Northumberland County Forest Universal Trail Plan

Transcription

1 Northumberland County Forest Universal Trail Plan Draft Mar. 4, 2014

2 Contents Introduction... 4 Scope... 5 Target Audience... 5 Site considerations... 6 Natural Heritage... 8 Cultural Heritage... 9 Trail Design... 9 Route Construction Specifications Overall dimensions Construction details Rest Areas Trailhead Waste container Outhouse Parking General Signage Maintenance Public Consultation Other Remarks... 22

3 Figures Figure 1. Location of universal trail in the Northumberland County Forest Figure 2. Topography and aerial view of vegetation in proposed universal trail location Figure 3. Carstairs memorial forest sign in commemoration of Carstairs bequest of land Figure 4. Draft universal trail layout including bench (picnic table markers) and parking lot locations. Note: Route will have some minor changes during construction Figure 5. Visual representation of clearing terminology (From BC Ministry of Forests Recreation Manual, Chapter 10: Recreation Trail Management, 2000) Figure 6. Trailbed (sub-base and surface) design for universal trail Figure 7. Trailbed (sub-base and surface) design for universal trail including drainage swale Figure 8. Specification drawing for construction and installation of guard rail (at swales and rest areas) Figure 9. Universal trail rest area layout Figure 10. Example trailhead sign from Woodland Road parking area Figure 11. Animal-proof waste containers being used at other forest parking areas Figure 12. Draft layout for universal trail parking area Figure 13. Specifications for accessible parking sign design as defined by O.Reg. 419/12, S.11.a Tables Table 1. Table of permitted and prohibited recreational opportunities for the universal trail Table 2. Table of measures of firmness and stability obtained by using rotational penetrometer (Axelson and Yamada 1999)

4 Introduction Trails in the Northumberland County Forest (NCF) are available for many users: Hiking Cross-country skiing Snowshoeing Mountain Biking Horseback Riding Off-road Motorcycling ATVing Snowmobiling The NCF s trails are generally technical with many obstacles, steep grades, few rest areas, unstable treads and long loops (shortest loop is ~2km: Orange kiddie loop). The NCF trails are geared toward sport/fitness/adventure experiences rather than destination or nature appreciation experiences. Trail widths vary, but the greatest proportion are narrow, mostly non-motorized single-track trails (~43%) and wide roads shared with motorized traffic (~41%) while the smallest proportion are double-track trails (~16%). All trails have native soil surfaces which are mostly soft, unstable sandy soil (a small amount of gravelly sand and some loamy soils). For these reasons among others accessibility to a variety of users is limited. Depending on abilities, recreational trail opportunities for those with mobility limitations are limited or non-existent. Our goal is to create a trail where barriers and obstacles to accessibility are minimized and the needs of all users are accommodated to the greatest extent possible; a universal trail (TFAOC 2006). The term universal recognizes that there will always be limitations that restrict some users from using the trail some people (e.g., unable to go outside: Trails For All Ontarians Collaborative [TFAOC] 2006). Rather than an accessible trail this is a trail that meets accessibility guidelines (USFS 2013) and legislation. Ideally, a universal trail with the best conditions possible to provide access for all would be part of the current trail network. Realistically, this is not possible as the current trail network was not designed with removing barriers in mind. In fact, trails were located to provide challenges or were not even intended to be used as trails, but were for farming or silviculture (i.e., forestry, reforestation). Renovating present trails to achieve our goal would not be possible. As a result, we had to look at this in the proper trail planning context and find a location that would be suitable based on factors such as topography and species-at-risk. As well, we wanted this trail to be less of a sport trail and more of a heritage (natural and cultural) appreciation trail and the location reflects this. To accommodate users that have some physical limitations, but who seek to use the other NCF trails, our continued maintenance and improvement of those trails as well as the addition of trail information such as using HETAP (High-efficiency trails assessment process) to identify important characteristics of trail difficulty (e.g., running slope, cross slope, distance, obstacles, tread width, trail surface) and provide signage to communicate this information will be undertaken.

5 Although we use the term universal trail, not all recreational user types will be permitted to use this trail. Using the term universal may not be clear to all and could suggest the universal use by all users is acceptable. Other uses such as ATV s, off-road motorcycles, horses and mountain bikes would be incompatible as they could create damage the trail and create obstacles that limit access for others. The universal trail will be for pedestrian traffic only. As with Ontario s Best Trails: Guidelines and best practices for the design, construction and maintenance of sustainable trails for all Ontarians (TFAOC 2006), we use the term pedestrians to include individuals who use wheeled forms of mobility (e.g., manual or power wheelchair, power scooter) although conventional all-terrain vehicles (ATV s) and off-road motorcycles are not permitted. To design the universal trail we have combined information, designs and considerations from many different sources, particularly from the U.S. where there is more experience with universal/accessible trails. Throughout the design there are the overarching standards of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act [AODA] 2005 (O.Reg. 413/12) with consideration to exceptions (Appendix A). Scope The design of the trail s features depends on the intended trail uses and site limitations of the site such as natural heritage and cultural features. The goal is to create a universal trail and the main considerations for this are removal of obstacles such as natural obstacles (e.g., logs, rocks, stumps) or constructed obstacles (e.g., width of trail, length of trail, surface firmness and stability). Target Audience To define suitable recreational uses, we started by identifying the user for which we seek to minimize limitations and then identify complementary and incompatible uses. Our overall goal is to provide access to the largest number of users without them require specialized equipment beyond what they would already use. The principal user that we are designing for are pedestrians: -Of all ages Including the use of strollers Low endurance No height obstacles -Using mobility aids including, but not limited to: Crutch(es) Support cane Walker Wheelchairs (manual or power)

6 Electric scooters White cane The trail requires a firm, stable and consistent surface that does not have unexpected obstacles or damage that would affect user safety or. So, activities such as ATVing, dirtbiking and mountain biking that would cause rutting and banking of corners or horseback riding that would cause gouging and destabilization of the surface would not be compatible uses (Table 1). Ideally, the universal trail would be suitable for children to ride bicycles on the trail, but defining that use while restricting older users may be challenging. As well, winter uses such as snowshoeing or cross-country skiing would be suitable for the trail, but we will not be maintaining the parking area, the outhouse or debris on the trail during winter as the level of maintenance required to ensure universality would be problematic. Table 1. Table of permitted and prohibited recreational opportunities for the universal trail. Use type Permitted Prohibited Pedestrians - Hiking/walking/mobility aid* Cross-country skiing Snowshoeing Bicycles Horseback Riding Off-road Motorcycle All-terrain vehicle Snowmobile *As defined in O.Reg 413/12, s.2. a device used to facilitate the transport, in a seated posture, of a person with a disability. -If under the age of 8 and in direct supervision of an adult and excludes those devices defined as mobility aids -parking lot and trail will not be maintained in winter Site considerations The location (Figure 1) was chosen as it is one of the few areas in the Northumberland County with little change in topography (Figure 2). In particular, it is an area of little steepness as most other areas have slopes greater than 5% which would make the construction of an

7 accessible trail difficult, if not impossible. As well, this area can be connected to the rest of the forest by trails to the south, but by closing the motorized trail that passes through the site (limiting the south trail to winter use only), the potential for prohibited use by off-road vehicles, mountain bikes and horses will be minimized. The creation of a parking area will also be easily done at this site. Figure 1. Location of universal trail in the Northumberland County Forest.

8 Figure 2. Topography and aerial view of vegetation in proposed universal trail location. Natural Heritage The soil at this site varies from poorly to well-drained and there are seasonally moist areas. These conditions pose a challenge to trail design and construction, but also provide opportunities as this area has a high diversity of plants and wildlife that are different from any other areas of the forest. The site is a European Larch plantation on the east portion, a white spruce/white pine plantation on the west portion and small areas of Red Pine plantation in the center (Figure 2). Other vegetation communities exist, generally along old fence rows and in wet areas including eastern white-cedar fencerow, mixed deciduous fencerow, Black Locust fencerow and mixed deciduous wetland. In 1949, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources planted a planned arboretum on the site. The arboretum was deemed to be a failure and cut down and replaced with European Larch a few years later. As a small European Larch plantation is not an economically viable (as of 2014), re-planting an arboretum of sorts would provide an area that can be used for interpretive education. There is a diversity of vegetation at the site such as Hobblebush, Chinquapin Oak and Horse Chestnut (species not indigenous to the site) as well as many native trees. As part of the development of the trail, interpretive plaques will be installed for each tree species that the trail passes. Depending on budgetary constraints, over time some larch will be removed to create gaps for planting other tree species at trail side, particularly species that are

9 found in Ontario, but not at this site such as Shagbark Hickory, Cottonwood, Sassafras and others that will not be invasive but would provide opportunities for public education. The Forest Management Officer performed vegetation surveys and wildlife surveys throughout the area in 2012 and 2013 and did not find any species of concern or species-at-risk. Cultural Heritage As with much of the Northumberland County Forest, this area has a rich cultural history. This area is known as the Carstairs Memorial Forest (Figure 3) as it was willed to Northumberland County by the Carstairs estate in There are the remains of a house on site and a church was located in the southeast corner although no remains area apparent. The site s history will be highlighted using interpretive signage throughout the trail system and will be develop in partnership with Northumberland County s Records Management and Archives department. Figure 3. Carstairs memorial forest sign in commemoration of Carstairs bequest of land. Trail Design The AODA (80.9.1) specifies that a trail must have (only relevant aspects shown): Minimum clearing width of 1.0m Minimum clearing height of 2.1m Firm and stable surface Edge protection at a drop-off o Must be an elevated barrier

10 o at least 5cm above trail surface o unimpeded drainage of trail surface Clear entrance opening between 85cm and 1m Signage indicating: o Trail length o Type of surface o Average and minimum trail width o Average and maximum running slope and cross slope o Location of amenities Website, brochures, maps and other information relating to trail must have this information Signage with high tonal contrast and sans serif font Other features that we have considered in our design that are not mandated by AODA legislation include provision and design of benches and rest areas, Route The Northumberland County Forest universal trail will be located within the Forest s Compartments 3 and 4. This area is bounded by County Road 9, Beagle Club Road and Bowmanton Road. The trail will have approximately 3.6km in total available length (Figure 4). It is a stacked loop design in the shape of a clover leaf with 4 main routes of approximately: 1.0km 1.3km 2.1km 2.5km The trail will use a portion of the current trails present. To ensure that use of the current trail does not continue. It will be blocked off at multiple locations with brush and planted trees. We will use organic matter and topsoil stripped during trail construction to cover and rehabilitate those trails.

11 Figure 4. Draft universal trail layout including bench (picnic table markers) and parking lot locations. Note: Route will have some minor changes during construction. Construction Specifications Overall dimensions We will maintain the AODA specified minimum clearing height of 2.1m from the top of the trail surface. We will maintain a minimum clearing width of 1.5m, but initial construction will involve a clearing width of a 2.5m minimum. On average, the standard clearing width will be 2m to allow for a clear trailbed (Figure 5 to define terminology).

12 Figure 5. Illustration of clearing terminology. The trailbed and surface will be 2m wide; 1.5m wide with a transition area of 0.25m on each side to allow for vegetation growth and some edge instability (Figure 6). This trail is designed as a one-way trail, but a2m wide surface would allow for the turning of a wheelchair and passage of two wheelchairs if needed. If there is a restriction in the trail s width (e.g., rock or tree), then the minimum trail width will be 1m for the shortest length possible. Construction details We will use standard sustainable trail design to locate and construct the trail. This will involve taking advantage of topographical changes to ensure that water is shed at regular intervals (rolling dips) without creating steep slopes (e.g., < 3% incline or decline). In addition, the surface will be mostly crowned (3%; 3cm:100cm); basically it is a turnpike design. Where drainage to both sides is not possible or is not wanted, the trail will have a cross slope. In this location, the cross slope should not exceed 3%. For trail composition, the sub-grade will be the native soils, preferably the B horizon, the sub-base will be a sand layer underlaid by nonwoven geotextile and overlaid by a geogrid and coarse aggregate. The trail surface will be a fine, angular aggregate.

13 Figure 6. Trailbed (sub-base and surface) design for universal trail. If a drainage structure is needed in some specific locations to help with surface run-off, open drainage (an open ditch/swale) parallel to the trail will be used (Figure7). This would be a swale, approximately 0.5m wide and filled with gravel. Additional width (a shoulder) will be needed along the side(s) of the trail with the swale(s) to accommodate the installation of a guard along the side to prevent users from rolling on stepping off the trail and into the swale. The guard will be made of a 10cm (4in)peeled Eastern White Cedar rail installed with spikes in pocketed grooves on 10cm (4in) cedar posts installed vertically 60cm into the ground and a maximum of 60cm apart. The bottom of the top rail will be 2.5cm above the trail tread (Figure 8). Next to water management, our main concern is maintaining a firm and stable tread. This is a requirement of the AODA, although it is not defined. A firm tread is resistant to penetration from a vertical force and a stable tread is resistant to penetration (slipping) from a rotating/moving horizontal force. To objectively measure trail firmness and stability (Table 2), and to be able to report it to users, we will a rotational penetrometer to measure and quantify firmness and stability (Beneficial Designs, Inc.; Minden, Nevada). The following are the steps in the trail s construction to create a firm and stable tread: 1. Excavate organic layer and some, if not all, topsoil. In areas of shallow soil, a minimum of 5 of soil will be excavated. 2. Line excavated area with a non-woven geotextile. 3. Install and mechanically compact (with sufficient wetness) 5cm (2in) of sand. 4. Overlay sand with a tri-axial geogrid. 5. Install a minimum of 15cm (6in) coarse aggregate and mechanically compact. 6. Install 10cm (4in) of well-graded, fine angular aggregate Compaction must be performed with a vibrating compactor and with suitable moisture. Should excavation of topsoil be greater than the minimum sand and coarse aggregate require, excavation depth can be a maximum of 40cm, maintaining the 1:3 sand to coarse aggregate ratio. We recognize that there must be a balance between the need to build on the B horizon and the reduced stability of thick aggregate layers (Zeller et al. 2012). It is expected that the

14 installation of the non-woven geotextile and the tri-axial geogrid will help where topsoil remains below sub-grade fill. The fine angular aggregate specifications (3/8in minus) are a combination of Bergmann (2000) and Penn State (2013) and will provide suitable firmness and stability: Parent material such as limestone Approximate composition (although may vary based on availability and pricing; similar to coarse limestone screenings): 95% passing 3/8 (9.5mm) sieve 75% passing #4 (4.75mm) sieve 55% passing #8 (2.36mm) sieve 35-55% passing #16 (1.18mm) sieve 12-20% passing #200 sieve (0.075mm) Although this trail will not be as natural as one that uses the soils present at a site, the use of the soils in the Northumberland County Forest would not be possible as they are generally either or silty clay, neither of which are suitable trail surfaces for a universal trail. Additionally, an aggregate base is more natural looking and has less effect on natural moisture regimen than a paved trail and will provide contrast with the forest floor. As the trail will not require any culverts or bridges and will not be more than a few inches above ground we do not need to be concerned with gaps or edge protection. Figure 7. Trailbed (sub-base and surface) design for universal trail including drainage swale.

15 Figure 8. Specification drawing for construction and installation of guard rail (at swales and rest areas). Table 2. Table of measures of firmness and stability obtained by using rotational penetrometer (Axelson and Yamada 1999). Firmness Firm 0.3 in. 3 Moderately Firm > in. > 3 5 Not Firm > 0.5 in. > 5 Penetration Depth Firmness Rating Stability Stable 0.5 in. 5 Moderately Stable > in. > 5 10 Not Stable > 1.0 in. > 10 Penetration Depth Stability Rating

16 Rest Areas TFAOC (2006) suggests that at a minimum, rest areas should be provide at 30min. intervals for the slower-than-average trail user, but as we are anticipating use by children and older adults, we will try to place them closer together at m intervals. Rest areas will be built as 6.7m x 2.15m bump-out pads from the main trail (Figure 9). At each rest area we will place benches made of natural materials with space on either side for wheelchairs, scooters and similar devices. Bench specifications will include (Zeller et al. 2012): Front edge ~0.45m from ground Full length back support Armrest in center 2.4m (8ft.) length to provide seating for approx. 4 people (0.6m [2ft.] per person) Benches will be placed 0.2m from the back of the clear area to either side of the bench to facilitate transfer from a wheelchair to the bench as well as general shoulder/seating alignment (Zeller et al. 2012). On the three sides of the bump-out that do not front onto the trail, we will place a wooden guard rail as specified in (Figure 8). This will take up 0.15m along each edge. Figure 9. Universal trail rest area layout.

17 Trailhead The trailhead sign will match the signage at the other 4 main trailheads; a 3 panel sign with panels for a trail map, trail information and etiquette and trail notices (Figure 10). A map box will also be installed for paper maps. Included on the map will be trail assessment information developed from the HETAP process and rotational penetrometer measures. The trail assessment information will include: Operation periods and weather constraints Skills required for use of the trails Trail Assessment Information: o Length of trail loops o Surface Type o Average and minimum trail width o Potential natural obstacles o Average and maximum running slope o Average and maximum cross slope o Max length of sustained slope o Potential obstacles/hazards (e.g., roots, rocks, poison ivy) o Tread firmness o Tread stability o Average distance between rest areas o Statement that the posted information reflects the condition of the trail when it was constructed or assessed, including the date of the construction or assessment A bench will be installed in front of the trailhead sign to provide a rest area and location to sit while viewing the map, regulations and notices. The bench will be 2m from the sign to allow a wheelchair access to the sign and map box. Figure 10. Example trailhead sign from Woodland Road parking area.

18 Waste container A waste container will be provided at this trailhead. It will be located north of the parking barriers to ensure that it is somewhat hidden from the road as this is a more common area for dumping. There will be a clear area greater than 1.5m x 1.5m in front of the receptacle and at least a 1.5m wide approach to allow forward and sideways approaches (Zeller et al. 2012). A difficulty with waste containers is that for this location accessibility must be considered with the overarching fact that they must be animal-proof, particularly bear- and raccoon-proof. Presently, our other trailheads have Tye-Dee-Bin Parke Doubles (Figure 11), chosen based on price and being animal-proof. For waste containers to be accessible they should not require pinching, grasping or twisting of the wrist and should be capable of being performed with minimal pressure (Zeller et al. 2012). This will be difficult as waste containers must be wildlife-proof and these either require twisting of the wrist as with our current receptacles or pinching. Our current waste containers require a tight grasp and twist of the handle (like a motorcycle handle) which would be difficult for some users. As well they are rectangular in shape and the lids are on the top which would make use difficult from a seated position. These difficulties, however, are not unique to this manufacturer as other animalproof containers have heavy levers and lids that must be manipulated and would be difficult. Figure 11. Animal-proof waste containers being used at other forest parking areas. In the U.S., at locations where large animals pose a threat to humans through habituation to a food source, waste containers do not need to be within the accessible requirements. The AODA does not specify waste containers in its design of public spaces specifications, but we would nonetheless like to minimize limitations as much as possible. At this time, we do not have a solution to this, but will continue to research and possibly work with a company on improvements.

19 Outhouse A wheelchair accessible, portable outhouse will be provided at the trailhead. Parking Parking will be off Bowmanton Road, east of the Carstairs Memorial and where the westernmost north-south trail exists. We will construct 12 parking spaces. Each space will be delineated by cedar fencing with a gap between fencing to allow entrance to the trail from the parking area. As the parking area will be built up from the ground, it will be built with a 3% cross slope that runs off into a swale built into the forest to the north where a natural drop will be present. This slope will bring the water to a vegetated swale (e.g., dogwoods and other shrubs). Construction of the parking area will be the same as the trail specifications. Parking space dimensions will be based on the AODA (80.34) specifications and requirements (Figure 12). Two types of parking space are required for off-street parking: 1. Type A a. Minimum width: 3.4m b. Signage identifying parking spot as van accessible 2. Type B a. Minimum width: 2.4m All parking spaces will be a minimum of 5.6m long. Per AODA (80.36) requirements, we will provide 2 Type A parking spaces and the remainder of all parking spaces will be Type B. We will indicate that both Type A and 2 Type B spaces are reserved for those with accessible parking permits (AODA 80.37: in accordance with section 11 of Regulation 581 of the Revised Regulations of Ontario, 1990 (Accessible Parking for Persons with Disabilities: APPD) made under the Highway Traffic Act. O. Reg. 413/12, S. 6.). These parking spaces will be marked per APPD S.11.a, being a minimum of 45cm in height and 30cm in width and with the specifications shown in Figure 13. As well, we will include a matching plate below that identifies Type A spots as van accessible. All other parking spaces will be indicated as sized but not reserved for accessibility. Access aisles as specified by the AODA (S.80.35) between parking spaces will be shared. The aisles will meet the minimum requirements of being 1.5m and extending the full length of the parking space (5.6m). Delineating parking spaces will be difficult. Generally, accessible parking spaces and the gap between spaces would be demarcated using paint, but this is not possible on a gravel lot. At this point, the spaces will be delineated by the barrier at the end of the space and parking signage. Should this be a problem in the future (i.e., cars parking too closely), then we will have to revisit the design and delineation.

20 Figure 12. Draft layout for universal trail parking area. Figure 13. Specifications for accessible parking sign design as defined by O.Reg. 419/12, S.11.a.

21 General Signage General signage throughout the trail network will include trail names, trail direction, exit indicators, emergency location markers (as throughout the rest of the NCF) and map boards at main intersections. Maps at intersections will indicate the distance between rest areas. Signage will be high contrast, matching with the other trail signage in the NCF designed in 2013 except that we will use a dark blue background with white lettering as this is generally better distinguished (TFAOC 2006). Current use is white background with dark lettering and has high contrast. All type will be sans serif and use the largest characters possible, being at least 3in in height (TFAOC 2006). Trails will be named with based on natural features or wildlife and will use high contrast, well-defined silhouettes or images of the chosen symbol so that users do not have to read the trail name, but can follow the symbol. The cultural and natural heritage of this site is very interesting and is one of the reasons that this location was chosen. The opportunity for interpretive signage along this trail is ideal. Interpretive signage could include information about the history of the site or the forest in general as well as information about wildlife or vegetation. Interpretive signage will be the least accessible signage as it will generally be composed of old, relatively unclear photos or detailed photos as well as a large amount of text that is likely to be smaller font. A possibility to improve the accessibility of these signs as they include a lot of text would be to include QR codes which can be read by a smartphone and that would link to an audio reading of that sign. Other options such as talking signage could be considered although this was not budgeted for and many questions such as weather resistance and longevity of power sources are unknown. Maintenance Maintenance can be a key to keeping an area accessible (Zeller et al. 2012). This trail will be checked more regularly by Northumberland County staff than other trails for trail damage and debris. As well, the trail will be checked after heavy rains and during any freeze thaw cycles while it is open and after the spring thaw. Annual surface repairs will be required. Regular maintenance of a trail such as this is often not considered in the design and there are multiple local examples of accessible trails that were constructed without recurring maintenance plans. The result is degradation of the surface and development of obstacles. Money will be set aside in the Forest Department s budget specifically for the universal trail s maintenance. Maintenance activities will include: Addition of aggregate where needed;

22 Removal of any vegetation growth from the surface; Addition of any stabilizing features such as logs or rock s to the sides of the trail; Compaction of tread. To ensure that we are prepared for maintenance, we will stockpile surface material so that it is ready to be used each spring by the trail crew. Public Consultation Prior to construction, the AODA specifies (S ) that organizations shall consult on (only relevant features shown): Slope of trail Need for, location and design of o Rest areas o Viewing areas o Amenities on trail o Any other pertinent feature Northumberland County must consult with the public and persons with disabilities and municipal accessibility advisory committees (S ) In the following order, Northumberland County will consult the: 1. Northumberland County Accessibility Advisory Committee 2. Public by posting the trail design document online and through hard copy pick-up for comment 3. The public through a public open house Should any other relevant organization request consultation, we will make all efforts to provide that consultation. Other Remarks Northumberland County recognizes that this trail is not as long as other forest trails, but it does provide a similar experience via access to similar forested habitat. As well, we recognize that the trail is located separate from the main non-motorized trail networks. It would not, however, be possible to create or renovate a trail in those areas to provide the ease-of-use that is afforded by developing this trail. Northumberland County will continue to make all efforts possible to consider accessibility for all NCF trails and have started implementing these considerations such as in our signage. Further important steps will be in the provision of trail access information at trailheads

23 on the conditions of a trail that will allow users to make an informed decision about their ability to use a specific trail, thus encourage access to the entire trail network. As part of this project, two pieces of equipment that will be purchased, initially for use on this trail, and which would be used on all other forest trails are a rotational penetrometer (firmness and stability measures) and a Wheeled Instrumentation Sensor Package (WISP) with High Efficiency Trail Assessment Process (HETAP) 2.0 software. The combination of these tools will provide objective measures that are recorded digitally with outputs produced by software that can easily be assembled to produce trail access information. These could be shared with partner municipalities for their trails as well.

24 References Axelson, P.W. and D.A. Yamada Accessible exterior surfaces technical article. Prepared for: U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. Contract QA Minden, Nevada. Bergmann, R Soil stabilizers on undervisally accessible trails. Technical Report SDTDC, San Dimas, California: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, San Dimas Technology and Development Center. 10pp. British Columbia Ministry of Forests Recreation manual; Chapter 10: Recreation trail management. Forest Practices Branch. Flink, C.A., K. Olka, and R.M. Searns Trails for the 21 st century. Island Press. Washington, District of Columbia. Trails for All Ontarians Collaborative (TFAOC) Ontario s best trails; Guidelines and best practices for the design, construction and maintenance of sustainable trails for all Ontarians. U.S.Forest Service (USFS) Forest Service trail accessibility guidelines. Zeller, J., R. Doyle, and K. Snodgrass Accessibility guidebook for outdoor recreation and trails; 9E92A86 update to the accessibility guidebook. USDA Forest Service, Technology and Development Center. Missoula, MT.

25 APPENDIX A Exceptions EXCEPTIONS TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR RECREATIONAL TRAILS AND BEACH ACCESS ROUTES Exceptions, general Exceptions to the requirements that apply to recreational trails and beach access routes are permitted where obligated organizations can demonstrate one or more of the following: 1. The requirements, or some of them, would likely affect the cultural heritage value or interest of a property identified, designated or otherwise protected under the Ontario Heritage Act as being of cultural heritage value or interest. 2. The requirements, or some of them, would affect the preservation of places set apart as National Historic Sites of Canada by the Minister of the Environment for Canada under the Canada National Parks Act (Canada). 3. The requirements, or some of them, would affect the national historic interest or significance of historic places marked or commemorated under the Historic Sites and Monuments Act (Canada). 4. The requirements, or some of them, might damage, directly or indirectly, the cultural heritage or natural heritage on a property included in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation s World Heritage List of sites under the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. 5. There is a significant risk that the requirements, or some of them, would adversely affect water, fish, wildlife, plants, invertebrates, species at risk, ecological integrity or natural heritage values, whether the adverse effects are direct or indirect. 6. It is not practicable to comply with the requirements, or some of them, because existing physical or site constraints prohibit modification or addition of elements, spaces or features, such as where surrounding rocks bordering the recreational trail or beach access route impede achieving the required clear width. O. Reg. 413/12, s. 6