteer base.

One hundred case studies were examined in the above‐noted document. Only 39 of the 100 case studies reported lump sum figures for trail maintenance. Often trails are maintained as part of the budget for parks and recreation departments of municipalities and the direct costs associated with the trail cannot be easily separated from the rest of the maintenance costs. Also since a lot of the maintenance is undertaken by volunteers, the costs are often not well‐ documented since the volunteer groups are more focused on the actual maintenance activities as opposed to the accounting activities associated with the cost of the maintenance. However, of the 39 rail trails that did provide lump sum cost, the average was reported at just under $1500 per mile of trail regardless of surface type. This equates to about $950 per kilometre of trail or a total of $105,450 for the entire 111km length of the Kinghorn Trail on an annual basis. (This $950 per kilometre figure is very close to the approximate figures provided by Kirsten Spence of Trans Canada Trail at about $1000 per kilometre annually).

About 60% of the case study trails were maintained by a government agency by paid staff at an average rate of $2000 per mile of trail annually, while the volunteer‐maintained trails (40% of the case studies) cost just under $700 per mile of trail annually. Obviously labour costs are a significant portion of the annual operations.

A key question is how to pay for trail maintenance and sustain it for the long‐term? Federal and provincial funding sources typically do not fund maintenance and operations of trails. The average trail surface will last about 12 years. Asphalt trails typically cost about 40% more than non‐asphalt trails to construct. However, the annual maintenance cost of asphalt trails is generally 20% lower than the unpaved trails.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 34 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Initially, the cost of a paved trail may seem prohibitive but the annual savings in maintenance over the life span of the trail surface may be in excess of the initial extra costs. The other key consideration is that it is typically more difficult to raise funds for maintenance costs whereas federal and provincial funding sources typically will provide for initial capital costs and perhaps even occasional costs in the future when re‐surfacing is required.

There are no easy solutions to the long‐term sustainability of maintenance funding. The following concepts and ideas are suggested:

 Establish a long‐term maintenance endowment  Raise funds regionally for a large trail or trail network rather than for individual trails  Place trail ownership in municipal bodies, rather than with not‐for‐profit ownership  Get support from tourism and recreation taxes and fees where applicable

The last point above is an important one. Trails are a very important economic driver. Legislators, tourism agencies, chamber of commerce and private business owners need to recognize their benefits and trail managers/operators need to do a better job documenting these benefits.

The average number of trail users in the case studies was 136,986 trail users per trail per year. The study indicated that the majority of trail users are 45 years of age and older with above average income and education. They are able and willing to spend money on lodging, meals, sports equipment and other associated purchases. This economic activity supports local businesses and generates tax revenues which should in turn have a mechanism that flows back into the maintenance of the trail.

The Rail‐Trail Maintenance and Operation – Ensuring the future of Your Trail (2005) document has a very detailed maintenance schedule in it that can be adopted and adapted to meet the needs of the Kinghorn Rail Trail.

There are as many operational models as there are rail trails. However, the Paint Creek Trail in Oakland County, Michigan has been recognized as a model for success. A Trailway Commission was formed by representatives from the various municipalities the trail crosses or services. The Commission follows a range of cost management strategies. Each participating community contributes a share to the operational budget and provides unique in‐kind services including sign making, office space, payroll services and meeting locations. The Commission also uses a licence agreement policy with utility companies instead of granting easements to generate annual and sustainable revenues while protecting the trail right‐of –way. This is a very similar situation to the Kinghorn Trail where the corridor crosses or services a group of municipal entities that would share both the benefits and costs associated with the maintenance and operation of the trail.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 35 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The annual operating costs for trails often includes general liability costs but there could be additional insurance costs depending on the model used for the maintenance and operation of the trail. General liability costs for trails are very low. Many municipalities include their trails under their general liability policy for no additional cost. If there is a direct cost for trail general liability, the premiums are generally in the range of just $500 annually.

Other types of insurance are sometimes applicable that could include:  Non‐owned automobile liability for liability in excess of the auto owner’s limits for work associated with your organization’s property or facilities;  Property and owned assets insurance covers buildings and personal property if any are part of the operation or maintenance of the trail;  Volunteer worker accident insurance;  Workplace Safety and Insurance Board coverage for paid staff;  Association or directors and officers liability insurance

Here are several key elements for developing a successful trail management entity and keeping operational costs under control:

 Collaboration and Cooperation. A collaborative planning process takes time but yields substantial benefits. The process involves various stages such as research and data collection, stakeholder engagement and broad public consultation. The time spent in the planning process will reap benefits when it comes time to develop shared ownership and responsibility for the trail.

 Solid Research. Strong strategies include extensive research and detail the current state of trails, trail users, recreation and tourism trends and the value of trails to communities. This research is critical in demonstrating the benefits of trails to potential funders whether it be government or private sector sources.

 Good Planning and Cohesive Leadership. Committees and working groups with good representation within different interest groups and regions including government participation typically will deliver legitimacy and financial support to the development process.

 Collaboration is the Result of Consultation. Public consultation is key to developing a successful strategy for the maintenance and operation of the trail. A comprehensive group will bring together common challenges and solutions.

 Future Decision‐Making. The identification of lead organizations solidifies support for strategy implementation. These strategies often identify new partnerships and working arrangements that can serve as a means for future decision making.

The collaborative approach taken to date by the Working Group for the Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail project is consistent with the above points, and bodes well for successful development.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 36 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

3.4 Trail Governance & Management Best Practice

There are a number of different models of trail governance and management. In this section we consider two such models from Ontario; (1) The Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance is one of the most extensive involving umbrella organizations that provide cost effective access to management tools, planning information, marketing, etc. to trail owners and user groups, and (2) The Victoria Rail Trail (Kawartha Lakes) provides a good example of how a municipally‐ owned trail has dealt with conflicts among users and adjacent landowners.

Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance (EOTA)

In September 1997 the Hastings/Quinte/Land o’ Lakes Recreational Steering Committee was formed as a vehicle for bringing together people and groups who had an interest in developing a regional trails network. Representatives were from area municipalities; various trail groups, Chamber of Commerce, Conservation Authorities, and individuals. This umbrella trails group was renamed the Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance in the spring of 1998. The Organization was incorporated in 1999 under the mandate provided to it by the Province of Ontario and various Municipal Corporations of Eastern Ontario. goals and objectives:

 The preservation of the continuity of the Corridors for Tourism and other economics uses  The management of the corridors as a multi‐use facility, representing the interest of recreational users, adjoining landowners and other interested groups  The development of the Corridors as a recreational attraction contributing to the Tourism and economy of the Eastern Ontario Region  The preservation and enhancement of natural and human heritage along the Corridors value of the EOTA approach:

 EOTA provides a mechanism for local planning and decision‐making within the Provincial framework resulting in a trail system that meets the needs of local user groups and the land owners (Municipalities & Crown) and provides economic return to the area  The trail system has been developed based on public consultation with different interest groups/clubs/businesses and local government thus it encourages co‐operation at the local/regional level  It provides recreational opportunities for all user groups in the area, motorized and non‐ motorized including ATVs, biking, horse‐back riding, etc… based on a shared use trail system which reduces costs and responsibilities for local users clubs  EOTA provides an avenue for conflict resolution among user groups, landowners, Provincial government issues, etc.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 37 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

 EOTA has established partnerships with 12 Municipalities, 12 user group clubs, 88 Businesses and 4 Destination Marketing Organizations

Ontario Provincial Police Partnership: EOTA in partnership with the Centre Hastings OPP and the Hastings Prince Edward Health Unit is the first area in the province to implement OPERATION LOOKOUT on shared use trails.

The OPP S.A.V.E. Team: The OPP officers of the S.A.V.E. (Snowmobile, ATV, Vessel Enforcement) Unit split their time patrolling between the trails and waterways. Their mandate is trail and marine safety. An OPP Educational Brochure on ATV road bylaw information has been produced and circulated.

Sources: thetrail.ca

Victoria Rail Trail (Kawartha Lakes)

The City of Kawartha Lakes (comprised of 17 municipalities linked by the Trent‐Severn Waterway) has an impressive system of trail corridors and nature areas, which link its urban communities, rural farmland, forests and lake systems.

The main features of the Victoria Rail Trail  a 55 km multi‐use trail owned and managed by the City of Kawartha Lakes  passes through urban, agricultural, rural and natural areas  has had to find ways to deal with issues arising among different user groups

The primary City‐owned recreational trail is the Victoria Rail Trail Corridor (VRTC) which extends across the municipality from north to south, and a network of trails in the forest management areas. The municipal system is supported by a provincially‐owned rail‐trail which links to adjacent communities on the east and west, as well as a range of trail loops in conservation areas and provincial parks.

The municipality commissioned the development of a Trails Master Plan that addressed the need for a comprehensive approach to trails planning and development and that outlined recommendations with regards such areas of concern as: importance of trail safety, accessibility, tourism and promotion, quality green space both in rural and urban settings, and cooperative shared use for trails across the City. Discussions around general trails planning and management included calls for a coordinated Trails Advisory Committee and a city‐wide approach to the provision of both motorized and non‐motorized trails.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 38 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The Victoria Rail Trail corridor, since its inception in the early 1990s, has accommodated a wide range of non‐motorized and selected motorized uses (emergency and maintenance vehicles, ATVs, and snowmobiles), managed through by‐law and policy development. In recent years, with increasing use of the VRT by many users, there have been complaints about the diminishing quality of trail experience from walkers, hikers, and cyclists in specific urban sections. This has been attributed primarily to: declining trail surface conditions, which no longer serve cycling use well; lack of trail amenities such as parking areas and signage; and concerns over the safety of shared use with motorized recreational vehicles, which have been using the trail in increasing numbers.

Most specifically concerns were directed at four wheeled ATVs and unauthorized use by two‐ wheeled motorized vehicles. Winter use by snowmobiles, while of concern to a few residents, is generally accepted as it is off‐season with the majority of the non‐motorized trail uses. During the study consultation, Lindsay and Fenelon Falls were the areas where concerns over shared use between motorized and non‐motorized uses were most frequently noted.

Use of the Haliburton County Rail Trail by snowmobiles is also regulated by the following conditions:  Snowmobile use is by membership in the OFSC, with permits issued by the Haliburton County Snowmobile Association (HCSA);  Snowmobiles are permitted December 1 to April 1;  HCSA indemnifies the County and its employees from insurance claims and legal  action;  HCSA is responsible for removal of litter on an annual basis;  HCSA Trail Wardens are authorized agents by the County to enforce the By‐law.

There is the potential through the OFSC for assistance with monitoring/management, promotion of user conduct and By‐Law enforcement, which is proving difficult for the City of Kawartha Lakes to manage on its own.

There are successful examples of management/monitoring on shared use trails such as trail permitting, use of Trail Wardens, and programs established by the OPP such as the SAVE program in use by EOTA, and the STOP program (implemented by the OFSC),

Providing the forum for collaboration between all user groups through a Trails Advisory Committee may help to fine‐tune policies and use agreements and resolve some differences.

The current speed limit on the VRTC is 50 km per hour. Some restrictions have already been applied to the VRTC including a reduction in the speed limit through urban areas to 20 km per hour, through an interim By‐law in 2005. The Haliburton County Rail Trail and the Ganaraska Forest both impose lower speed limits on ATVs, at 40 km per hour and 30 km per hour respectively. The Pontypool Forest User Advisory Committee passed a motion in 2005 to reduce the speed of motorized uses on the trails to 20 km per hour.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 39 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Among the recommendations made in the Master Plan that may be relevant to the current project are the following.

1. Develop and approve a municipal By‐law to regulate trail uses on the existing Victoria Rail Trail Corridor as follows:

That snowmobile use is sanctioned for use by permit only to the Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Clubs (OFSC) and its members providing that the following undertakings are accepted:  Members and users of the trail must be properly licensed and insured, and display trail permits.  All use of the trail is subject to the following regulations: Hours of Use: 7AM to 11PM, unless by special permit Snowmobile Season: Dec. 1 to March 31 Snowmobile Speed Limit: 50 kph/ 20 kph through urban areas

2. Investigate /develop a program for management and enforcement of trails regulations, including a trail permitting system for motorized uses. The program should be developed in consultation with the OFSC and local chapters, other trail user groups, the City of Kawartha Lakes Police and the OPP. Models to investigate include:

 Use of municipal by‐law enforcement officers on the trail;  Establishment of a volunteer Trail Warden program with OFSC as enforcement agents (This is the Haliburton County Rail Trail model);  Establishment of a Trail Warden program conducted as a collaborative initiative between City & OPP (SAVE unit). (This is the EOTA trail model).

Source: city.kawarthalakes.on.ca/residents/parks‐recreation‐culture/trails/city‐of‐kawartha‐ lakes‐trails‐master‐plan

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 40 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

4. Project Concept for the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail 4.1 Inspiration & Direction Inspiration for the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail

“People were still lining the road saying, ‘Keep going, don’t give up, you can do it, you can make it, we’re all behind you.’ There was a camera crew waiting to film me. I don’t think they even realized that they had filmed my last mile… people were still saying, ‘You can make it all the way Terry’. I started to think about those comments in that mile too. Yeah, I thought, this might be my last one.”

Terry Fox

The Terry Fox Courage Highway from Nipigon to Thunder Bay marks the final steps in Terry Fox’s courageous Marathon of Hope in 1980. The final steps of Terry’s run took place on September 1, 1980 in Shuniah Township, just east of the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre overlooking Lake Superior.

In helping to develop the project concept for the Kinghorn Rail Trail from Nipigon to Thunder Bay it struck the authors of this report that there could be no greater inspiration, and no more suitable namesake, than Terry Fox. This idea was proposed by our consulting team during the Joint Planning Sessions the week of February 28 – March 4 in Nipigon and Thunder Bay. The idea was warmly and respectfully received. The concept was then jointly developed further by all those involved. Establishing this rail trail in honour and celebration of Terry Fox can only be pursued, over time, with the approval of the Terry Fox Foundation and with the approval of Terry’s mother Betty Fox.

The envisioned predominant, overarching theme for the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail is  Celebrating the legacy of Terry Fox

The supporting themes for the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail are  Helping raise the profile of Terry Fox and the Terry Fox Foundation  Inspiring and educating the trail users including residents and guests  Celebrating the heritage of Lake Superior and the region.

The overall theme and supporting themes will be utilized as the basis for developing trail‐head, trail and rest area signage, interpretive panels, programming, activities and events.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 41 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Mission The Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail is being established as a destination trail venue that will celebrate the legacy of Terry Fox. Trail users will be inspired by Terry Fox and educated about Terry Fox and the Terry Fox Foundation through events, activities, signage and programming. The trail will also celebrate the heritage of Lake Superior and help grow our trail towns and businesses.

Goals The major goals for the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail are  Support and enhance the legacy of Terry Fox and the Terry Fox Foundation  Provide Terry Fox related physical and educational challenges for all trail users and visitors  Promote and encourage healthy living for all through events and activities  Welcome trail users and guests of all physical abilities and providing enhanced accessibility features  Further develop our understanding and ability to be good stewards of our natural environment along the northern coast of Lake Superior  Strengthen the connections between our trail communities, residents & visitors  Welcome trail users locally, regionally, nationally and internationally  Increase economic opportunities through business development, attraction, retention and expansion  Operate as a self‐sufficient trail

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 42 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

A Destination Trail for Individuals, Groups, Loops and the TCT The Terry Fox themed trail will be of great significance at all levels: local, regional, national and international. The trail user visitor experience will be created carefully and respectfully to challenge the users to learn about Terry Fox, and surviving cancer, and it will be a challenge for trail users physically dan even emotionally.

The trail design, signage and marketing will create demand for guests to come use the trail throughout the year. Guests will come as individuals, families and groups.

Some trail users will come to the Lake Superior Terry Fox Trail as it will help complete a ‘loop tour’ (ie. Lake Superior Loop Trail, snowmobile connections, etc.). For snowmobilers, the trail will be an important and safe connection between Thunder Bay and Nipigon. Other trail users will be attracted to the trail as a key element of the Trans Canada Trail through North‐Western Ontario.

Active trail users will enjoy the themed inspirational and educational elements at any time they choose to visit and in whatever manner mode is appropriate from non‐motorized summer use (walk, hike, stroller, run, bike, horseback, assisted access, etc.) to winter snowmobile use (on some of the trail) during the winter.

We anticipate that these ryea round trail guests will include  Local residents  Regional residents  Cancer survivors and families across Canada and beyond who are inspired by Terry Fox  Sports enthusiasts (from casual to extreme) inspired by Terry Fox including the running community across North America, triathletes and adventure racers

The Terry Fox element of the trail, if approved by the Terry Fox Foundation, is critical to the scope and magnitude of the project. It is this specific Terry Fox element which will make this trail a ‘must do’ trail for Canadians from coast to coast to coast, and which will also attract endurance athletes from across North America and beyond. This unique project element, developed respectfully and appropriately, is what will make the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail capable of generating significant interest and demand on a year round basis.

As well, this project concept is designed to further enhance the Terry Fox Monument site and over time bring increased benefits to the Terry Fox legacy and the Terry Fox Foundation.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 43 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

A Year‐Round Outdoors Events Venue The trail will also be utilized as a special events venue on a year round basis. A range of special events will also be hosted on the trail or on appropriate sections. This could include the annual Running with the Giant Marathon, adventure races, cycling races, triathlons (iron kids, try‐a‐tri, sprint, Olympic, 70.2 Ironman or full Ironman), dog‐sled races, cross country ski races and more.

We anticipate that many of these events could be developed from existing events in the region, if desired, and that other new events could be developed locally or with outside partners.

A Proposed Feature Event: The Annual Terry Fox 3 Day Marathon A three‐day annual fund‐raising event is proposed to be held for and organized in conjunction with the Terry Fox Foundation as a unique new part of the nation‐wide Terry Fox Run events held every September. This will be a multi‐day marathon event and may include competitive and non‐competitive marathon elements.

Each day of the three day event will feature a marathon distance (42 km) run in honour of Terry Fox. The event is expected to quickly gain national and international prominence.

 Day One will feature a marathon distance run starting from Red Rock to Nipigon, and then heading south to Hurkett Cove (all locations approximate) – along with much shorter 5K and 10K distance runs ending in Nipigon / Red Rock and at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre.

 Day Two will feature a marathon distance run from Hurkett Cove to a location east of Pass Lake – as well as half marathon (21 km) runs ending in Nipigon / Red Rock and at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre.

 Day Three will feature a marathon distance run from east of Pass Lake, over the picturesque Pass Lake Trestle, and ending at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre via the Terry Fox Overpass.

 Where needed, particularly on Day Three, the marathon runs will use a 'staggered start' to address the high volume of runners compared with the width of trail and the Pass Lake Trestle Bridge in particular.

 Those capable of running back‐to‐back marathon distance will be encouraged to run all three days. Those capable of running one marathon will be encouraged to run on day three only.

Again with permission of the Terry Fox Foundation, it may be possible to integrate Day Three of this marathon event with the Miles with the Giant marathon event. The September timing is perfect as a ‘Boston Qualifier’ with the Boston Marathon taking place the following spring.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 44 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

4.2 Trail Type & Uses

Activities

The final decision on what trail uses are permitted and not permitted will be up to the proponent communities to finalize over time.

At this time, the anticipated rail trail uses are as follows:

Spring / Summer / Fall  non‐motorized plus assisted accessibility

Annual Terry Fox Run in September Walking, Jogging, Running Hiking Assisted accessibility (i.e. motorized scooters) Cycling (Mountain Bikes, Hybrid Bikes, ‘Fat Tire’) Horse‐back Riding Hosting Special Events (races, marathons, triathlons, etc.)

Winter  motorized use except during some special events

Snowmobiling (likely on most of the trail, at most times) Cross Country Skiing and/or Snowshoeing (possibly on some parts of the trail – for example, if desired between Red Rock and Nipigon, or if desired west of Mackenzie River) Hosting Special Events (i.e. cross country ski loppet, snowshoe race, dogsled race)

Excluded uses include ATV’s, dirt bikes, motorcycles, ebikes, and segways.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 45 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Surfacing of the Trail

For the purposes of the feasibility study, we are assuming the following with regards to trail development and surfacing;

 Trail length is approximately 111 km (final length to be determined based on final routing)  CN to remove rail ties from rail bed  Existing ballast to remain and be used as trail base, graded to a minimum of 4 metres (13 feet) where possible  Geotextile fabric or similar product can be used to minimize loss of gravel (to be determined ‐ optional)  Assumed trail width (generally) is 4 metres (13 feet) for entire trail, with two paved sections having a paving width of 3.4 metres (11 feet) plus 0.3 (1 foot) gravel shoulders  Need to add approximately 6 inches of ‘A’ or ‘B’ gravel with fines  Need to add approximately 2 inches of stone dust or fines for top‐dressing except for two anticipated paved sections  For existing 13 bridges, need to add decking and hand rails, as required

Typical Cross Section Sketch of Trail

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 46 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

 A new Terry Fox Overpass (for pedestrians, bicycles and assisted access) proposed to cross Highway 11/17 at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre at a location just west of the monument . Establishing a pedestrian, bicycle and assisted access overpass at this location will have significant benefits for the trail, for MTO, for the existing Terry Fox Monument and for all parties involved . This Terry Fox Overpass would need to be proposed and approved by Ministry of Transportation

 Paved Section #1 – 8 km from Nipigon to Red Rock . Again this would enable additional trail uses, and would be a community asset for local residents and for enhanced tourism

 Paved Section #2 – up to 42 km from the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre at least as far as the Pass Lake Trestle . 42 km is marathon running distance and will enable various additional trail uses between Thunder Bay and Sleeping Giant including running events, road bikes, roller skates and roller blades

Eco‐paving opportunity

Instead of using the petroleum‐based binders of typical asphalt pavements, resin modified emulsion pavements use a binder made primarily from tree resins. This binder is mixed with aggregate materials to produce compacted pavement of higher strength and resistance to fuel spills than traditional asphalt. The construction/installation process for resin modified emulsions is similar to that for asphalt pavements. The resin modified emulsion is first applied alone to the prepared area as a base coat. The binder and aggregate are mixed on site and then applied and compacted to a smooth finish. A final coat of resin is used to seal the pavement. Unlike asphalt pavements, the resin emulsion does not have to be heated for application.

This product is useful for environmentally sensitive sites. The resin binder is clear so the pavement retains the color of whatever aggregate is used. Use of lighter aggregates allows for a more reflective, cooler pavement.

We have included an allocation for eco‐paving materials in the budget. This aspect will need to be reviewed in more detail as the project develops to ensure appropriateness and affordability.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 47 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

4.3 The Route

The rail trail location is envisioned primarily for the existing Canadian National rail bed from Thunder Bay to Nipigon. The proponents are discussing a potential 25 year lease of the rail bed from Canadian National.

A map of the overall anticipated route is provided below. The exact routing will need to be finalized by the proponent communities as the project develops over time. The proposed eastern trail head is at Gapen’s Pool in Nipigon (north of the marina). The Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre is the anticipated western trail head.

There are several options and sub‐options for connecting the western trail head to the rail bed. These are presented in the following pages for non‐motorized and accessibility users, and further below for winter snowmobilers. A decision on specific routing is not required at this time. This can be decided over time as the project develops over time. In this regard, it is important to acknowledge that some concerns have been expressed about the western trail head connection routing by numerous Shuniah Township camp and cottage owners whose properties are adjacent to the rail bed. Some of these owners do not want rail‐trail development.

The Ontario Ministry of Transportation is currently undergoing a four‐laning project between Thunder Bay and Nipigon. Construction has already begun at the south end. The final trail plans will need to take into account the upcoming changes to the highways. Within this document, we refer to the ‘existing Highway 11/17’ and to the ‘new Highway 11/17’. The new highway route will be constructed within the next three to four years over the existing highway route in some locations and north of the existing highway route in other locations.

On July 30, 1981, the stretch of Highway 11/17 between Nipigon and Thunder Bay was named the Terry Fox Courage Highway in honour of Terry Fox. The Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre is located on the north side of the existing Highway 11/17 (east of Hodder Avenue/Copenhagen Road and west of Spruce River Road/Highway 527). On June 26, 1982, a 2.7‐metre (9 foot) ebronz statue of Terry Fox was unveiled at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre. The site overlooks Lake Superior just west of the site in Shuniah Township where Terry ended his run on September 1, 1980. The new highway route includes plans for a new access lane to reach the Terry Fox site east of the current access lane.

As mentioned earlier, we are assuming and advocating the establishment of a Terry Fox Overpass for pedestrians, bicycles and assisted mobility. This overpass would be established at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre by the Ministry of Transportation. This would need to be proposed to, and approved by, the Ministry of Transportation. We understand that there have been some past local discussions about an underpass or overpass near the site which were never finalized. The Ministry of Transportation has built overpasses and underpasses elsewhere in Ontario to meet local needs along with four‐laning projects.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 48 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Map of the Trail Route

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 49 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Eastern Trail Head (For All Users) The proposed eastern trail head is at Gapen’s Pool which is north of the Nipigon Marina. This would be for all users. There is ample room for parking at this location and opportunities for interpretive centre development, over time, with the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area.

Sketch showing Gapen’s Pool Trailhead

all sketches (including cover) by David Andersen

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 50 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Western Trail Head (for all users except snowmobilers) The proposed western trail head for non‐motorized trail users and assisted accessibility is at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre (Terry Fox M&TIC).

The preferred routing from here (Option 1) is south via a new Terry Fox Overpass recommended for this project.

Sketch of Proposed Western Trail Head Connection South via new Terry Fox Overpass

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 51 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The proposed Terry Fox Overpass will be for use mainly by pedestrians, bicycles and assisted accessibility (motorized scooters, etc.). It is envisioned that the Overpass will be designed carefully in partnership with the Terry Fox Foundation in order to create an iconic landmark overpass which will draw further attention to the Terry Fox Monument Site and have artwork and signage which celebrates the Terry Fox legacy and the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail.

Sketch of Terry Fox Overpass (aerial view)

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 52 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The Terry Fox Overpass sketches provided here are by David Andersen, a world renowned ecotourism architect based in Minnesota.

In David’s words: in my sketch looking east you can see how you enter on the north high side and the inside of the Terry Fox Overpass slopes down to the south while the form of the bridge remains level to form an gateway arch when viewed from the highway...while I have glass "windows in the center for relief...I envision the side walls to be an interpretive story piece of sorts ... picture lighting it artistically at night ...with solar panels on the sloped center as a roof and to power lighting...

Sketch of Terry Fox Overpass (View from Thunder Bay looking East)

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 53 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Cross‐Section Sketch of Terry Fox Overpass

Again in the words of David Andersen:

Inside of the Terry Fox Overpass consider flat screen interpretive displays...with vandal‐ proof covering.... motion‐sensor activated for back‐lighting...changing with seasons and the Terry Fox story sharing and interpretive themes...think of the bridge as a linear interpretive centre celebrating Terry Fox ...

We could put in radiant panels in ceiling button or motion sensor operated ...on timers … we could even link to remote cameras on the trail to show people real time what to expect on the trail or even show real time race updates during trail events ...lots of possibilities when you use current technology to make the bridge a changeable story board ... could even consider tasteful and appropriate electronic billboards on the outside to celebrate Terry Fox …..

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 54 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Western Trail Head Connection Options Thus far, a total of three options and four sub‐options have been identified for connecting the western trail head to the rail bed for all users aside from the snowmobilers. A decision on these options can be made at a later time. Here are the identified options to reach the rail bed on Strathcona Avenue / Lakeshore Road:

Option 1: Go South from Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre

(this is the recommended option illustrated on the preceding pages via Terry Fox Overpass)

This option is based on a newly proposed Terry Fox Overpass and a vehicle parking area for east bound vehicles to be located south of the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre. These would be additional to existing Ministry of Transportation plans and provided by the Ministry of Transportation. Non‐motorized and assisted mobility trail users would head south from the overpass on a new trail through the bush, if possible, or on existing hydro line corridor, if possible, and then turn east on Strathcona Avenue at Bare Point Road.

Option 2: Go West from Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre

Go west from existing Terry Fox M&TIC (route to be determined), cross west over Copenhagen Road, go south on Copenhagen Road, cross on west side only sidewalk across new bridge over Highway 11/17, continue south on Hodder Ave., cross east over Hodder Avenue, and then turn east on Strathcona Avenue.

Option 3: Go East from Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre

Go east from Terry Fox M&TIC (route to be determined) along new Terry Fox Access Road (under construction shortly by Ministry of Transportation), and head further east overland (route to be determined) parallel and north of the Highway 11/17, cross the new north‐west ramp for Highway 527 / Highway 11/17, head south across Highway 11/17 at new lights (to be confirmed), then cross the new south‐west ramp for Highway 527 / Highway 11/17, and go south on Spruce River Road and then turn east on Lakeshore Drive.

Four Sub‐Options: we have identified four sub‐options to connect from Strathcona Avenue / Lakeshore Road south to the rail bed: ‐ sub‐option ‘A’ turn South on Bare Point Road to reach Rail Bed ‐ sub‐option ‘B’ continue east 1.4 km on Strathcona Avenue and then turn South on North Star Road to reach Rail Bed ‐ sub‐option ‘C’ continue east 7.3 km on Strathcona Avenue / Lakeshore Road and then turn south on Wild Goose Road to reach Rail Bed (near Wild Goose Beach) ‐ sub‐option ‘D’ continue east 13.0 km on Strathcona Avenue / Lakeshore Road and then turn south on Silver Beach Road to Rail Bed

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 55 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Western Trail Head – Three Connection Options and Four Sub‐Options

Western Trail Head – Connection Sub‐Option C and D, continued

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 56 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Western Trail Access for Snowmobilers Only

It would appear that the best option for snowmobile access to the trail is via the new Mackenzie Bridge which is being constructed as part of the Ministry of Transportation Four‐ Laning Project between Thunder Bay and Nipigon.

If the above noted option is proven appropriate, this would bring snowmobilers across the new Highway 11/17 near the existing McKenzie Beach Road east of where Lakeshore Drive currently meets the existing Trans‐Canada Highway. This location is located east of all four sub‐options for the non‐motorized trail traffic noted earlier.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 57 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Western Trail Snowmobilers – via new MTO Mackenzie Bridge

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 58 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Access Points and Nodes (Points of Interest)

We anticipate having an access point to the trail every six km on average, for a total of 17 access points in between our two trail heads.

Nine of the access points are assumed to be 'basic' with limited parking, compost toilets, drinking water and basic signage / map. Six of the access points are assumed to be 'intermediate' with increased parking, additional washrooms and enhances signage and maps. The exact locations for these access points can be determined over time. Two of the access points are proposed as special ‘staging areas’ with additional features. One is proposed for the Pass Lake Trestle area, and the second is proposed for Red Rock. All of the access points are for day use only.

Trail Nodes, or 'points of interest' will be developed to take advantage of existing attractions which are adjacent (e.g. Wild Goose Beach) or nearby (Silver Harbour Trail). The Western Trail Head at Terry Fox Outlook will also be the main connection point west to the Trans Canada Trail and to the Thunder Bay trail network. The Eastern Trail Head at Gapen’s Pool will connect with Trans Canada Trail east of Nipigon.

The following is a list of assumed access mpoints fro west to east. These are shown as trail heads and access points.

 Western Trail Head at Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre with Accessibility Park (5 features with assisted accessibility) o Spruce River Road . Access to KOA Kampgrounds and Resort o Wild Goose Public Beach o Silver Harbour Conservation Area . Access to Silver Harbour Trail o Mackenzie River is an important ecological and historic site and a small trail leads to the mouth of the river. o Amethyst Harbour o Pass Lake Trestle Staging Area . Access to Sibley Peninsula (via existing Trans Canada Trail and Sleeping Giant Provincial Park trail network) included a number of major features: archaeological sites dating back to 7000BC, Red Sibley rock and soils, Sleeping Giant Provincial Park, Thunder Bay Lookout, Marie Louise Lake Picnic Area view of the sleeping giant, Marie Louise Lake Visitor Centre, Sea Lion Rock Formation, Silver Inlet mining community & Thunder Cape.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 59 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

o Superior Shores Road o Pearl and 5 Road South . Access to Amethyst deposits . 10km to Amethyst Mine Panorama by road o Meyers Road East . Access to Ouimet Canyon Park Road. Unique geological and ecological representation o Dorion . Access to Cavern Lake Nature reserve – Largest know bat hibernaculum in Ontario o Dorion Fish Hatchery o Bible Camp Road o Black Bay Road and Hurkett Cove Conservation Area o Hurkett & Coughlin o Everard . Black Sturgeon River, Black Bay and Black Bay peninsula. A number of unique vegetation communities such as peat land shorelines and rare plants and major freshwater fisheries. . 7.5km from the Black Sturgeon River – Red Rock Cuesta. Prominent landmark and unique geological formation o Red Rock Staging Area . Southern Access to the Nipigon River Recreational Trail  Eastern Trail Head at Gapen’s Pool (north side of Nipigon) with Accessibility Park (3 features with assisted accessibility) o Nipigon . Northern Access to the Nipigon River Recreational Trail . Access to ‘The Paddle to the Sea’ Park and the Nipigon Marina . Access to Nipigon Tourist Information Centre o Access (8km north on Hwy 628) to ice climbing site at the Palisades near Orient Bay, aboriginal pictographs, southern limit of the woodland caribou and populations of Bald Eagles and White Pelicans

Trail Nodes (points of interest) are locations where activities will take place. We are envisioning sixteen nodes to be established along the trail route. These nodes will be themed as a central element to the Terry Fox interpretive story, and will feature physical and educational challenges for the trail users.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 60 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Sketch of Typical Intermediate Access Point

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 61 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Pass Lake Trestle

The Pass Lake Trestle (also known as the Blende River Viaduct and located at milepost 173.10) was constructed in 1916. At 2280 feet across and 140 feet high, it is one of the largest and deepest trestles in North America.

The Trestle will be one of two special staging areas. It will provide linkages with Highway 17, and with Sibley peninsula and the Sleeping Giant Provincial Park trail network. Snowmobile and other traffic not comfortable with heights will bypass the trestle via an adjacent trail that will be constructed north of the trestle (details to be confirmed).

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 62 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Redevelopment of the Pass Lake Trestle for trail use will require a significant amount of work and investment.

However, as with the Kettle Valley Trail in British Columbia’s Myra Canyon, high trestles are a valuable and attractive feature.

a Trestle Bridge on the Kettle yValle Trail

Work on Kettle Valley trestles took place from 1993 to 1995. The Myra Canyon Trestle Restoration Society, together with the generous financial support of individuals and the business community, undertook to place decks and guard rails on all 18 trestles within the Myra Canyon section of the old Kettle Valley Railway line. This feat was accomplished through the efforts of members of the society, as well as many volunteers within the community. All this work eventually had to be re‐done (with generous federal government support) due to the fires of 2003 which destroyed all the trestles.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 63 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Cross Section sketch of Pass Lake Trestle Improvements

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 64 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Developing the Trail Elements

‘A trail is a trail is a trail’ is a common phrase that describes the lack of memorable trail experiences. Successful destination trails must be unique and different if they are to attract visitors and act as a core trip motivator. Rail trails are particularly challenging in this regard due to the nature of rail trails which minimize changes in elevation and direction.

Since Thunder Bay is located a considerable distance from Canadian and US tourism markets, and even from large Ontario tourism markets, the experience has to be one of a kind to ensure people will make the effort to get there.

We believe that there is an opportunity with the Kinghorn to become the only trail of its kind in the world. The Kinghorn represents significant natural beauty and scenic vistas and structural opportunities. All of this combined with the inspiring and epic story of Terry Fox can turn the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage trail into a major tourism demand generator for the North of Superior region and for Northern Ontario.

“Run, Walk, Bike, A Marathon Everyday…Live the Terry Fox Story”

The communities from Nipigon to Thunder Bay, and in particular Shuniah Township, have a very strong connection with the Terry Fox story. The Kinghorn Trail represents an opportunity to enhance the current tourism offerings by developing the rail trail to be an intimate, challenging physical and emotional trail experience drawing on the Terry Fox story for inspiration and interpretation. Each day on his journey across the Country, from the Atlantic Ocean to Shuniah Township just east of the memorial, Terry Fox ran a marathon and endured tremendous challenge, pain and exhilaration. He is a source of inspiration for not only cancer patients but for fitness and running enthusiasts and endurance athletes around the world.

Terry Fox Trail Themes

The Concept: Develop and position the Kinghorn Trail as an experiential “Marathon of Hope” utilizing the first 42.195km representative of a day in the life of Terry Fox, and using the full 111 km as an opportunity to ‘run in the shadow’ of Terry Fox and the last three days of his incredible effort to run across Canada.

The Experience: An outdoor tribute corridor that is experienced by running, walking, cycling. The corridor linking to the Terry Fox Outlook and Visitor Information Centre would be converted into a 42.195km hard surfaced (paved) trail, complete with interpretation (related to the fitness side of his journey), extensive distance/goal marketing, and fitness challenges that replicate what Terry went through each and every day. Visitors would use this trail to be pushed, challenged and inspired. The trail experience would be designed for all ability levels with varying distances/challenges for the full 42.195km ending at the Terry Fox Monument, and for the entire 111 km courage trail.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 65 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Special events on the trail will become a key part of the product marketing strategy. Securing signature special events for this trail such as relocating the Thunder Bay Marathon within a Three Day Terry Fox Marathon would greatly enhance and validate the trail experience and can be used to come and walk or run the trail at any time of year. Runners specifically will travel great distances to challenge themselves i.e. Boston, Disney, Toronto, Chicago & Nunavut.

Developing the Trail Route Details

Trail Heads / Staging Areas Staging areas are critical to successful trail development. These locations are where people start and end their trail experience and set the stage for what lies ahead. The basic amenities required at these locations are:  Parking (passenger and oversize)  Washroom  Trail head kiosk with mapping and interpretation and cross selling of other experiences  Beginning of the trail wayfinding system  Take away printed map  Shaded picnic area with garbage receptacles and tables  Bicycle lock up  Emergency reference number and contacts

The design elements of the staging areas and the trail should reflect Terry’s route – i.e. along the roadways of small town Canada set in an early 1980’s period. Elements would include:  Asphalt with yellow and white lines  Highway signage  The iconic police car and support van  1980’s roadside stop (gas station)  Terry’s iconic white t shirt

Signage & Wayfinding Signage for the trail‐heads and on‐trail wayfinding should become one of the main conduits for portraying the brand of the trail in addition to guiding users and providing interpretation. Goals of the signage system should be to:  Provide location and directional information  Instruct users on how to use the trail  Provide distance markers  Provide fitness goal markers  Provide geographic interpretation  Provide Terry Fox story interpretation

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 66 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Trail‐head kiosk sample – Mammoth Creek

Distance marker example – Mammoth Creek

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 67 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Interpretation & Experience Node Concept Development The trail node (point of interest or activity) aspect is the most critical differentiating component of the Kinghorn Trail development. The interpretation and experiential node creation is what will make this linear corridor into a kilometre by kilometre story board for a day in the life of Terry Fox and unlike any other trail in the world.

The first 42.195 km starting at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre will be a very intensive element of the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail. This section will have intensive nodes designed to challenge, inspire and allow users to feel what Terry went through on his ‘marathon a day’. Similar to a fitness trail concept this linear trail will have nodes that allow users to endure a physical or educational challenge, to replicate Terry’s experience. The rest of the 111 km route will share this focus, although in a less intensive manner.

The following image represents an activity station that would be placed along a fitness trail. Here trail users are given a series of exercises at this station to provide an enhanced workout. Similar type nodes would be placed along the Terry Fox Trail to emulate the distance challenges that Terry went through each day.

Cool Park, New South Wales, 2009

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 68 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

It is critical during the design phase that fitness experts are engaged along side the trail designers to develop the utmost authentic and accurate experience.

Outdoor Fitness Equipment – www.greengym.ca

Green Gym is an example of a supplier in Canada who makes outdoor fitness equipment.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 69 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

In addition to physical and education challenge nodes, purely recreational experiential features are envisioned for placement at both trail heads (with 5 features at the western trail head, and 3 at the eastern trail head).

These Accessibility Parks will be targeted specifically at children and users with disabilities to allow them to also follow in Terry’s footsteps and feel and share his challenges. One in seven people in Canada have a disability and very few destinations are targeting this segment. The following images illustrate examples of these types of features.

‘Liberty Swing’, New South Wales, 2009 www.libertyswing.com.au

ADA Wheel Thru Arcade www.specialneedsplaygroundequipment.com

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 70 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

4.4 Trail Governance & Management Governance

The ownership of the rail bed right of way, and thus most of the trail route, will remain with Canadian National (CN) Rail. There will be a lease of 25 years or more to the municipalities. Terms of the lease are to be determined over time through negotiation.

There will need to be a lessee for the rail bed. The lessee will be a Trail Management Board (which will need to be legally established) and/or the project proponents (five municipalities). There may be a role as well for the Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Clubs. The capital project may be undertaken by the Trail Management Board and/or the project proponents (five municipalities).

The anticipated Trail Management Board is envisioned as a non‐profit organization with the members being the local partner communities, as follows: ‐ a board of directors will be appointed by the local partner communities (we are recommending a small board with 5‐7 board members carefully selected so that the group covers off the partner communities as well as the stakeholder user groups such as hikers, runners, snowmobilers, etc.) ‐ the board will have regular meetings every two months, and together with the Trails Manager will report back to the five municipalities on an annual basis (submitting year end progress report, a plan for the year ahead, and a five year strategic plan) ‐ the board will oversee Trail Manager and establish advisory committees as required ‐ the board will monitor progress in key portfolios including ‐ communications ‐ trail maintenance, care and development ‐ marketing and promotions (for individuals, groups and events) ‐ events development and revenues ‐ corporate sponsorships ‐ supporting business attraction, retention and expansion along with local business partnership efforts and service revenues ‐ Trail Endowment Fund for ongoing trail maintenance and development ‐ may also develop Trails Land Trust (over time)

We also anticipate that the Trail Management Board will establish a ‘Friends of the Trail’ group. This would be a volunteer group having a hands‐on‐role with trail maintenance, trail stewardship and organizing events and activities. This group would also be coordinated through the Trail Manager for enhanced coordination and effectiveness.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 71 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Trail Manager

A full‐time Trail Manager will be the key full‐time staff member responsible for managing all operations of the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail.

The manager will:

 serve as vital communications link between partner communities, users, outside agencies and the public  attend all Trail Management Board meetings  oversee all trail maintenance  market and promote the trail to individual users, groups and events  coordinate with events and collect event fees (based on the number of participants per event day)  develop, secure and maintain corporate sponsorships  coordinate with local business providers and provide linked marketing and collect fees for joint marketing services  develop and establish a Trail Endowment Fund for ongoing trail maintenance and development  develop Trail Land Trust (over time)

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 72 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Risk, Risk Management & Liability

The Ontario Trails Strategy identified a number of key issues that sometimes prevents the successful operation of a recreational trail. The vast majority of these constraints fall into the category of risks, liabilities, maintenance costs and operational responsibility. The following sections will look at these topics in more detail.

Risk

Recreational trails carry inherent risks that can never be fully prevented. How can the risk be assessed and the user be informed to thereby reduce, acknowledging that the risk will never be completely eliminated? In order to truly understand risk and ensure that everyone involved is reading from the same page, it is important to define risk as it pertains to recreational trails. Risk is the probability of a hazard occurrence (Smith, 1992). It has also been described as the likelihood per unit of time of a hazard developing into an actual adverse effect causing loss, death, injury or illness to people (Okrent, 1996). A hazard by definition is a potential threat to humans or an undesirable event that may occur. To simplify the relationship, it can be expressed as: Risk = Hazards/Safeguards

Based on this relationship, in order to reduce risk, safeguards must be increased, recognizing that in theory the hazard or exposure to a hazard will never be completely eliminated. Risk analysis is an important tool in determining your exposure to risk and typically includes three elements: risk identification, risk estimation and risk evaluation. The identification of risk for an operation such as a recreational trail may include lack of user knowledge of the trail. Lack of knowledge about the intended use, signage, safety practices could lead to the exposure to a hazard associated with the trail.

Risk estimation is concerned with the probability of a risk event. It is typically a combination of the probability of an event happening and the consequences of the event. The key factors considered in determining the degree of risk include the nature of the hazard, the characteristics of the trail users, the likelihood of the occurrence, the magnitude of the exposures and consequences and the public values. Trail operators often have limited data to base their analysis on.

Risk assessment carries this process one step further by judging the importance of the consequences of a risk event. This stage is all about making value judgments by weighing the risk consequences and an assessment of the human judgments about risk and arriving at a reasonable tradeoff that reduces risk at a fair and justified cost and effort.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 73 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Risk Management

The Rails to Trails Conservancy has published an excellent document that provides some best practices to manage risk and limit liability entitled A Primer on Trail‐Related Liability Issues & Risk Management Techniques (2000). Much of the following section is referenced from this document.

Having a comprehensive and well‐thought‐out policy and practice for trail maintenance and usage will provide probably the best form of protection and risk management. Well‐designed and maintained trails eliminate or minimize most of the common risks associated with recreational trails and contribute to limiting liability. Utilizing recognized standards to construct and operate trails can provide protection by showing due diligence in using generally accepted designs and guidelines. The Trans Canada Trail Trailbuilding Guidelines (2010) and in the U.S. the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials publishes guides for pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Compared to other public recreational facilities such as roads, swimming pools and playgrounds, recreational trails are quite safe with inherently lower risks.

A well‐designed policies and procedures manual developed by the trail manager/operator is the keystone to effective risk management. During trail design and development, it is critical to document the following:  Develop an inventory of potential hazards along the corridor (Genivar is currently doing this with regard to hazards associated with the existing bridges and trestle);  Create a list of users that will be permitted on the trail and the risks associated with each;  Identify applicable legislation and regulations;  Design and locate the trail to reduce exposure to obvious hazards  Develop methods to advise users of potential hazards through education, signage, etc;  Complete trail design and construction by persons who are knowledgeable and experienced with recognized design guidelines such as those discussed above  Post and enforce trail rules, regulations and code of conduct

Once the trail is constructed and ready for use it is critical that the normal maintenance and operations includes:  Regular inspection of the trail by a qualified person who has the expertise to identify hazardous conditions and maintenance issues;  Correct and document maintenance issues quickly and where an issue cannot be corrected immediately, provide appropriate warnings to the trail users;  Develop, implement and practice procedures for handling all potential emergencies and especially medical emergencies. Document these procedures and ensure all occurrences of medical emergencies are well‐documented;  Maintain records of all inspections, what was found, and what was done to correct any deficiencies. Use photographic records where possible.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 74 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Practicing good risk management techniques will not only ensure that hazards are promptly identified and corrected in a reasonable timeframe, resulting in reduced risk of injury to trail users, but will also provide protection to the trail manager/operator. Due diligence by way of acting responsibly with regards to the operation and maintenance of the trail will also provide an excellent defence in the event that a lawsuit does occur.

Liability

Risk and liability are certainly related but they are not interchangeable terms. The legal definition of liability is, “The legal responsibility for one’s acts or omissions”. Typically there are two groups of people associated with recreational trails that have warranted concerns about liability: the trail manager/operator and the adjacent private landowners. It may not be as clear why adjacent landowners may have a concern associated with liability, whereas it is somewhat obvious why the trail manager/operator would have liability concerns.

The adjacent landowners in the case of the Kinghorn Rail Trail fall into two distinct categories. The Canadian National (CN) Railway has proposed to lease the rail corridor for the purposes of a recreational trail while still maintaining ownership of the corridor. A lawsuit could develop on the trail that would expose them to liability since they are the actual owners of the land that the trail occupies. CN is seeking to limit their liability to some extent by including conditions in the lease agreement to the benefit of CN.

These draft conditions include:

The Licensee agrees that it shall at all times indemnify and save harmless the Railway, its employees, servants and agents, from and against any and all claims, direct or derivative, demands, actions, losses, suits, expenses including reasonable lawyers’ fees, liability, judgments or other proceedings, cost or liabilities arising out of loss, damage or injury to any persons (including death) or to property, including the Railway’s Fibreoptics, attributable to or connected in any manner with the granting of this License or with the exercise of this License (collectively the "Claims") by or on behalf of the Licensee, its guests and invitees, howsoever incurred by the Railway, its servants and agents.

The Licensee hereby agrees to obtain and maintain in force during the continuance hereof, a policy of insurance containing terms and conditions satisfactory to the Railway, in which the Railway shall be named as one of the insureds, to provide for public liability including liability imposed by any Workers' Compensation Act or comparable legislation, respecting the property of the Railway, including the Licensed Premises in the amount of TEN MILLION DOLLARS ($10,000,000.00) or such further or other amount as shall be deemed appropriate by the Railway from time to time during the currency hereof. Such policy of insurance shall contain the following provisions:

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 75 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

"Cross Liability” In the event of an employee, servant, agent or member of one of the insureds named herein being injured by an event for which another insured named herein is or may be liable, this policy shall apply to such insureds against whom the claim is made or may be made in the same manner as if separate policies had been issued to each insured named herein. In the event of damage to property belonging to any one or more insureds for which another insured is or may be liable, this policy shall apply to such insured against whom claim is or may be made in the same manner as if separate policies had been issued to each insured"

As proposed, the CN lease offer shifts much of the liability from CN to the trail group. This draft CN lease agreement should be carefully scrutinized by a qualified team to determine if the proposed level of liability for the Trail Group is reasonable and fair.

The other private landowner group that may have liability concerns are the adjacent landowners that have property that abuts the proposed trail corridor. Their concerns stem from the possibility of a trail user straying from the trail onto their land and becoming injured or conditions on their property jeopardizing the safety of the trail users such as a branch falling from a tree on their property or a beaver dam on their property releasing waters that damages the trail or injures a trail user.

Communication between the trail manager/operator and the concerned landowner is critical to maintain a good working relationship and limiting liability for both parties. Key considerations are:  Work with the trail designers to have the trail located away from potential hazards that cannot be corrected;  Make it clear that trail users are not invited onto adjoining lands through trail user education, appropriate signage, buffers, vegetative screening or fencing;  If a hazardous condition does exist near the trail, signs should be developed in cooperation with the landowner to warn trail users of the hazard if it cannot be eliminated

It is very important to note that in the case of a rail trail, where the railroad retains ownership of the land that may include parcels of land in addition to the actual rail bed and affords the railroad exclusive use and excludes the adjacent landowner from any occupation of the surface absent of the railroad’s consent. An abutting landowner cannot be responsible for the condition of property from which he or she is excluded. Therefore the adjacent landowner can eliminate liability associated with the rail trail by ensuring they have not occupied any part of the rail lands without legal authorization by the railroad.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 76 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

There are basically three legal precepts that limit liability either on their own or in combination. The first concept is due care or due diligence. This relates to the landowner and the trail manager/operator’s responsibility for anyone on their land or facilities. The policies and procedures described in the previous sections about risk management go a long way in demonstrating due care and due diligence for the people on their lands and/or using their facilities.

The second is a legal limiting of liability. The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) has presently formed the “AMO Municipal Liability Reform Working Group” to address the affordability issues of liability insurance. The Ontario Trails Council is also currently working on reforms that would include a Trails Act. Currently trails are regulated by over 45 pieces of provincial legislation through 15 provincial ministries. The Trails Act would streamline and consolidate these into a more harmonious balance of economic development and land stewardship. The reforms include better rules and regulations under the Occupiers Land Act which would indemnify the landowner in the event of a trail accident assuming they were not negligent in the maintenance and operation of the trail.

Finally there is liability insurance as the last line of defence. It is important to understand that there are many different policy types that may apply to the operation of a trail even though we typically only think of the general liability angle. They may include:  Comprehensive general liability;  Non‐owned automobile liability for liability in excess of the auto owner’s limits for work associated with your organization’s property or facilities;  Property and owned assets insurance covers buildings and personal property if any are part of the operation or maintenance of the trail;  Volunteer worker accident insurance;  Workplace Safety and Insurance Board coverage for paid staff;  Association or directors and officers liability insurance

It is also advisable to have an insurance specialist examine the various stakeholders that have an interest in the trail to determine if there are multiple policies covering the property that the trail corridor occupies. Trails are often insured multiple times without the various stakeholders knowing. To give an example, a portion of a trail occupies municipal and crown land and is managed by a third entity. The Crown has liability insurance for crown land users, portions on a rail bed were insured by the railroad, the municipality has liability insurance for public infrastructure and the trail manager/operator also carry a policy and all for the very same trail. There is often an opportunity to share the expense or reduce and eliminate double policy coverages of the same property or facility.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 77 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Conflict Resolution A well‐designed, well‐maintained and operated trail will go a long way to reduce the potential for conflicts. Keeping motorized travel and non‐motorized uses separated by seasons will eliminate about 75% of the conflict potential.

It is important to support the development of a framework, tools and strategies for addressing the needs of multiple users, resolving the conflicts that arise among competing uses and promoting a comprehensive system of trails that meet the needs of varied users including consideration of trail systems that separate multi‐use between motorized and non‐motorized.

A process for resolving conflicts between users and involving users and adjacent landowners must be present. The process must be fair and transparent and be managed by the trail manager/operator. Trail user education and promoting a safe and courteous Code of Ethics for the trail will reduce the majority of potential conflicts. Possibly the most common complaint by landowners and trail users are that if they do have a complaint or concern, they do not know who they need to contact to have their concern heard. So having a single point of contact that is readily accessible will greatly reduce the frustration level and prevent small issues from escalating.

Some important tips to consider for reducing trail conflicts are:  The best and most natural ways to screen trails for sight, sound, smell, should be determined. This could help reduce the level, duration, and intensity of trail‐user contacts  Conduct research regarding the durability of trail surface materials options  Determine best ways to control and repair erosion is needed along with a better understanding of how to protect and restore vegetation  Examine how speeds and use patterns are affected by different trail widths, surfaces, shoulders, signs, etc  Develop the best and most cost‐effective means of communicating with trail users. Use the most effective means of unobtrusively influencing the attitudes and behaviors of trail users  Research the most effective means to influence attitudes and changing the behavior of your trail users  Improve our understanding of the trail users' characteristics, behavior, and information needs;  Determine which users are most likely to be uninformed or commit unintentional, unskilled, or careless acts that lead to conflict  Determine the best ways to break down false impressions different user groups often hold of one another  Explore ways to get users to appreciate (or try) activities that are new to them  Involve the trail users in developing a Code of Ethics and means to achieve good compliance  Develop strategy to accommodate user/land owner conflicts  Develop fencing/crossing/buffering strategy  Create a safety/enforcement strategy

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 78 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Permits and Approvals

It is anticipated that there will be a range of federal, provincial and municipal permits and approvals potentially required to complete the planned works and undertakings. The following sections will outline what permits and approvals are required and future requirements to gain environmental clearance for the project to proceed.

Federal Permits and Approvals

There are three federal agencies where permits and/or approvals may be required to proceed with the proposed project undertakings. The federal agencies likely to be involved are Industry Canada through potential funding provided by FedNor, Fisheries and Oceans Canada and finally Transport Canada.

Industry Canada The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) requires that a screening report is prepared when triggered by a federal permit or approval or when a project is fully or partially funded through a federal agency such as FedNor. When the CEAA is triggered by one of the above, typically the first point of contact within the federal government becomes the “responsible authority” and will request that an environmental screening document be prepared for review by the various federal agencies to ensure the project does not represent a significant negative environmental impact. The CEAA could be triggered by any of the federal agencies involved, but if there is any funding by FedNor, they will likely be the responsible authority. Depending on the season, the data required to be collected could take 6‐9 months and may require an additional 3 months for approval. Early consultation with the responsible authority is critical to ensure that the correct format for the CEAA Screening Report is followed since each federal agency uses a slightly different format.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada The Fisheries Act is administered by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). Any works that may have an impact on fish or fish habitat may require an Authorization under Section 35 of the Fisheries Act. Contact should be made with this agency once the preliminary design has been completed for the project especially if there is any anticipated replacement or repair of watercourse culverts or bridges that may have an impact on fish habitat. Again, early consultation will assist in developing the final design to avoid the need for an Authorization as a result of a harmful alteration, destruction or disruption (HADD) of fish habitat. Assuming that appropriate mitigation measures can be developed, DFO may be able to issue a letter of advice that will contain some generic conditions. In the event that a formal authorization is required, this will trigger the CEAA and a screening report will be required as discussed ine th previous section and fish habitat compensation measures may have to be developed and implemented.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 79 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Transport Canada Transport Canada is responsible for formal approvals under the Navigable Waters Protection Act. Approvals may be required if any of the culvert or bridge replacements/repairs could potentially affect navigability of the waterway. There are requirements to post any projects under this act in the Canada Gazette and allow a period of time for public comment prior to approval. It is advisable to allow at least 4 months for approvals under this Act. Once again, in the event that a formal approval is required, this will trigger the CEAA and a screening report will be required. Transport Canada is also responsible for the Railway Safety Act. If there are any potential new level crossings as a result of the trail routing, early consultation with Transport Canada at the preliminary design stage should flag any potential permits or approvals under this Act.

Provincial Permits and Approvals

The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources may be involved by the issuance of a work permit under the authority of the Public Lands Act or the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act. Typically the beds of Ontario waters are considered crown lands and works within crown lands require a work permit. Depending on the amount of in‐water work required to repair/replace any culverts or bridges, a work permit may be required. Any potential trail corridor that may cross crown lands to link with the abandoned rail bed may also require a work permit under the Public Lands Act and may be subject to the Class Environmental Assessment for MNR Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects. Increased scrutiny as a result of the Endangered Species Act can sometimes require considerable time to acquire a required work permit. A typical and simple work permit usually requires 3 months from submission to approval. If species at risk are involved and field work is required to support the application, this process can extend up to 12 months or more. Early and comprehensive consultation is critical to understand time frames and requirements for approval.

Municipal Permits and Approvals

There appear to be two approval processes at the municipal level that may need to be followed. The Municipal Class EA may apply depending if any of the municipalities will be directly involved in the works or funding of the project and a Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses permit may be required from the Lakehead Region Conservation Authority (LRCA). The jurisdictional area of the LRCA takes in virtually the entire study area for the proposed Kinghorn Trail. There is a fee for permits through the LRCA depending on the scale of the project. When multiple environmental assessment processes are required at various levels of government, there is an opportunity to streamline the process where one report may be able to satisfy all three levels instead of preparing three individual EA reports. Early consultation with the appropriate agencies will go a long way in developing an efficient plan for approvals.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 80 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Some Next Steps for Permits

Following the completion of the Business Plan, a generic project description will be developed that will be used as the first step in each of the required Environmental Assessment processes to allow the regulatory agency to assign the appropriate category to the project.

Fish habitat investigations will be undertaken as required to determine the extent and nature of any fish habitat components within the study area that may be impacted as a result of the undertaking. A brief report should be prepared as a supplement to the EA documentation and permit applications.

A work permit application will be prepared under either the Public Lands Act or the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and submitted to the Ministry of Natural Resources as required.

Once detail design plans have been completed for the proposed works, they will be forwarded along with supporting documentation to the regulatory agencies discussed in the previous sections to confirm the permit and approval requirements.

It is important to create a critical path schedule for permitting once all permits and approvals have been identified for the project. This will ensure enough lead time is allotted for each permit and critical timing of any field investigations are accounted for.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 81 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

5. Feasibility Factors – Findings and Assesments

The following sub‐sections reflect our findings on four items: People, Place, Market and Project Financing.

5.1 People – Our Findings & Assessment Proponents: Nipigon to Thunder Bay

Nipigon (population 1,752)

Nipigon is located on the most northern point of Lake Superior and situated along the west side of the Nipigon River and south of the small Lake Helen running between Lake Nipigon and Lake Superior. The bay is situated to the north and has several islands. Lake Nipigon is located about 20 to 30 km north of Nipigon. There are two bridges at the east end of town spanning the Nipigon River, one a single‐line railway bridge, and the other a two‐lane road bridge. Collectively, they comprise the narrowest east‐west land link in Canada's transportation system. Both Highways 11 and 17, and both railways, route all their traffic across the bridges. The only other east‐west link in this part of Canada is the path across the dam north of the town (not an actual road) or a few logging roads far north of the town.

Nipigon is a setting off point for fishing excursions onto Lake Superior and the Nipigon River system leading up to Lake Nipigon. The world's largest speckled trout was caught in the Nipigon River in 1915, weighing in at 6.6 kg (14.5 pounds).

Red Rock (population 1,063)

The Township of Red Rock is located at the end of Highway 628, 8 kilometres from the junction with Highway 11/17. Red Rock is 100 km east of Thunder Bay, and just 8 km overland south of Nipigon. Red Rock was the site of a major Prisoner of War camp during World War 2.

The Township of Red Rock has a district high school serving the communities of Nipigon, Dorion, Hurkett & Lake Helen Mission. Red Rock Public & St. Hilary Catholic elementary schools also serve the community.

The historic Red Rock Inn has recently undergone a major restoration and now serves as a four season hotel/convention center. Red Rock maintains a full service, 82 slip marina and park on the waterfront of Nipigon Bay. An 8 km hiking trail has been completed from Red Rock to Nipigon offering panoramic views of Lake Superior. The Nipigon‐Red Rock Golf Club is located midway between the two towns.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 82 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The area around Red Rock boasts some of the most spectacular scenery in the world. The name Red Rock comes from the large red cuesta (long sloping hills that end abruptly in steep cliffs) that can be seen from Hwy. 17 between Red Rock and Nipigon. The rugged time‐worn Early Precambrian rock base, which is overlain by the nearly flat‐lying sedimentary and intrusive rocks of the Late Precambrian age are some of the oldest rocks in the world.

Dorion (population 379)

Throughout history Dorion's resilient character and vibrant volunteer base has continued to shine regardless of the economic circumstances and challenges. 2001 did mark a troubled period with the downturn of the forest industry. Many small logging and milling operations closed leading to out migration patterns and decreasing student enrolment rates. Since 2007, Dorion has been proactively pursuing various economic development opportunities with good success.

In‐land, Dorion is home to Canada's largest suspension bridge and wild life mural and to Eastern Canada's deepest Canyon ‐ Ouimet Canyon. Enroute to Ouimet Canyon, visitors can trek across the 600 ft suspension bridge at Eagle Canyon with Eagle Canyon Adventures. This can be followed up by a hike at Ouimet Canyon Provincial Park with the opportunity to also admire the 5000 sq. ft. wild life mural painted on the side of Canyon Country Service.

On the shore of Lake Superior, Dorion has the Dorion Fish Hatchery. Dorion has many other attractions in the area including waterfalls, conservation areas and a vast back country for exploring the many other canyons and rock formations found in the area.

Shuniah (population estimated at 2,348)

The Municipality of Shuniah covers an area of 55,374 hectares bordered by Lake Superior on the south with a shoreline of approximately 40 kilometres from Bare Point to Bays End and the shoreline on Black Bay.

Shuniah has a considerable cottage population, with the first surveyed subdivision for recreational purposes being laid out in 1920 at Birch Beach. In 1995, the number of households was listed as 1,971, permanent residents.

Today, the number of households has risen to 2,887, an increase of almost 50%. The population of Shuniah is estimated at 2,348 which is based on owners whose full time or permanent address is within Shuniah. However during the summer months those numbers almost double and are estimated to be as high as 5,000.

Unique to Shuniah are the association areas stretching from just west of North Star Road to Wild Goose Park. In the association beach areas the lands are owned by the association in which the cottagers are the shareholders and in some cases lease the lands.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 83 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Thunder Bay (population 109,140)

Thunder Bay is formerly the twin cities of Fort William and Port Arthur. It is a city in and the seat of Thunder Bay District, Ontario, Canada. It is the most populous municipality in Northwestern Ontario, and the second most populous in Northern Ontario after Greater Sudbury. The census metropolitan area of Thunder Bay has a population of 122,907, and consists of the city of Thunder Bay, the municipalities of Oliver Paipoonge and Neebing, the townships of Shuniah, Conmee, O'Connor and Gillies and the Fort William First Nation.

As the largest city in North‐western Ontario, Thunder Bay is the region's commercial, administrative and medical centre. Many of the city's largest single employers are in the public sector. The City of Thunder Bay, the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, the Lakehead District School Board and the Government of Ontario each employ over 1,500 people. Bombardier Transportation operates a plant in Thunder Bay which manufactures mass transit vehicles and equipment, employing approximately 800 people. Tbaytel is a major employer as well.

The city has been successfully attracting quaternary or "knowledge‐based" industries, primarily in the fields of molecular medicine and genomics. The city is home to the western campus of the Northern Ontario School of Medicine, the first medical school to open in Canada in a generation. Lakehead University, established through the lobbying of local businessmen and professionals, has proved to be a major asset for the city and is connected with the Northern Ontario School of Medicine. Confederation College is also a major asset to the city.

The city has attracted major sporting events including the 2010 Ontario Special Olympics, and the 2010 World Junior Baseball Championships.

Sleeping Giant

The large formation of mesas on the Sibley Peninsula in Lake Superior which resembles a reclining giant has become a symbol of the city. Sibley peninsula partially encloses the waters of Thunder Bay, and dominates the view of the lake from the northern section of the city. The Sleeping Giant also figures on the city's coat of arms and the city flag.

Terry Fox

Terry Fox was forced to end his 5,342 km Marathon of Hope just east of where a 9‐foot high bronze statue, erected in memory of Terry Fox, now stands, commanding a breathtaking view of Lake Superior and the Sleeping Giant. This Terry Fox Monument site is the proposed eastern trail head for the proposed Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail. In addition to the five partners, there are two First Nation communities who have traditional territory that together encompasses the entire proposed trail area. The proposed trail infrastructure and operations could eventually link and bring benefits to these communities if they desire involvement, and their participation could strengthen the project. For example, the

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 84 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

First Nations may be interested in supplying materials, construction work and perhaps in contributing significantly to broadening the cultural tourism elements of the project.

Red Rock First Nation (population 1,484 – registered)

Red Rock First Nation is situated 2km north of the proposed eastern trail head (Nipigon), approximately ¼ mile from the junction of TransCanada Highways 11 and 17.

The Red Rock First Nation (also known as Red Rock Indian Band or Lake Helen First Nation) is an Ojibwa First Nation whose territory is located on the Red Rock (Parmachene) and Lake Helen Indian reserves. The total area covered by these two reserves is 950 acres. In October 2008 they had an on‐reserve population of 232 people living on the Lake Helen reserve.

Fort William First Nation (population 1,798 – registered)

Fort William First Nation is an Ojibwa First Nation south of and adjacent to Thunder Bay, south‐west of the proposed western trail head. As of January 2008, their on‐Reserve population was 832 people. Fort William First Nation has a two rink arena which is home to the Thunder Bay Bearcats of the Superior International Junior Hockey League. A business park in the eastern end of the community is home to the head offices of Wasaya Airways, the band offices and various other businesses.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 85 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Project Partner Relations

As noted, there are five founding partners for the project: Nipigon, Red Rock, Dorion, Shuniah and Thunder Bay. As the project develops over time, communications with these partners will continue to be of central importance. The Working Group has members from Nipigon, Red Rock and Thunder Bay who can report internally. We recommend continued extra ongoing communications with Shuniah and Dorion as the project develops.

Trans Canada Trail Ontario and Trans Canada Trail Canada are also playing an active support role including membership on the project Working Group. This is a key founding relationship that is central to the project.

The project has made initial contact with Red Rock First Nation and Fort William First Nation to share project information and to eventually determine their interest in any project involvement. They may have an interest in a formal role, in partnership projects, or in supplying labour and/or materials for the initiative.

Given the importance of Sleeping Giant Provincial Park and Sibley Township, we recommend that contact me made with these parties to determine their interest in project involvement as well.

The Working Group has generated an extensive list of local and regional groups who should continue to be kept appraised of the project developments over time. Many if not all of the following groups are on this list and were invited to participate in the Concept Development planning session and open house events held March 1‐3, 2011; Lakehead Region Conservation Authority The Land of the Nipigon Waterways Development Association Lakehead University Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Clubs District 16 Ontario Parks

The Working Group has already established a strong working relationship with the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area (LSNMCA) and Parks Canada. We recognize this as being an extremely important relationship for the project. As an emerging organization with an interest in land based interpretive elements from Sleeping Giant east, LSNMCA would be a natural partner for trail interpretive facilities and trail access nodes through to the eastern trail head at Gapen’s Pool. LSNMCA may be interested in joint development of signage and interpretive facilities. Parks Canada may be an additional source of funds for interpretive elements of the trails project as well.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 86 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

There are three key partner relationships which are critical for successful development of the trail project:

1) Canadian National (CN)

As the rail bed owner, this organization is critical to the overall trail project. We recommend continued efforts over time to establish a surface use lease arrangement with CN which will be fair to the local project partners and to the trails project as well as to CN.

We anticipate considerable benefits to CN as a partner in this project. By hosting the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail, CN will benefit through association and will also have further opportunities for involvement in sponsoring events and developing aspects of the trail. These benefits should be discussed together with CN in greater detail.

As CN remains the landowner and has ongoing interests in the fibreoptic, we are assuming that CN should maintain responsibility for keeping the bridge and culvert structures in good repair. We recommend that the lessee/ trail operator will then take responsibility for the trail additions and the trail usage impacts. In this manner, the trails group takes responsibility for all surface improvements to make the trail (with works subject to approval by CN) dan for maintenance of the trail. Under this approach, if there is there is damage to the Right of Way, bridges or culverts caused by trail usage, then the Trail Management Board would be responsible. However, if there is any other damage (weather, climate, beavers, etc.) then CN remains responsible.

We have reviewed the draft lease agreement tabled by CN and we have the following preliminary comments, as follows:

The agreement is not for the entire rail line section (Subdivision right of way lands from mileage 126.5 to mileage 129.55 and mileage 132.23 to mileage 193 situated in the District of Thunder Bay). The agreement refers to Schedule A which apparently is a map of the section that falls under the agreement but we did not have access to this.

One key item is that under the agreement the maintenance and repair of all bridges, culverts and drainage elements are the responsibility of the licensee. Included in this is the inherent risk to a break of the fibre optic cable that becomes the Trail Organizations liability risk since CN will be named in their policy as cross‐insured. The lease cost of $500/year is very low but the inherent cost and liability in the event of a washout that damages the fibre optic cable could be quite high.

If possible, we recommend that the drainage elements should be a CN cost and liability since CN owns the rail line and the fibre optic cable. The fibre optic cable is of no use to the Trail group and is not part of the lease agreement and therefore it should not become the Trail Management Board’s risk and liability.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 87 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Another concern is that the draft lease says that any environmental contamination resulting from the actions of the licensee will be the sole responsibility of the licensee to clean up. Rail lines are inherently bad for contamination so there is a very good chance that it is already contaminated and if the railroad has not completed an Environmental Site Assessment, at their cost to identify the location and nature of the existing contamination, then it would be high risk for any trails organization to accept the proposed liability without knowing what the benchmark is.

As an example to illustrate such a concern regarding environmental contamination, in North Bay CN sold rail lands to the City of North Bay for $1 on an "as is" basis. Subsequently, the City decided to develop these lands into a public space which required extensive work on developing a Record of Site Condition to determine the current level of environmental contamination. This led to a multi‐million dollar clean up by the City of North Bay which had to be paid for 100% by the City of North Bay.

One more minor detail is that it says in the first part of the agreement that ATV's are a permitted use and then further on it says that snowmobiles are the only permitted motorized use. As well there does not appear to be any reference to allowing CN maintenance staff/equipment access to the line, but we assume they still want to have that right or privilege but it is unclear what types of vehicles may need to have access along the line.

A further recommendation is that a lease agreement with CN should also include a detailed ‘exit agreement’. This should cover any possible situations whereby one or the other signatory would require an early exit from the agreement, and indicate clearly the requirements to compensate the other party should this occur for any reason.

Finally, given the scope of the capital project envisioned in this report, we further recommend that a longer term be considered for the lease such as 50 or even 100 years. This would make the entire project much more attractive to the capital project investors.

2) Betty Fox & the Terry Fox Foundation

The Terry Fox aspect is the central element of the project. It is also the distinct element will make the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail a destination trail of national and international importance.

Efforts should proceed as soon as possible in the best manner possible to establish a relationship with Betty Fox and the Terry Fox Foundation. Hopefully they will appreciate the desire to establish this special trail in this special place and the overall development of the project including the Terry Fox Overpass which will become a major icon in his honour, and the entire trail which will reinforce the Terry Fox Monument as a ‘Mecca’ for cancer survivors and endurance athletes.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 88 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Without the Terry Fox aspect, the entire project concept would need to be scaled down, and there would be significantly less impacts for business attraction, retention and expansion, for economic development and for tourism development.

To pursue this relationship, specific planning should take place in this regard with the Working Group as well as those in the region who may already have a successful relationship with the Terry Fox Foundation. This will likely be some of the current organizers of the Thunder Bay Terry Fox Run and the Running with the Giant Marathon.

3) Ministry of Transportation (MTO)

Within the capital budget, the Ministry of Transportation is envisioned as a major funding partner. MTO is identified as the funding source for the Terry Fox Overpass as well as the adjacent South Parking Area. They are also recommended as an overall funding partner in lieu of costs they would otherwise incur for bike lanes on the new 4‐ laning project. (Note that the theming and signage elements of the overpass are not included in their proposed financial contribution.) Including MTO as a funding partner is consistent with MTO costs incurred in other areas of Ontario for four‐laning projects.

Now that the Feasibility Study is complete, it would be ideal to approach MTO as soon as possible to propose the Terry Fox Monument Overpass and the other noted elements. The Working Group can likely be most effective with MTO by working with senior staff at the City of Thunder Bay, and by keeping the municipal partners advised and supportive in this regard.

A partner relationship should also be established with Canadian Pacific (CP) Rail. At the east end of the trail between Red Rock and Nipigon there is a portion of the rail bed that overlaps with CP. As well, CP is often adjacent to the Kinghorn rail line for much of the entire proposed trail and would be an ideal partner for shared stewardship once the trail is operational with regards to monitoring the trail and such matters.

Finally, with regards to enhancing Business Attraction, Retention and Expansion (BARE), the GAP rail trail provides an important model in this regard that is applicable for this project. The GAP project has a lending program partner which plays a key role in their progress with BARE. For the Kinghorn, there are two Community Futures Development Corporation Offices which together cover the trail area, namely Thunder Bay Ventures and Superior North Community Futures based in Terrace Bay. Ongoing partnership and relations with these two offices is of great importance to providing the local towns and businesses with business development tools and access to financing. We acknowledge that the Working Group is already in close contact with Superior North Community Futures and in some contact with Thunder Bay Ventures. We advocate continued involvement as the project develops including consideration of special promotions and business support mechanisms for businesses related to this proposed rail trail.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 89 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Our Assessment of People

The spirit of collaboration and cooperation that has given birth to this project will be an increasingly significant factor as the initiative moves forward. The Working Group has demonstrated their ability to consult and involve proponents and even critics.

The proponent communities vary in size but appear to have a shared determination and strength. The City of Thunder Bay is a suitable lead applicant for the capital project, and has a track record with large scale capital projects.

We anticipate that there will be significant uptake from the business sector, including attraction of new entities, and retention and expansion of existing ones. This aspect is addressed in greater detail later in this report.

Your proponent communities have the desire and the capacity required to undertake this proposed project and to be successful operators. It is our professional opinion that your proposed venture is feasible in regards to the ‘People’ aspect.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 90 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

5.2 Place – Our Findings & Assessment

Overview: Nipigon to Thunder Bay

Lake Superior and its watershed are situated at the heart of the North American continent, and represent the greatest expanse of freshwater on Earth. With the establishment of the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area, it is now also the largest protected area for freshwater in the world.

The area has incredible natural beauty and features, including rugged coastlines, rivers and trails. Outside of Thunder Bay, the most significant current natural core attractions are fishing, hunting, snowmobiling, and canoeing/kayaking. Significant visitor sites of interest include Ouimet Canyon, Eagle Canyon, Sleeping Giant Provincial Parks, and the Amethyst Mine Panorama.

The region also has numerous appealing built core attractions catering to all market segments and offering, to some degree, year‐round experiences. The most significant of these are located in Thunder Bay; Fort William Historical Park and the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre.

Fort William Historical Park is one of the largest living history attractions in North America, devoted to re‐creating the days of the North West Company and the Canadian fur trade. It is recognized as one of the Top Ten Attractions in Canada and one of the world’s most impressive historic sites, and receives 100,000 visitors annually.

The Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre, open 360 days annually continues to be the main consumer contact centre. This site attracts in excess of 67,000 visitors annually. The centre also processes over 15,000 telephone and email visitor information requests and distributes 33,000 conference delegate packages annually.

As well as drawing on domestic markets due to its iconic position – geographically and historically – the region’s position on the Lake Superior Circle Tour draws upon a market of over 35 million North Americans (11 million of which are passport holders) who live within the 12 hour drive of the city.

The Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area includes the waters from the southern tip of Sleeping Giant Park (Sibley Peninsula) south to the mid‐lake Canada / US boarder, east beyond Terrace Bay. This includes all the shoreline and waters between Sleeping Giant and Gapen’s Pool at Nipigon. This internationally significant conservation area will continue to develop and grow and attract increased attention and visitation.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 91 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Some Features of Interest in the Trail Region

The following is a list of some of the features along the proposed trail corridor:

 Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre (1km east of Hodder Ave)

 Armstrong Highway 527 (3km east of the Terry Fox Memorial) is named after the artist William Armstrong (1822‐1914). The Thunder Bay Museum Society and the Algoma Art Gallery in Sault Ste. Marie have a collection of his paintings. One of William Armstrong’s paintings shows an aboriginal burial site on the Mackenzie River.

 Mackenzie Station (15.5km east of Armstrong Highway 527) is an important ecological and historic site and a small trail leads to the mouth of the river.

 Sibley Peninsula includes a number of major features: archaeological sites dating back to 7000BC, Red Sibley rock and soils, Sleeping Giant PP, Thunder Bay Lookout, Marie Louise Lake Picnic Area view of the sleeping giant, Marie Louise Lake Visitor Centre, Sea nLio Rock Formation, Silver Inlet mining community, Thunder Cape

 Town of Pearl – Amethyst deposits

 Ouimet Canyon Park Road. Unique geological and ecological representation and Eagle Canyon Adventures.

 Cavern Lake Nature reserve, near Dorion, is Ontario’s largest bat hibernaculum

 Black Sturgeon River, Black Bay and Black Bay peninsula. A number of unique vegetation communities such as peat land shorelines and rare plants and major freshwater fisheries.

 Red Rock Cuesta 7.5km from the Black Sturgeon River – a prominent landmark and unique geological formation

 Red Rock / Hwy. 628 Junction ‐ Trailhead for the Nipigon River Recreational Trail, Nipigon Tourist Information Centre, Nipigon marina

 8km from Hwy 628 – Nipigon – Ice climbing site at the Palisades near Orient Bay, aboriginal pictographs, southern limit of the woodland caribou and populations of Bald Eagles and White Pelicans

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 92 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area (LSNMCA)

At more than 10,000 square kilometres, the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area is the largest freshwater marine protected area in the world. Although there have been previous national marine parks, this is the first area in Canada to be designated as a "National Marine Conservation Area", as defined by the Marine Conservation Areas Act. The area extends 140 kilometres (87 mi) eastward from Thunder Bay, from Thunder Cape in the west, at the tip of Sleeping Giant Provincial Park, to Bottle Point in the east, and stretches southward to the Canada‐US border, linking with Isle Royale National Park. It also anchors existing protected areas to the north, including the Nipigon River, Lake Nipigon, and the Wabakimi Provincial Park.

More than 70 species of fish inhabit the near‐pristine waters of Lake Superior, the largest of the Great Lakes. Gulls, herons, eagles, and pelicans feed in these waters, while some also use island habitats for breeding. There may be as many as 50 shipwrecks within the Lake Superior NMCA – one of which, the Gunilda, Jacques Cousteau characterized as the most beautiful wreck in the world. The area boasts many other attractions related to geology, geomorphology, and flora and fauna. Aboriginal presence in this area dates back at least 5000 years and continues to the present day.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 93 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Proposals to protect the area were first suggested in the mid‐1990s and formal plans were first announced in 2002. The LSNMCA now has several full time staff in place and they are hiring additional staff.

The marine conservation area was established after discussion with provincial and First Nations representatives. The First Nations in the area, represented by Wilfred King, the regional grand chief of the northern Superior region, endorsed the proposal once they were satisfied that it respected the Robinson Superior Treaty of 1850.

The official designation prevents resource extraction or other operations which may damage the aquatic or terrestrial ecosystems in the conservation area. However, per the agreement with the First Nations, it does not exclude all commercial marine activity, such as shipping, and commercial and sport fishing.

Sleeping Giant Provincial Park

Sleeping Giant has the longest trail system of any Ontario park – more than 64 km – and its steep cliffs are among the highest in Ontario at 240 metres. The southernmost point is known as Thunder Cape and has been depicted by many early Canadian artists. The park has natural, recreational and cultural opportunities during every season including hiking and biking, canoeing and kayaking, camping, wildlife viewing and photography, and winter sports like cross‐country skiing and snowshoeing.

The Park is also home to the Sleeping Giant Loppet, a major annual 50km cross‐country ski event that attracts about 1000 participants every year. For more than 30 years, the Sleeping Giant Loppet has been the region's key Nordic event. What sets the Sleeping Giant above its counterparts, such as Quebec's Gatineau Loppet or Wisconsin's famous American Birkebeiner, is its rugged charm as one of the last wilderness loppets.

Trails at Sleeping Giant There are two types of developed land trails at Sleeping Giant Provincial Park: hiking trails and nature trails. The seven nature trails, which have a combined length of 10 km, are relatively short trails that pass through some of the more accessible and easily traveled areas. Trails such as Gardner Lake and Sifting Lake take hikers through majestic old‐growth white pine and eastern white cedar. Some of these trails also have interpretative signs along their length that highlight certain aspects of the park’s natural history.

Conversely, the hiking trails (over 80 kilometres) travel through some of the more scenic and rugged terrain that characterizes this region. These trails range in length from the 0.5 kilometre Sea Lion Trail, which is often hiked as a side‐trip on the way to the Tee Harbour, to the 40 kilometre Kabeyun Trail, which can be hiked in several sections or as a multiday expedition. The

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 94 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Kabeyun Trail is the park’s major trail, beginning at either Silver Islet (South Kabeyun trailhead) or Thunder Bay Lookout (North Kabeyun trailhead). The Kabeyun Trail offers spectacular scenery and access to many beaches and coves as it follows the coast of Lake Superior.

In order to accommodate overnight trips, most of the longer hiking trails are equipped with interior campsites.

Recently, additional trails to the top of the giant have been developed. Within the past five years a new trail to the giant’s head has been built – The Top of the Giant Trail.

Sleeping Giant Provincial Park

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 95 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Other Related Tourism Attractions

Fort William Historical Park

Fort William Historical Park is one of the largest living history attractions in North America, devoted to re‐creating the days of the North West Company and the Canadian fur trade. It is recognized as one of the Top Ten Attractions in Canada and one of the world's most impressive historic sites. Some of Canada's most renowned explorers were also connected to the NWC, including Simon Fraser, Sir Alexander Mackenzie and David Thompson, which is indicative of how the fur trade played a key role in forming the foundations of Canada.

With over 40 buildings on 225 acres, Fort William offers a vivid and rich tapestry of fur trade life, running the gamut from culture to crafts, medicine to business, domestic life to heritage farming. Aside from its comprehensive historical program, Fort William Historical Park is also a multi‐functional operation, offering a variety of programs including overnight experiences, education programs, artisan workshops, conferences, banquets, festivals and recreational opportunities.

Ouimet Canyon Provincial Park and Eagle Canyon

Ouimet Canyon is a geologic phenomenon that results in one of the most spectacular landscapes found in eastern Canada. Formed by rock faulting and the forces of ice, wind, rain and time,e th canyon measures a full three km in length and is 152 metres across. This spectacular gorge can be viewed from two platforms along a one km barrier free trail and visitors can feel the cool air rising from the depths. Below the 107metre cliffs, hidden under the boulders on the canyon floor are rare Arctic plants. To protect this fragile plant community access to the canyon floor is prohibited.

En route to Ouimet Canyon is Eagle Canyon. This is the site for Eagle Canyon Adventures (www.eaglecanyonadventures.ca) which is a very popular tourism attraction featuring a suspension bridge and a zipline. Eagle Canyon Adventures describes their suspension bridge as ‘Canada’s Longest’ and their zipline as ‘Canada’s longest, highest and fastest’. Their suspension bridge is 600 feet in length, 152 feet above the canyon floor. Their zip line is 0.5 miles long, 175 feet high and it reaches speeds of more than 45 miles per hour.

Amethyst Mine Panorama

The Amethyst Mine Panorama was established in 1960. It is the largest amethyst deposit in North America. It was discovered in 1955 as a result of a road being built to the forest fire lookout tower visible from the mine site. Amethyst production started in 1960 and the mine has produced continuously since then. The mine produces 40% useable amethyst by volume. A large digging area, open to the public, contains 20% useable amethyst and is the main source of “pick your own” amethysts.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 96 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Food, Accommodation & Related Services (a partial list)

Below is a list of some of the numerous services that are of value to tourists and trail users:

Thunder Bay ‐ Best Western Crossroads Motor Inn ‐ Shoreline Motor Hotel ‐ Bob's Motel ‐ Strathcona Motel ‐ Comfort Inn ‐ Super 8 Motel ‐ Days Inn & Suites ‐ Superior Motel ‐ Days Inn North ‐ Thunder Bay Inn ‐ Econolodge ‐ Travelodge Thunder Bay ‐ Fort Motel ‐ Voyageur Motel ‐ Holiday Inn ‐ White Fox Inn ‐ King's Motel ‐ Kaylee's B&B ‐ Kingsway Motel ‐ Little Pearl B&B & Suites ‐ Lakehead Motel ‐ McVicar Manor B&B ‐ Marina Inn Luxury Suites ‐ Sail Superior.com Yacht Charter's B&B ‐ Modern Motel ‐ St. Anthony Square B&B ‐ Munro Motel ‐ Top of the Harbour B&B ‐ Old Country Motel ‐ Terra Elysium ‐ Overpass Motel ‐ Dog Lake Resort ‐ Pineview Motel ‐ Mink Mountain Resort ‐ Relax Motel ‐ Wilderness North ‐ Sea‐Vue Motel ‐ Chippewa Park

Shuniah ‐ Amethyst Mine Panorama ‐ KOA Kampgrounds & Resort ‐ Bayview Golf Course ‐ Lakeshore Variety Store ‐ Blue Point Amethyst Mine ‐ Lakeview Lodge ‐ Crystal Beach Roadhouse ‐ Mirror Lake Campgrounds ‐ Crystal Beach Variety ‐ McKenzie Inn ‐ Eldorado Beach Bed & Breakfast ‐ Mt. Baldy Ski Club ‐ Frank Pollari Bike Tours ‐ Pass Lake Corner Service/Store ‐ Green Valley Gardens ‐ The Fish Shop ‐ Karens Kountry Kitchen ‐ Thunder Bay International Hostel

Hurkett ‐ Handmade Furniture ‐ A&R Greenhouses Ltd. ‐ Hurkett Cove Lodging ‐ Black Bay Strawberry PatchGreen ‐ Jems Strawberries Thumb Greenhouse ‐ Wolf River Bear Baits ‐ Hamilton Baits

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 97 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Dorion ‐ Ball Bus Service ‐ Home Interior & Gifts ‐ Beyond The Giant Nature Retreats ‐ Olavi's Fresh Produce ‐ Big Bear Adventures ‐ Ouimet Experience (camping sites; ‐ Brenda's Baking kayak, canoe, bike rentals) Canyon Country Service & Post Office ‐ Sunset Valley Farm ‐ Dorion Bible Camp & Conference Centre ‐ The Friends of Ouimet Canyon Prov. ‐ Dorion Inn Park ‐ Eagle Canyon Adventures Inc. ‐ Tony's Baits & Licenses ‐ Frantastic Catering ‐ Wolf River Campground

Red Rock ‐ Northern Sights Studio Gallery & Coffee ‐ A Castaway – All Season Fishing House ‐ Birchwood Campground & Café ‐ Red Rock Marina ‐ Bowman Island Charters ‐ Red Rock Quikmart ‐ Hidden Gem B&B ‐ Saunders Foodland ‐ Lakeview Café ‐ Red Rock Inn ‐ Nipigon River Adventures ‐ The North Shore Golf Club ‐ The Quebec Lodge Nipigon ‐ Beaver Motel ‐ Nipigon Husky Travel Centre ‐ Birchville Motel ‐ Nipigon Marina ‐ Canadian Tire ‐ Nipigon Petro‐Canada Service ‐ Cara's Cabana ‐ Nipigon River Bear Hunts ‐ China Gardens ‐ Nipigon River Motel and Cottages ‐ Epic Adventures ‐ North Superior Charters ‐ Four Way Variety ‐ Northland Motel ‐ Grey Rocks Inn & Bistro ‐ ‘Paddle to Sea’ Park ‐ Gus’s Restaurant ‐ Pelletier’s Gas Bar ‐ Hardcore Fishing ‐ Pine Crest Motel ‐ Hebert’s Confectionery ‐ Pizza Hut/KFC Express/Robin's Donuts ‐ Logan’s Vacationland Motel ‐ Potan’s Gas Bar ‐ Mac’s Mart ‐ River's Bend Bed & Breakfast ‐ Nighthawk Charters ‐ Scandia House B&B ‐ Nipigon Baits and Tackle ‐ Stillwater Park and Amethyst Gift Shop ‐ Nipigon Café ‐ Subway ‐ Nipigon Community Centre ‐ Town and Country Motel ‐ Nipigon Drive‐Inn ‐ Zechner’s Foodmarket ‐ Nipigon ESSO Restaurant

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 98 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Festivals & Events (a partial list)

Nipigon Epic Adventures Mountain Bike Festival Frazer Lake Walleye Classic Fish Derby Hike for Health Nipigon Blueberry Blast – long weekend of August Nipigon Fall Fishing Festival – every Labour Day weekend

Red Rock Live From the Rock Folk Festival Paju Mountain Run Red Rock Fish and Game Club Annual Trout Derby ‐ first weekend in June Canada Day Event ‐ July 1

Dorion Canyon Country Birding Festival Canyon Country Challenge

Shuniah Inline Skate for MS Pass Lake Fair – late August

Thunder Bay 2011 Walk to Fight Arthritis – mid May Crohn's and Colitis Heel'n'Wheel – mid June Fire Fighters 10 Mile Road Race – end of May Health & Wellness Expo – late April Out of the Darkness Memorial Walk – beginning of May Run for Life – mid April Sleeping Giant Loppet – beginning of March St.Patty's 5K & 5 Mile Road Race – late March Superior Living Health & Wellness Expo – mid April Terry Fox Run – mid September The Amazing Raising Cash for Kids Race Thunder Bay Marathon – mid September Thunder Bay Triathlon – late July

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 99 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Our Assessment of Place

The Thunder Bay/Superior North Shore can be seen as the “crown” of Lake Superior with the Great Outdoors City of Thunder Bay adjoined to the magnificent natural features of Lake Superior and the fascinating history and heritage of all its inhabitants.

The proposed route between Nipigon and Thunder Bay has many advantages:

 the connection with Terry Fox’s legacy and the location of the western trailhead at the Terry Fox Monument & Tourist Information Centre is a unique and highly valuable theme for the project that is both a highly recognizable “brand” and which gives the project great social and emotional value  the route itself passes through and nearby some of the most beautiful country in Central Canada which also has a long and varied history as an important link in Canada’s historical/geographic timelines, and which is a very important area in terms of landscape, environment and ecology  adjacent to the contemporary trans‐Canada highway connection between Eastern and Western Canada  the Kinghorn Line rail bed provides an excellent bike/snowmobile–friendly “roadway” suitable for covering long distances

The distance to market is a challenge for the location overall. However, we do find that the unique proposed elements can be combined to overcome this aspect successfully.

It is our professional opinion that your proposed venture is feasible in regards to the ‘Place’ aspect.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 100 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

5.3 Market – our findings and assessment

The project concept builds well on the findings of the 2008 Premier Ranked Tourist Destination Final Report: North of Superior Tourism Region (see pages 11‐15) and the ongoing creative focus of Tourism Thunder Bay as being a gateway to the outdoors and the region, and sports tourism (see pages 16‐19).

The project concept for the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail is also in keeping with two of the key findings from the 2008 Rosehart Report called Northwestern Ontario: Preparing for Change. Recommendation 10.0.5 (Rosehart Report page 38) calls for “one or more new destination tourist attractions in Northwestern Ontario” with recommended contributions “towards developing and delivering the attraction”. Recommendation 10.0.4 (Rosehart Report page 38) calls for the federal government and the highway 11/17 communities to “maximize the tourism experience and development potential from the many parks along this route, in particular, the recently announced funding for the National Marine Conservation Area”.

The Rosehart Report also quotes Sergio Buonocore, General Manager of the Fort William Historical Park;

“Tourism attractions play a vital role as economic catalysts and champions in their regions. As travel generators, they support the economy by providing a focal point for tourism visitation and related spin‐off benefits to other industry sectors and communities.

Expansion and clustering of tourism attractions act as magnets to promote new product and partnership opportunities for additional investment towards a vibrant tourism destination experience. By their very existence, attractions assist the regional economy as an employer, and through their own consumption of goods and services. Based on the success of Fort William Historical Park, consideration should be given to the establishment of an additional attraction for Northwestern Ontario.”

Thunder Bay Tourism and Red Rock are part of a Lake Superior cruise ship tourism coalition which includes Duluth and Sault Ste Marie. Cruise Ships now represents a little over one half of a percent of Thunder Bay's overall tourism receipts annually. However, it is a strategic segment in that it is high profile and aligned with respected and renowned brands in cruising and unique and exotic visitor experiences. Growth in this segment is being pursued aggressively.

In Thunder Bay, the new Pool Six Cruise Ship terminal opened in the summer of 2009 with 11 visits from the cruise ship Clelia II. In 2010, Clelia II made a total of 10 stops in Thunder Bay with visits to Red Rock added to the schedule in 2010 from June through September. There was an average of 85 passengers per visit which generated approximately $423 000 in local and regional economic impacts, including passenger, crew and vessel services and supplies.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 101 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

In Thunder Bay alone in 2010, over 36 companies were positively impacted by the cruise ship industry visits from attractions to retail galleries, transportation, security and vessel supply firms.

The Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail would be a unique land‐based attraction that would add to the attractiveness of the Thunder Bay to Red Rock area for the Cruise Ships industry. A portion of the cruise ships travellers will choose to visit the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail during their land excursions and some of this group will likely seek to walk, run or bicycle the trail between Red Rock and the Terry Fox Memorial.

Market Opportunity: Soft Adventurers Running, Walking, Hiking, Biking, Horseback Riding, Snowmobiling, Cross Country Skiing, Enhanced Access

For a tourist to travel for a trail experience, it must be unlike anything they can get at home. It must be unique and different and show them something new and exciting. Scenic vistas, creative on‐trail experiences (single‐track), technical trail features, enhanced surfaces, fitness challenges & story telling are components that should examined for incorporation into new trail development.

Marketing of the new trail will be able to build on the existing tourism visitation to the Nipigon through Thunder Bay region. It will significantly expand visitation if it is developed and marketed effectively as a Destination Trail Venue.

The following is additional information on the current regional tourism industry.

Current Visitor Activity in the Thunder Bay Region (2008)

Table 1.1: Person Visits: Length of Stay Overnight Same‐day Total Visits Visits Visits Total (000s) 586 357 229 Ontario 396 226 170 Other Canada 39 39 0 U.S. 143 86 58 Overseas 8 7 1

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 102 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Table 1.2: Person Visits: Place of Residence (Top 10 Places) Overnight Same‐day Total Visits Visits Visits Top 10 Total (000s) 489 267 222 CD58: Thunder Bay 236 93 144 District CD59: Rainy River 77 52 25 District Minnesota 54 38 16 CD20: Toronto Metropolitan 39 39 0 Municipality Michigan 26 8 18 Wisconsin 24 12 12 Winnipeg CD11 11 11 0 CD30: Waterloo 7 7 0 Regional Municipality New York 7 2 5 Illinois 7 5 2

 Average age of Visitor: 46.2  Any Outdoor / Sports Activity 178,000 visitors = to National Parks & Historic Sites combined.  Average visitor spending with an overnight: Ontario ‐ $442, Other Canada $261, U.S $238, Overseas $701

Source: http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/research/rtp/2008/CMA595/index.htm

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 103 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Target Markets

When creating a destination trail, the goal is to develop a wide reach of potential visitors to include short, medium and long haul targets. The proposed new trail development with strong emotional connections to the Terry Fox story and one of a kind on trail experience will attract users from Ontario, Canada and the United States.

The primary targets for this trail are:

Local Residents For any new tourism operation the primary market opportunity is usually based on capturing a share of existing tourism visitation to the local area or region. Other markets can then be developed over time. With the metropolitan area of Thunder Bay (Pop 122, 907), Nipigon (Pop 1752), Red Rock (Pop 1063) on the doorstep of the Kinghorn Trail, it will become a recreational asset for the city and surrounding residents. One of the most significant benefits of destination trails is the legacy impact they have on the local people. Residents become frequent users, and their engagement of increased physical activity creates a healthier, more vibrant community. This trail proposal with its interactivity, focus on fitness and uniqueness will become embedded as part of local residents’ daily routine. This market segment will be a major component of this trail.

Visiting Friends & Relatives (VFR) The second largest number of visitors to the Thunder Bay Region (13%), are visiting friends and relatives. This key market may not be the highest spending segment but they make up for it in numbers. If local resident trail use becomes high then they will perform the sales task of inviting friends and family to come and experience it. The opportunity for this segment is awareness and cross linking all of the attractions, restaurants and retail together to increase the yield. The VFR market exists in the email address books of everyone of the local residents. Empowering residents to invite people to experience the trail and region is a strategic approach to increase visitation.

Fitness Enthusiasts The greatest opportunity to drive overnight stays and visitation lies within this market segment. In the US and Canada, ultra fitness events such as marathons, adventure races, long distance cycling, and trail running are experiencing dramatically increased participation rates. The most detailed statistics are found within Marathons. The following illustrates the growth rate of 36% over the past 7 years in the US.

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total Finishers 299,000 295,000 324,000 334,000 362,000 383,000 397,000 407,000* Year‐to‐Year ‐1.3% 9.8% 3.1% 8.4% 5.8% 3.8% 2.3% Growth Percent Male 62.5% 62.1% 61.5% 60.9% 60.5% 60.0% 60.1% 60.5% Percent Female 37.5% 37.9% 38.5% 39.1% 39.5% 40.0% 39.9% 39.5% Source: Marathonguide.com

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 104 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The growth in Marathon events is already benefiting new smaller events. Marquee events such as the New York, Chicago, Honolulu and Boston marathons have sustained years of growth and are now constrained by capacity limits. The marathon community is actively searching for new, unique locations to host events. With the connection to the man who “Ran a Marathon Every Day”, there is tremendous opportunity to position Thunder Bay as significant Marathon destination. The City of Thunder Bay has already recognized sports tourism as a key pillar of future tourism development.

The economic benefits of Marathons are substantial.

In 2010, more than 10,000 of the runners to the Chicago Marathon indicated it was their first time to the city. 6,000 came from 100 countries. In 2009, the marathon contributed $150 million worth of activity and produced 1310 jobs. Source: Bank of America , 2010

The ultra fitness enthusiasts exist in every town and city across North America. They train together via local fitness, cycling and running clubs and travel to events. They can be communicated to using these networks.

Recreational Hiking & Cycling In Canada over 1.5 million people have taken a hiking or cycling vacation, but more importantly they have become part of the touring vacation culture. Vehicles are loaded with bikes, and hiking boots and hiking and cycling have become a core staple for all segments while road tripping. This is a significant component for the Thunder Bay region’s visitation. These markets are looking for points of interest, waterfalls and scenic overlooks, and trails are the conduit to get there. Once developed, this trail will be positioned as one of the region’s “Must See” activities. If built to its fullest potential it will become a Core Trip Motivator, becoming an anchor activity to draw visitors to the region.

The Quebec cycling and hiking market is a good match for the Kinghorn Trail product. Quebecers can relate to the Terry Fox story as he passed through Quebec, and would be attracted to a unique purpose built trail corridor. Quebec has also invested heavily in its own cycling infrastructure and cycle tourism product and has increased ridership. These riders are now looking for destinations outside of the Province. If linkages are made to the regions other scenic roadways i.e. Sleeping Giant off the trail, there would be substantial cycle distance to attract a longer haul market such as this.

Statistics on one of Quebec’s iconic routes ‘La Route Verte’:  Spend an average of $105 per day  Stayed an average of 5.5 nights  Season range – May to September  Approx 500,000 cycle tourists in Quebec  16,700 out of Province riders, 26,400 domestic Source: Bicycling in Quebec – A Population on the Move, 2000

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 105 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Cancer Survivors “An estimated 173,800 new cases of cancer and 76,200 deaths from cancer will occur in Canada in 2010” Source: Canadian Care Statistics, Canadian Cancer Society, 2010

“About 1 out of 20 adults is surviving cancer in the United States” Source: National Coalition For Cancer Survivorship, 2011

The Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail will provide cancer survivors and those families affected by the disease a place to reflect, motivate, and challenge themselves the same way Terry did throughout his marathon of hope. This unfortunate disease touches so many people within North America and around the world that patients and survivors annually gather en masse to fundraise, mourn and celebrate. Many cancer themed events exist in Canada alone including:  Terry Fox Run  Relay for Life  Great Ride ‘n’ Stride  Taking Steps Against Breast Cancer  CIBC Run For the Cure  Weekend to End Women’s Breast Cancer

With Thunder Bay’s strong connection to the Terry Fox story already made, this new trail development project could enhance that experience to provide a place for cancer survivors, patients and families to come and gain strength and motivation. The trail would become a living experiential story that people would participate in by walking, cycling, and running. The trail could also become a major focus point for fundraising events for the Canadian Cancer Society.

People with Disabilities “One in Seven Canadians – 4.4 million adults and children‐are living with a disability” Source: Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. 2009 Federal Disability Report: Advancing the Inclusion of People with Disabilities. 2009

New Zealand, Tasmania and Australia are leaders in focusing on travelers with disabilities. This enormous market segment is attracted to places that are barrier free and have activities designed exclusively for them. As the ‘Baby Boomer’ ages this market is going to rise dramatically. In addition to attractions, it requires an overall strategy to address transportation constraints, accommodation accessibility, and customer service requirements.

As part of an overall barrier free tourism strategy for the region, the Thunder Bay region could become one of those internationally attractive destinations with the addition of the Kinghorn Trail. The emotional story of Terry Fox provides massive credibility and would empower visitors during their visit to the trail.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 106 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

The on‐trail experience for this segment needs to be the major motivating factor to visit. The creation of fully accessible parks at the trail heads (with features such as the Liberty Swing) and having similar features available at various nodes and access points will make the entire trail attractive to users with a disability.

“People with disabilities and older persons are becoming a growing group of consumers of travel, sports, and other leisure‐oriented products and services. Furthermore, with regard to physical access, families with young children, who are also becoming part of this increasing tourist market, have similar needs to persons with disabilities and older persons. Thus large numbers of people require tourism to be made barrier‐free.” Source: Barrier Free Tourism For People With Disabilities in the ECAP Region, Asia pacific Conference on Tourism For People with Disability, 2000

This market is world‐wide, however, focusing on short to medium haul markets until the product is fully mature is the best approach.

Snowmobilers

According to the North of Superior Region, Premier‐Ranked Tourist Destination final report in 2006, snowmobiling was identified as one of the 10 Natural Core Attractions in the Thunder Bay region. In consumer surveys it was ranked in the top 5 as one of the tourism strengths of the region. In the overall recommendations of the report snowmobiling was listed as number 1:

Recommendation One/Product/Snowmobile Trail Development: That NOSSA, with the appropriate partners, seek funding to complete all missing trail linkages within the North of Superior region.

The Kinghorn Trail is one of these major connection routes that are required to enhance the snowmobile experience in the Thunder Bay region. The snowmobile market for this region lies domestically in Ontario, and internationally in Minnesota Wisconsin, and Michigan.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 107 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Our Assessment of Market

The proposed Terry Fox Courage Trail provides ample evidence of marketability – both from a local/existing market perspective, and for new tourism markets.

This is borne out by a number of points:

 the Premier Ranked Tourism Destination process that was carried out is encouraging in the face of economic downturns and increasing competition for tourism dollars, and provided a solid assessment upon which to build upon the existing market and product base

 Thunder Bay Tourism is very active and effective in the area of marketing, showing significant ability to broaden and expand its tourism traffic, and overcome its distance‐ to‐market challenges – while their focus on the Greatest Outdoor City, being a gateway to the outdoors, and events marketing are all 100% consistent with the proposed trail concept

 the potential draw of a high quality trail, as is proposed, for the recreational marketplace is supported by the increasing popularity of other long‐distance trails and bikeways such as British Columbia’s Kettle Valley Trail, Pennsylvania’s Great Allegheny Passage, Ontario’s Bruce‐Grey Trails Network, and Quebec’s extensive “Route Verte”

 the central Terry Fox element sets this proposed trail on a national and international stage – careful, respectful and appropriate development of the trail is required to bring the concept effectively to the marketplace – with proper development of this project, the market response will be very significant and worthwhile – for all the proponent communities, for the region, for Northern Ontario and for Ontario

It is our professional opinion that your proposed venture is feasible in regards to the ‘Market’ aspect.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 108 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

5.4 Financials – Our Projections & Assessment

We have developed preliminary budgets for construction and operation of the trail. These have been developed to an appropriate level of rigour to assess financial feasibility of the project. The budgets will need to be further refined and developed if the initiative proceeds to business planning.

Our preliminary costs for actual trail construction are based on the delivery and supply of aggregate materials, grading and compaction of placed aggregate and the supply and installation of asphalt. These costs were developed from actual quotes from local suppliers (two paving quotes + two aggregate supply and delivery quotes). We have also considered the reported costs from Trans Canada Trail reports and extensive additional rail trails research.

In developing a preliminary capital budget, we have made every effort to ensure that the indicated total budget is sufficient to cover all required expenses and we have estimated the costs keeping in mind that construction start‐up may be 2‐3 years down the road. Within the business planning process, it may be possible to identify net cost savings and reduce the capital budget perhaps in the range of 5‐15% or more. This will need to be determined over time.

The preliminary capital budget shown in this section has been designed to reflect the plan to make the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail a destination trail venue of national significance in order to make it a tourism demand generator. If the project concept was merely for ‘another rail trail’ or a trail for local use only, the capital budget would be reduced significantly. However, such a trail would have very limited economic impacts and would not deliver the needed results for business attraction, retention and expansion. To drive economic results, the trail needs to be a destination trail and the project concept achieves this goal tremendously. To succeed with implementing the vision, a significant capital budget is required as shown in this section including a significant launch marketing budget to create the appropriate ‘first impression’ and to make this trail a ‘go to’ trail within the North American markets.

For operating costs, a number of operating trails were researched to determine accurate figures for an annual maintenance and operation budget. Discovery Routes Trails Organization was contacted to obtain actual trail maintenance and operation costs for a paved rail trail in North Bay. The trails operations reports reviewed provided very similar figures to those provided by Trans Canada Trail with an average annual trail maintenance cost of about $1,000 per kilometre of trail.

A number of sources were consulted to determine general liability insurance costs to operate the trail on an annual basis. A single broker, OASIS Insurance was recommended from a number of sources confirming that they specialize in outdoor recreation insurance policies and their clients include a number of trail groups including the TCT. OASIS provided an initial quote of $500 annually for liability insurance. According to Trans Canada Trail Ontario, annual insurance costs can go as high as $5,000 per year particular for trails that include ATV use.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 109 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Determining Trail Construction Costs

At the feasibility stage, a number of assumptions must be made about the design of the trail in order to develop reasonable cost estimates. In general, we have assumed that the trail base will be 4.0m wide and constructed from a compacted layer either of Granular A or Granular B material at a thickness of 150mm. The final granular trail surface will be 3.4m wide and constructed of a compacted layer of stone dust/crusher fines at a thickness of 50mm. The option to pave all or a portion of the trail was also investigated. It was assumed that HL4 asphalt would be applied at a thickness of 50mm to create a trail surface of 3.4m over the created 4.0m granular base.

Since there are several suppliers of the required materials within the study area, it is impossible at this stage to accurately identify the delivery costs of the materials. To standardize this aspect of the costing process, we have assumed the material will be delivered by triaxle dump trucks with a maximum capacity of 22 tonnes with a delivery cycle of 2 hours at $85/hour between loads. This is a reasonable assumption to cover most situations over the length of the trail.

The aggregate quantities for the project were calculated in cubic metres of materials and standard Ministry of Transportation conversions were used to convert the volumes to tonnes of material for costing purposes. The following is a summary of the assumptions used for costing purposes:

 Granular trail base will be 4.0m wide and 150mm thick  Stone Dust/Crusher Fines trail surface will be 3.4m wide and 50mm thick  One Cubic Metre of Granular A is equivalent to 2.4 tonnes  One Cubic Metre of Granular B is equivalent to 2.0 tonnes  One Cubic Metre of Stone Dust/Crusher Fines is equivalent to 1.3 tonnes  Aggregate Material will be delivered by triaxle trucks with a maximum capacity of 22 tonnes  Delivery cycle of material will be 2 hours per load  Delivery costs will be charged at about $85 per hour  HL4 Asphalt trail surface will be 3.4m wide and 50mm thick  We have assumed the use of a geotextile (Terrafix 270R or equivalent) to be placed under the granular material to prevent downward migration into the railway ballast (this may be a higher priority for the paved sections)

Determining Other Capital Construction Costs

The other costs in our capital expense budget have been estimated in various ways. The Terry Fox Overpass costs are estimated based on informal discussions with Genivar. The bridge decking and hand rails costs are an estimate only based on other trail projects. The professional fees, marketing and other costs are based on extensive experience with other projects in Northern Ontario.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 110 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Preliminary Capital Expense Budget expense assumptions: trail length 111 km paved sections length 50 km stone dust sections length 61 km CN responsible for culverts and bridge structures (not including trail additions) construction period of approximately 2.25 years Expenses

Materials and Labour rates units 17,532,633 88% Trails 9,572,540 47.9% Geotextile fabric (270R Terrafix or similar) 3,400 /km 111 377,400 Gravel base - 15 cm (6 inch) depth, 4 m (11 ft) wide 33,000 /km 111 3,663,000 Stone dust - 5 cm (2 inch) depth, 3.4 metre (9 ft) wide 6,400 /km 61 390,400 Grading, levelling, compaction (base, gravel & stone dust) 9,600 /km 111 1,065,600 Paving - 3.4 metre (9 ft) wide 46,000 /km 50 2,300,000 Supplementary paving costs for eco-products 35% 16,100 /km 50 805,000 Landscape restoration 1,000 /km 111 111,000 Contingency 10% 860,140 Terry Fox Overpass 3,507,500 17.6% Terry Fox Overpass construction 2,400,000 Terry Fox themed signage & artwork on the overpass 400,000 New south parking area at Terry Fox Overpass 250,000 Contingency 15% 457,500 Trail Additions to Existing Bridges (decking & 2 side rails) 1,035,000 5.2% Pass Lake Trestle (pedestrian and bicycle use only) 300,000 1 300,000 12 small bridges (for all trail users including snowmobiles) 50,000 12 600,000 Contingency 15% 135,000 Trail Signage and Features 3,417,593 17.1% Western Trail Head (additions to Terry Fox site) 200,000 1 200,000 Accessibility Park Features at Western Trail Head 52,000 5 260,000 Eastern Trail Head (new build) 340,000 1 340,000 Accessibility Park Features at Eastern Trail Head 52,000 3 156,000 Staging Areas (Pass Lake Trestle/Sleeping Giant + Red Rock) 104,500 2 209,000 Intermediate Access Points (basic plus additional features) 76,000 9 684,000 Basic Access Points (includes signage, water, toilets, bollards) 44,000 9 396,000 Special Nodes for Terry Fox Fitness and Education Challenges 29,820 16 477,120 Benches & interpretive panels (between access points) 5,000 19 95,000 Bollards and signage for non access road crossings 5,000 10 50,000 Terry Fox / TCT trail markers (1 every 1 km) 300 109 32,700 Buffering vegetation and other such re private landowners 1,200 60 72,000 Contingency 15% 445,773

Professional Planning & Support 1,912,607 10% Business Plan 0.45% re entire project 88,046 Trails Master Plan 0.80% re entire project 156,526 Architecture (Trail-heads, Access Points, Bridge) 4.0% re trail heads, access points, overpass 186,100 Engineering (Bridges - Overpass + Parking + all othe 10.0% re overpass & parking + bridge additions 355,000 Engineering (Trails) 5.0% re trails 478,627 Professional Project Management Support 2.5% re entire project 474,434 Contingency for Soft Costs 10% 173,873

Other Costs 539,000 3% Project Manager (full time) years: 2 50,000 /year 14% benefits 114,000 Launch Marketing Planning 125,000 Launch Marketing Implementation 300,000 19,984,240

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 111 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Preliminary Capital Revenue Budget We have developed a draft revenue budget which is provided below. We are assuming a construction period of about 27 months (2.25 years). This provides an opportunity for the project partners to spread their investment over 3 fiscal years.

expense assumptions: trail length 111 km paved sections length 50 km stone dust sections length 61 km CN responsible for culverts and bridge structures (not including trail additions) construction period of approximately 2.25 years proponent financing is shared on a per capita basis (size of population)

Revenues

# of fiscal Local Communities per year years sub-total 999,212 5% Nipigon 7,137 3 21,412 2.1% Red Rock 5,948 3 17,843 1.8% Dorion 1,190 3 3,569 0.4% Shuniah 9,516 3 28,549 2.9% Thunder Bay 309,280 3 927,840 92.9% 100.0%

Project Partners

Trans Canada Trails Ontario 3,000,000 15% Ontario and/or Canada (specific agencies to be determined over time) 13,345,028 67% Ministry of Transportation of Ontario 5,720,000 29% Terry Fox Overpass construction 2,400,000 New south parking area at Terry Fox Overpass 400,000 Contingency on Overpass + Parking 15% 420,000 Engineering for Terry Fox Overpass 240,000 Engineer for new south parking area 40,000 In lieu of paved shoulders on 4-laning 2,220,000 Total 19,984,240

As shown, the local investment will leverage considerable investments from outside agencies given the scope of the project and the anticipated economic development, business investment and tourism stimulus impacts. The project proponents and the outside agencies investing in the project will realize significant benefits and return on their investments which are addressed in subsequent sections of this report and which can be further detailed as the project develops over time.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 112 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

There are a range of possible funding agencies that may be interested in investing in the project. Our preliminary list includes ‐ Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corporation, ‐ Tourism Ontario, ‐ FedNor, ‐ Parks Canada, ‐ Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area (on shared einterpretiv signage and facilities) ‐ other federal and provincial sources which can be identified over time.

We have also taken an initial look at other possible funding agencies. For example, we considered the P3 Canada Fund which encourages Public Private Partnerships but it does not appear to be a suitable fit for the project. The smallest P3 Canada Fund approval to date was $45 million, and the program requires a significant private sector role by large scale private sector companies. At this point, this does not appear feasible for this project. The P3 Canada Fund should, however, be reviewed further during business planning.

We are satisfied, given the significant scope of the Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail, that securing capital funding investments for the project is achievable. This will need to be pursued over time, and addressed in greater detail within business planning. This will also need to take into account, as much as possible, any funding agency program changes resulting from the upcoming federal and provincial elections this year.

Given the scope of the capital budget, professional management of the project will be of great importance to ensure that cost over‐runs are avoided. A construction management approach should be considered as an important option in this regard. Professional project management support is also highly recommended and is therefore included in the preliminary capital budget.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 113 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Operating Revenues and Costs

operating assumptions: trail length 111 km paved sections length 50 km stone dust sections length 61 km general annual cost increase 2% (assumed)

Year Year Year Year Year One Two Three Four Five Operating Revenues

Municipal Partners (in-kind trail maintenance) Nipigon 2.1% 2,413 1,940 858 365 12 Red Rock 1.8% 2,011 1,617 715 304 10 Dorion 0.4% 402 323 143 61 2 Shuniah 2.9% 3,217 2,587 1,144 486 16 Thunder Bay 92.9% 104,557 84,084 37,172 15,801 516 112,600 90,552 40,031 17,016 555

Events - # of participants 4250 5165 6296 7695 9432 Events - $10 fee per participant/day 42,500 51,650 62,955 76,954 94,324 (no fee for Terry Fox Run)

Corporate Partners / Sponsors 50,000 60,000 72,000 82,800 95,220

Business Partner Fees (for Service) 0 7,000 8,400 9,660 10,259

Trail Endowment Fund 0 0 30,000 40,000 50,000

Sub-total 205,100 209,202 213,386 226,430 250,358

Operating Expenses

Trail Maintenance paved 900 /km 45,000 45,900 46,818 47,754 48,709 stone dust 1100 /km 67,100 68,442 69,811 71,207 72,631 sub-total 112,100 114,342 116,629 118,961 121,341

Trail Manager - salary 50,000 51,000 52,020 53,060 54,122 Trail Manager - benefits 7,000 7,140 7,283 7,428 7,577 Transportation for Trail Manager 10,000 10,200 10,404 10,612 10,824

Marketing (beyond launch period) 20,000 20,400 20,808 30,000 50,000 General Liability Insurance 3,000 3,060 3,121 3,184 3,247 Other (TBD) 3,000 3,060 3,121 3,184 3,247

Sub-total 205,100 209,202 213,386 226,430 250,358

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 114 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Projected Economic Impacts

We anticipate that our proposed project will have a very significant impact on economic growth, diversification and job creation in Ontario, and in the Thunder Bay / Nipigon region in particular.

We have carried out an economic impact analysis for this project using an Income Expenditure Economic Impact Model incorporating direct, indirect and induced impacts on both employment and income for capital construction. The economic impacts of this project have been analyzed using an income expenditure economic impact model with industry‐specific Statistics Canada multiplier rates. These are summarized below, and details are available

We have also utilized Ontario's Tourism Regional Economic Impact Model (TREIM) to project the economic impact of the Kinghorn Trail once it is fully operational.

Construction Impact

New Wealth Creation Impact: $37,665,796

• includes direct, indirect and induced impacts during construction phase

New Employment Impact: 448 person years

• includes direct, indirect and induced impacts during construction phase

Given the nature of the project, the vast majority of this wealth and employment creation will take place within North‐western Ontario.

Excerpts from the detailed economic impact analysis are included on the following pages.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 115 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Construction Income Analysis:

Direct Impacts Indirect Impacts Inclusion of Induced Impacts

sum of labour 14,020,029 4,996,060 induced income multiplier 1.51 sum of material 5,964,211 direct + indirect 24,980,300

total 19,984,240 total construction income 37,665,796

Employment Analysis – Construction Phase: percentage local labour 100% local const. labour rate 30,000 outside const. labour rate 46,000 average const. labour rate 38,000 service labour rate 25,000 construction labour employment multiplier = (income multiplier -1)*(average const. wage)/(average service wage) + 1 = ( 1.51 less 1) * ( 38000 ) / ( 25000 ) + 1 = 1.61 direct impact construction wages 8,686,575 average const. labour rate 38000 # of construction jobs (in person years) 228.6 direct jobs indirect impact indirect income 4,996,060 service labour rate 25,000 # of supplier jobs (in person years) 50.0 indirect jobs assume 25% of material order / service labour rate total employment = (direct employment + indirect employment) * employment multiplier = 228.6 50.0 1.61 = 448.3

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 116 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

TREIM Analysis of Trail Operational Impacts

The following figures are based on visitor spending of $22,739,893 which are projected to occur for the first full year of trail operations (including fully implemented launch marketing strategy).

The following breakdown of visitors by origin was taken by the Ontario 2008 Tourism Profile for the Thunder Bay District:

Visitor's Origin Spending % Ontario 73.10% Rest of Canada 5.80% USA 18.60% Overseas 2.50% Total 100.00%

The following breakdown of expenditures by category was provided by the TREIM model for outdoor activities in North‐western Ontario:

Public Transportation $548,097 Private Transportation - Rental $391,953 Private Transportation - Operation $4,626,160

Local Transportation $167,956

Accommodation $6,149,384

Food & Beverage - At Stores $2,234,275

Food & Beverage - At Restaurants/Bars $3,589,865

Recreation & Entertainment $2,342,447

Retail - Clothing $1,231,145

Retail - Other $1,458,611

Total $22,739,893

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 117 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Labour Income

North-West Ontario

Direct $6,542,763 $97,970

Indirect $1,483,365 $113,136

Induced $1,440,681 $137,524 Total $9,466,810 $348,630

Employment (Jobs)

North-West Ontario Direct 182 2 Indirect 26 2 Induced 25 2 Total 233 6

The first year figures indicated above will increase significantly on an annual basis. With the Lake Superior Terry Fox Trail’s appeal to a national audience, the portion of the trail users coming from outside the region will increase significantly over time. This group of users has significantly higher rates of spending per day, and therefore greater economic and business attraction and expansion impacts.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 118 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Business Attraction, Retention and Expansion

Status Quo: Current Tourism‐related Business Snapshot for Thunder Bay

 Canadian traffic led the way in 2010, representing 81% of total traffic, (dominated by Ontario and Manitoba), followed by the United States at 15% (dominated by Minnesota) and Overseas markets at 4% (largely German and British markets)

 Visitation to the Terry Fox Visitor Center was 67,222 visitors in 2009, up 4% from 64,866 in 2008.

 Year end results continue to support growth in the hotel segment, with the city posting a 70.5% occupancy rate, up 5.2 points from 2009. Average summer occupancy for 2010 was just under 84%

Anticipated Impact of Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail on Local Businesses

A comparison of projected economic impacts (summarized above) with the 2008 Tourism Profile of the Thunder Bay District suggests an average increase in visitor spending of 12% as a result of this proposed project.

2008 Visitor Spending ‐ Thunder Bay District Projected Additional Visitor Spending with new Trail

$191,492,001 $22,739,893

Public Transportation $4,615,506 Public Transportation $548,097 Private Transportation - Rental $3,300,628 Private Transportation - Rental $391,953 Private Transportation - Operation $38,956,761 Private Transportation - Operation $4,626,160 Local Transportation $1,414,354 Local Transportation $167,956 Accommodation $51,783,786 Accommodation $6,149,384 Food & Beverage - At Stores $18,814,768 Food & Beverage - At Stores $2,234,275 Food & Beverage - At Restaurants/Bars $30,230,152 Food & Beverage - At Restaurants/Bars $3,589,865 Recreation & Entertainment $19,725,684 Recreation & Entertainment $2,342,447 Retail - Clothing $10,367,440 Retail - Clothing $1,231,145 Retail - Other $12,282,922 Retail - Other $1,458,611 Total $191,492,000 Total $22,739,893

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 119 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

A number of studies have demonstrated the significant impact trails such as the proposed Kinghorn Trail have on “trail towns” and the businesses that service trail users. The aforementioned economic impact studies of the Great Allegheny Passage and Bicycle Touring in Maine, and many others – primarily in the US – focus on the relationship between businesses and trail users and the kinds of impact user spending has on new business development, business retention, and expansion.

According to the Economic Impact Study conducted for the Great Allegheny Passage Trail, one new business was created (net) for every $3,500,000 of user expenditures during each of the years 2008 and 2009.

Accordingly, we are projecting a business creation impact from the Kinghorn Trail during the first five years of full operations, as follows:

Projected Projected number Year Tourism Revenues New Businesses (net)

1 22,739,893 7 2 27,609,401 8 3 35,560,095 10 4 44,982,270 13

5 55,844,694 16 5 year totals 186,736,352 53

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 120 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

Our Assessment of Financials

With a $20 million capital budget, the Lake Superior Terry Fox Trail is an ambitious project. We find the budget scale to be appropriate given the national significance of the project concept and the tremendous benefits that will accrue to the local communities and the proposed funding partners.

The financing partners identified have interests and responsibilities which are an excellent match for the proposed project. It is reasonable to anticipate their support with a professionally developed project of the proposed calibre, scale and scope.

The economic impacts are impressive and the prospects very worthwhile for business attraction, retention and expansion.

It is our professional opinion that your proposed venture is feasible in regards to the ‘Financials’ aspect.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 121 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

6. Feasibility Assessment Conclusion

We have found the project to be feasible in the four key aspects we have investigated: People, Place, Market and Financials.

It is our overall professional opinion that your proposed venture for a Lake Superior Terry Fox Courage Trail is feasible and therefore we recommend proceeding to the Business Planning stage.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 122 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

7. Next Recommended Steps

The development of this Feasibility Study is an important first step towards achieving the goals envisioned for development of the Kinghorn Line.

Successful planning and development will require a continued focused commitment by community leaders, regional organizations, government agencies and other stakeholders, along with appropriate allocations of resources.

In order to accomplish this we offer the following phased approach for your consideration.

Phase One: Initial Community Planning

Phase Two: Feasibility Study

Phase Three: Business Plan and Capital Project Funding Applications

Phase Four: Project Development including Trails Master Plan

Phase Five: Construction and Final Launch Planning

Phase Six: Launch of Trail Operations and Ongoing Management

Phase One and Phase Two are now 100% completed.

Your Phase Two Feasibility Study has resulted in a detailed project concept which has been judged positively for viability.

It would be prudent to proceed as quickly as possible to Phase Three should this be the wishes of your project partners.

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 123 Kinghorn Rail‐to‐Trail Feasibility Study – Final Report March 31, 2011

8. Annex

MacLeod Farley & Associates page 124

The unexpected growth of business along the Great Allegheny Passage

Rite of Passage

By Mary Kate Malone, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

WEST NEWTON -- From her hot dog stand, Barb Philipp, 41, can see the tops of Trailside Restaurant's patio umbrellas, a renovated West Newton visitors center, and the simple crushed- stone trail of the Great Allegheny Passage, which made it all possible.

This has been the busiest summer ever for her business, said Mrs. Phillip, who has been selling food and drinks to trail users from the same spot for six years.

There's no doubt, she said, that the 150-mile long biking and hiking trail from McKeesport to Washington, D.C., is transforming the town at a much faster pace than any of its 3,000 residents ever expected.

"When you're a small town, you don't know if there is any economic future," said George Sam of Downtown West Newton Inc., which has been working to revitalize the city's Main Street.

"But when you bring a trail in that brings people from all over the world, all of a sudden we have a direction. We can be more than we are, we have assets to share," he said.

The trail, which is slated to connect to Point State Park in Pittsburgh by this fall, is attracting entrepreneurs who see dollar signs in the increasing number of walkers, runners and bikers using it.

At the same time, money from state and county government is helping towns perk up. In West Newton, plans are in place for a new community square with a concert stage and park area.

In 2007, Somerset County officials counted 31 new businesses started as a direct result of the Great Allegheny Passage. The Trail Town Program, an arm of the non-profit Progress Fund and supported by government and foundation money, helped start 11 new businesses last year alone. Halfway into 2008, Trail Town has aided eight more, and assisted with another two.

"Of course it's not like having a major industry that's going to employ 5,000 people," said Linda McKenna Boxx, president of the Allegheny Trail Alliance, the coalition of seven trail organizations in southwestern Pennsylvania and western Maryland that built and maintains the passage. "But it's a lot of entrepreneurial outfits, a handful of employees in lodging, food services, bike rental and repair. It's bit by bit.

"As the community starts to revitalize, people say, 'Hey this is a great place to live,' and it just adds to the quality of community life."

Pioneers lead the way

Rod Darby and business partner John Markle opened their Trailside convenience store and restaurant in 2006 in West Newton, convinced their location -- a mere 20 steps from the trail -- would provide a steady stream of customers.

Two years -- and one damaging fire -- later, the business has tripled its sales, added a patio for outdoor dining, and fielded countless phone calls from other entrepreneurs looking for advice on starting a business along the trail.

"The traffic has increased tremendously," Mr. Darby said while standing in the dining area of his restaurant, which recently hired a chef to expand the menu. "We have traffic from all over the world. Every day we have someone from some part of the country sitting in our restaurant."

Mr. Markle said he has served customers from 48 of the 50 states and 13 foreign countries, including China, Japan, New Zealand and Israel.

What's more, Trailside employs about 27 workers, many of them from West Newton.

An economic impact study conducted in 2007 determined the trail is generating $12.5 million in revenue and pouring more than $3 million in wages into trail-side communities.

In 2002, even before the Great Allegheny Passage joined the C&O Canal Towpath to Washington, D.C., about 350,000 people biked, hiked or walked some part of the passage, according to a study by the Trail Towns Program. Cathy McCollum, Trail Town's regional director, predicts that number will be at least 1 million for 2008. Trailhead parking lots are full on the weekends.

Funding from state, county and local governments is helping, but so are business visionaries like Mr. Darby and Mr. Markle.

"We're the explorers," Mr. Markle said, referring to entrepreneurs who took on a sizable financial burden to start a business along the trial. "We have taken a risk and we hope it pays off."

In Confluence, an increasing number of trail users have been staying in Carol Kemp's bed and breakfast, about a mile from the trail. When she and her husband, David, took over the RiveRest in 2003, their customers came mostly from visitors to nearby Fallingwater, the house Frank Lloyd Wright designed for the Kaufmann family of Pittsburgh.

But these days, 50 percent of her business comes from the trail. Spreading the word

Back in West Newton, Mr. Markle and Mr. Darby are eager for their neighbors to spruce up their properties, many of which are in need of repair or, at the least, a fresh coat of paint.

"We are at the very beginning of making this a very different community," Mr. Markle said. "You have to bring facilities here that are world-class. I vow to show people something great can be done here."

After biking about 16 miles on the trail last Thursday, Larry Kozlowski, 60, stopped for soup and a sandwich at Trailside.

It was his second visit to the restaurant since last week.

A great deal of business development along the trail can be attributed to the efforts of the Trail Town Program, which provides loans, support and guidance for start-up businesses.

"We work with communities to help them take better advantage of the growing trail market... such as putting in bike racks, safe street crossings, benches," said Ms. McCollum of the Trail Town Program. "The community has to welcome the visitors."

Ray Silbaugh, 61, is doing just that in his hometown of Confluence. Mr. Silbaugh returned there in 1993 to run a restaurant and hardware store after spending 28 years in Baltimore, Md. In that time, he has seen the town perk up and diversify, thanks to the talented entrepreneurs who set up shop there.

"They are very, very capable people and they have brought some talent with them," Mr. Silbaugh said, noting that the newcomers have embraced the community by supporting local businesses, joining civic organizations and volunteering their time to help with marketing and Web development for the town.

First published on July 27, 2008 at 12:00 am accessed at www.post‐gazette.com/pg/08209/899883‐85.stm on March‐14‐11 �������������� � ��� � � � � � � � �

R.R. #7, 223177 Grey Road 17B Owen Sound, Ontario, Canada N4K 6V5

phone: 519-370-2332 fax: 1-866-409-8633 (toll free)

e-mail: [email protected] web: www.macfar.ca

A member of