Clinton County Comprehensive

Clinton County Comprehensive rail + Greenway Plan 2012 Clinton County egional Planning Commission / nergize Clinton County Christian chock Parker Hoar aylor tuckert * Clinton County rails Coallition * Clinton treamkeepers * Clinton County pen ands * ytle Creek eague of Conservators rchitecture + andscaping

Contents: rail evelopment Priorities 3 Finding + ction: 5 rail Funding + dministration 9 Finding + ction: 9 Bikeways on County oadways 11 Finding + ction: 11 rail Impact + Buffering 37 Fisher Plain: Buffering tudy 38 abina Buffering tudy 44 Construction etails 47 ypical Path ection 49 esign eferences 49 Greenway evelopment 17 Finding + ction: 17 Park + rail Intersection evelopment 19 rail esign + Construction 20 Finding + ction: 20 rail esign lements 21 ypical railhead menities 22 rail rchitecture esearch 24 Pavilion esign 26 Kiosk esign 31 Covered Bridge esign 33 2.

rail evelopment Priorities he Clinton County trail system is strategically located between the ayton and Cincinnati metropolitan areas, and completes a key linkage in the broader tate of hio rail Plan to connect existing trails in those metropolitan areas and across the tate. Clinton County is a strategic point in the broader regional and state trail system. here have been robust trail user reports and economic studies from both metropolitan planning organizations (Ps) for ayton and Cincinnati, the iami Valley egional Planning Commission (VPC), and the hio Kentucky Indiana egional Council of Governments (KI) which detail the positive impacts of trail development. he hio Kentucky Indiana egional Council of Governments completed a landmark ittle iami cenic rail Users tudy in 1999. he study concluded that that there are 150,000 to 175,000 trail visits annually on the 27 mile section between oveland and Corwin in arren County, hio. It was noted at this major trail facility, which is less than 25 miles from the proposed trail, that 66% of trail users were bicycling; 25% were walking or jogging; and 8.5% were in-line skating (ittle iami cenic rail User tudy; hio Kentucky Indiana egional Council of Governments, 1999). he iami Valley egional Planning Commission (VPC) completed their iami Valley rail User survey, which included trail locations throughout the P area in ecember of 2009. he survey determined that trail use is bike-dominated with many users referring to them as bike trails. he study showed that on the weekend, over two thirds of counted trail users were on bikes; this was slightly lower on the weekday counts and over three-quarters of survey respondents included biking as one of their primary activities on the trail. In general, the study found that the use of mobility assistance devices is low and that demographically trail users tend to be male (~60%), between the ages of 36 and 65 (~66%) and frequent users of the trail. ver 65% of survey respondents indicated they use the trail 1 or 2 times per week or more often (iami Valley rail User urvey; iami Valley egional Planning Commission, 2009). 3.

hile there are many national studies which note the positive economic impacts, Clinton County is fortunate to also have relevant local studies completed recently that show the positive economic impact of the existing trail systems in the ayton and Cincinnati metropolitan areas. he further development of trails in Clinton County is not only a positive economic impact to our local area, but a great economic benefit to the region. he University of Cincinnati, studying housing prices along the 72 mile ittle iami cenic rail, less than 25 miles from the proposed trails in this plan, found that homeowners were willing to pay a premium to be located within close proximity of the trail (University of Cincinnati, chool of Planning; ainer vom Hofe & livier Parent, 2011). he hio Kentucky Indiana egional Council of Government study noted the economic impact of the trail users, highlighting that the users spend approximately $3.1 to $3.7 million annually on trip-related expenditures and trail-related durable goods, and many of these goods were purchased in establishments adjacent and near the trail (ittle iami cenic rail User tudy; hio Kentucky Indiana egional Council of Governments, 1999). he iami Valley egional Planning Commission study found that the trail system within the metropolitan area had a significant economic impact in at least 3 ways (iami Valley rail User urvey; iami Valley egional Planning Commission, 2009): 1. Hard Goods--Purchases of athletic equipment, clothing, shoes and other such goods related to trail use total between $6.4 million and $7.1 million annually. 2. oft Goods--Food, beverage, and snack purchases related to trail usage total between $5.5 million and $7.1 million annually, and 3. vernight accommodations--trail users from outside the region spend between $1.6 million and $1.8 million in total annually. he development of trails can also have a positive impact on overall community health. It is widely recognized that obesity is a health epidemic in the United tates and that childhood obesity is an especially challenging public health issue. recent report found that children with low neighborhood amenities or 4.

those lacking neighborhood access to sidewalks or walking paths, parks or playgrounds, or recreation or community centers, had 20-45% higher odds of becoming obese or overweight compared to children who had access to these amenities (hite House ask Force on Childhood besity, ay 2010). Finding: - rail and greenway development has a positive impact on home values, recreational and tourism opportunities. he investment of public and private funds into trail and greenway development provides both health and environmental quality benefits and is positive for economic development. Proactive trail development leads to a better quality of life and the physical, social and economic development of all of Clinton County. ction: + rail and greenway development should be promoted, celebrated and continually enhanced in Clinton County + Future trail projects should be prioritized to ensure regional connections to statewide and national trail networks + Clinton County trail and greenway development is a positive force for tourism, local health and wellness, and economic development 5.

he op Priority reas in Clinton County Include: xtend the existing uther arren Peace Path rail westward from elson oad in ilmington towards Clarksville evelop on-sidewalk trails where possible to establish the urban trail linkages between existing and future trails, especially along the ugartree treet Corridor Complete the Clinton Fayette Friendship rail from elvin to the Fayette County line through abina along the corridor secured by the Clinton County Parks istrict evelop an urban trail owntown abina connector from the Clinton Fayette Friendship rail stablish a village-centered multipurpose trail system along public alleys in owntown Blanchester ork collaboratively with arren County to complete a orrow to Clarksville trail along the abandoned railroad adjacent to odd s Fork Complete the ilmington to elvin portion of the Clinton Fayette Friendship rail adjacent to the existing, active railroad or along another agreed upon route stablish a trail along the abandoned railroad adjacent to Fancy treet in Blanchester and eastward towards estboro and ynchburg xplore options for the establishment of a trail park facility at the ckee Farm on Cuba oad at the Union wp./ashington wp. line xplore funding options to ensure that trail development, maintenance and repair can be sustainably funded by the Clinton County Parks istrict or the respective local parks boards nsure that all new major subdivisions and planned unit developments within both incorporated and unincorporated areas properly include sidewalks and trails as appropriate 6.

Proposed Clinton Fayette Friendship rail: abina, hio 7.

rails re Important For iverse easons: ransportation ecreation xercise ccess to nvironment 8.

rail Funding + dministration he development of a comprehensive trail and greenway system in Clinton County requires a more comprehensive funding mechanism for the development, maintenance and repair of the trail system. If trails and greenways are a countywide and regional asset, they must be funded at the broadest level possible for the development to be successful and sustainable. Finding: - he development of a comprehensive trail and greenway system in Clinton County requires a more comprehensive funding mechanism for the development, maintenance and repair of the trail system. If trails and greenways are a countywide and regional asset, they must be funded at the broadest level possible for the development to be successful and sustainable. - rail maintenance and management is scalable depending on resources, but should be viewed as a countywide and regional effort. combination or the structured collaboration of the existing parks districts or the creation of a regional trails district is imperative for the future development of trails and greenways in Clinton County. In addition to traditional forms of funding, such as grants, alternative mechanisms for funding trail development and maintenance should be explored. 9.

ction: + xplore the merger of the City and County Parks istricts to create a Clinton etroparks type system which could seek future park and recreational levies from a broader population base than just the City of ilmington. + ork collaboratively with the existing City, Villages, ownships and County to ensure collaboration and coordination on this plan and other efforts. eek signed cooperative agreements between the local entities regarding trail development, maintenance and repair efforts. + Create tax increment financing, special improvement district or other trail development district, coordinated by the City and County Park istricts or a etro Parks, which could fund construction of buffering improvements and maintenance of adjacent trails through the incremental increase in property values. hrough a tax increment approach, a portion of new value derived from trail proximity could provide funding for increased development, improvement, and maintenance of the trail system. + rails are an important part of the Parks and ecreation offerings. ll park boards and districts should include trail expansion and trail maintenance in their annual operating and capital budgets, and in future fundraising efforts. + he Clinton County rails Coalition, along with City, County, Villages, ownships and other stakeholders should continue to pursue grant funding for construction of trail corridors identified. he rails Coalition should also consider charitable trusts and land conservation easements, marketed to property owners on or adjacent to proposed trail development which would allow future trail corridor acquisition and provide tax benefits to the current landowners. 10.

Bikeways on County oadways hile off roadway trail development is the priority of this plan, Clinton County has existing roadways which serve as important linkages across the County. his Plan highlights the best and worst existing roadways for biking, with the best roadways noted as bikeways. hese bikeways should be prioritized for bike awareness signage and other safety efforts, while the worst roadways should be highlighted for improvements when investment is scheduled for those corridors in the future. Finding: - here possible, off roadway trail development should be encouraged and prioritized. In places where trail development is not possible or unlikely in the future, existing roadways serve as an important part of the bike transportation network in Clinton County. he use of chip and seal pavement techniques should be limited to the greatest extent possible on the bikeway designated roadways below, in cases where this is unavoidable, the roadway should be immediately swept following the chip and seal. ction: + s biking opportunities bring important recreation and tourism, existing roadways which are considering valuable for biking for connectivity, safety or scenic value should be highlighted and those roadways most dangerous for biking should be examined as future improvements are possible. + oadways considered the best for biking in Clinton County Bikeways, and which should be considered for bike awareness signage: H134 orth of ilmington Prairie oad orth of ilmington elson oad and Center oad orth and est of ilmington Gurneyville oad from U68 to ew Burlington oad Cuba oad outh of ilmington artinsville oad between Cuba and artinsville U22&H3 between the arren County line and ilmington + oadways considered the worst and most dangerous for biking in Clinton County should be considered for future additional carriage-way paving, along with safety signage at hills and curves- in an effort to create safer shoulder areas for biking on these roadways: H72 from Greene County to Highland County H134 outh of ilmington U68 orth and outh of ilmington H73 est of ilmington he use of chip and seal pavement techniques should be limited to the greatest extent possible on bikeway (black) designated roadways. 11.

C U 72 9 P 729 C C BU 4 13 F HI B B I 71 C F F 73 G U 22 CU B 73 FIH 13 729 2 13 4 68 28 U 28 1 33 4 12 3 251 U 68 I 28 12 I ynchburg U B I Z 12. 134 K GV CHBU G U 22 µ 1 inch = 1.21 miles 73 350 I 350 U 3 CH 73 U H 350 13 U 68 V V C H 0 12 4 IFCK B 134 72 22 B U 22 U IPKI 34 I 71 72 K ew Vienna 28 PHIIP PCH C C V 28 729 I QUIG C U G P K B 8 U 6 I CKIBB HU 1 VI CUB U 68 I UH IC ICH G I P B C H 3 80 U 68 I H I C P G B II H ICK I B H P U IV HH HIIG H I I 13 2 V V P I V H H tate Park oad I FI 28 Path: C:\VProjects\2013 Project Files\BeastandorstoadsforBikingClintonCountyhio.mxd CU G G H U 68 CK H CK H C P U I K ' C K C G 25 1 County oad 3 12 U Highway ownship oad PIK U B P 3 tate oute HI C CH HI C Interstate B H I PI J oad ype 13 K G I BI H I 72 H C F C U I K FIG I C C IV H CH BU G HU CU I K CJU C B I Z H IC C H I V PI F F I F H - U G B I I V F GU F H Blanchester C C B CH I Z F U B treets -- oads unicipal oad C I CH artinsville idland 28 PIK I 28 H K C I C PH KIG B B Z H V GI I F JH U H FI H I U I K X 350 C C C V U H U H I I IV I B CU 3 J 13 C B KU H I I I FIF G P I I B KU G UI Q P H P B C H I V 350 U 22 IC GU P C C X U 73 C H B I B P B 134 P 3 13 K B CH K G I K UV abina I K CC I V I H B U 22 K P I P K J 73 G U G HI B P 0 73 K ay C C I GU C U CI H U CC ss ilmington V G gre Pro V CH B FIF CHG V KH I P VI G K C G Clarksville JI B V I H I K V V 350 CU I C HG 9 72 BB G B I V J K C H G K C B H I C B C K 22 I I P V F I 71 U U 22 H I G K HU IGGI K CH HI H CH P HKI P BBBI V V PC 1 I7 BI VI 73 B VIC G C U B B P CH G KI Best oads K I I 71 73 orst oads K F P Classification I GI CK Biking Clinton County oads 72 U B BI B I V ZI I H P U 1 I7 I BU 72 V 73 U G H BI GU 380 C C I G G I GI P I Port illiam H I HU B UCK U U 72 Bike-ays II P H U G B B U I G FUK 68 U Z Clinton County Bikeways

F K BH V I P K U 73 ilmington rails U 68 134 rails ICH PIC U 22 73 HIC K IG V G ytle Creek VICI CP K PK CUI I CI X G V CH C V PGG CU K IG HIG V FIGU PI FI #3 K FIGU #5 K HK P V IB G HH U JPHI H U I UH PC BIK I HICK ICH P C FQUH V IGH P H H V ytle Creek ytle Creek BIC PH FI CI GUP BU IHF V UHIG V U V GV XI V UI H CU UG KUCK V VI PIG ICHIG V II V UB I HI V FU UB UH B K V PVI V UH U U VI I IC BI UG I V C V H CKI IB V FI V UB V CP V CH H V B V IH V FICH HIGH CUBU CU PI V XF PK CUI V G I GII CI UI PII V BB CK II UG FC V B CG K BV KH HI V K PII CK XIG J PII PII V H QUK JH I PPG HIGGI I V K CUBU VI FCU P UI CI BHI 4C BICI BIK I C ' IV BIK I JU G CUI I PII FIF V X IG CI CI HI BCH V VI FI FIF Progress ay HU U KIIG I FU IP Progress ay H CC PK G BUCK 73 V U 22 CC I egend ilmington Potential rails treets -- oads oad ype Interstate tate oute U Highway County oad ownship oad unicipal oad tate Park oad I B B IG JI P IG BI P B 73 U 73 ICH C BB J I 730 CUB CGUI ilson Creek IC UHI BV U 68 I Cowan Creek 134 C H' HP Cowan Creek IB Indian un JKI Cowan Creek ICH µ 1 inch = 0.21 miles Path: C:\VProjects\2012 Project Files\ilmingtonPotentialrails24x36.mxd 13.

KI CHP abina rails BU 729 ilson Creek H PK FC V U 22 I P HI V PK V G V C CG FC V UI HU HIG U K HI VI CH V V JFF I V CG C I V JFF H V F H V H H PK JCK H V I CHII C 729 HB V G G PK V U CK V H C V H FI C PP BI HP F K H CI P KB JCK V CKHU HIG HU BI GFI BI U 22 Village of abina Path: C:\VProjects\2013 Project Files\abinaegionalPlanning.mxd 1 inch = 400 feet egend rails lternative 14.

VI C Blanchester rails KI-B 28 G I B IB KI HIGH V IF Cemetery G I B V econd Creek BUB P PIK IGH B JH JH I I ZB BI I P U CH CI CH VI C CHUCH H I FC HVI C 133 CUBU BI GV F I C V B C JH GV HIGH B UPIG CK B BUUGH C C CK CUBU IGH VI P VI UPIG U VI BCH HP CH H G V V FC I H 28 CI CH 28 HIG CH 28 U Village of Blanchester 0 0.25 0.5 1 iles K GV V P GV V F PK V BCK B H C egend rails 133 FVI tonelick Creek FIGU FIVI 123 PK PC CKZI C H C Path: C:\VProjects\2012 Project Files\BlanchesteregionalPlanning.mxd 15.

PIGHI Clarksville rails odds Fork CK CBB PBB FIFH odds Fork I V PI V 4H 3 350 350 ast Fork of odds Fork I 2 B 2 PI V C UG FI ewell un CKVI Village of Clarksville 1 inch = 200 feet G UH UG G VI H B I egend rails 1 132 350 Path: C:\VProjects\2012 Project Files\ClarksvilleegionalPlanning.mxd 16.

Greenway evelopment Finding: - Greenways are linear corridors or ribbons of natural or generally undisturbed lands which link people, places and wildlife- this may include topographic features, streams, utility or railroad corridors, etc. Highlighting and utilizing the existing greenway corridors in Clinton County is an important tool to develop future trails and other linear networks. ction: + Greenway areas should be preserved in their natural state, with no change to the natural slope and vegetation (except the removal of invasive species), especially within the greenway corridors highlighted in this plan. Both the County and City have adopted riparian area setbacks which should be enforced. + he ytle Creek Greenway serves as the most important corridor in the County as it presents the best balance of environmental assets with population proximity. he ytle Creek Greenway should be developed to include both passive environmental preservation and active trail development. + reas of parcels along the ytle Creek Greenway should be dedicated to permanent preservation where possible, with landowners considering conservation easements, land donations or other mechanisms especially within a 100ft. critical buffer area of ytle Creek. + Permanent farmland preservation, through agricultural easement or other means, is a crucial step to the preservation of greenway and other natural habitats. his Plan prioritizes the work of Clinton County pen ands and other land trust organizations to secure permanent agricultural easements across the County, especially in or adjacent to designated Greenways. + Future storm water management fees collected by the City should include a portion of funds to the care and maintenance of the ytle Creek Greenway as this stream is tasked with all of the storm water for the City of ilmington. + tream monitoring programs and awareness signing of local streams should be a priority as it increases the understanding of local environmental assets and environmental impacts- changes in stream chemistry composition and local invertebrate census counts is often a first sign of more serious environmental impacts. 17.

B I 72 9 72 9 H H BU BU F H H H F K PH I IP C I P FI H 12 4 729 C I U V P P H I I C V B 28 28 µµ 13 4 inch = 1.29 mile 1 inch = 1.291 miles 13 4 V FI H C F K F 28 V PH I IP C HI B C F G QUIG HI B PCH F PCH QUIG G HIGH G K K G Z Z Path: C:\VProjects\2012 Project Files\GreenwayapCountyide24x36.mxd C CK IBB HIGH B V K G U I I CH U 68 CH U 68 P U C V B CK IBB K B V U C U 68 V B I V I CUB I U C G B CU U 68 729 C V 4 13 IC H U I V 68 U H C B P IK P IK B CU V P H C H H P G P H U U IV IV HIIG HIIG 4 13 IC H U CUB 68 U I P H C B I B C GP C C FUK HH CU ICH G I CU B G ICH H H G I P K C CU 13 P tate Park oa tate Park oad I B HH G P U I H G B II II ' K C G U 68 CU CK P U CK H C I I H CK CK H I H H C I ' K 1 K I 2 K ICK C I C ICK V V J I CHB UG H U C ownship oadownship oad H V 4 CU B IP KI 12 U Highway I tate oute U Highway I CU B IP KI Interstate tate oute V U I CH HI FI K PI F V K 28 Interstate County oad County oad B KIG I H J HI H 9 H PI F U 72 C U 68 H H U U I G oad ype oad ype P 13 3 K C F I I I C G I 1 2 K F U B 13 K B V F K I I B PI V F FI I C I 3 treets --treets oads -- oad 72 F IG 13 H I PH U H V P U HU B I I K U FI I K CHB UG C KIG H I B P I B CC U PH IFC H B U H K G B I I IFC H CH 1 H I 25 B 9 B P 1 B I I 72 I B 25 K K G G G C FI P I C U J HU 3 12 HB 72 H C C G HI G H F IG U C C C H I H unicipal oadunicipal oad X G H H C H I J X C K H HB X IF X F CC H C K P C 3 12 KI HU KI U CJ CU C U 22 U 22 FIF CC K I C C B I C J B C G H C B C C C I C H U 350 U I CH IC U C I H CC F H H C C C I I B Z Z F F C CC J VI B J K I Z 28 I I U CC V K I VI C B U Z C B C I H BCH V F B B K B I B 350 B H U 22 U 22 U 22 B CU Greenway rea Greenway reas B H CK U B I B P B P CH 3 50 KI B FIF 134 B U H egend egend I HU CK K U GU B CU C P K P CH I 134 I K P BU H KI C I B C CH B I P I C P I I BU P C BI P H C 72 CH P I I J KU P C Greenways Greenways H CH P C U I K P BI U 22 BI P PI H B B H K C B IC 73 I V P K KU U 28 H FIF 3 50 CU C ay I VI V P BCH CU I H U H U CJ s es G I UI I GU U VI H I G V I - V H C CH FC I F F I C F C U CK gr U K I C CH BI P H P C U FC PI B G I F I K G I IGGI I P IGGI G C 0 73 B P K U H F CH 73 U G K K H ay I B U GU I IV H U Pro CU I C HG V UI H 28 28 ZI VI K s es gr ro KP P C I7 72 VI K I C 1 BBBI B B 3 13 - B B CH G C C J I UI I G H CH P V K 0 73 GU I HKI HKI H Q 72 V BBBI G C HG V P K H UV CK I P I C F C VI GU 3 P CH H - H VI B I 13 J I I IV I I GU I I K G UI I I - V K P P K H K CH I UV H I B Q 3 P I V K I I 13 I H B P P I G VI C 3 22 U I 13 G B C C CH I CH 0 K 73 P P G C 35 K G B P G C VI HI G I V G BB K 0 35 G G VI B C GI J H K F C G K I B V G BB G C K I ZI C GI I7 2 K U I G BI V F G C C I G 73 B 22 GI 7 I G 1 I7 U V H J B G HI G G BI VI C B U VI 73 I 71 I 71 I B H I 71 I 1 I7 73 V G VI C H I K I V H I V 73 73 V K I B U GU I I G H C I B 3 80 3 80 GU C I G 1 GI I H I HU I I P I P I I I HU B U CK U B U CK U P 72 G 72 U G U 68 68 B B Z G G U U B U I G B U I G FUK Z I I Clinton County Greenways 18.

Park + rail Intersection evelopment here possible, site trailhead facilities at junction points of multiple activities and alternate means of transportation. hese nodes of mixed use often increase overall activity. rail evelopment Potentials ew Bike ervices Business ew Food Business ew est + ecreation ervices rea ew ourism Information rea 19.

rial esign + Construction he Clinton County trail system should be accessible, encourage use by a variety of users, and be designed to be as multipurpose as possible. here are commonly accepted multipurpose trail construction techniques and best practices, including standard hio epartment of ransportation standards which should be utilized for future trail development in Clinton County to ensure public access and safety. he Plan also suggests the included common design elements be accepted as a standard and incorporated in future trail development to ensure that the trail system has a unified look. Finding: - Consistent trail implementation and construction throughout Clinton County will create a uniform brand and experience that stresses the advantages and unique style of the area as presented in this plan. ction: + ew trail development should incorporate aspects of the design strategies summarized within this plan and structural design of trailheads, signage, and consistent themes should be used across the trail network within the County. + reas along existing and new trail development, especially at trailhead locations should include interpretative spaces where information on local history and the local environment could be presented and showcased. 20.

rail esign lements + hile much of the trail construction will be quite standard, there are trail amenities that provide opportunity to create unique user experiences, when their design is integrated into the place. unique design can create a memorable association with the activity and the place in which it occurs. Covered in the following pages are design typologies for trailhead shelters, covered bridges, trail kiosks, and rough overview of trail construction itself. + aterial selection was driven by a survey of local building materials and components produced in the area. uch of the land intended for trail development is along agricultural land, and the few built structures visible along those routes use the corrugated metal for their grain bins. ecycling this material into trailhead shelters bridges, and kiosks provides some visual continuity sense of place. nother prevalent building material are shipping pallets, which can be created locally through our wood processing plants and logistics companies. + he trail architecture and signage can enhance recreation, environmental and commercial areas if the siting and design of those facilities aims to accommodate both the existing attributes of the site and the planned use. 21.

ypical railhead menities: helter from precipitation, access to water, toilets, signage + maps 22.

railhead Pavilion xamples 23.

elected rchitecture aterials xamples of eclaimed Grain ilo rchitecture 24.

elected rchitecture aterials xamples of Palette tructures 25.

xample of Pavilion ayout wc bike parking seating info. 26. pavilion_1

xample of Pavilion ayout wc 27. pavilion_2

arly endition of Pavilion 28.

Proposed Vision For Pavilion 29.

30.

Proposed Kiosk esign 31.

xisting Kiosk Proposed Kiosk 32.

Covered Bridge rchitecture 33.

xisting: Covered Bridge rchitecture 34.

Potential esign: odern daptation on Bridge rchitecture 35.

Construction Cost stimates: Kiosk: $500.00 Pavilion: $15,000.00 Bridge: $20,000.00 36.

rail Impact + Buffering rail and greenway development has a positive impact on housing and land values. recent University of Cincinnati study conducted on the nearby ittle iami rail found that homeowners were willing to pay a premium to be in close proximity to the trail. his study complements numerous other national studies which have consistently demonstrated similar results. ven with the positive results, active trail development must also be designed in a way that is sensitive to neighbors and adjacent uses. Finding: - rails are good neighbors; they increase property values and have been consistently found to be safe from a public safety perspective in a variety of situations and neighborhoods. here are well-recognized buffering strategies that allow trails and trail users to be compatible with all adjacent uses. ith the proper design and deployment of buffering techniques that are detailed in this plan, trails are appropriate in nearly every area of Clinton County. ction: + ctive trail development should be buffered in populated areas with a combination of 4 strategies which include: spacing, fencing, plantings and berming where appropriate as detailed in this Plan. 37.

CP BUFFIG Fisher Plains tudy 38.

Proposed Buffering echniques IX PIG HGIG B 39. G PCIG

xample of ixed Plantings 40.

xample of ixed Fencing 41.

BUFFIG G: Fisher Plains 9 residential backyard potential buffer drain basin trail 101 61 61 trees along berm low plantings split-rail fencing 42.

endering of Potential Fisher Plains evelopment 43.

rail Buffering trategy: abina ooking est - without vegetative buffering 44.

rail Buffering trategy: abina ooking est - with vegetative buffering 45.

rail Buffering trategy: abina ooking ast 46.

Construction etails ypical Path ection: Horizontal Clearance bstructions = 3 desired, 2 min. eparation from oadway = 5 teep mbankment (> 3:1) = 5 : ypical ection of Bikeway on bandoned ailroad Vertical Clearance 10 desired, 8 min. idth Path idth = 10 Graded houlder = 2 Bridge or unnel idth = 14 Cross lope Path lope = 2% pref., 3% max o crown Graded houlder = 12:1 pref., 6:1 max. Pavement Composition esign for expected emergency, law enforcement, & maintenance vehicles commercial drive design is recommended ection rawing (right): Bike esign on bandoned ailroad 47.

rainage: Use Bicycle safe grates (4 max. grid spacing) Provide ditch on uphill side of the path Culvert design per ocation & esign anual itch flow depth per & section 1102.4 (istrict 12) 9 below edge of path, pref. 0 below edge of path, min. Vertical lignment: ax. Grade Break w/o a vertical curve ot addressed directly in H Use ocation & esign anual (&) Figure 203-2 inimum length of vertical curve stablish topping ight istance () for crest curve ecommended peed: 30mph = 1.30% 20mph= 2.9% 48.

esign eferences: H Guidelines for the evelopment of Bicycle Facilities, (1999 or latest edition) FH Publication o. FH-P-01-027, Best Practices esign Guide Part 2, esigning idewalks and rails for ccess, (2001) UC hio anual of Uniform raffic Control evices (2005 or latest edition, Chapter 9) 49.