Legacy Trail Extension Project

Legacy Trail Extension Study
Georgetown - Scott County, Kentucky
June 2014
This study is dedicated in memory of Dick Robinson. Not only was
Dick a devoted bicycle enthusiast, he was an active member of the
community, an educator, mentor, and close friend to many. He was a
primary initiator for the extension of the Legacy Trail. His efforts and
devotion to the project lead to the support that made this study possible.
4
acknowledgements
table of contents
Mayor
1. Project Overview5
•
Parks and Recreation Board
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mary Singer - Chair
Russ Fendley - Vice Chair
Daniel Wells - Treasurer
Ben Vaan Meter - Secretary
Rand Marshall - Attorney
Jaime Kumar
Ursula McIntyre
Bob Leonard
Chad Wallace
Georgetown-Scott County Planning Commisson
•
•
•
Earl Smith
Joe Kane
Megan Eyneart
Steering Committee Members
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Christie Robinson - Chair
Keith & Leslie Flanders
Geri Remley
Paul Combs
Kyle Goodwin
Jared Hollon
Jeanne Biddle
Ray Clere
Kelly McEuen
Additional Support and Assistance
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
John Simpson, Georgetown-Scott County Tourism
Georgetown College
James Koeppe & Vickie Masterson
Zan Rexroat, Scott County Public Schools
Representative Ryan Quarles
Keith Lovan, LFUCG Division of Engineering
Brad Biliter, LFUCG Parks and Recreation
John LaPlante, T.Y. Lin International
Report Prepared by CDP Engineers
•
•
•
• Scope of Study
• Introduction
Honorable Everette Varney
Jason Hale, Project Manager
David Uckotter, Engineer
Evan McDaniel, Landscape Architecture Graduate
page
5
5
2. Context6
• Regional Comprehensive Trail Network
6
• Inventory and Assessment8
• Design Character14
• Trailhead and Signage Theme15
3. Conceptual Alignments16
•
•
•
•
Concept One16
Concept Two17
Concept Three18
Concept Four19
4. Public Involvement20
• Survey Results20
5. Proposed Alignment21
• Section One: Kentucky Horse Park to Lemons Mill Elementary
• Section Two: Lemons Mill Elementary to North Elkhorn Creek
• Section Three: North Elkhorn Creek to Railroad Intersection
• Section Four: Railroad Intersection to Cardome Trailhead
• Urban Loop: McClelland Circle to Royal Springs
• Toyota Loop Alignment
22
24
26
30
34
39
6. Trail Design Standards40
• Shared-Use Trail40
• Equestrian Trail40
7. Implementation Strategies42
• Property Acquisition 42
• Permitting42
• Funding Sources42
8. Preliminary Costs43
• Opinion of Probable Cost43
• Operations and Maintenance45
9. Summary and Final Recommendations
46
• Phasing46
• Reference Materials and Resources47
3
project overview
scope of study
CDP Engineers, of Lexington, Kentucky, was selected to perform
a feasibility study which evaluates an extension of the Legacy Trail
into Georgetown, as well as to develop a conceptual comprehensive
regional trail network from which the Legacy Trail can expand.
The scope of services requested an investigation of various corridor
options for an extension of the Legacy Trail into Scott County, providing
the desired non-motorized connection between Georgetown and the
Kentucky Horse Park. The services required were threefold:
•
Perform a planning and feasibility study for a shareduse trail system that will connect downtown Georgetown
from Royal Spring Park to the northern boundary of the
Kentucky Horse Park within Scott County; involving
community stakeholders in at least two public meetings;
taking into account connectivity with existing trails, parks,
schools, Georgetown College and its athletic campus;
•
Prepare a trail conceptual plan which is to include a
preliminary preferred corridor alignment, preliminary
shared-use trail design details and cross-sections, and a
program of proposed public access points or trailheads
taking into consideration compatibility with existing design
plans utilized on the existing segments of the Legacy Trail
in Fayette, County;
•
Prepare preliminary construction cost estimates for the
preferred trail alignment.
Horse Park and into Georgetown. Through the initiation of trail
advocates within the Georgetown-Scott County (GSC) community, a
steering committee comprised of Representatives from the Georgetown
Parks and Recreation Board, GSC Planning Commission, and private
stakeholders was formed to facilitate a feasibility study to extend the
Legacy Trail into Georgetown.
In August 2010, a small group of Scott County citizens met to discuss
how the community may someday be able to walk, jog, and bicycle along
a paved trail connecting downtown Georgetown to the Legacy Trail. A
selection committee posted a Request for Qualifications / Proposals for
services from professional design firms interested in the extension of
the Legacy Trail through the community. After a selection committee
interviewed ten different firms, CDP Engineers was selected to perform
the study. GSC Parks and Recreation administered the contract with
the funding raised by the non-profit organization Bluegrass Land Trust.
Planning efforts for the trail extension study occurred at a timely
juncture during which other efforts were being developed: the GSC
Planning Commission was actively involved with the in-depth Small
Area Plan study of the US-25 corridor with the intent to update the
GSC Comprehensive Plan and guide policy and planning decisions
for the transportation corridor being constructed. Additionally, the
organization Bluegrass Tomorrow was responsible for directing a joint
planning effort with the National Parks Service to develop a general
Trails Master Plan that includes an equestrian trail system in addition to
walking and cycling trails within the greater Scott County region.
This study is a result of a collective effort put forth from individuals
that were determined to see the benefits offered from a regional trail
network that extends through their community.
introduction
The Legacy Trail in Lexington, Kentucky is a shared-use path with
approximately 8.5 miles of off-street, paved trail and accommodates
all types of non-motorized users. The trail begins at the north side
of downtown Lexington and ends south of the Kentucky Horse Park.
The Legacy Trail was completed in 2010, in time for the FEI World
Equestrian Games that was hosted at the Kentucky Horse Park. The
Legacy Trail is one of the longest paved shared-use paths in Kentucky,
and should serve as a precedent for the development a regional
shared-use path network for the Bluegrass.
Shared-use paths create opportunities for economic and social growth.
The Legacy Trail has continued to be a popular resource for active
recreation, and for ecological, cultural and historical education. The
Kentucky Horse Park, a gem of the Bluegrass region, straddles the
county line shared between Fayette & Scott Counties and creates the
opportunity for the Legacy Trail to be extended through the Kentucky
Existing Legacy Trail Map. www.mylegacytrail.com
5
context: REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL NETWORK
Many of its residents already know that Georgetown
contains some features which are unique to this region
and, in many instances, unique to our state and nation.
These features are already recognized by citizens within
the county and promoted by Georgetown-Scott County
Tourism Commission among other individuals and
organizations. Take for instance the historical significance
of architectural features present at the Cardome Centre,
the Scott County Courthouse, and Georgetown College.
Royal Springs should also be considered a significant site
which is not only Kentucky’s largest spring-based public
water system, but also provided water for Baptist minister
Elijah Craig where it is reported that some, if not the first,
bourbon whiskey was produced.
Other attractions found in outlying areas of Scott County
include but are not limited to Ward Hall, Evan’s Orchard,
the Scott County Reservoir, and the Elkhorn Creek present
great destinations for connection along a multi-use path.
In addition to the features, the outlying communities of
Stamping Ground and Sadieville would be desirable
destinations to connect with a regional trail network. Midway
is nearly as close to downtown Georgetown as Stamping
Ground, so it could be considered a worthwhile node for
connection as well. Even the Toyota manufacturing plant
should be considered a destination since it employs a large
population of workers which itself is a large community of
potential trail users.
Though our scope of work is to evaluate and determine the
best connection from the northern limits of the Kentucky
Horse Park to downtown Georgetown, we must consider
potential connections beyond our focus area if the intent is
to construct a successful trail network that also becomes
a tourist destination. In addition to Lexington, other
regional connections should consider Frankfort, Midway,
and Versailles. The Horsey Hundred is an annual cycling
event that is hosted by Georgetown-Scott County but
extends over 100-miles within the Inner Bluegrass region
by following a path which changes annually and utilizes the
existing road network. The success of this event saw over
2,000 participants in 2013 and should demonstrate the
interest in shared-use cycling facilities – not to mention the
potential to generate tourism dollars and spur additional
economic development.
Bourbon is a part of this region’s unique heritage within
Kentucky and also generates millions of dollars in tax
revenue annually.
Another successful route within the
region is the Bourbon Trail with approximately 2.5 million
visitors in the past five years. The trail also hosts an
6
annual foot race, The Bourbon Chase, which connects
the numerous distilleries along a 200-mile race through
central Kentucky and hosts as many as 4,000 racers. This
event features heritage which is unique to this region and
appeals to many visitors across the nation. Combine this
with picturesque views of the scenic Bluegrass Region and
our distinctive horse farm industry and the bluegrass truly
hosts attractions that are found nowhere else.
Numerous outlying communities offer nodes of connection
from the trail extension proposed through Georgetown.
With the existing network of trails within parks and
neighborhoods of Georgetown, there is opportunity to
connect not only these, but extend further into Lexington
and outlying community nodes. Sadieville has an existing
horse trail network and is currently pursuing the “Trail Town”
designation. The Legacy Trail currently is located within
Lexington, beginning at the YMCA on Loudon Avenue,
connects to the Coldstream Research Campus, and
terminates just south of the Kentucky Horse Park at Iron
Works Pike. But future extensions to this trail will connect
to downtown Lexington and hopefully through the Kentucky
Horse Park and north to Georgetown. Other prominent
trail spurs exist within Lexington as well: the Brighton
East Trail consists of approximately 4 miles southeastward
from Man O’ War Boulevard toward Chilesburg, and the
Town Branch Trail is planned to extend from Rupp Arena to
Masterson Station. This final leg of the route has already
been constructed and connects to another network of trails
on the north western side of the city. Hisle Park is another
recently opened park located on the northeast side of
Lexington and consists of 280-acres of land that may serve
as a future connection from Georgetown. There are plans
to expand and open an additional tract in a future phase of
the park which should be of particular interest to horseback
trail riders since the park already offers 2.5 miles of trails
for pedestrian and horseback trail riders.
The focus of this study is an extension of the Legacy Trail
from Lexington into downtown Georgetown, the existing
network of trails and bike routes must be evaluated. But
if the study limited its focus solely to this route alone, we
would be remiss of the opportunity to consider connecting
to a broader network of trails extending beyond our focus
area. It is for this reason that downtown Georgetown
should not be considered the terminus of the trail, but
maybe another destination along a larger regional trail
system where the experience highlights significant
features within our central Kentucky Region. Picture a
large trail network that leads from Lexington to Frankfort
and connects several communities along the way. A loop
system could even be developed which links numerous
towns in a continuous circuit. This wouldn’t exclude the
possibility for additional connections because increased
connectivity is encouraged if the trail network is intended
to attract users. However, a primary trail “spine” could
be defined from which other secondary spurs could then
connect other communities or destinations.
Trails are proven to generate tourism, and revenue as a
result. However, skepticism toward safety and security
exists even when data supports that little to no criminal
activity has occurred along many shared-use facilities.
This perception of crime may lead to the avoidance and
misconception of security of trails particularly among many
private land owners. Research has revealed that crime
rates are lower on trail networks than the overall region
in which they are located – this includes urban, suburban,
and rural areas. But trail networks poses little risk to
adjacent landowners, and the more heavily a trail is used,
the less criminal activity can be expected. Facilities with
more trail users have fewer security issues. A partnership
between local law enforcement that can routinely police
these locations and the communities where the trailheads
are located is the most effective way to address perceived
criminal activity.
Once a complete trail nework is developed that offers an
experience unique to the Bluegrass, the public will take
ownership and provide the foundation for a successful
system. There are existing trail networks within various
parks and neighborhoods in Georgetown – Scott County,
but two significant trails which extend from Lexington
toward Scott County are the Town Branch Trail and the
Legacy Trail. Linking these existing trails and developing
an interconnected trail system that spans the Bluegrass
region will allow for success on the level of other trail
systems in the country; such as, The Monon Rail Trail (16.7
miles), The Dawkins Trail (36 miles), The Little Miami Bike
Trail (68.5 miles), and the Virginia Creeper Trail (35 miles).
Existing North Legacy Trailhead south of Iron Works Pike / KY Horse Park.
2013 Horsey Hundred
Kentucky Horse Park Main Entrance
credit: Georgetown News Graphic
Downtown Frankfort, Kentucky Streetscape
Rural Bluegrass Region Landscape Character
Sadieville, Scott County, Kentucky
Conceptual Regional Comprehensive Trail Network Plan
7
context: INVENTORY + ASSESSMENT
The Legacy Trail extension project area, as defined in the project scope
of work, begins at the north end of the Kentucky Horse Park and ends
at Royal Springs Park in downtown Georgetown. The direct distance
between these to locations is approximately 3.75 miles.
The design team utilized input from the public as well as planning
officials to begin an inventory of significant places of interest within
the project corridor. This list was used to begin a detailed inventory
of places and features. We cataloged numerous photographs, aerial
images, and field measurements obtained during numerous site visits.
It was also important to expand beyond the direct project corridor to
inventory any opportunities beneficial to planning the shared-use trail.
The significant places of interest, major landowners, stakeholders, and
features inventoried:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Kentucky Horse Park
Lisle Road Soccer Complex
Barton Brothers Farm
Cane Run
Lemons Mill Elementary School
Future Anderson Development at the Amerson Farm
US-25 Widening
Marshall Park
McClelland Circle Industrial Park
Rock Quarry
North Elkhorn Creek
Georgetown College
Georgetown College Athletic Campus
Toyota
Residential Communities
Royal Springs Park
Cardome
Yuko-En Japanese Friendship Garden
A major challenge in planning trails is determining how to cross or
bypass physical barriers and obstacles within the project corridor.
There will likely be positives and negatives for each solution, so it
is important to investigate and document all possibilities in order to
develop the most efficient and appropriate shared-use path trail.
Physical barriers within the project corridor include Interstate 75,
Norfolk Southern Railroad, US-460 Bypass (McClelland Circle),
Lemons Mill Road, North Elkhorn Creek, Paris Road, US-25, and
Cane Run. Other obstacles to consider are industrial developments,
agricultural operations, and other land-uses that may not be conducive
for a shared-use trail.
The inventoried potential crossings and opportunities within the project
corridor are documented in the remaining pages of this chapter.
8
1
Iron Works Pike Railroad Underpass
2
I-75 Road-Cut at the County Line
3
I-75 Stream Crossing at Cane Run
The Norfolk Southern railroad bridge on Iron Works
Pike has vertical rock embankments on each side.
There is a 12’ shoulder with an additional 12’ from
the edge of shoulder to the rock embankment. A 2’
concrete barrier with a 2’ buffer would be required by
AASHTO standards; leaving only 8’ for a trail,deeming
this crossing option infeasible.
The construction of Interstate 75 created a deep roadcut, coincidentally at the Fayette County-Scott County
line. This presents the opportunity to construct a
bridge over the interstate with reduced construction
costs, because bridge approachment would not be
necessary. Though a bridge in this location would be
less costly than at other locations, a bridge crossing
over a 250’ span would still be very expensive.
Cane Run meanders through the Kentucky Horse
Park and passes under Interstate 75 at a stream
crossing. In order for the trail to cross the interstate
at this point the culvert would require excavation
to make it deep and wide enough for a shared-use
trail. This area is also susceptible to flooding, which
is evident in the amount of deposited debris. This
crossing is not feasible for a shared-use trail.
4
4
3
2
Railroad Stream Crossing at Cane Run
The Norfolk Southern Railroad crosses Cane Run
west of Interstate 75. The railroad is 25-30’ above the
stream bed and has three large culverts. The northmost culvert, which was dry during the visit, is the only
one with potential for a shared-use trail. Stormwater
flood modeling will be required to determine if the
culvert is feasible. The natural surrounding provide a
desirable experience at this location.
1
9
8
5
Tunnel Under I-75 near the KHP
6
Lemons Mill Road Overpass at I-75
7
Railroad Underpass at US460 Bypass
8
Railroad Spur at the Industrial Park
There us an existing tunnel crossing underneath
Interstate 75 at the north end of the Kentucky Horse
Park. Though this tunnel is primarily used for access
to the Barton Farm, it is within state right-of-way.
Safety features will be required to accommodate a
shared-use path while maintaining access to the
Barton Farm. The tunnel is 14’x14’, and is a feasible
option for crossing Interstate 75.
A potential obstacle exists at the Lemons Mill Road
overpass crossing of Interstate 75. There are steep
road embankments that would require tunneling
underneath Lemons Mill, or elevating the trail to meet
grade; both these options may prove cost prohibitive.
6
7
The Norfolk Southern railroad underpasses the US460 Bypass. There is potential to follow parallel with
the railroad, using Rails-With-Trail standards. The
concrete embankments would need to be filled to
create a flat spot for a shared-use path. This is a
possible solution for crossing the railroad; however,
cooperation with the railroad company may be
difficult.
5
10
There is an existing railroad spur that leads into
the industrial park from the main Norfolk Southern
railroad. This spur could be converted into a shareduse trail corridor. However, this is a heavily industrial
area and may experience additional industrial growth;
the railroad spur may be needed in the future.
Industrial areas are not a desired environment for a
shared-use path because of the safety hazards, as
well as the undesirable scenery.
9
US-460 Bypass Road-Cut
The construction of the US-460 Bypass created
deep road-cuts in certain locations. One such
location is between the industrial park and the future
development at the Amerson Farm. This presents
the opportunity to construct a bridge over the fourlane bypass with reduced construction costs. The
span is approximately 250’ and could prove to be a
cost prohibitive option for crossing the bypass.
11 12
10
US-460 Bypass / Lemons Mill Road
The intersection of Lemons Mill Road and US-460
Bypass (McClelland Circle) presents an obstacle for
a shared-use trail. Trail users would have to cross
5 lanes of traffic with design speeds of 55 miles per
hour. This creates an uncomfortable and potentially
dangerous crossing condition for trail users.
10
9
11
Elkhorn Green Neighborhood Access
The Elkhorn Green Neighborhood is a medium density
residential community that backs-up to North Elkhorn
Creek. This neighborhood has an existing access
corridor with wooden steps down to the North Elkhorn
Creek floodplain. This provides the opportunity for
linkage to a major residential community.
12
Maintenance Path at N. Elkhorn Creek
There is an existing maintenance path that follows
the banks of North Elkhorn Creek. This path
connects with the access corridor into the Elkhorn
Green Neighborhood and goes to the Interstate 75
stream crossing. This path lies with in existing utility
easements in the North Elkhorn Creek floodplain.
This area also presents the opportunity for appealing
natural scenery along North Elkhorn Creek.
11
16
13
I-75 Crossing at North Elkhorn Creek
14
Existing Park Land
15
14
13
15
16
12
Interstate 75 crosses over North Elkhorn Creek; there
is ample space for a shared-use path to go under
the interstate at this crossing. There is an existing
maintenance path on both sides of the stream. This
crossing provides the opportunity for crossing I-75 with
no vehicular conflict, as well as the connection of a major
residential community with existing park land.
There is a piece of city-owned park land that links the
Interstate 75 stream crossing with the US-460 Bypass
stream crossing and is adjacent to North Elkhorn Creek.
This park land is in the North Elkhorn Creek floodplain
and is currently underutilized. The area has ecological
and scenic value, as well as direct linkage to a residential
community.
US-460 Crossing at North Elkhorn Creek
The US-460 Bypass crosses over North Elkhorn Creek
and there is space underneath for a shared-use path.
There is an existing maintenance path on both sides of
the stream. This provides the opportunity to cross the
US-460 Bypass without vehicular conflict. This area
also boasts scenic views of North Elkhorn Creek, and
connects existing park land and residential communities
with a major retail/commercial development.
Paris Rd. Crossing at N. Elkhorn Creek
Paris Road crosses the North Elkhorn Creek with a twolane bridge. There is insufficient space for a shared-use
trail under the stream crossing. An at-grade crossing will
be required. This area provides open space and views of
North Elkhorn Creek.
19
17
At-Grade Railroad Crossing
18
Georgetown College Athletic Campus
19
Cardome Area
17
18
There are existing at-grade railroad crossing
opportunities that are not on major roads or
intersections. These crossing can all be used for
crossing the railroad, a major obstacle, with minimal
vehicular conflict.
The Georgetown College Athletic Campus is a
major amenity of the City of Georgetown. This area
of campus provides open space, at-grade railroad
crossings, parking, existing pedestrian bridge, and
a link into main Georgetown College campus and
downtown Georgetown.
Cardome is a major historical and cultural amenity for
Georgetown and Scott County. This site offers open
space for a trailhead, historical/cultural education, and
scenic beauty. There is an existing bridge abutment
from the abandoned railroad, as well as an existing
walking path that goes underneath North Broadway
Street. This area is also home for the Yuko-En
Japanese Friendship Garden.
13
context: DESIGN CHARACTER
Planning a shared-use trail for a community is not only about alternate forms
of transportation or connecting Point A to Point B. The Legacy Trail provides
the opportunity to also exhibit contextual characteristics and present unique
features of the Bluegrass Region. The primary themes that drive the design
characteristics for the Legacy Trail extension within Georgetown - Scott County
include the many influences available from cultural, environmental, social, and
educational themes.
The Bluegrass Region is known for the equine industry and scenic horse
farms which create a desireable destination for tourism. The Legacy Trail can
be a medium for exhibiting these characteristics of the Bluegrass Region as
well as other unique features. Promoting education and a healthy lifestyle is
another possibility to consider with a recreational facility. Partnerships could be
developed with schools for outdoor education opportunities as well as health
departments that may be interested in monitoring the health benefits of walking
or biking as an alternate mode of transportation.
It is also important to connect people with their cultural and natural environment.
Some unique amenities to feature within Georgetown-Scott County include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
14
Cardome
Yuko-En Japanese Friendship Garden
Ward Hall
Kentucky Horse Park
Downtown Georgetown
Georgetown College
Royal Springs Park
Limestone Fences
Horse Farms
Origin of Bourbon Whiskey
Limestone Geology
Wildlife
Fluvial Ecology
Architecture
conceptual themes
Cultural
• Agriculture
• Architecture
• Equine
Environmental
•
•
•
•
Limestone Geology
North Elkhorn Creek
Royal Springs Aquifer
Cane Run
Social
•
•
•
•
•
Public Health
Future Development
Economic Growth
Community Connectivity
Recreation
Educational
• History
• Ecology
• Environmental
context: TRAILHEAD AND SIGNAGE THEME
The existing Legacy Trail has established a “brand” that people
can recognize and readily identify. The design vocabulary
of the existing Legacy Trail is consistent and maintains an
associated character throughout. It’s important to maintain
this established design vocabulary of the existing Legacy Trail
which allows for a consistent identity of the Legacy Trail brand,
even when you cross county boundaries. However, this does
not limit the potential to incorporate design influence from the
unique features of Georgetown-Scott County into the design
vocabulary of trailhead and signage components for our subject
extension of the Legacy Trail.
The existing Legacy Trail trailhead and signage programming
includes limestone fences, stone pylons and mile markers, and
a native plant pallet. The Legacy Trail extension will continue the
forms and styles of the existing trail, though brick is the dominate
material found in the significant architectural examples of Greek
Revival styled structures that are significant to Georgetown. It
is for this reason that the trailhead and signage design concepts
could incorporate brick as a material which acknowledges these
significant buildigns. As the trail progresses from the terminus
of the existing Legacy Trail towards the proposed destination
at Cardome, one consideration for trail signage design could
be to gradually increase the amount of brick closer to the end
destination. This transition of increased brick material could
also represent distance and translate as a mile marker as well:
consider every mile point as a tier of limestone that transitions
into brick. When the trail reaches Cardome, the trailhead and
signage designs will be constructed primarily of brick and reflect
features of the Cardome architecture. This is one concept to
consider, though other ideas could be generated. Throughout
the trail, the trailhead and signage design can also incorporate
features unique to that particular site.
Existing Legacy Trail signage.
Existing Legacy Trail pylon.
The future connection in the Kentucky Horse Park will cross the ScottFayette County line, providing the opportunity to create a “gateway”
between the counties. This is where the transition from all limestone
materials can begin to incorporate brick elements.
Signage incorporating fluvial inspriation of North Elkhorn Creek.
Signage panel matches forms of existing Legacy Trail signage.
Courthouse
Pylons gradually incorporate brick approaching Cardome, identifying mile points.
Cardome Pylon
Georgetown College
15
alignment alternatives: CONCEPT ONE
alignment description:
opportunities:
As stated in the project scope, the project corridor begins at the
northwest corner of the Kentucky Horse Park at the Interstate 75 tunnel
near the Barton Farm, and ends at Royal Springs Park in Downtown
Georgetown. However, the design team felt it important to consider the
connection to the terminus of the existing Legacy Trail in Fayette County
at the North Legacy Trailhead on Iron Works Pike. This connection will
likely follow the western perimeter of the Kentucky Horse Park along
Iron Works Pike and Interstate 75.
•
Close connection to US-25 corridor
•
Overlap with GSC Planning ‘Greenbelt ’ Overlay
•
Connection to Grace Christian Church
•
Interaction with Cane Run
•
Promote WQ awareness
•
Connection to Marshall Park
•
Connection to S. Broadway bike lanes
•
Direct connection to downtown
The alignment of Concept One considered three potential options for
crossing I-75, the first major barrier. The preferred crossing option
would be to cross with a pedestrian bridge, utilizing the road cut near the
Scott County / Fayette County boundary. After crossing the interstate,
the alignment quickly approached an active railroad corridor, the next
major barrier. There is potential to construct an at-grade railroad
crossing at the Lisle Road intersection of the railroad but would result
in a potentially dangerous condition involving high-speed vehicular
traffic and a rail crossing. From this point, the alignment follows along
the railroad corridor and agriculatural property lines until it reaches the
recently widened US-25 highway. The alignment follows the Greenbelt
Zone established by Georgetown-Scott County Planning Commission,
which also includes Cane Run.
McClelland Circle is the next major barrier to cross. The alignment
crosses McClelland Circle at a planned lighted intersection at a
developing retail/business area. The trail alignment then enters the
west end of Marshall Park and then reaches existing bike lanes on
South Broadway. From this point, the alignment is on-street bike lanes
and sidewalks until it reached the destination at Royal Springs Park.
The other options for crossing I-75 at the project beginning would be
to follow Iron Works Pike beneath the railroad, cross into Scott County
and the follow property lines until reaching US-25. Going under the
railroad with Iron Works Pike will require stone excavation to obtain
adequate width for a shared-use trail. This would be cost prohibitive;
and though it avoids bridge which crossed I-75, it is the least feasible
option. A pedestrian bridge is preferred because it provides the safest
means of crossing the interstate, and also would create an interesting
“gateway” between the two counties while also promoting the Legacy
Trail; however, this is 250’ span and would be very expensive. The third
crossing option would be to utilize the existing tunnel at the northwest
corner of the Kentucky Horse Park. This is a safe crossing and also the
most cost effective, but would need to be adequately signed / signalized
to offer the safest crossign condition. After crossing Lisle Road, the
alignment follows property lines of farms, crosses over the railroad, and
continues until it reaches US-25.
16
constraints:
•
Expensive crossing at County line may be cost prohibitive
•
Bypasses: Soccer Complex, Amerson Farm, Georgetown College
•
Numerous landowners / difficult property acquisition
alignment alternatives: CONCEPT TWO
alignment description:
opportunities:
The Alignment for Concept Two considers two of the Interstate 75
crossing options: the “gateway” pedestrian bridge at the county line,
and the tunnel at the northwest corner of the Kentucky Horse Park.
The pedestrian bridge would be the most desired option, but the tunnel
is the most likely and feasible crossing option to get past I-75. If a
pedestrian bridge is built, the alignment would follow along the east
side of the railroad corridor until it reaches the public soccer complex
on Lisle Road, a desireable amenity and connection for a shared-use
trail.
•
Connects the following:
Soccer Complex, Lemons Mill Elem, Amerson Farm, Georgetown
College
•
Most direct connection from KHP
•
Interaction with Railroad
At this point, the alignment proposes two different options: the most
direct option to reach the destination at Royal Springs Park would be
to continue along the railroad and go under McClelland circle. The
crossing option is possible, though the concrete abutment would require
a retaining wall to create a level surface for a trail to be construction
adjacent the railroad corridor. The alignment then goes through an
existing industrial development that has plans for future growth. There
are multiple railroad tracks that could be converted into trail. Though
the industrial development presents some opportunities for a shareduse trail, the scenic environment and experience is not desirable for a
trail user.
•
With spur alternate, expensive bridge crossing at McClelland Circle
•
Industrial connection = least desirable views / experience
constraints:
The second option at the soccer complex would be to go through a
future mixed-use development planned at the Amerson Farm by
Anderson Communities. This is also adjacent the location of the newly
built Lemons Mill Elementary School. Connecting to the Soccer Park,
the new development, and the school are all highly valued amenities
for a shared-use trail. There is an opportunity to utilize a road cut and
build a pedestrian bridge to cross McClelland Circle from the Anderson
Communities development to the Industrial development. However,
as mentioned before, a pedestrian bridge would be the most cost
prohibitive crossing.
The Georgetown College Athletic Campus is directly north of the
Industrial development. The alignment follows the perimeter of
the athletic campus and crosses the railroad at-grade and goes to
Georgetown College Main Campus. There are several options of how
the trail could go through campus, but the connection to the college
is important since the college is host to many potential trail users
that would benefit from this connection. From Georgetown College
Campus, the alignment proceeds to downtown Georgetown and to
Royal Springs Park destination.
17
alignment alternatives: CONCEPT THREE
alignment description:
Concept Three takes a different approach to the alignment as well as the
destination. The design team determined that Cardome may be a more
appropriate destination with greater appeal for the Legacy Trail extension
as a regional trail network. The Cardome center, located just north of
downtown Georgetown, is a highly valued cultural amenity and tourist
attraction with the capacity for shared parking and increased access. The
facility also hosts numerous event annually and the Yuko-En Japanese
Friendship Garden is located adjacent the Cardome property.
Cardome as the preferred destination allows for a different concept for
the project corridor and trail alignment. The alignment of Concept Three
begins at the northwest corner of the Kentucky Horse Park, but instead
of going through the tunnel beneath I-75, the alignment follows the east
side of the interstate within the Barton Farm. The farm provides scenic
value that is ideal for illustrating the agricultural heritage and benefits of
the Bluegrass. However, the necessary agricultural operations (use of
pesticides, chemicals, heavy equipment, etc.) may not be suitable for
exposure to trail users and could result in liability on the property owner,
causing difficulty in acquiring easement from the landowner.
The alignment continues along the interstate until it reaches Lemons Mill
Road. This intersection presents a challenge because Lemons Mill Road is
at a much higher elevation. The approach to cross at-grade would be long
and steep; the other option would be to tunnel beneath Lemons Mill Road.
After crossing Lemons Mill Road, the alignment follows Clabberbottom
Lane and connetc to an abandoned railroad corridor before crossing
North Elkhorn Creek. From this point, the alignment follows the east side
of the North Elkhorn Creek, around the quarry, and then crosses the creek
twice more to reach the Elkhorn Green residential neighborhood. There
is existing access from Elkhorn Green to this location, which is scenic
open space along the creek.
This alignment follows an existing maintenance path that eventually
goes beneath I-75 along North Elkhorn Creek. West of the interstate
creek crossing is public land, and where there is existing access from
a residential neighborhood. Though promising for use as a trail, this
parkland, comprised mostly of floodplain, is presently underutilized and
has no public access. However, the parkland extends west to McClelland
Circle where there is another maintenance path along North Elkhorn
Creek beneath McClelland. These crossings are optimal for crossing I-75
and McClelland Circle, safely and cost effectively.
West of McClelland Circle, the alignment for Concept Three goes through
unused public land to Paris Pike. Traffic engineering will be required for
this intersection to address the existing traffic conditions, largely by access
managment, but also to provide a safe crossing which could accomodate
a proposed shared-use trail. North of Paris Pike, the alignment crosses
North Elkhorn Creek from a public park / boat launch to a wooded,
18
undeveloped area. There is an existing at-grade railroad crossing,
which serves as the most cost effective means to cross the railroad.
The alignment then reaches the North Elkhorn Creek again where it
crosses and follows the creek to Richard O Winder Park, at residential
developoment Peninsula. The existing walkway under North Broadway
that connects the park to Cardome / Yuko-En Japanese Garden could
be widened to accomodate a shared-use path without having trail users
interfere with North Broadway traffic.
The alignment alternative of Concept Three utilizes opportunities that
the other alignments did not have; such as, the maintenance paths
under the interstate and McClelland Circle, existing parkland, at-grade
railroad crossing, and fewer individual propertis impacted. However, this
alignment bypasses major nodes that are desireable connection points
for trail users including: the soccer complex on Lisle Road, Lemons Mill
Elementary, and the future Anderson Communities development. The
design team also considered it important to include Georgetown College
and Downtown Georgetown. The last two attractions are considered
major destinations and primary trail user groups and for this reason a trail
spur alignment has been proposed to include the college and Downtown.
From Cardome, the alignment would go south to Royal Springs Park
(the original destination in the project scope), Downtown, connecting
to Georgetown College and back to the main alignment at the parkland
south of Paris Pike. This allows for the proposed extension to maintain
the typical section (12’ wide) already established by the existing Legacy
Trail, while creating spur connections to Downtown and the College that
would require standard bike lanes.
opportunities:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Barton Farm
Scenery & only 1 owner
North Elkhorn scenery
Connects underutilized open space
Connection to residential use & commercial areas
Secondary trail spur through College to downtown
Connection to Bi-Water Farm / Peninsula & existing trail
•
Connection to Cardome / Yuko-En
constraints:
•
•
•
•
Close proximity to quarry
Difficult crossing at Lemons Mill
Impact to residences / easement acquisition
3 total creek crossings
•
Crossing at Paris Rd / RR Abutment Street
alignment alternatives: CONCEPT FOUR
alignment description:
opportunities:
The alignment for Concept Four basically combines portions of
Concept Two and Concept Three.
Concept Three has major
constraints in bypassing the school, soccer complex, and Anderson
Communities development, as well as the concerns with the Barton
Farm. To avoid this, Concept Four utilizes the tunnel under Interstate
75 at the northwest corner of the Kentucky Horse Park and connects
to the soccer complex on Lisle Road, Lemons Mill Elementary and
the future Anderson Communities development. However, instead of
crossing McClelland Circle, the alignment of Concept Four continues
northward, crossing Lemons Mill Road at-grade. From this point, the
alignment goes through an undeveloped stretch of land and reaches
North Elkhorn Creek and crosses over to the parkland discussed in
Concept Three.
•
Connects the following:
•
Soccer Complex, Lemons Mill Elem, Amerson Farm, Georgetown
College
•
North Elkhorn scenery
•
Connects underutilized open space
•
Connection to residential use & commercial areas
•
Secondary trail spur through College to downtown
•
Connection to Bi-Water Farm / Peninsula & existing trail
•
Connection to Cardome / Yuko-En
The alignment of Concept Four then continues west, utilizing the
maintenance path beneath McClelland Circle. The remainder of
the alignment is the same as Concept Three, with the proposed
destination at Cardome. Concept Four also proposes the urban spur
that would connect Cardome with Downtown and Georgetown College.
This alignment also allows for future expansion with the concepts of
a regional trail network. From the parkland, the trail could split and
continue east, going beneath I-75, connecting to neighborhoods,
Toyota (see Toyota Loop alignment), and outlying towns.
constraints:
•
Impact to residences / easement acquisition
•
four stream crossings
•
Interaction with railroad
19
public involvement
public involvement
When planning a trail project intended to serve the public, it is important to
obtain as much public input as possible. On September 26, 2013 the first public
meeting was held to present the fifty percent phase of the feasibility study. After
the meeting, an online survey was advertised and released to the public for
additional input. The survey was a success with over 650 survey responses.
The survey asked for input on the presented alignment alternatives, design
themes, and general desires for the final product.
The Legacy Trail is a shared-use trail that connects downtown
Lexington with area neighborhoods, parks, and historic sites
as it follows a northward course to the Kentucky Horse Park.
The trail is a significant component of Lexington’s Greenway
Master Plan and is a legacy project to the 2010 World
Equestrian games. Is the “Legacy Trail” an appropriate name
to apply to the trail extension through Georgetown-Scott
County?
Would you like to see an extension of the Legacy Trail beyond
downtown Georgetown into outlying communities like
Stamping Ground, Midway, Versailles, and even Frankfort?
Utilizing information gathered from comments and concerns identified by the
public from the first public meeting and the online survey, the design team
determined and finalized a proposed alignment. The proposed alignment and
other detailed recommendations were presented at a second public meeting on
April 30, 2014, demonstrating the 90% milestone for the project.
In addition to the public meetings, the CDP design team participated in monthly
meetings with the Bluegrass Bike Hike Horseback Trails Alliance (BBHHTA).
This group is led by Bluegrass Tomorrow and is working to develop a countywide
Trails Master Plan for Scott County. It was important for the design team to
coordinate with BBHHTA to maintain communication as to what was being
planned for a trail network, and to inform them of the Legacy Trail extension
plans.
online survey results
Of the four alignments provided, which do you prefer and
why?
20
Would you prefer to see a continuation of the existing Legacy
Trail trailhead markers or see different signage and trailhead
elements based from designs and constructed materials
unique to Georgetown – Scott County?
Would you like the extension of the trail to accommodate
equestrian trail riders as well?
proposed alignment
Alignment Concept Four was selected and refined to produce the proposed
alignment concept for the Legacy Trail Extension. The proposed alignment
was divided into four sections, plus a proposed spur to connect to downtown
Georgetown and Georgetown College. The project corridor begins at the
northwest corner of the Kentucky Horse Park and ends at the Cardome
Center. The primary alignment (sections 1-4) totals approximately 6.6 miles
and has three proposed trailheads.
section one: 1.17 miles
Section One begins at the tunnel crossing under Interstate 75 near the
northwest corner of the Kentucky Horse Park. This tunnel is currently used by
the Barton Farm for access to their property. The tunnel is within State rightof-way, but coordination with the Barton Farm will be necessary to develop
a system (signage, lighting, automated gates, etc.) to assure safety for trail
users that may share the tunnel with Barton Farm equipment and vehicles.
Lisle Road runs parallel with Interstate 75 and is known for speeding traffic.
A flashing light system and appropriate signage will need installed at this
road crossing to make drivers aware of a trail crossing, as well as to stop
trail users and yield to traffic. The trail then proceeds west to the railroad
corridor where it then turns north and follows parallel to the railroad. Design
standards established by Rails-With-Trails will be used to design a safe and
appropriate trail along the railroad. The trail follows three parcel boundaries
before it reaches public owned land at the soccer complex, where it continues
to follow parallel to the railroad. Scott County has a masterplan for the soccer
complex, seen on the map. The design team is proposing a trailhead at the
soccer complex that coincides with its masterplan. Amenities of this trailhead
facility can be shared with the soccer complex functions. Section One ends
at the newly built Lemons Mill Elementary School (plan provided by Sherman
Carter Barnhart), and the southern end of the adjacent Anderson Communities
development.
section two: 2.07 miles
Anderson Communities (Dennis Anderson) provided the concept plan, seen
on the map, for the future residential and commercial development. They
planned for a pedestrian path along the perimeter of the development; they
have expressed interest in allowing the Legacy Trail extension to come
through the development in place of the originally proposed pedestrian path.
At the north end of the Anderson Communities development the trail will cross
Lemons Mill Road. North of Lemons Mill Road there is an existing residential
neighborhood, as well as plans for more residential development on the
vacant land west of the neighborhood. The trail proceeds north to a parcel
also owned by Dennis Anderson, who has expressed interest in allowing
the trail to locate on the perimeter. Section Two ends at this parcel where it
crossed North Elkhorn Creek with a bridge.
section three: 1.53 miles
Section Three begins with the stream crossing and at public owned parkland.
The parkland backs up to a residential neighborhood; however, this parkland
is underused due to lack of direct access and because it is in the floodplain and
stays wet. The design team has proposed a trailhead at this location, as well
as the concept for a wetland park. A wetland park could be a long term goal,
but it would create the opportunity to establish a usable park that educates
users about ecology and the environment, in particular, North Elkhorn Creek.
A wetland project could also be used to mitigate stormwater runoff and protect
the creek. A concept plan can be seen on page 29. This trailhead can also
serve as a node for connecting to future connections to other trails within
the county or to regional network connections. From the trailhead, the trail
proceeds west, goes under McClelland Circle and follows North Elkhorn
Creek to Paris Pike. There is currently a mobile home park in this location; the
FEMA floodplain shows that the mobile home are in the floodplain that may
be eligible for floodplain hazard mitigation assistance. The trail then crosses
Paris Pike at-grade. This intersection will require traffic analysis to design an
appropriate intersection for an already congested area. North of Paris Pike,
the trail continues through the public park / boat launch where it crosses the
creek with a bridge. The trail follows the creek and through an undeveloped
area until it reaches an at-grade railroad crossing.
section four: 1.84 miles
Section Four begins at the at-grade railroad crossing where the trail then goes
north through a wooded parcel to North Elkhorn Creek and crosses to BiWater Farm. Bi-Water Farm is an agro-tourism destination in Georgetown,
and the incorporation of a shared-use trail on the property would be mutually
beneficial. The trail follows parallel to the creek until it crosses into Richard O
Winder Park at the Peninsula neighborhood. The trail will meander through
the park and cross the creek again to access and existing path under North
Broadway. Since stream crossings are expensive and funding for this section
may take a long time, a temporary on-street connection on Payne Street could
get trail users to Richard O Winder Park. After the trail goes under North
Broadway, it follows adjacent the Yuko-En Japanese Garden before it then
turns north onto an abandoned railroad corridor. The trail ends at a proposed
trailhead at Cardome. The trailhead is located between the Cardome Center
and Yuko-En, and there is abundant parking in the adjacent lot at the Cardome
Center. This trailhead location also provides the opportunity for future regional
network connections to Stamping Ground and Frankfort to the west.
urban loop
A connection to downtown Georgetown and Georgetown College’s main and
athletic campuses is important. It will provide additional destinations for trail
users, bring business to downtown, and provide non-motorized transportation
for students. A majority of the Urban Loop will be on street bike lanes, and not
the typical section of a shared-use trail. This is the reasoning for proposing
this spur connection separately; maintaining an off-road shared-use trail that
is consistent with the existing Legacy Trail for the main “spine” of the extension
to Georgetown. The Urban Loop will utilize existing plans to connect Cardome
to Royal Springs Park (see previous study on pg. 33) by converting Water
Street into a linear park. The trail will then go through Downtown on Main
Street, and then south on Memorial Drive into Georgetown College. There
are several ways the trail could go through campus, but the proposed route
uses College Street, Military Street, and Avondale Avenue before it crosses
the railroad with a pedestrian bridge into the athletic campus. There is also
potential to use an existing walkway over the railroad on Lemons Mill Road to
the south. The trail follows the northern perimeter of the athletic campus to
Main Street Extension. Following parallel to Main Street Extension, the trail
then crosses McClelland Circle and connects with Section Two of the primary
alignment.
21
section one alignment:
22
KENTUCKY HORSE PARK TO LEMONS MILL ELEMENTARY
Section One Context Map
Conceptual trail section along the railroad corridor. This section of trail will follow Rails-With-Trails design standards to maximize safety with railroad
operations and trail users.
Tunnel at Barton Brothers Farm approaching Lisle Road (west of I-75).
Lisle Road crossing Location at the Barton Brothers Farm tunnel.
Monon Trail road crossing, Indianapolis, Indiana. This crossing is an example of how lighting and
signage can allow for a safe crossing at Lisle Road. Captured from Google Maps Street View.
23
section two alignment:
24
LEMONS MILL ELEMENTARY TO NORTH ELKHORN CREEK
Section Two Context Map
View of Lemons Mill Elementary School from proposed trail Corridor.
Typical trail section through the Anderson Communities Development.
Lemons Mill Road crossing location.
25
section three alignment:
26
NORTH ELKHORN CREEK TO RAILROAD INTERSECTION
Proposed wetland park trailhead location.
Bird’s eye view of proposed wetland park trailhead
location. Captured from bingmaps.com
Existing at-grade railroad crossing at the end of Section
Three of the proposed Trail alignment.
Existing maintenance path under McClelland
Circle along proposed trail corridor.
Section Three Context Map
An existing mobile home park is currently with in the updated FEMA 100-year floodplain. Data obtained from
FEMA Flood Map Service Center.
Rendering of a shared-use trail at-grade railroad crossing.
27
section one trailhead concept plan
28
section two trailhead and wetland park concept plan
29
section four alignment:
30
RAILROAD INTERSECTION TO CARDOME TRAILHEAD
Temporary route corridor on Payne Street.
Section Four Context Map
Section Four Trailhead Contept Plan at Cardome
Conceptual typical section following Rails-to-Trails standards at the abandoned railroad corridor.
This rendering illustrates how the proposed stream crossing in Richard O Winder Park functions with parking and circulation alterations.
31
urban loop alignment:
32
MCCLELLAND CIRCLE TO ROYAL SPRINGS PARK AND CARDOME
Urban Loop Context Map
Royal Springs Greenway / North Broadway Small Area Plan
A study was performed in 2004 that explored a potential greenway trail along North Water Street from Royal Springs Park which continued northward across the
Elkhorn using existing railroad trestle abutments. The greenway would connect several existing features along the way including the historic Royal Springs Park,
the Model Mills site, what is now the Arts Consortium, the Yuko En Japanese Gardens, and further into Cardome. The goal of the study was to evaluate residential
redevelopment along North Water Street and make a linear park adjacent the existing stream.
Existing Lemons Mill Road pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks at the Georgetown
College Athletic Campus.
Another study, the North Broadway Small Area Plan, was completed in 2007 and focused specifically on the existing character and proposed improvements to the
North Broadway corridor. This final report included recommendations defined in three separate zones: the downtown core, a residential district, and a mixed-use
district on the northern side. But this Small Area Plan also referenced the Royal Springs Greenway and elaborated upon the concept of a trail connection from
Royal Springs to Peninsula Park.
33
urban loop alignment:
DOWNTOWN MAIN STREET CONFIGURATIONS
existing conditions
alternate #1: separate one-way bike lanes
Several streetscape alternatives have been considered to accommodate the extension of the trail through downtown Georgetown.
Many factors exist which may prohibit one alternative over the next, but these alternatives have been provided for an initial
consideration and have been based on both field measurements and data obtained from aerial imagery. Before a definitive
determination could be provided on a preferred streetscape section, our recommendation would first be to perform a traffic analysis
to confirm that the drive lanes could be reduced, how the bike lanes would interfere with the pedestrian and vehicular circulation,
signal timing, how intersections are addressed, among others. Our sections are provided as a potential starting point to bring the
trail through downtown Georgetown, but that decision would first need made by the community to see if they are desired or not.
This scenario reflects the conventional location of two 6’-0”, one-way bike lanes adjacent parallel parking spaces. The lane
configuration remains the same as the existing conditions with two drive lanes and a center turn / loading lane except that the drive
lanes are reduced from 11’-0” down to 10’-0” and the center lane is increased from 10’-0” to 11’-0”. Alternate #1 offers a two-way
bike facility on street, but presents a potential hazard of car doors opening within the bike lanes without the desired separation
from the adjacent on-street parking spaces. However, by reconfiguring lane widths and simply restriping the pavement, bike lanes
could easily be included within the Main Street Corridor and the spatial constraints.
Since a parking assessment has not been performed, the net loss of on-street parking spaces has not been determined - which
applies to subsequent configurations as well.
Disclaimer: Dimensions of the existing conditions along Main Street were taken from both
field measurements and aerial imagery (we were able to accurately measure the sidewalk
from building face to face of curb, but not the paving width from curb face to curb face).
observations
The objective of this evaluation of the downtown core was to examine various streetscape
configurations which accommodate bike lanes within the constraints of existing conditions
between face of curb to face or curb. The existing conditions are as follows:
1) The north side of the street has parallel parking adjacent the pedestrian zone (sidewalk);
the southern side has angled parking adjacent the pedestrian zone.
2) The total pavement width may be 58’-0”, but we proceeded with a more conservative
dimension of 57’-0”.
3) The sidewalk width from building face to curb face is 12’-0”
4) Two 11’-0” lanes of traffic exist with a 10’-0” center turn lane which is also used for temporary
loading / deliveries
Center turn lane is used for truck loading
and deliveries.
Portland, OR (Note the former striping for previous lanes)
MAIN STREET
Aerial Photo of Existing Conditions of Main Street
34
Alternate #1
Source: Bike Delaware, Inc.
urban loop alignment:
DOWNTOWN MAIN STREET CONFIGURATIONS
alternate #2: one-way separated bike lanes Alternate #2 considers buffering the bike lanes from the parking spaces and moves the bike facility closer to the sidewalk /
pedestrian zone and provides a safer experience by being further separated from the travel lanes. The spatial requirements
of the buffered space prohibit more than a one-way westward approaching bike lane. However, a “loop” connection could still
be completed by turning south on Broadway and using the existing bike lanes, then east on College Street toward Georgetown
College.
Looking West on College Street
Source: National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO)
Alternate #2
Looking North on Memorial Drive
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers
Alternate “Loop” Connection to College Street
35
urban loop alignment:
DOWNTOWN MAIN STREET CONFIGURATIONS
alternate #3: two-way cycle tracks & parallel parking alternate #4: two-way cycle tracks & angled parking
With this concept, two-way bike lanes are reconsidered and accommodated through the use of two-way “cycle tracks” on the
north side of Main Street. The travel lanes return to 11’-0” with a 10’-0” center lane which matches existing conditions in this
scenario. Parallel parking has also been provided on both sides of the street. The NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide as
the basis of design for the dimensions of the cycle tracks. 12’ is the preferred lane width for two-way cycle tracks, but only the
minimum 8’-0” can be provided within the given constraints of Main Street. A 3’-0” minimum buffer space separates cyclists from
the parking lanes.
Two-way cycle tracks are proposed with this concept as well, but rather than propose the parallel on-street parking, this concept
allows for angled parking intended to match the unique character of the existing parking configuration on Main Street in downtown
Georgetown. One adjustment to the proposed angled parking would be to switch from a conventional front entry to a safer
reverse angled parking. This allows for easier enter / exit of vehicles as well as loading pickup truck beds directly from the
streetscape rather than having to approach from the traffic lane. The visibility upon exiting is greatly improved since the reverse
motion is made when initially parking.
Source: National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO)
Source: Inst. of Transportation Engineers
Alternate #3
36
Prospect Park: Brooklyn, NY
Alternate #4
Canton, OH
final recommendations: streetscape enhancement Additionally, this streetscape concept could be expanded upon to include stormwater treatment by reducing stormwater runoff volumes or
improving the quality of stormwater runoff. Some methods of reducing stormwater volumes would be capture and infiltration of runoff into
rain water gardens incorporated into planter islands or even within a network of larger cellular containment systems beneath the sidewalk
that is intended to house street trees. Another method that would both capture and slowly release stormwater and also increase water
quality would be the integration of permeable pavement within the proposed bike lane. The illustration at right demonstrates how this
proposed solution may create a more appealing and pedestrian friendly streetscape environment by introducing a medium-sized tree and
a decoratively paved cycle tracks area.
Permeable Concrete Bike Lanes
Existing Streetscape
Permeable Parking Lanes
Alternate #5
Illustrative Streetscape for a Shared-Use Path on Main Street
37
toyota loop alignment
alignment description:
Corresponding with the conceptual regional and countywide
comprehensive trail network, the design team proposed a separate
shared-use trail spur which connects to Toyota. It is important to
connect primary destinations with the people who use them. Toyota is
a major contributor to the economy and employs about 7,000 people
from Georgetown-Scotty County and the surrounding counties. Toyota
Motor Manufacturing Kentucky, Inc. has announced that in 2015 Lexus
production operations will come to the Georgetown plant.
Residential development is increasing on the northeast side of
Georgetown due to the convenient proximity to the Toyota plant. The
proposed Toyota Loop will serve as a trail spur that will connect the Legacy
Trail extension with residential developments, commercial and retail
usesl, community parks, and the Toyota plant. These connections are
important for providing alternate forms of transportation for commuting
to work, a recreational outlet, and acquiring daily necessities.
The Toyota Loop alignment begins at the wetland park trailhead in
Section Three of the proposed alignment of the Legacy Trail extension.
The trail utilizes the existing maintenance path under Interstate 75 along
North Elkhorn Creek. The alignment then follows a tributary of North
Elkhorn Creek adjacent to the North Elkhorn Green neighborhood. The
trail alignment continues along the tributary, continues east of the Rock
Creek Farm residential development, until it reaches Old Oxford Road.
It then follows Old Oxford Road northward to the north end of Cherry
Blossom Golf Course. There are plans for constructing a new Interstate
75 interchange at the Toyota plant (Fall 2014) which will connect Cherry
Blossom Road to Champion Way. A shared-use trail is already planned
for this connection.
The Toyota Loop alignment reaches Champion Way and continues
southward to The Community Sport and Activity Pavilion (The Pavilion),
another important community and recreational destination. The
alignment then connects to existing street infrastructure at Grandstand
Drive. Though there is currently no development on Grandstand Drive,
people have been observed using the streets for walking and cycling,
emphasizing the need for shared-use trail facilities in this area. The
alignment is then proposed across Champion Way and could follow
an existing tree row along one property line to Meyers Drive, where
the alignment can utilize on-street facilities to reconnect to the primary
Legacy Trail alignment at the Paris Pike boat launch park.
Toyota Loop Alignment Map
38
Existing street infrastructure (Grandstand Drive) off Champion Way is used by walkers and cyclists.
Open space adjacent The Pavilion where the Toyota Loop can connect to Grandstand Drive on the other
side of the tree line.
Plans from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for the future I-75 interchange at the Toyota plant. The interchange will connect Champion Way to Cherry Blossom Way.
Kentucky Transportation Cabinet typical section for the future I-75 interchange at the Toyota plant. The interchange will include a 10’ multi-use path.
39
trail design standards
Shared-Use Trail
The typical paving cross section that was used for estimating purposes
is a twelve foot (12’-0”) wide bituminous asphalt surface with a two foot
(2’-0”) dense grade aggregate (DGA) shoulder. The depth of the asphalt
material was estimated at a 3” thickness over 8” of compacted DGA. This
paving section is durable enough to allow the temporary access for both
maintenance and emergency vehicles.
Asphalt Surface
Dense Grade Aggregate
(DGA)
shared-use trail (typical section)
Prepared Subgrade
Equestrian Trail
In areas where the shared use path could include an equestrian path,
separation is recommended between these two facilities to reduce
potential conflicts. Many examples can be cited where bicycling and
equestrian uses share the same trail route in the United States, but
bicyclists are often unaware of the need to slow down and provide
additional clearance when approaching horses. The same would apply
with trail users that walk or jog with their pets. Some horses may be
apprehensive to approaching bicyclists or pets if they perceive them as
a threat. Potential equestrian conflicts can be reduced by designing for
separate bridle paths, providing adequate sight lines (so bicyclists and
equestrians see one another well in advance), and by providing signage
that clearly indicates yielding responsibilities and appropriate passing
techniques.
An unpaved bridle path can serve the dual purpose of accommodating
horses and joggers. Separate paths should be divided by a vegetation
buffer or barrier a minimum of six feet (6’-0”) wide. Equestrians and many
cross-country runners prefer unpaved trail surfaces.
40
shared-use trail with equestrian (typical section)
trail design standards
Equestrian Trail (Materials)
Paved surfaces provide little traction for horses and if loose
material (ie mulch or gravel) is not stabilized in sloped areas,
the material will migrate and the trail will be more susceptible
to erosion. Other variables, including the expected use, cost
of material, terrain / slope, and long-term maintenance, should
be closely considered if trails are intended to accommodate
equestrian use.
Signage examples for shared-use trails that include equstrian riders.
Relative characteristics of common surface materials for horse trails, trailheads, and campgrounds.
Shared-use trail with side equine path. Gateway Trail, St. Paul, MN.
10’ vertical clearance, Clear Creek Trail, CO; photo by Stuart Macdonald
Source:http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/publications/fs_publications/07232816/page11
41
implementation strategies
Property Acquisition
Property negotiations and / or easement acquisition on known
affected properties for the initial trail sections could begin
immediately.
Additionally, there are funds available through the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) that provides states and local
governments funding to purchase parcels that are known
to be impacted during flood events. The Hazard Mitigation
Assistance (HMA) Unified Guidance specifically intends to
reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to people and property
from damage resulting from natural disasters. Within the HMA
Unified Guidance, there are five programs outlined for funding:
While the statutory origins of the programs differ, all share the
common goal of reducing the risk of loss of life and property due
to natural hazards. One potential application could consider the
mobile homes and some adjacent parcels located south of Paris
Pike and west of McClelland. According to the FEMA Flood
Insurance Rate (FIRM) map, nearly all the mobile homes and
the adjacent parcels south of Paris Road are located within the
floodplain:
fills, water resource projects, infrastructure development.
Kentucky Division of Water:
Floodplain Construction Permit. The Kentucky Division of
Water, Floodplain Management Section has the primary
responsibility for the approval or denial of proposed
construction and other activities in the 100-year floodplain of
all streams in the Commonwealth. Typical activities permitted
are dams, bridges, culverts, residential and commercial
buildings, placement of fill, stream alterations or relocations,
small impoundments and water and wastewater treatment
plants.
If subject parcels have had histories of claimed damages, they
are eligible to receive funding. They may also be eligible to
receive Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) funding by simply being
located within the AE Zone of the floodplain.
401 KAR, Water Quality Certification Permit. The §401
Water Quality Certification Program of the Kentucky Division
of Water is the Commonwealth’s review and authorization
of selected federal license and permits. Activities that may
require a certification from the Kentucky Division of Water,
Water Quality Certification Section include:
1. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
HMGP is available, when authorized under a Presidential major
disaster declaration, in the areas of the State requested by the
Governor.
2. Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)
The PDM program is designed to assist States, Territories,
Indian Tribal governments, and local communities to implement
a sustained pre-disaster natural hazard mitigation program to
reduce overall risk to the population and structures from future
hazard events, while also reducing reliance on Federal funding
from future disasters.
3. Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)
The FMA program is authorized with the goal of reducing or
eliminating claims under the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP).
4. Repetitive Flood Claims (RFC)
It is the goal of the RFC program to reduce flood damages to
individual properties for which one or more claim payments for
losses have been made under flood insurance coverage and that
will result in the greatest savings to the National Flood Insurance
Fund (NFIF) in the shortest period of time
5. Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL)
The SRL program is authorized with the goal of reducing flood
damages to residential properties that have experienced severe
repetitive losses under flood insurance coverage and that will
result in the greatest savings to the NFIF in the shortest period
of time.
Source: Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance
42
Permitting
Various permits will be required to develop the entire Legacy
Trail plan. The following is a brief listing of probable required
permits:
Local – Local permits for right of way encroachments or other
activities will be required.
Railroad – Railroad permits will be required if any direct or indirect
construction is placed on railroad right of way. This could include
culvert or stream redirection, bridges or underpasses, utilized
portions of right of way for the project or crossing the railroad,
even at locations where there are existing road crossings.
Kentucky Transportation Cabinet – KYTC permits will be
required on all state maintained right of way
Kentucky eClearinghouse – The submission of documentation
to the eClearinghouse will be required to obtain environmental
clearance for any portions of the project that include state or
federal funding. The eClearinghouse will obtain comments for
the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Department as well as the State
Historic Preservation Office, addressing topics such as historic
properties, floodplain management, wetlands protection,
endangered species, and farmlands protection. This covers
basic (or Phase 1) environmental assessment. Additional
environmental review has not been considered in this estimate.
US Army Corps of Engineers – Section 404 Permit. Section 404
of the Clean Water Act regulates the discharge of dredged and
fill material into the waters of the United States, including rivers,
lakes streams and most wetlands. Regulated activities include
• Placement of dredged or fill materials into waters of the state and/or wetlands
• Structural fill such as culverts and bridge supports
• Road and utility crossings
• Dredging, excavation, channel widening, or straightening
• Flooding, excavating, draining and/or filling a wetland
• Bank sloping; stabilization
• Stream channel relocation
• Water diversions
• Divert, obstruct or change the natural flow or bed of any waters of the state (e.g. debris removal, bank stabilization or culverting)
• Construct a barrier across a stream, channel, or watercourse that will create a reservoir: dams, weirs, dikes, levees or other similar structures
Funding Sources
Though other methods of securing funding exist, the following
may be the most applicable for the intended design and
construction of the proposed Legacy Trail Extension project:
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
• 80% / 20% Match
• $13 Million for KY in FY 2014
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
• $10 Million for KY in 2014 (apart from TAP)
Recreational Trails Program (RTP)
• 50% / 50% Match
• $100K Maximum grant amount
• $1.4 Million for KY (apart from TAP)
Tax Incremental Financing (TIF)
• Allows a portion of tax revenue generated from private
development in blighted areas to be used for public
infrastructure improvements.
USEPA Clean Water Act - Section 319 Grants
• A program that provides funding for projects designed to
mitigate nonpoint source pollution that can demonstrate
improvements to storm water quality.
Corporate / Private Sponsors
The 2010 World Equestrian Games was the catalyst for the
Legacy Trail. For a major trail development to advance further,
having support outside the public sector will be an important
factor. Being able to demonstrate the interest, or better still,
the commitment of an outside sponsor will add additional
leverage to the interest developed by the community which will
be expected to continue by the local government agencies, in
our case is Georgetown - Scott County.
A remarkable (and possibly similar) example to cite for the
Trans Canada Trail was the corporate involvement of Diamler Chrysler (now Jeep) as a major supporter. The Trans Canada
Trail is the world’s largest trail network with 14,000 miles planned
and 10,400 miles of currently usable trail. Diamler - Chrysler
sponsored a pavilion with donors names inscribed on panels
and developed a program where donors could “own” a linear
stretch of trail according to their sponsorship level.
The similar comparison for Georgetown would be Toyota. The
manufacturer plays such an important role in the community.
The contributions of this corporation would not need to be
substantial, but the leverage with government and in generating
overall public interest would be remarkable to further generate
enthusiasm for the succes of the Legacy Trail Extension.
preliminary costs
Opinion of Probable Cost
Right Of Way / Property Requirements:
The category of Property Requirements considers the land necessary to
construct the proposed trail and how property will be acquired. Land for
the trail will include property currently owned by the Georgetown-Scott
County Government, donated land, access easements, or fee-simple
purchase, that will need to be purchased from private land owners and
recorded as a conservation easement or dedicated as public land.
Though some property owners have pledged their support and intend to
donate access easement in locations, no property has been designated
at the conclusion of this study. Values for this land have been included in
the figures listed for property to be acquired as a maximum dollar figure
for acquisition and the total project cost has been reflected accordingly.
For the purpose of developing this opinion of probable cost, various
property values obtained from the Georgetown Scott County PVA have
been gathered and averaged for residential, commercial, and agricultural
land uses. The recommended width of Right of Way is 50’. The average
width of 40’-0” has been used for estimating purposes, recognizing there
will be some narrow sections in developed areas. The desired width
in rural areas, outside our focused study area, may be increased to
accommodate equestrian use.
construction are considered within the “Proposed Improvements”
category.
Storm Drainage considers the piping, headwall structures, labor,
materials, and incidentals required to complete the storm drainage
improvements required to manage storm water runoff.
Stream Crossings include the cost associated with the manufacturing
of pre-fabricated bridges, their delivery, construction, decking
material, installation of structural footings and abutments, wing-walls,
and guardrails.
Miscellaneous items include the relocation of utilities, signage / signal
requirements, pavement striping, and permitting.
Design Fees:
Design Fees can be expected to vary according to section, but in
general, this category includes the civil / site design requirements for
the trail alignment as well as grading and drainage. Additionally, the
design fees can include geotechnical engineering, structural design for
proposed stream crossings along the trail, and construction observation
/ reporting requirements.
Construction:
The following is a summary of the construction items that were
considered, but have been condensed into the individual trail sections:
General Conditions include construction staking, mobilization of
construction equipment, maintenance of traffic, and demobilization.
Demolition considers the work associated with site protection
devices, protection of existing trees to remain, clearing and grubbing
of vegetation to be removed, and the disposal of additional features
to be removed.
Proposed Improvements:
The proposed improvements category includes figures for materials
(asphalt riding surface, stone base, fencing, etc.) and labor associated
with the trail construction, installation and maintenance of sediment
and erosion control measures, necessary modifications to existing
streets (when applicable), “at-grade” street crossings, railroad
crossings, fencing, mile markers, and general site restoration.
Trailhead and Amenities includes restroom facilities, pavement (both
asphalt and concrete where applicable), plantings, site furnishings
(bollards, seating, bike racks, trash receptacles, and lighting), bicycle
repair stations, interpretive or orientation signage, stone and/or brick
monuments, and all required utilities (water, electric, and sanitary
sewer). This category would include pavement associated with the
trailhead and vehicular use areas only. Figures associated with trail
43
Section 1: 1.17 Miles (6,200 LF)
ITEM
NO.
RIGHT OF WAY / PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS
Total
Section 2: 2.07 Miles (10,920 LF)
TOTAL
COST
$
18,250
CONSTRUCTION
General Conditions
ITEM
NO.
RIGHT OF WAY / PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS
Total
Section 3: 1.53 Miles (8,050 LF)
TOTAL
COST
$
135,330
CONSTRUCTION
General Conditions
$
105,040
$
60,000
$
915,740
$
253,090
$
59,450
$
50,000
$
$
$
1,000,380
105,040
150,060
$
1,255,480
Demolition
$
125,170
General Conditions
Contingency (15% of Subtotal)
Total for Construction Cost
912,120
$
125,550
$
18,050
18,250
1,255,480
125,550
$ 1,399,280
$
181,020
$
65,000
$
728,320
$
286,580
$
45,600
$
70,650
$
30,000
$
448,090
$
$
$
1,192,100
125,170
178,820
$
50,000
$
1,496,090
$
$
$
1,724,030
181,020
258,600
$
2,163,650
$
216,370
$
$
$
75,390
2,163,650
216,370
Trailhead & Amenities
Storm Drainage
Stream Crossings (2 @ 120 LF crossing)
Subtotal
General Conditions
Contingency (15% of subtotal)
Construction Cost
Miscellaneous
DESIGN FEES
Site / Civil (10%)
$
149,610
General Conditions
Contingency (15% of subtotal)
Construction Cost
$
$
$
75,390
Proposed Trail Improvements
Subtotal
SECTION 1 - TOTAL
Right of Way / Property Requirements
Construction
Design Fees
$
Miscellaneous
DESIGN FEES
Site / Civil (10%)
51,000
Storm Drainage
Miscellaneous
Subtotal
$
Trailhead & Amenities
Storm Drainage
$
Demolition
Proposed Trail Improvements
Trailhead & Amenities
TOTAL
COST
CONSTRUCTION
General Conditions
Demolition
Proposed Trail Improvements
ITEM
NO.
RIGHT OF WAY / PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS
Total
SECTION 2 - TOTAL
Right of Way / Property Requirements
Construction Costs
Design Fees
$
$
$
135,330
1,496,090
149,610
$ 1,781,030
DESIGN FEES
Site / Civil (10%)
SECTION 3 - TOTAL
Right of Way / Property Requirements
Construction Costs
Design Fees
$ 2,455,410
44
Section 4: 1.84 Miles (9,715 LF)
ITEM
ITEM
NO.
RIGHT OF WAY / PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS
Total
TOTAL
COST
$
54,320
$
197,710
$
71,200
$
771,840
$
227,040
$
61,400
$
657,130
CONSTRUCTION
General Conditions
Summary
Demolition (+/-3%)
Proposed Trail Improvements
Trailhead & Amenities
Storm Drainage
General Project Statistics:
6.6 Miles (Average: +/- $1.25 Million / Mile) 5 – Stream Crossings
1 – At-Grade RR Crossing
4 – Street Crossings
Lisle Rd, Lemons Mill, Main St Extended, Paris Rd
3 – Existing Culvert Crossings
KY Horse Park, McClelland, North Broadway
3 – Trailheads
2 – Bathroom Facilities
Total Property Acquisition:
Construction:
Design Fees:
$283,290
$7,278,300
$727,838
Stream Crossings (3 @ 120 LF crossing)
Miscellaneous
Subtotal
General Conditions
Contingency (15% of subtotal)
Construction Cost
$
40,000
$
$
$
1,882,930
197,710
282,440
$
2,363,080
$
236,308
DESIGN FEES
Site / Civil (10%)
SECTION 4 - TOTAL
Right of Way / Property Requirements
Construction Costs
Design Fees
$
$
$
54,320
2,363,080
236,310
$ 2,653,710
Operations and Maintenance
Operations cost for shared-use facilities typically includes security or policing the facility. Maintenance includes pavement
(sweeping, snow removal, and repair), drainage (cleaning and repair of storm drains), traffic controls (pavement marking,
signs, and traffic signal maintenance), and landscape maintenance.
When shared-use trail facilities are elements of other, larger facilities, the maintenance costs are often included into the
cost of the maintenance of the larger facility. Often the marginal or incremental costs of added maintenance are modest
and not seperately accounted for as discrete facility costs. For example, for a roadway-widening project, it is difficult to
discretely identify the added operations and maintenance (O&M) costs associated with the widening from the overall costs
of maintaining the road. As a result, it is difficult to seperate maintenance costs for most facilities and it is assumed that the
added O&M costs are negligible. A typical exception to this assumption is the cost of landscape maintenance for bicycle
trails.
Our research into trail maintenance costs identified a source that has been widely used by trail proponents to estimate
costs. Several trail proponents used a Rails to Trails Conservancy breakdown of maintenance costs for the year 2000. The
cost items include drainage, sweeping, trash removal, weed control, mowing, minor repairs, supplies, and fuel. The total
annual per mile cost is estimated at $6,500 (1).
(1) Source: Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities 2005; National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 552,
Transportation Research Board.
Additionally, the Legacy Trail may be our closest model and most accurate comparison for annual maintenance costs to be
expected. When contacting both the LFUCG Department of Parks and Recreation as well as the Division of Engineering,
the cumulative range for annual maintenance cost varied from $3,800 - $5,000 per mile.
45
summary and final recommendations
Phasing
The Legacy Trail Extension through Scott County should be considered a long
range plan that may take longer than 10 years to implement. However the phasing
of the various sections or components can begin immediately and should. It is the
intent of this study to serve as a guide for future grant applications. It is important
to outline projects in advance so that when funding becomes available, there is a
trail component or feature that can be pursued as part of a larger plan. Here is a
tentative schedule for the extents of the proposed trail sections:
Section Two:
1 – 2 years
Section One:
2 – 3 years
Section Three:
3 – 5 years
Section Four:
(and Urban Loop)
5 – 10 years
Acquiring Property Located in the Floodplain:
The trailer park located adjacent Paris Road is within the floodplain according
to FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Two specific categories of eligibility for
the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) program that could assist with
the acquisition of this property are 1) the Pre-Disaster Mitigation and 2) Flood
Mitigation Assistance. The trail could then be located along the corridor indicated
in Section 3 west of the proposed Wetland Park.
Recreational features such as ball field and trails are features that are better
located within the floodplain than residential units, especially if they respond to
the terrain and do not propose an increase to the existing flood elevation.
Steering Committee:
Additionally, there could be certain components, such as trailhead features that
are designed and constructed separately from the larger section of trail. Take for
example the trailhead at the existing Scott County Soccer Complex proposed as
part of Trail Section One. This trailhead feature could be phased for construction
prior to the design and installation of the trail because it could serve the community
as a facility before the trail is constructed, but simultaneously be used to generate
interest in the trail project. By classifying the feature as a trailhead, this component
would be eligible to receive matching grant funds through Recreational Trails
Program or Transportation Alternative Programs for design and construction.
The trailhead concept shown in Section 3 that is referred to as “Wetland Park”
would require fill to be placed in the approaches to the bridge crossing. Since
this area is located within the floodplain, there would need to be additional
containment area provided which would counter any decreased capacity within
the floodplain resulting from the added fill used in the approaches. The excavated
areas could be designed as restored wetland habitat and could be funded in part
with Federal 319(h) – Clean Water Act money if the project demonstrates an
improvement to water quality. There are also numerous funding sources available
through the following federal agencies: US Fish & Wildlife, Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS), USDA Forest Service; and the following state
agencies: Department of Natural Resources, Fish and Wildlife Management, and
the Division of Water Quality. The use of funds from these agencies could offset
the costs associated with constructing new wetlands. Presently the area where
the park is proposed is low in elevation and holds water after rain events making
it difficult for the City of Georgetown to maintain. The flat terrain could easily be
reverted to wetlands and would result in less area for the city to mow regularly.
46
A steering committee has already been formed and was heavily involved in the
development of this feasibility study. It is highly important, in order for this project
to succeed, that the steering committee maintain momentum established by the
existing Legacy trail and its success to date. Collaboration with city and state
government officials, as well as potential corporate and private stakeholders, is
necessary to continue the efforts in obtaining funding and construction phases
of the trail. Momentum carried forward by the steering committee is pertinent to
extend the Legacy Trail from Lexington to Georgetown, and to establish a shared
legacy for the Bluegrass Region.
reference materials
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). (2012). Guide for the development of bicycle facilities.
American Trails. (1990). Trails for all Americans. Retrieved February, 19, 2011, from http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/rtca/helpfultools/trailsforall.pdf
Documenting Economic and Community Benefits of Trails, Russell Irvine, 1999. National Recreational Trails
Fabos, J.G. (1995). Introduction and overview: the greenway movement, uses and potentials of greenways. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33, 1-13.
FEMA Map Service Center. https://msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/FemaWelcomeView?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1
Flink, C., Olka, K., & Searns, R. (2001). Trails for the twenty-first century: planning, design, and management manual for multi-use trails, second edition.
Washington, DC: Island Press
Georgetown-Scott County Planning Commission. (2009) Scott County zoning map. Retrieved April 11, 2013, from http://www.gscplanning.com/maps/
ScottCountyZoning24x36.pdf
Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities 2005; National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 552, Transportation Research
Board.
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, Repetitive Flood Claims Program, Severe Repetitive Loss Program: June 1, 2010. Federal Emergency Management Agency Department of Homeland Security.
Jackson, Laura E. (2003). The relationship of urban design to human health and condition. Landscape and Urban Planning, 64, 191-200.
Kentucky Trasportation Cabinet. http://transportation.ky.gov
Leinberger, C. (2008). The option of urbanism: investing in a new american dream. Washington, DC: Island Press.
National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO). www.nacto.org
RDG Martin Shukert & Ciaccio Dennell Group. (1994). A Network of Discovery: A Comprehensive Trails Plan for the State of Nebraska. Retrieved February 4, 2013,
from http://www.nlc.state.ne.us/docs/nlcwesterntrails/networkofdiscovery/NetworkDiscovery.pdf
Strand Associates, Inc. & CBA, Inc. (2009). Feasibility study: the legacy trail. Retrieved March 23, 2012, from http://www.lexingtonky.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.
aspx?documentid=7532
Toyota Motor Manufacturing Kentucky, Inc. http://www.toyotageorgetown.com
U.S. Department of Transportation. (2002). Rails-with-trails: lessons learned (FTA-MA-26-0052-04-). Retrieved from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/
rwt/railswithtrails.pdf
47