Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-16 RESOLUTION113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Resolution: 95-16 File Number: 2016-0211 KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS MASTER PLAN: A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND ADOPT THE KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, on February 18, 2014, the City Council approved Resolution No. 40-14 authorized the purchase of 376 acres on Kessler Mountain with the assistance of the Walton Family Foundation, Chambers Bank and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association; and WHEREAS, on June 2, 2015, the City Council approved a contract with Progressive Trail Design, LLC for the development of a Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan; and WHEREAS, after more than eight months of stakeholder group meetings and public input sessions, a final draft of the Master Plan was presented to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, which approved the plan unanimously; and WHEREAS, the proposed plan makes recommendations regarding improvements to the existing trails and proposes the construction of 7.6 additional miles of public use trails. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby accepts and adopts the Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution. PASSED and APPROVED on 5/3/2016 Page 1 Printed on 514116 Resolution: 95-16 File Number: 2016-0211 Attest: Sondra E. Smith, City Clei°1~ ��1t�rtirtt�� Treasurer AJ/ R�^ ��'� FAY�nEV4LLE.; '��•�� +5.M �•` ,tif►� Page 2 Printed on 514116 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street * i Y Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 -' Text File File Number: 2016-0211 Agenda Date: 5/3/2016 Version: 1 Status: Passed In Control: City Council Meeting File Type: Resolution Agenda Number: C 2 KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS MASTER PLAN: A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND ADOPT THE KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, on February 18, 2014, the City Council approved Resolution No. 40-14 authorized the purchase of 376 acres on Kessler Mountain with the assistance of the Walton Family Foundation, Chambers Bank and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association; and WHEREAS, on June 2, 2015, the City Council approved a contract with Progressive Trail Design, LLC for the development of a Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan; and WHEREAS, after more than eight months of stakeholder group meetings and public input sessions, a final draft of the Master Plan was presented to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, which approved the plan unanimously; and WHEREAS, the proposed plan makes recommendations regarding improvements to the existing trails and proposes the construction of 7.6 additional miles of public use trails. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby accepts and adopts the Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 1 Printed on 51412016 Ken Eastin City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2016-0211 Legistar File ID 5/3/2016 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 4/13/2016 Parks & Recreation / Parks & Recreation Department Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: Park staff recommends approval of a resolution of the City Council to recognize and adopt the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan as prepared and presented by Progressive Trail Design, LLC and as recommended by the Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Budget Impact: 4479.9470.5314.00 Sales Tax Account Number Fund 14013.1 Kessler Mountain Acquisition Project Title Project Number Budgeted Item? Yes Current Budget $ 60,349.00 Funds Obligated $ - Current Balance Does item have a cost? No Item Cost Budget Adjustment Attached? NA Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget . ,,"m'g: Jf V20140710 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # 40-14 Original Contract Number: Comments: Approval Date: CITY OF elte.—fvIi ARKANSAS MEETING OF MAY 3, 2016 TO: Mayor and City Council CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO THRU: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Connie Edmonston, Parks and Recreation Director Alison Jumper, Park Planning Superintendent FROM: Ken Eastin, Park Planner II DATE: April 13, 2016 SUBJECT: Resolution to recognize and adopt the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan as prepared by Progressive Trail Design, LLC and as recommended by the Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION: Park staff recommends approval of a resolution of the City Council to recognize and adopt the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan as prepared and presented by Progressive Trail Design, LLC and as recommended by the Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. BACKGROUND: Through the authorization of Resolution 40-14, the City of Fayetteville purchased and preserved over 350 acres on Kessler Mountain in a partnership with the Walton Family Foundation, Chambers Bank and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association in 2014. Located in the southwest corner of Fayetteville, Kessler Mountain reaches 1,856 feet above sea level and consists of steep bluffs and rock -covered woodlands with miles of nature trails that traverse through stands of old -growth forest and rock outcroppings, showcasing many native flora and fauna species. Resolution 40-14 also directed Parks and Recreation to establish a public trailhead at the Regional Park in order to provide public access for the approximately 8 miles of nature, hiking, biking, and recreational trails previously established on Kessler Mountain. Furthermore, it was determined that a master plan be prepared to assess the condition of the existing trails and make recommendations on new trails to be established on Kessler Mountain. A Request for Proposal (RFP 15-02) was drafted and advertised on March 16, 2015 and opened April 10, 2015. Two proposals were received. Through review by a selections committee, Progressive Trail Design, LLC was selected to prepare the master trails plan at a cost of $26,320 Mr. Jeremy Pate noted in his February 4, 2014 memo to the City Council for the purchase of the land that the city's vision was to utilize already forged partnerships with groups to develop programs at Kessler Mountain that emphasize and expand upon established outdoor recreation in the form of mountain biking, hiking, and nature study. To meet this advisory need, various group representatives formed a stakeholder/ steering committee to aide in the preparation of a Master Trails Plan that will guide natural surface trail development within the forested mountain Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 property. The active stakeholder group consists of representatives from the Walton Family Foundation, Beaver Watershed Alliance, Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Fayetteville Public Schools, Illinois River Watershed Partnership, International Mountain Bicycling Association, Kessler Greenways, NWA Audubon Society, NWA Land Trust, Ozark Off -Road Cyclists, Ozark Regional Land Trust, as well as the City of Fayetteville's Active Transportation Committee, Development Services, Parks and Recreation, and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Professional consultants on the project consists of Progressive Trail Design, Alta Planning and Design, Ozark Ecological Restoration, Inc. and Amy Reeves Robinson, group facilitator. This stakeholder group initially met on August 3, 2015 and began an extended process for preparation of the master plan. An initial public meeting was held on August 31 to gather input from the general public on the content of the plan to be developed. From this beginning, the consultant and team of stakeholders met a total of five times and ultimately came to consensus on improvements to the existing trails system and recommendations for new trails to meet the user needs of Fayetteville. This concensus resulted in a final draft of the plan. This draft was then presented back to the general public in an open meeting held on December 14, 2015. Following, the stakeholders met one final time to review public comments. From this meeting, final revisions were made which culminated in the draft plan presented to the Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) at a specially -scheduled meeting held on April 12, 2016. After a presentation of the plan by the consultant, the PRAB opened the floor to public comment on the plan. After comment and discussion, the PRAB unanimously approved and made recommendation to the City Council for official adoption of the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan by the City of Fayetteville. DISCUSSION: In an effort to move forward with fullfilling the commitments and visions set forth by the City Council through the approval of Resolution 40-14, staff worked with Progressive Trail Design and the stakeholder committee for the preparation of the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan. This effort resulted in the presentation of the draft plan to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and a public comment session on the plan's contents. Following public comment, the PRAB discussed the plan. This discussion culminated with a motion made by Phillip McKnight and seconded by Richie Lamb to adopt the Kessler Mountain Trails Plan as prepared and presented. The PRAB then voted unanimously to accept the plan and recommend forwarding to the City Council for approval. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: Adoption of the plan will have no effect on City budget or staff time. Attachments: Draft Kessler Mountain Trails Plan Resolution 40-14 311 a - CifYOF h44 PIt47GItIs5S1EiE Prepared for the City of Fayetteville F�ttiile 'MAIL SIGN Prepared by Progressive Trail f]eslgrr Alta Planning+ De5igr� ARKANSAS PARKS AND. RECREATION PLANNING + DESIGN Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Thanks to the 300+ local residents, business leaders, and government staff that participated in the development of this plan through meetings, events, volunteering, interviews, online surveying, comment forms, and plan review. Special thanks to those who participated as stakeholders, staff and advisors, listed below. ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Walton Family Foundation Alta Planning + Design Beaver Watershed Alliance City of Fayetteville Active Transportation Committee City of Fayetteville Development Services City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association Fayetteville Public Schools Illinois River Watershed Partnership International Mountain Bicycling Association Kessler Greenways NWA Audubon Society I Arkansas Audubon NWA Land Trust Ozark Ecological Restoration Inc. Ozark Off -Road Cyclists Ozark Regional Land Trust Progressive Trail Design CITY OF vll1e ARKANSAS PROGRESSIVE TRALL DESIGN PROJECT STAFF & ADVISORS Nathan Woodruff Progressive Trail Design Clayton Woodruff Progressive Trail Design Brett Budolfson Progressive Trail Design Jon Bryan Progressive Trail Design PROJECT CONSULTANTS Joe Woolbright, Ozark Ecological Restoration, Inc. Kent Laughlin, Alta Planning + Design Erin Rushing, Alta Planning+ Design Amy Reeves Robinson - Stakeholder Meeting Facilitator PROJECT CONTACT Ken Eastin, Park Planner City of Fayetteville Parks & Recreation Department 479-444-3472 keastin@fayetteville-ar.gov aIt a Prepared for the City of Fayetteville Prepared by Progressive Trail Deslg Alto Planning + Design Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Table of Contents CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Project Overview................................................................................. 5 Background............................................................................................ 6 CHAPTER TWO: HISTORY Settlement.............................................................................................. 9 Kessler's Winery..................................................................................10 Modern Development..................................................................... 11 CHAPTER THREE: EXIST ING CONDITIONS November 2013 - Mount Kessler Reserve byFrank Sharp....................................................................................14 February 2015 - A Rapid Terrestrial Ecological Assessment of Kessler Mountain Reserve byTheo WitselI...................................................................................15 August 2013 - An Analysis of Old Growth Forest Parcels on Kessler Mountain by Alan Edmonston................................16 February 2012 - City of Fayetteville Regional Park Plan by Lose & Associates, Inc................................................................17 CHAPTER FOUR: OBJECTIVES Project Objectives.............................................................................19 Project Scope of Work.....................................................................20 CHAPTER FIVE: THE PLANNING PROCESS CHAPTER SIX: THE TRAIL. PLAN DesignApproach...............................................................................27 Concept.................................................................................................28 Sustainable Trail Guidelines..........................................................28 TheTrail Plan........................................................................................30 CHAPTER SEVEN: EXISTING TRAILS Condition/Prescription Survey Map................ Condition/Prescription Survey Assessment Trail Closures.............................................................. PrivateTrail................................................................. Former Roadbeds / Trent Trail ............................ CHAPTER EIGHT: PROPOSED TRAILS Beginner Loop (1.5 miles)...............................................................56 Lower Bluff Trail (3.4 miles)............................................................50 East Bluff Trail (1.7 miles).................................................................52 Paved Active Transportation Trail and Regional Park Trail Loop.................................................................53 Trailheads..............................................................................................54 CHAPTER NINE: ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES Interpretive Nature (Hiking Only) Accessible Trail................57 BikePark................................................................................................58 Purpose -Built Downhill Mountain Bike Trail ..................„.......58 CHAPTER TEN: PHASING PLAN & BUDGET PhasingPlan........................................................................................61 Construction Budget........................................................................63 CHAPTER ELEVEN: RISK MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE Risk Management and Emergency Access Map....................66 Risk Management Guidelines.......................................................68 Criteria to Consider...........................................................................70 Trail Difficulty and Signage............................................................71 Emergency Access.............................................................................72 Developing an Emergency Response Plan .............................72 Maintenance and Inspection........................................................73 APPENDIX A: EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANS APPENDIX B: PUBLIC INPUT APPENDIX C: SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN Table of Contents 1 3 ' ! r rY [Ia •1 III Introduction r+ r1 :' ai f a +s _ N } pp SY�S7L `y. s, +- 4 I Chapter 1: Introduction , . {� ,5 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter provides a brief overview of the project, in terms of how this plan came to be, as well as some general background information about Kessler Mountain as it is today. PROJECT OVERVIEW Kessler Mountain is a 387 acre natural area located in southeast Fayetteville adjacent to the 232 -acre Regional Park with easy access to 1-49 and the rest of the Northwest Arkansas Region. Kessler Mountain exemplifies the quintessential natural features that make the Ozarks region such a beautiful place to live, work and play. Over the years, mountain bike enthusiasts constructed approximately eight miles of natural surface trails on Kessler Mountain. Ultimately, these trails provided access for citizens and community leaders to experience this special property to determine that Kessler Mountain had intrinsic value as a preserved open space. In 2014, the City of Fayetteville, in partnership with the Walton Family Foundation, was fortunate to be able to purchase this property and permanently preserveWthese natural assets for the citizens of the City of Fayetteville. One of the first tasks identified by the City of Fayetteville was the need to create a Trail Master Plan for this property. The intent of this Plan is to identify, design and prioritize improvements to existing and future shared -use trails on Kessler Mountain. Through a request for proposals process, the City of Fayetteville selected Progressive Trail Design (PTD) in collaboration with Alta Planning and Design and Ozark Ecological Restoration to develop this Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan. The implementation of the recommendations contained in this Plan will ultimately result in an improved network of varied and functional trails that will be accessible to hikers and bicyclists of all abilities. Cha ter:_- ; 5 %.,,. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan fk3l t3lita ti6 -53fi /c.r T 49jL1r I J] (1f° X 3A'�750 �y5, fi62 _ trW4er;lEY -"--; Faye� h I r p tt vill:e 17rfJ w t5th5t () farrnrngton Ik 7 ' rsi AP�leby L 11 �x•.o 7r r i e rx/iidlle {.7fS7YP i1 �3f arr!ekebd ..l`__ : t,reenlad �.. {; — Strafe Nark , GJ' f 1: Prairie 'Grove Kessler Mountain and the Regional Park are nestled into a central location with access to recreational, cultural, historical and educational points of interest. Adjacent destinations include the University of Arkansas, the Razorback Regional Greenway, and Prarie Grove Battlefield. BACKGROUND Kessler Mountain is in fact a plateau. As such, it is an ideal place within our urban environment to see the natural forces that provide the basis for living in our area. Fossils associated with marine animals are visible. Soils resulting from the breakdown of the ancient plateaus provide for the diverse flora, as well as many species of birds and other living creatures such as butterflies. These change with the season, making interesting repeat visits to Kessler. Kessler Mountain is located in the southwest corner of Fayetteville, Arkansas (Washington County). The elevation reaches 1,856 feet above sea level allowing both northern and southern biota. The Atoka sandstone formation caps Kessler above the Boyd formation with exposed Trace Creek shale and outcroppings of Kessler Limestone. The complex geology weathers the parent material into many soil types allowing for great biodiversity. The area receives an average of46 inches of precipitation annually. The Ecological Society of America recognized the ecological importance of Kessler Mountain in their 1926 publication "Naturalist Guide to the Americas". 6 1 Chapter 1: Ir _ra: io Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Kessler Mountain has a rich history of settlement from the mid -1800's and has a unique advantage of being a property that exists today without much change from that time period. Blessed with an abundance of native flora and fauna, stands of native old -growth Ozark tree species, rock outcroppings, significant view sheds, and changes in topography and ecosystem, the property is a perfect opportunity for citizens from the region and beyond to engage in discovery of the Ozark forest, for both recreational and educational opportunities. T IN Chapter 3: . 1 k 7 stir History mfr afff• `b 4t, a�-SFr `• � '�' •��s � .y'M}J �' _Y�,�_ �.. ��ss�-�-.�'-� �� 44 �' �; . qr �.5 � Vii. ���,. *�• ��, �+ � ;�* "'r"�t �} "�., i fs .. i • ? ! �.:�� � F + ,� , �° �i �. � . .,�,,.. F fR7�1 I`�,• r ka�.�. i� �' =i",�r ',C"�.s'�I, y tµ � ` :: ' `,. ' k, � I:.. F i . ,ran fit , r �'t s - f • Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter summarizes the history of Kessler Mountain from the roots of the John and Hannah Rieff Family to the strong-willed property owners of today, like Frank Sharp, who fought for the preservation of this local and special natural amenity. INTRODUCTION In 1951, after a hike atop Kessler Mountain, Miss Jobelle Holcombe wrote: "As I looked out over the surrounding picturesque hills at the distant mountains against the blue sky with its gray clouds, and at the valleys between the rolling hills, I could well understand why John and Hannah Rieff would settle here to hew out of the wilderness an abiding place for the generations to come."- Miss Jobelle Holcombe SETTLEMENT Modern settlement of Kessler Mountain began in 1838 when John and Hannah Rieff bought twenty acres on the mountain for $35.00. Resettling from Wilson County, Tennessee, the couple began to carve a homestead. This modest beginning led to the establishment of a new and prosperous family in the City of Fayetteville. An image of the original winery found at Kessler Mountain. There are no remnants of the Kessler Winery today, other than the stone wine cellar, which can be accessed via the Wino Trail. Chapter 2: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan KESSLER'S WINERY Phillip Kessler was born to a wine making family in Germany and brought to Springfield, Missouri at a young age. He married Kate, who was also born in Germany, and they soon had a daughter, Clara Elizabeth. The Kessler's arrived in Fayetteville in 1866 "in a brand new surrey with four beautiful horses and $11,000 in gold". The Kessler's purchased thirteen acres on top of the mountain, because it reminded them of stories they were told about Germany. They built a house, dug a well and wine cellar and established probably the first vineyard and winery in the State of Arkansas. The wine business was in full operation by 1869. Between 1869 and 1873, notices in local papers advertised a "full supply of native grape wines and celebrated Champagne Cider. The trade supplied for sale at Dorman's Bakery." Kessler's Wine Hall opened, on West Center Street in Fayetteville, featuring "Kessler's celebrated wines and peach and apple brandies... drinks ten cents or three for twenty-five cents." The local paper described the Wine Hall as "where bad little boys of town congregate at nights and shove billiards." The last remaining remnant of the Kessler Winery. This is a very intriguing article from the past that stands even after years and years of exposure to the natural elements and the threat of development. The natural stone arch makes this feel like a natural wonder. 4 k•� 10 1 Chapter .yk Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 1� Today, nothing remains of the Kessler house and winery except the hand -dug well and wine cellar adjacent to the beautiful, two-story, stone Mount Kessler Inn. And still today, Kessler Mountain continues to support many private homes and acreage. It is still largely forested, providing habitat for a wide variety of wildlife. `I..- .Er>ila.r■}rr}ja..! T4 n.sc. Twf.Nf.+-W7HtiNR }} hi- I.l}. -•.,.E}ww.r of 7'. va.ar,.�•,.H.=, ,.,..$ I.q• 3.ir Native Grape dills. w• r7 Ma'..A a'rxu Oi.i Ms.i.1 r Fro ( 1 F) E IL I ..h i IP. .n. ..n !=..r.... [ rta,l !' a% F.'.�-l.l i n .i.7 .. }yes-lar°s iI t ..lscf From fnru.,ri{.1='mk.,r,Scr1e€btr1r.18G�� The image above is a clipping from the newpaper around the time the Kessler Minery was at its peak in popularity. The local paper described the Wine Hall as "where bad little boys of town congregate at nights and shove billiards." MODERN DEVELOPMENT Beginning in 2002, Fayetteville began looking for a possible location for a Regional Park. An initial list of 18 potential sites was eventually narrowed down to four sites, ultimately resulting in the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board's recommendation of the 800 -acre Cummings property on the east slope of Kessler Mountain as the most suitable Regional Park site in August 2003. The Board recognized the site's potential to meet a variety of developed and natural recreation needs through its unique character, existing forest land, and topography varying from gentle grades to rugged mountainside. These were all recognized as assets in offering diverse recreational opportunities. The site provided ample developable topography for active sports fields, as well as an adjacent rugged landscape for forest -based recreation. Moreover, other attributes of the site such as visibility, an accessible location, and available adjacent property contributed to the selection. As a potential public/private partnership, this 800 acre property was purchased by SouthPass Development Company for a proposed large mixed -use development, which called for new neighborhoods interspersed with greenspace and parkland. This development, known as SouthPass, included a proposed donation of 200 acres to the City for the Regional Park. Although SouthPass was never realized, Chambers Bank, which held the property, donated the land for the Regional Park to the City in 2010. The groundbreaking for phase one of the new Regional Park was held on March 18, 2015. Meanwhile, numerous individuals and groups, led by the tireless efforts of Kessler Mountain resident Frank Sharp, promoted the acquisition, preservation, and public enjoyment of much of this forested mountain. This effort was very popular and generated a great deal of interest in this acquisition. Chambers Bank agreed to the sale of much of the remaining Cummings property to the City, resulting in the acquisition of 387 acres of Kessler Mountain in March 2014. This acquisition was made possible with a generous grant of 1.5 million dollars from the Walton Family Foundation, an agreement with the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association to assist in raising a portion of the remaining funds, and to create a conservation easement to assist with the protection and management of the property. Chapter 2: '' <.tt•ru 1 11 N i R t ;yl9:k.-• - er Mountain ' ils Mast�J Jw+ I t. fir,. l- j P?• �4'"Y�'",.". h i^ � Existing Conditions , r i.'+ !'''°•F �!•1 `a _ A=Yr ft h �,.. c c •TJ iv � 4. a 1 � ".., "3 'A. 4 'i ty• : 91:jv vL �J ♦17 t, -'Y. 1 �l�,w ,��S t'�`�+ifi - ;�^ �y� •-'` l °bow •i � 73'ti"rt � S U � X L• 3r +i '�". � s,} ,�, '` L! w v ti+Y ' t"�„ a+ia' ���,, � 'r S ���,� ^�• 3 '� f � Rt� .� .1 -.G*� k w 0 i � � , rye � �' Y ` ,.:�'P �'''`i*�q ;r- • r % f' �, -: M��` 1+l. ���, ..F� 1 3�',? .„Y,r' i'�•'-<l� y'Rir�!` °� � A `.L �1 Y .. - �� �, � n w r-� ., yam;:-r�'pj�,� �" •�,.. 5 r ■1 r •. �Jj1 r . y I r- Ill' - • x _ - v ,0-.•"�� ,#.: _ �.,,}��+� i •tom � �:•j .. • -v'Sa. f. ad' .t�.f '•� �' Y1�• �' "Ik+" r. ,f^'�P��. �` {".� 1 '�'•a r�i 1 I Chapter" 3:"'Existing Conditions �•n a„ tai - j Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter describes documents and studies used for guidance in the master planning process for the sensitive development of Kessler Mountain. INTRODUCTION Existing documents and studies related to Kessler Mountain have been a driving force behind the plan. These documents and studies have served as a guide and reference for planning with natural systems, wildlife habitats, cultural and tourism attractions, land use and access easements, and positive and negative control points. The studies provided valuable information regarding the feasibility of new trails in particular areas, where existing trails could be improved, and also served as a guide for ecologically sensitive areas and associated restrictions. This plan has acknowledged and utilized the existing studies, which are summarized below. Chapter 3: Existinq :c, c do I 13 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2013, NOVEMBER — MOUNT KESSLER RESERVE BY FRANK SHARP Frank Sharp, Kessler land owner and champion for its protection, compiled a document advocating the acquisition and protection of Kessler Mountain in 2013 while the land was still privately owned. The document includes history of the mountain, the current state, ecological & geological studies, many letters from users, and trail use data. Full report can be downloaded from the FNHA website http://www.fayettevillenoturol.org/. Frank Sharp, Kessler land owner and champion for its protection, compiled a document advocating the acquisition and protection of Kessler Mountain in 2013. ter R, r �K IZ?1K CIi9+V3 FRAIL LOG r�•.1 .s s.eY R.. qtr: a llay n', -----,r—.'a N `v AY. C s _ "s A. .y -! !..rt s !v .a_ee:,?S.G lta l "-s, I ",,• C''' -tea TI'snrS 4' '%L,r. n"t.'F3V 1534.' 44-a'.dd 3 b'. •-v-r., .v'y: usY .-.!S1, 3St 15 14az r_i i'sa≤, "p. ihF ri .', C-ri i-s a, s -C. Ic.., d¢'T3',CN 9 a4 Kirati qr r'F ;:' b4 P.,. 5 '•.$ J.!'A' gs�s s_c a. aex5a rt»ch �l ^ } als'�`P•� Fief ;�.'�= a-�."'e 3s4.r::r_'x-rs's ':a—xr Asr iei•_.:. ;=.?q u6'Q . tw:.'.-i'. :e ' p iLr Et Frr�'Ss..•x �x� cr�sa-�ui -.a--n Tai �a�� , s � -a. ;n xrsss. r,.•r.,rr.w%.n=Crex-. errr.', c.,,ara sra-taa 45%. ,•+x,x�^� ..- .,ra LYG_eS,yts_,w,a'a.`'^.5* .. 4:f!arb�s ♦i-.. fl se;rey±r:.n,4₹s. _t,t. 'trt-. sxK,'..'r' t ..r!. r Iran •4 'r � y C. �, "'� 14 1 Chapter 3:::ii it g(Ti ridhtrrris Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2015, FEBRUARY —A A RAPID TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF KESSLER MOUNTAIN RESERVE BYTHEO WITSELL The Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission (ANHC), under contract with the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association (FNHA), conducted a rapid ecological assessment of the Kessler Mountain Reserve from April through October, 2014. This report summarizes findings based on six separate inventory trips to the reserve (15 days total) by Theo Witsell, Botanist and Ecologist with the ANHC. This inventory documented 11 natural communities or habitats and 544 plant species present in the study area. Five areas or habitats were identified as being especially ecologically significant to the site. Populations of at least nine plant and animal species of state conservation concern (rare species) were documented and at least two of them are considered to be of A N+wE TVM11 I Ic 4 c.' le. Mo MaI,, Re lw c-Tof F.WTO n+.. W.anlryto. Corry, • 3s' *4 .n ¢•r.. k.irr. a rti nr./w. wr.w..J....ey'"' u...•r M r.. 1' w....l. r.4-vr.,t_ • Lund 4�`w.t e✓4�. W.+e�e /wve. Ynl global concern. One globally rare plant species, Missouri groundcherry, had not been documented in Arkansas in more than 60 years. A second, Church's wild rye, was not previously known in Washington County. This report presents an ecological overview of the site, descriptions of the natural communities present, maps and brief descriptions of ecologically significant areas, maps of known occurrences of species of conservation concern, and an annotated list of plant species documented from the study area. It also makes recommendations for ecological management and provides an annotated list of those non- native invasive plant species present that are considered to be a threat to the integrity of natural communities on the reserve. Ecologically sensitive areas and habitats shown on the graphic plan maps were determined from this study. Full report can be downloaded from the FNHA website: http:// www. foyettevillenaturol. org/. Chapter 3: l 15 f Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2013, AUGUST - AN ANALYSIS OF OLD GROWTH FOREST PARCELS ON KESSLER MOUNTAIN BY ALAN EDMONDSON "The forest on Kessler Mountain is mixed oak -hickory hardwoods. There are some areas on Kessler Mountain where remnants of old growth forests have escaped logging. These stands of ancient post oak (Quercus stellata) and chinkapin oak (Quercus muehlenbergii) were not cut because they were not fit for commercial timber."- Alan Edmondson Full report can be downloaded from the FNHA website: http://www.fayettevillenatural.org/. Overstaxy Relative Frequency $ite A 0 a 7wr9n s A.erFserM ikA W i rime 0et . 01"o rasa Cat • LtKa+r 3106 O4. • S.Or•r Ntoi V4— 7aAeitL- Frett.A eY Pau Oak Glade CtRegenry Underst*ry Relative Frequency Site A a.4i ri4f maMLbt rYaiat:e � Ceaat . roseds aCedeb. . Oak a 1114 _,Y a ywt31eOat •1I i*It .Ica chm'" • arare#.0Qv rNYM?b.Aelit' irxr.venryirotlt l�:adeundvsFory i'a..at.0ared pail a^ we lroreSeer rna aver rw6 ari�b.t the rV.,atd tyre Ir n wi ?00 a*s M Ufte AM mt at [arse 7. Overstery Relative Frequency Site s mart 4a.P* ,* rrsq>-Mty Chlnkrp-Oak (3Carp-&€ O'.*r *ry Understory Relative reqteny Site B zx 2 2% . paste[,! $t: iedsr ■ kOC.r3r , A" s Cviat,wbaaaktw iSti'i�r e I Aftcwe" we Lwy aiY < CfiwAaw Oai Burrb.AelaFleeerrgrrntyCr,' Oakiscarp.rr,itr•detgDry 16 1 Chapter 3: Exist tg C ?rt st€or5; Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2012, FEBRUARY — CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL PARK PLAN The Regional Park consists of 232 acres immediately adjacent to and on the east side of the Kessler Mountain property. The Regional Park will provide an area for developed, active recreation while Kessler Mountain provides a natural, backcountry complement largely preserved in its natural condition. This will provide a park setting with a wide, diverse range of both active and passive, natural and developed recreation opportunities. The first phase of the Regional Park is under construction and will open in the fall of 2016. This initial development consists of four baseball fields, six soccer fields, two concession/ restroom/ storage facilities for both baseball and soccer, as well as roads, parking, and utilities necessary for operation. When fully completed, the park will have seven soccer fields, eight baseball fields, four softball fields, trails, playgrounds, a great lawn, pavilions, tennis courts, basketball courts, volleyball courts, water features, an amphitheater, and park maintenance and office facilities. The Regional Park will serve as the gateway and primary trailhead for trail activities on Kessler Mountain. The park will be connected to the City's paved transportation trail system and will contain a paved loop for fully accessible trail use within the park. Trails immediately adjacent to the trailhead will be relatively easy, yet the trails will become progressively more challenging as users travel farther away from the park development. f r � row. -. I.w.frar, / I. FAME I»TN\'ILLS. RIul.N L PARK �:ItSIFRI'[spa Chapter 3: cxp'. inu C1 1ditFonsr !i 17 ti Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2013, AUGUST— KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILHEAD LOG DATA: BASELINE TRAIL USAGE AND USAGE FROM 07/14/14 TO 05/12/15 The efforts by Frank Sharp and the City of Fayetteville to document the amount and type of users frequenting Kessler Mountain have resulted in the information outlined in the section of the plan. The baseline data was collected from Frank Sharp's trail use log and was collected from August 12, 2013 until July 13, 2014. The most recent data was collected from July 14, 2014 until May 15, 2015, with coincides with the opening date of the public trailhead located along Judge Cummings Road. Kessler Mountain Trailhead Log Data Baseline Trail Usage 139/12/2013 - 07/13/2014 Monthly Unique Group Logs Public Trailhead Private Trailhead Totals 12 -Sep -13 288 288 October -15 349 349 November -13 852 852 December -13 207 207 January -14 503 503 February -14 284 284 March -14 710 710 April -14 745 745 May -14 745 745 June -14 375 375 13 -Jul -14 290 290 0 5348 5348 Kessler Mountain Trailhead Log Data 07/14/2014 - 05/12/2015 :Baseline Trail Users: 5348 TYPES OF USERS Other 6% Bike 12% ,. Public Trailhead Private Trailhead Totals Unique Logs 1975 2770 4745 Total Users 4178 6604 10782 38.70% 61.30% 100% Groups with 10+ 12 31 43 Types of User Groups Hike 2942 5615 8557 Bike 513 451 964' Run 487 455 942 Other 236 83 319 4178 6604 10782 Monthly Unique Group Logs T J j Total Monthly Unique Logs - . � + w - - - July -14 173 143 316 August -14 142 236 378 September -14 159 287 446 October -14 228 350 578 November -14 203 320 523 December -14 132 185 317 January -15 319 341 660 February -15 146 237 383 March -15 167 244 411 April -15 237 292 529 12 -May -15 69 135 204 1975 2770 4745 18 I Chapter 3:. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan it Kessler Mountain Trailhead Log Data Total Monthly Users { yr;;, p'"" co 4,. -� tc� • ��' c` a�` gc�F ��` tea" mcty vn,•rrte MonthlyTotal Users July -14 301 312 613 August -14 239 517 756 September -14 258 680 938 October -14 506 791 1297 November -14 607 865 1472 December -14 289 452 741 January -15 629 811 1440 February -15 320 565 885 March -15 382 546 928 April -15 503 808 131Y 12 -May -15 144 257 401 4178 6604 10782 Kessler Mountain Trailhead log Data 111• II- - 1111 Illil 7��Illtil IJ I � • I_ Illii �7�111� • I_ I—, MIND iI11�1 iii i11E3 111E3 —7111 I— I— II- IIlli7. II �111� 'I- -- Ii ��Illi-0 .11 I IIEEB • I�IlliJ II— II — II IIEE#i X11 IE11fi II- IEii IIEE#1 I- .111EE#3 �k��l11EE0 ID�IIIIEEB ��1i111EE## Chapter 3: ,+l 1;; ..caitcll IQIti, 1 19 Objectives ..e +x rat Fj fp . {; C ~ •. ` .++"�_ ".> �' i i Y y -, r , . A �t •yam ` .T>• ' - A• '. te.„ e ua 4- y> x r? AFB t +* ` } , A •r 7 f r"! SAY' l��• �•r ' .'�,".-F'.' rii.t'4r., Y A "R ',spa- A _ - L• _� w. YA r4`, •F'.+� • " iti rY ABa - .. - 1f•.. + �!—• . • r ' �.I�E''a r-. _. ,.. _.. - y a ! ,_ i� y^yA•�/ 'µ �.... rte. �.,,. ' • - `y 1, x •"k" �. h.4 _ ��, r fI A� rte...-„��.. r►`" - 1, _ illb. �,. •+ r T� r '!! : -.1 - rop �` :rr I • Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter outlines the objectives, which were developed in the stakeholder meetings through the consensus building efforts of the facilitator. These objectives used to create a comprehensive trails plan that will serve as another set of guidelines for the development of the Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan. INTRODUCTION This comprehensive trails plan serves as a foundation for creating new trails, improving existing trails and adding trail amenities to provide a wide range of users with a variety of trail experiences, as well as expand outdoor recreation and education opportunities on the mountain. The proposed trails will be purposefully designed to allow trail users to experience the beauty of Kessler on foot or bicycle while minimizing user conflict and environmental impact. The plan focuses on soft -surface trails, however it does include some conceptual paved trails that are in line with the City of Fayetteville's Active Transportation Master Plan. Through a request for proposal, the City of Fayetteville selected Progressive Trail Design, with Alta Planning + Design, and Ozark Ecological Restoration Inc. (OERI) to assist with the development of this comprehensive trails plan. Chapter 4: Objectives 1 21 PROGRESSIVE TRAIL DESIGN (PTD): A highly skilled Trail building/Bike Park Development company based in the rugged Ozark Mountains of Northwest Arkansas with an office in the foothills of the Colorado Rockies. PTD is a member of the Professional Trail Builders Association (PTBA) and specializes in the development of "progressive recreational facilities", mountain bike parks, municipal park renovations and enhancements, and a wide variety of purpose-built trails (i.e. equine trails, motorized trails, bike trails, interpretive hiking trails, etc...). SCOPE OF WORK: Overall Site Assessment - Inventory the entire site, determine property boundaries, analyze and identify opportunities and constraints, identify environmentally sensitive areas (through the assistance of OERI and referencing Witsell's Report), identify positive and negative control points, and identify a preliminary concept of trail expansion feasibility. Existing Trail Assessment - Assess all eight miles of existing trail. Identify any poorly aligned segments, drainage issues, and/or flow issues. Make recommendations for improvements and GPS the recommendations to be shown on the overall map. Conceptual Layout - Through input from the public and stakeholder meetings, determine the desired amount and type of new trail that is appropriate for Kessler Mountain and begin to layout conceptual alignments. :�'► Final Layout - Once a consensus has been established regarding which of the new trails, reroutes and additions are acceptable, PTD will begin to ground truth the trails and GPS their general alignment. These alignments will go on the first draft for review and comment. This is a conceptual layout and does not include final flagging and alignment. s ! Deliverables - Master Plan Proposal -After comments and revisions, PTD staff will compile the map, all field notes, proposed trails with descriptions and support images, and a budget for construction into one comprehensive document along with a separate map/plan. • is °�-0 -fir , `'1 'S 4# r#,t. d� ' _. y ;� �,e �r� tea_ .. � ¢ ` tI.•' �' F,s`: � �a� . �"� a '�S, W" a • tR! 4 P r JJ_ : 't •. _ ''171 tp..'•y !i. 1 _�, . ter►. a :&• •.: ,-✓'& `'. •ow 1.• i\A .z•,. • — 1•• '�` 4x✓^w' J� � jFs �y„ .l v .•,ate.,^'-`9a�. . � �' � ,�' . �t I T,. • v••' •^�.`' .. tr' r �-y �'; — yam„ • r Kessler Mountain Traits Master Plan �wf j4:4F' nC�. ��{ � �,�� �y��d,��.•. fy"� FvC�i. 1. y, r 1 I .. a «��r 4 �1 ilN 24 I Chapter 5: Planning Process Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan,, OVERVIEW This chapter describes the process performed to gather input involving the general public and stakeholder groups. Public input was gathered in variety of ways, ranging from conversational feedback to different forms of media. INTRODUCTION The trails plan was developed through the input of the city, the public, private organizations and professionals. The process began in mid -2015 and continued over the course of six months. The biggest challenge in developing this plan was to find the balance between preservation and recreation. Through the input of the public and the collaboration of the diverse group of stakeholders, a compromise was reached which resulted in the plan presented in this document. The Rapid Terrestrial Ecological Assessment Plan by Theo Witsell and the Analysis of Old Growth Forest Parcels by Alan Edmonson were utilized as a basis for proposing new trails and improving existing trails. A stakeholder group comprised of over 20 individuals representing various user groups and organizations was formed to guide the direction of the plan throughout the process. In total, there were six stakeholder meetings and four public input sessions. In addition, Alta Planning + Design created a public survey in which 150 respondents provided their feedback. This data was also critical in the development of the plan. Chapter 5: The: P <irn€nq>'r;3cess 1 25 >zr Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan • Walton Family Foundation • Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association • Alta Planning + Design • Beaver Watershed Alliance • • City of Fayetteville Active • Transportation Committee • City of Fayetteville Development Services • City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation • City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Fayetteville Public Schools Illinois River Watershed Partnership International Mountain Bicycling Association Kessler Greenways NWA Audubon Society / Arkansas Audubon • NWA Land Trust PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY: Survey results and a summary of comments received from the public input sessions are included in Appendix B: Public Input from the two public input sessions. Below are general statements from different user groups that highlight common desires and concerns. Two main categories emerged from the public and stakeholder comments: Preservation and Recreation. The biggest challenge of this plan was to find the balance between these two opposing viewpoints. The end goal was to respect the natural environment and key sensitive areas outlined in the ecological assessment, while still providing access to new areas and proposing new trails to build skill level progression into the trail system. Given that an existing eight -mile trail system has been on the mountain since the early 2000's, users have already grown to love it for • Ozark Ecological Restoration Inc. • Ozark Off -Road Cyclists Ozark Regional Land Trust • Progressive Trail Design its natural beauty and remote back country feel. Almost all users unanimously agreed that they wish to keep that experience intact. Differences are primarily centered on the amount of new trail appropriate for the mountain and where proposed trails should be located. Through the use of existing studies and the feedback of different user groups, this plan was developed to address this balance of users' needs. The two primary user groups are hikers and mountain bikers. The hiker group includes anyone on foot: trail runners, birdwatchers, photographers, backpackers, etc. The mountain biker group includes anyone on a bike; however, this group also falls into the hiker group, because many who bike also hike and run. 26 I Chapter 5: Tie Par:,; ri=g P oc:ess Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Based on the feedback gathered during the public input process, hikers are linked to enjoying short loops and destinations, such as a bluff, overlook, or spring. Their focus is not so much on the trail itself, but the efficiency of finding a unique location and the experience of getting there. Mountain bikers, on the other hand, are linked to longer, exciting, flowing trail loops. They desire a unique experience with a focus on a variety of trail types and challenges. In order to meet the desires of these two groups, it was equally important to provide new trails as well as improve the existing trail system. Vic. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan j 2iidp%Wti l .C y tit ! • J r:; rs h'1 �'� a -t 1 ,- ;5 � w�4 .• a r h i- 1 �y' F � �F ;(Z�r�c . s q h .�.,.': MT, KESSLER y K y • r , c `•. r W � t Y tl.. " •fg+M A. _ F'•., bq'. i �' 4 � Xlf TW w' !�y 1y� i •t � w R�1 •1. ��. • y _ t 22 # y ^ ,_ x,tr `r-� x. �� .c�y� � • ��, t- a -SF � " iy.,•; .. ��'�r�.w,.. } ,.r � i� ��.-• �. � �. t F � r'�i�. R Cr �,y�`1��':f��1� �+t„wa'-ff r � f }. ' > �y, roh •.,�lY'y'f r s.,.Rr�: _ .�Y"r: r • ...r ` A��t�i ..�� f't �`- .�-.:GL�1 •e."P : { �. ti ry #_ �� :-a*�..i'+C_ •k..: •lam- � ,.ir`�i .-...-_ Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter provides a brief overview of the project, in terms of how this plan came to be, as well as some general background information about Kessler Mountain as it is today. INTRODUCTION The overall trail master plan map for Kessler Mountain includes three primary components. Each of these will be detailed in the following pages. DESIGN APPROACH When developing a trail system, the primary goal is to build sustainable trails and protect environmentally sensitive areas. Supplementing this goal with trail experiences that appeal to a variety of user groups and minimize user conflict, maximizes the overall experience. In order to create this experience, user group are typically either segregated or integrated depending on the size of the site and the type and volume of users. For Kessler Mountain, the goal was to create a shared -use trail system that would work well for the widest variety of use. Through strategic and sustainable design, this plan has been created to address the needs of all users; hikers, bikers, nature enthusiasts, trail runners, groups, and users with special needs. Another critical component that drives design is positive and negative control points. The positive control points are the places you want to take the trail to, such as an overlook or a waterfall. The negative control points are those areas you want to stay away from, such as a sensitive ecological habitat, or a wet area. To put it simply, the goal is to identify all the positive control points and connect Chapter 6: ; h ThiP ��. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan the dots in a sustainable fashion while avoiding the negative control points. CONCEPT Input from both the stakeholder group and the public raised a concern about user conflict, specifically between pedestrians and cyclists. This is a common concern and one that has been addressed in the design of the trail system. There are a number of solutions to mitigate user conflict. First and foremost, it is important to create a well -organized progressive -based trail system. This is achieved by providing a variety of trails at varying levels of difficulty: beginner, intermediate, and expert. This applies to all user groups and is signified by the character of the trail itself. Steeper, rocky trails are considered expert while smooth trails on gentle grades are considered beginner. This helps to provide an opportunity for beginner level cyclists, less ambitious hikers or less mobile users to enjoy nature in a more comfortable fashion. Given that almost all of the existing trails on Kessler are considered difficult and expert level, it is important to integrate some beginner and intermediate level trails into the plan. The area below the bluff line on the east side of the mountain provides the perfect terrain for these types of trails and is immediately accessible to the developed Regional Park. The new trails will create a "stacked -loop trail system." This means that one loop is connected to the previous loop in a stacked formation. This allows the system to develop with the easier trails near the trailhead and each connected loop becoming progressively more challenging as they advance in distance. This helps to segregate users and disperse traffic. The topography of Kessler caters well to this progressive -based, stacked - loop trail system because the bluff line circling the perimeter of the mountain acts as a natural separation between the more distant, rugged trails and the more accessible, easier trails. The more advanced cyclists and adventurous hikers/ runners will use more of the system and travel to the remote areas; whereas, the beginners and less ambitious will generally stay closer to the trailhead on these more accessible trails. This also provides for a variety of loop configurations. SUSTAINABLE TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES There are two documents established for trailbuilding and are referred to as the industry standard: United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Trail Construction and Maintenance Notebook as well as the International Mountain Bicycling Association's (IMBA) Sustainable Trail Design Standards. Though IMBA is a mountain bike trail advocacy organization, these trail guidelines are commonly accepted by all trail builders as the standard for sustainable trail design. Trail _ Construction _. y _ nd .k• aipry}ten {2nCe �M1 • 2titl7Etfiflon There are many valuable resources to refer to regarding natural surface trail design. 30 1 Chapter &: ans.-ar Poi.�i.^ y [E+Mk ea.neM1 I -.a v GitidlPw.E [Rain&d] - -.---- NATURAL SURFACE TRAIL DEFINITION: A natural surface trail is any type of trail utilizing native mineral soils as the primary final tread surface. Comprised of a "full bench cut", these trails commonly follow the land contours and pass by or incorporate terrain features. Developing these trails with moderate grades, mild undulation and limited surface variation delivers a very sustainable resource. However, grades and surface may be adjusted to provide a variety of textures and experiences. Tread can range from eighteen (18) inch wide single track to five (5) foot wide double track. This kind of trail can be produced to accommodate any type of user group. The "full bench cut" simply means that the tread is completely carved out of undisturbed soil with none of the excavated fill used as a part of the tread. This provides a more durable, sustainable trail. TWO CRITICAL TRAILBUILDING TIPS: AVOID THE FALL LINE. Fall -line trails usually follow the shortest route down a hill - the same path that water flows. The problem with fall -line trails is that they focus water down their length. The speeding water strips the trail of soil, exposing roots, creating gullies, and scarring the environment. AVOID FLAT AREAS. Flat terrain lures many trailbuilders with the initial ease of trail construction. However, if a trail is not located on a slope, there is the potential for the trail to become a collection basin for water. The trail tread must always be slightly higher than the ground on at least one side of it so that water can drain properly. FIVE SUSTAINABLE TRAIL PRINCIPLES: Ideally, a trail would simultaneously incorporate all of these principles. •j THE HALF RULE THE 10 -PERCENT AVERAGE 2 GUIDELINE 3 MAXIUM SUSTAINABLE GRADE 4 GRADE REVERSALS 5 OUTSLOPE Keep water off the tread and users on it. Build with the contour of the land and use frequent grade reversals. Follow the half -rule: A trail's grade should -1 not exceed half the grade of the cross slope. Maximum grade should be 15 percent (except for natural or built rock structures). :� Average grade should stay under 10 percent 'vr7 (with grade reversals). Route trails to positive control points (viewpoints, water, and other attractions). Use bench -cut construction and excavate soil from the hillside. Provide an tread out -slope of three to five 1: percent in order to encourage rapid water removal from the tread. For reroutes, reclaim the old trail thoroughly, both the visual corridor as well as the trail tread. For highly technical trails where grade will sometimes exceed 15 percent, use natural rock, rock armoring or other rock features to add challenge and improve sustainability. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 32 1 Chapter 7: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan LEGEND NOTE: ALL TRAIL LENGTHS AND ALIGNMENTS ARE APPROXIMATE EXISTING TRAILS BIKING ALLOWED 6 Miles (Within Park Boundary) QQ BEGINNER LOOP RESTROOMS OOOOO 0o O OOO 1.5 Miles (4'WIDE) PARKING AREA 000 O 00000 LOWER BLUFF TRAIL OO 3.4 Miles (2'-3'WIDE) ABANDONEDTRAILS ..• •..• • EAST BLUFF TRAIL, •• 1.7 Miles (18"-2'WIDE) FUTURE PAVED TRAILS OOOOO 0o TRAIL REROUTES Proposed by the City of Fayetteville O 000 1 Mile PAVED TRAILS - PROPOSED Proposed by City of Fayetteville ECOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS AND HABITATS SHALE BARRENS fill BLUFFS OLD GROWTH POST OAK WOODLAND rj RIPARIAN HABITAT Information taken from Arkansas Natural Heritaoe Commission. Ecological Assessmer O/7 KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS MASTER PLAN REGIONAL PARK I The plan presented on this page represents the JUDGE CUMMINGS ROAD 7 Kessler Mountain public area integrated with the planned development of the Regional Park. The + o plan proposed by Prgressive Trail Design highlights - O the concept of a stacked loop trail system mac, integrating the existing trail system wtih a range of difficulty for all trail users to experience. The plan used to illustrate the City of Fayetteville's Regional Park plan can be viewed in entriety in : Appendix D: City of Fayetteville Regional Pork Plan. // __ `�'gdp�ryp f o t L 800 al Secondary NORTH - —__L Parking &Trailhead Chapter 7: Lx sunr;-•cs 133 r Y 4 4. PV' ... ..A y� � ZJ. Yb.1r A? .: 1! V i lS4 y Existing Trails � r : A tTT.... .. �.. �i, Y,,. .yrr + r:. .•'R r � .M1+'�; � ._�� 1- �T �� I � 'Lp 'rt k f s y,. - 1 rj rt .r Y. � _ '- "' '-f5 i a . - .�,. • 4'' c 'c ♦' �.'_i'� T Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 'x!� OVERVIEW This chapter outlines the current conditions and the recommendations from Progressive Trail Design for the six miles of public use trail at Kessler Mountain. INTRODUCTION The existing trail system on Kessler Mountain is approximately eight miles. Six miles of this system are on city property, while the remaining two are on private property. The two miles on private property were assessed in this report and are discussed in more detail in the following pages. As previously mentioned, all existing trails were built by volunteers, primarily Ozark Off -Road Cyclists, over the last 15 years with the permission of previous and existing landowners. There was no master plan for these trails. It was simply a group of volunteers building trails slowly overtime All the trails were built by hand to maximize the trail experience in the best terrain for mountain biking. It is important to note that all existing trails are considered "expert" level according to IMBA Guidelines. These trails are all one to two feet wide singletrack that are very rocky and technically challenging in nature. For most hikers this is not a problem, but a mountain biker must be an advanced rider to navigate these trails comfortably. Therefore, beginner and intermediate level trails for all users are one of the most critical needs of the trail system. Most of the existing trails today have stayed in relatively good shape, however, as expected, there are some design and sustainability issues that must be addressed. This report will result in recommendations to resolve some of these issues and problem areas. As such, Progressive Trail Design conducted a full assessment of all existing trails. The assessment identified problem areas and poorly aligned trail segments and prescribes solutions to these areas. This has resulted in a condition/prescription survey in order to make the trail system sustainable in accordance with the industry accepted guidelines for building sustainable trails. The intention of this trails improvement plan was to maintain the alignment and character of the existing trail system. Recommendations for reroutes in areas where the trail is either too steep, located in perpetually wet zones, or have alignment issues that hinder traffic flow (aka "trail flow"). All problem spots, including small reroutes, are indicated on the Existing Trail plan with recommended solutions and are expanded upon later in this chapter. Any reroutes that were significant are indicated on the plan as a separate, proposed trail. Chapter 7: Exstinq ;r<;`s j 35 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan • f ti ;', �i' vya 3 Ti'! ' ry. 1y ,riA ;;11!1ITT i� : _______ �wl�o�x,clry r . r• ii[ s�Fft3Y !3 °' Senior Citizens A©A t � f+arking &frail Hub t i I •�� r3 L_ < h `�i o t •• �' r } yifI a. �Ii :J: i k .err it J _` 1 "?" P f �3kllir trill Hiih N y __ yF 1 5 st zY� m :`Fr ayJ 15 L. '1` •fir'°' ,aOts. fJA ECOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT 4, ,,;^G :•" AREAS AND HABITATS {l (na ° c' — / ' �[� SHALE BARRENS c° $_.• . �:. _ - _ _ �� BLUFFSi ace ss iu pri OLD GROWTH POST li-------------------L.. r PRIFFFPF 5OUNt3rik1OAK WOODLAND � fi✓ Kf SSI-Ett MOUN£AIN ROAu RIPARIAN HABITAT Information taken from Arkansas Natural Heritage Corr fission. Ecological Assessment prepared by Theo Witsell on February 2015 36 j Chapter 7: Spellbound Repairs CONDITION: At the Intersection with Western Myth the drainage rundown Spellbound. PRESCRIPTION; 500'reroute to alloy for betterintersection location and drainage. CONDITION: Poordrainage on rockdroplandfng PRESCRIPTION: Create better drainage and 50'rock armoring. CONDITION; Comer istoo tight and trail grade too steep causing poordrainage. PRESCRIPTION, 200 reroute to reduce grades and impmvedrainage. CONDITION: Seep causing muddy trail tread. PRESCRIPTION: 50'rock armodog. CONDITION: Steep trailgrades and poor drainage before corner. PRESCRIPTION: Realign comer upslope for improved drainage. CONDITION: Poor drainage before corner. PRESCRIPTION: 60' reroute of comer for improved drainag CONDITION: Poor drainage at the intersection of Western Myth PRESCRIPTION: 150' remu€e to allow for better intersection location and improved drainage. CONDITION; Trail grade exceeds the maximum geadeof 1590 for an extended distance. PRESCRIPTION: 500' reroute with a dimbing turn to reduce troll grades and better align trail and trail flow. CONDITION: Poor location and alignment of trails at intersection with Eggbeater. T i PRESCRIPTION: 200' reroute for better intersection location and '. 'Tr improveddralnage. CONDITION: Two tumsexceed maximum grade ferdkttbingtums PRESCRIPTION; Relocate both turns approx. 75' behind current location in order to reduce grades CONDITION: Poor drainage on old mad bed. ;tie PRESCRIPTION: Build in -line grade dips toimprove drainage Trent Trail Repairs CONDITION: Seep causing muddy trail tread, PRESCRIPTION: 400'reroute with 100' of rnckarmorirg. This isalso part of the major reroute around the Shale Barren shown on the map. Rock City Trail Repairs C��T CONDITION: Turns exceeds maximum gradefor clenbmg turns. PRESCRIPTION: Corner 1 - Rebuild as a rolling crown swdchbaA Comer 2 - Rebuild as a roiling crown swrtchhed, with 5 W:30L rb vmll retaining backside of twin tomaintain existing drainage from road Regrade rrair between between turns to improve drainage CONDITION: Large boulder blocking trail musing narrow unsafe mute amund PRESCRIPTION: BuildaZlfxlt2LCdb wok tocreateasafeasustainable route around boulder. CONDITION: Large boulderfell onto trail blocking the tread causing users to go off trail to avoid PRESCRIPTION: Move large boalderand reestablish original tailalignmcnt. CONDITION: Steeprockyf l.Iere trail for appras. 200`causbrg poordrairwge and diffresdl navigation for some users. PRESCRIPTION-,Opr.t: Stay an eclsdrg teak atignmmL Repair using rolling grade dips and rockarmoring. Opt.2(preferredi:300'rerouteupslope from existing trail align xnt using cgaderevnrsalsferwater managernem. ®CONDITION: Narrow tree gate formountain bikersspecrfically ousmg users to go around PRESCRIPTIONr OpL1: Remove the Silver Maple. Olrt.2-'a!0rrrrwta 5'anr slppr CONDITION:Old tree stu i mein toil tread PRESCRIPTION- Remuvesturep. CONDITION: Seep uusmg muddy trail tread. PRESCRIPTION: 50 red, armoring eCCONDITION: Seep causerg muddy trail tread. PRESCRIPTION: 30' rock annortng. CONDITION: Seep causing muddy trod tread. PRESCRIPTION: 100' rerouteand eockarmodrg. Ct CONDITION: P.Idni3 rf cnmenlston tlghtnuupg trs we plirrulRy [ewunrain biters Io stray Off trail PRESCRIPTIOflt Rekcatecprner vmh 175 reason fa.,Rrw Inn Metter r[Im radIr CONDITION: Dead tree in comer, causing a tight radius. PRESCRIPTION; Rema'e dead tree to open radius of corner. i CONDITION: Seep coigne muddy lrmltread PRESCRIPTION: 50)' rackarmodog.. CORDITSO N:. Seep drains down trod end tiro Potts located moo close to a borbtd wire luster rmdklnp R dnngneerr ter stirrer. PRESCRIPTION: 500' reroute irrcWding 2 ckmbing toms and 30' of rock armoring [o span seep. This reroute will also help to control the speeds of mountain bikers. Closeold traiL O CONDITION: Radius of corner is too tight cawing users, primarily mountain biters to stray off toad. The tamer is also too dose to a barbed erre lance, making it dangerous far users. PRESCRIPTION: Open radiusaf cornerand along with a 50 reroute downhill from comer. Cl CONDITIONS Hikers base created a nodal trail that createsadirect spore to the Shale Barren. PRESCRIPTION: Reroute turn north to create separation and insta'stay on trairsigns (Jose social trail. 1,r Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Sideslope (fall line slopr). _ ,rF r Tread grades. : _ Trend dip. -:a . :. .. Tread tress, - Hardened (read C ' r Svstownoble natlsre tred.. PRESCRIPTION TREATMENTS This section is to familiarize the reader with terms and types of treatment proposed in the Kessler Mountain Existing Trails Condition/Prescription Survey. The terms discussed in this section are: rock armoring, inline drainage features, climbing turns, rolling crown switchback, knick construction. Rock Armoring 0rrainage crossing. r I1 Climbing Turns 7rrad climb, Edge buffer. .v . it A turn where the grade of the trail as it passes through the fall line is exactly the same as the grade of the slope being traversed. Rolling Crown Switchbacks Rolling crown switchbacks are sustainable turns on a hillside engineered for drainage. The trail is routed onto a Rock armoring can be used for drainage crossings, crowned deck trail approaches,"" where it makes and steep trail »mss a transition to �': sections that need ''' the opposite --.-.y. �.�1►�e� additional protection ,`" ., direction. The . wM ,, --".Y rr .- .• from erosion. Rock yy r upper approach armoring tends to }a ;`` is insloped to be relatively low °?w r =*� Y drain water out maintenance and the back of the landing, while the lower approach visually appealing, while also stabilizing challenging trail sections Inline Drainage Inline drainage features are typically used on existing treads where the tread has already been established and there is little space for a large, wide, relatively clog -proof dip and outlet formed through alignment. Please refer to the image on page 47 for more information. is outsloped. ((nicks are constructed into existing trail } tread in order to drain puddles from flat areas. L - -.— r ti Y off' 'ri 38 I Chapter 7: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Knick Construction A knick is an effective outsloped drain constructed into existing trails. For a knick to be effective, the trail tread must have lower ground next to it so the water has a place to drain. A knick is a shaved down semicircle about ten -feet long that is outsloped about fifteen percent in the center. Knicks should be unnoticeable to users. .L: I .>L> ..I.1/'( .I I� ',II C(.. 1 IO'N i!I�Vi l ROCK CITY TRAIL Rock City Trail Recommendation #1 s( /,=1 f.( N' Latitidue: N36 02.394 Longitude: W94 13.248 I t'? (/;i .I 3. $6,500.00 Turns exceed maximum grade for climbing turns. klt((;Ij''(I�� Corner 1 - Rebuild as a rolling crown switchback Corner 2- Rebuild as a rolling crown switchback with 5'Hx30'L crib wall retaining backside of turn to maintain existing drainage from road. Regrade trail between turns to improve drainage • Rock City Trail ° Recommendation #2 Latitidue: N36 02.384 Longitude: W94 13.215 $800.00 Large boulder blocking trail causing narrow unsafe route around. Build a 2'Hx10'L crib wall to create a safe a sustainable route around boulder. Rock City Trail Recommendation #3 I U Latitidue: N3602.382 Longitude: W94 13.185 I' ) ( (� i ; $500.00 Large boulder fell onto trail blocking the tread causing users to go off trail to avoid. Jfl Move large boulder and reestablish original trail alignment. •Rock City Trail Recommendation #4 kk"t , Latitidue: N36 02.442 Longitude: W94 13.175 $3,400.00 Steep rocky fall -line trail for approx. 200' causing poor drainage and difficult navigation for some users. Option 1: Stay on existing trail alignment. Repair using rolling grade dips and rock armoring. Option 2 (preferred): 300' reroute upslope from existing trail alignment using grade reversals for water management. Chapter 7: Exct±n_ ,r; �:s 139 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan k' Rock City Trail Recommendation #5 Latitidue: N36 02.336 Longitude: W94 13.032 ' �► $200.00 Narrow tree gate for mountain bikers specifically, causing users to go around. Opt.1: Remove the Silver Maple. Opt.2: 30' reroute down slope. Rock City Trail Recommendation #6 Latitidue: N36 02.324 Longitude: W94 13.027 $200.00 Old tree stump in trail tread. Remove stump. Rock City Trail 7 Recommendation #7 Latitidue: N36 02.221 Longitude: W94 13.007 $2,250.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. 50' rock armoring. Rock City Trail Recommendation #8 Latitidue: N36 02.159 Longitude: W94 13.029 I $1,350.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. flfla . 4 30' rock armoring. Rock City Trail Recommendation #9 Latitidue: N36 02.150 Longitude: W94 13.065 $800.00 9•, Seep causing muddy trail tread. 100' rock armoring. Rock City Trail Recommendation #10 Latitidue: N36 02.159 Longitude: W94 13.114 :)':J,: $1,800.00 Radius of corner is too tight causing users, primarily mountain bikers to stray off trail. Relocate corner with a 75' reroute to allow for better turn radius. 40 1 Chapter 7: _ tin u ` is Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Rock City Trail Rock City Trail Recommendation #11 Recommendation #14 •1IWfIIIS1 Latitidue: N36 02.131 lLatitidue: N36 02.006 Longitude: W94 13.114 Longitude: W94 13.111 a T •.,. ■ $200.00 xi����s�■ $1,500.00 Dead tree in corner, causing a tight radius. Radius of corner is too tight causing users, primarily mountain bikers to stray off trail. The corner is also too close to a barbed wire fence, making it dangerous Remove dead tree to open radius of corner. for users. . a Rock City Trail 1• Recommendation #12 Open radius of corner and along with a 50' reroute downhill from corner. Latitidue: N36 02.090 Longitude: W94 13.093 Rock City Trail $4,500.00 Recommendation #15 1= "` ! ■ Latitidue: N36 01.921 Seep causing muddy trail tread. Longitude: W9413.080 11: l l Its ■ $800.00 100' rock armoring. Rock City Trail Hikers have created a social trail that creates a Recommendation #13 direct route to the Shale Barren. Latitidue: N36 02.026 Reroute turn north to create separation and install Longitude: W94 13.112 "stay on trail" signs. Close social trail. I,• ,. $7,000.00 Seep drains down trail and the trail is located too close to a barbed wire fence, making it dangerous for users. 500' reroute including 2 climbing turns and 30' of rock armoring to span seep. This reroute will also help to control the speeds of mountain bikers. Close old trail. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan EGGBEATER TRAIL Eggbeater Trail Recommendation #1 %',l Latitidue: N36 01.924 Longitude: W94 13.049 H'1 I P,'l l.HH $800.00 :J1.H i l'l {liar; 50' fall line trail. 100' reroute to mellow grades. Eggbeater Trail Recommendation #2 I s HLatitidue: N36 01.903 Longitude: W94 13.061 H iI $3,375.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. 75' of rock armoring. WESTERN MYTH TRAIL Western Myth Trail Recommendation #1 a 1� 0 N Latitidue: N36 01.814 Longitude: W94 13.094 V,A'III> _ $3,200.00 At the intersection with the Eggbeater trail the drainage runs directly down the Western Myth trail paired with steep grades and poor drainage for an extended distances. 400' reroute to the north to allow for a better intersection location and reduce the trail grades. Western Myth Trail Recommendation #2 I /?< 1H Latitidue: N36 01.721 Longitude: W94 13.148 $1,600.00 Trail grade is too steep for an extended distance. 200' reroute to reduce the trails grade. 42 1 Chapter 7: F: i_::tinc 1i :iH Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan SPELLBOUND TRAIL Spellbound Trail Recommendation #1 Latitidue: N36 01.615 Longitude: W94 13.184 '1 = h� (t I. $800.00 At the Intersection with Western Myth the drainage runs directly down Spellbound Trail. >jM,iti:'1ONe� 100' reroute to allow for better intersection location and drainage. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #2 1 s € i( Latitidue: N36 01.821 Longitude: W94 13.212 $900.00 (t ii Poor drainage on rock drop landing. Create better drainage and 50' rock armoring. } Spellbound Trail Recommendation #3 Latitidue: N36 01.863 Longitude: W94 13.214 $1,600.00 1 Pip.. Corner is too tight and trail grade too steep causing poor drainage. 200' reroute to the north reduce grades, open turn radius, and improve drainage. OSpellbound Trail Recommendation #4 Latitidue: N36 01.734 Longitude: W94 13.214 PrlP1J;`l fL Pi $2,250.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. I tI 50' rock armoring. OSpellbound Trail Recommendation #5 s • " Latitidue: N36 01.384 Longitude: W94 13.265 z 1 �?. � �; L; $1,000.00 Steep trail grades, tight turn radius, and poor drainage in and out of turn. 11. . l; 1 Realign corner upslope and to south for improved drainage. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #6 Latitidue: N36 01.340 Longitude: W94 13.257 $1,50u,o0 Poor drainage before turn. 60' reroute of turn for improved drainage. Chapter 7: Ex stiroc Tails 1 43 } Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Spellbound Trail Recommendation #7 l N Latitidue: N36 01.358 Longitude: W94 13.237 /"l) C.fl/ ;'I` $1,200.00 NN Poor drainage at the intersection of Western Myth. 150' reroute to the north for better intersection location and improved drainage. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #8 li$IW U[t1►i 1 Latitidue: N36 01.348 Longitude: W94 13.212 rh"3[afai.. $4,000.00 Trail grade exceeds the maximum grade of 15% for an extended distance. 500' reroute with a climbing turn to reduce trail grades and better align trail and trail flow. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #9 Latitidue: N36 01.411 Longitude: W94 13.147 $1,600.00 Poor location and alignment of trails at intersection with Eggbeater. 200' reroute for better intersection location and improved drainage. Spellbound Trail , Recommendation #10 Hi ' Latitidue: N36 01.434 Longitude: W94 13.121 fi3=iVls5fc'u�lia.tu?'. $3,200.00 Two turns exceed maximum grade for climbing turns. Relocate both turns approx. 75' behind current location in order to reduce grades. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #11 1 Latitidue:N3601.341 Longitude: W94 13.095 j/itt $500.00 ,9 d Poor drainage on old road bed. Build in -line grade dips to improve drainage. TRENT TRAIL Trent Trail Recommendation #1 Latitidue: N36 01.820 Longitude: W94 13.040 $9,600.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread, 400' reroute with 100' of rock armoring. This is also part of the major reroute around the Shale Barren shown on the map. 44 1 Chapter 7:E i;,ung'Eits Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan CRAZY MARY TRAIL N Crazy Mary Trail tJ Recommendation #1 1 (-> ( 0,' I t ( Latitidue: N36 01.314 Longitude: W94 13.054 I L '11;. $1,600.00 FR Steep grade with poor drainage. 200' Reroute to reduce grade and improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #2 11 Latitidue:N3601.315 Longitude: W94 13.026 (('i: $800.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. 100' Reroute above seep. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #3 i '""I ICifLatitidue: N3601.398 Longitude: W94 12.967 $400.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 50' Reroute to improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #4 1 (<i IY>'; Latitidue: N36 01.425 Longitude: W94 12.943 I 4/; i I I,(( �,�,'I : $800.00 Seep and bad trail alignment causing poor drainage and wet trail tread. 100' Reroute to improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #5 I (t(:/'I iUi Latitidue:N3601.466 Longitude: W94 12.901 •y $1,350.00 2 seeps causing wet trail tread. 30' Rock Armoring. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #6 Latitidue: N36 01.532 Longitude: W94 12.878 - . 11Iti Poor drainage. Inline drainage feature. $500.00 Chapter 7: ExistlnTrzils 1 45 >k Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Crazy Mary Trail JY Recommendation #7 Latitidue: N36 01.564 Longitude: W94 12.845 cYI f0A'` l { r {, r; {; $1,200.00 CC?t.1f11laa Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 150' Reroute to improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #8 J l H I Latitidue: N36 01.602 Longitude: W94 12.852 fH $1,200.00 'H � Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 150' Reroute to improve drainage. f . Crazy Mary Trail n Recommendation #9 Latitidue: N36 01.672 Longitude: W94 12.855 $1,600.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 200" Reroute to improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #10 H,-(' t { 1 IH Latitidue: N36 01.775 Longitude: W94 12.873 :1n:f >>t' I $800.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 100' Reroute to improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #11 Latitidue: N36 01.847 Longitude: W94 12.890 $ 800.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 100' Reroute to improve drainage. •Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #12 Latitidue: N36 01.945 Longitude: W94 12.832 yR�- � $6,400.00 Bad trail separation. The trail comes close to itself as it snakes down the slope. 800' Reroute. Move upper leg upslope and taper down to the double rock drop. After drop, middle leg will traverse slope instead of climbing. Move lower leg downslope then traverse slope back to trail. This is shown on the map as one of the main reroutes. 46 1 Chapter 7: =_ i i:; i sirs Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan _r CRAZY MARY TRAIL CONT. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #13 Latitidue: N36 01.973 Longitude: W94 12.680 $500.00 s 0 e Poor drainage & meandering trail around sinkhole. Inline drainage features & 200' Reroute to connect REROUTES The most significant reroutes are primarily to avoid ecologically sensitive areas, avoid private property, or realign trails to be sustainable and have better separation. There are three significant reroutes: Spellbound Reroute — As part of the two miles of trail located on private property, the section of the Spellbound Trail in the southwest corner of the property has been identified for rerouting due to the need for public access. This reroute will serve as an alternative to the current alignment, but could become the permanent trail especially if the City is unable to attain an easement or acquire this piece of private property to publically accommodate the existing trails. This reroute is not ideal because it shortens the trail system and makes this area more congested, but this reroute will be considered as an alternative. SEE BUDGET ON PAGE 63 FOR TOTALS ON ALL EXISTING TRAIL Shale Barren Reroute — As identified by Theo Witsell's ecological assessment, the shale barren is a rare and sensitive ecological amenity and unique to Kessler Mountain. To accommodate this ecologically -sensitive area, reroutes around this area are proposed in order to avoid damaging the delicate fauna and flora. To enhance this reroute recommendation, educational signage will be required in order to keep users from accessing this sensitive area as well as informing the importance of this ecological amenity. More information regarding the shale barren can be viewed in Appendix B: A Rapid Terrestrial Ecological Assessment of Kessler Mountain Reserve by Theo Witsell. Chapter 7: Ex <. ir.gTri t 1 47 ti Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Crazy Mary Reroute — To support the primary goal of building sustainable trails and protecting environmentally sensitive areas, two sections of the Crazy Mary Trail are in need of rerouting. One of these areas is located at the Crazy Mary and Trent Trail intersection near the top of the mountain, while the other is located near the northern end of the Crazy Mary Trail above the bluffline. This proposed reroute is needed in order to reach sustainable grades and to provide better trail separation where turns are condensed and limited in maneuverability. TRAIL CLOSURES Abandoned trails and corridors are generally closed by eliminating the existing tread while disguising the open corridor. Existing tread can be removed by scarifying the compacted soil to encourage new vegetation growth, placing organic litter and debris in the tread, and breaking the previous tread's continuity with logs, stones or other material. The open corridor can be more difficult to disguise. Vertical elements such as the placement of a fallen tree, especially cedar, is helpful to visually remove the open corridor line which attracts the eye. These vertical elements will ideally last through a couple of growing seasons until natural growth can be established. In some cases, this is even accomplished with the planting of live trees and shrubs. Again, the intent is to completely camouflage the corridor. If people can see it, they will reopen it, especially if it's a short- cut for hikers. PRIVATE TRAIL There are approximately two miles of trail on private property. These trails have existed for many years and are considered to be an integral to the existing system. In order for these trails to be open for public use, the City must gain access through an easement or land acquisition. Appropriate alternate solutions have been provided assuming that the City is unable to gain access. However, these trails have been included in the assessment should they become part of the public trail system. There are three trails located on private property: Rock City Trail -This trail is approximately one mile and crosses a few different property owners, one of which has been a champion for Kessler Mountain and has gone as far as providing access to the trail and creating a small trailhead and sign -in sheet. This has been one of the main access points to the trail system for years and holds some of the most beautiful terrain on the mountain. Spellbound Trail - This is a one mile segment of trail on the far southwest end that climbs up the mountain. It is the connection between all west side trails Wino Trail -This is a spur trail to the historic stone wine cellar. Below are images of how a trail can be closed off for public use. Providing an obvious obstruction is the easiest way, but blending the former corridor into the landscape is the most sustainable. 48 1 Chapter 7: ..:i ., e :3' Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Sir FORMER ROADBEDS - TRENT TRAIL The Trent Trail is actually a historic road bed that served as the main road over the mountain during the late 1800's when Kessler was being used as a winery (please refer to Chapter 2: History for more information). Today, the trail functions as the primary north -south connector trail that is situated as the main spine of the trail system. The trail starts near the water towers on the northeast end of the property and continues west to the shale barren and then turns south along the top of the ridge to the radio towers at the far south end of the property. For purposes of analysis, the trail can be broken into two segments: Water Towers to Shale Barren —The trail/old roadbed is approximately eight feet wide and continues directly up the mountain along the fall -line (prevailing slope), therefore exceeding maximum grades for sustainable trail. However, given that this segment of the trail is already established and provides the only motorized access on the mountain, it is recommended that the existing path be improved and remain as an emergency access and maintenance route for the City. This path should remain open as a public use trail for those preferring a more direct route or climbing challenge. Also recommended is to regrade and install inline grade dips to mitigate erosion due to the steep alignment of the trail. A minimum of six feet width should be established to accommodate utility vehicles for emergencies and maintenance. This does not mean that the trail tread width must be six feet, rather the corridor must be cleared of any trees, downfall, rocks, or other obstacles that would impede a UTV from traveling down the trail. The tread itself would more likely become four feet wide like it is today. Shale Barren to Radio Towers — There are a few places where the trail has been routed around deadfall that have caused some steeper grades and trail flow issues. Progressive Trail Design recommends these areas be addressed with the installation of inline drainage features in any place where the trail is straight down the fall line for extended periods. Again, a minimum of six feet width should be established to accommodate utility vehicles for emergencies and maintenance. The diagram below is an example of inline grade dips, which are a proposed solution to erosion issues on steep grades for the Kessler Mountain trail system. CONSTRUCTED TREAD DIP CONFIGURATIONS to -c------- .,ti i Chapter 7: 1 49 N < MAl1Al" .c� Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter outlines the proposed trail system from Progressive Trail Design for an additional 7.6 miles of public use trails at Kessler Mountain. INTRODUCTION There are a total of four proposed trails: These trails total approximately 6.6 miles, excluding the paved or hard surface paths. The focus of this master plan is primarily on the soft surface trail. The shared -use, paved paths were not included in the scope of this plan; however, high-level concepts based on the City's Regional Park Plan and Active Transportation Plan were included. It is important to note that all proposed trails in this plan are conceptual alignments based on field work and the public input process. They are all subject to be further refined on the ground during the pre -construction final design phase. Much thought, debate and field study has gone into the proposed locations. This plan is meant to be used as a guide for the future development of the Kessler Mountain Trail System. All of the proposed soft surface trails are intended to be "natural surface trails" (see definition below) that will range in width and character. They are proposed to address the need of providing more diverse experiences for a variety of users, introducing difficulty level progression by adding beginner and intermediate options, and accessing key attractions. The following pages are a description with support images of the different types of proposed trails. Chapter 8: ?rap s d Traik 1 51 z� Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan BEGINNER LOOP (1.5 MILES) This trail, designated by the green color in the image below, would be an approximately four- to five-foot wide natural surface trail that serves as a hiking or beginner level mountain biking loop. With proximity near the main trailhead at the Regional Park, this loop offers an easily accessible recreational opportunity for a variety of users. The trail is aligned at the base of the mountain and skirts the edge of the recently capped landfill, which will soon be restored to prairie -like conditions. It begins and ends at the main trailhead and navigates through the woods along gentle slopes. This trail type is needed in order to provide better access to the mountain for all users and skill progression in the trail system. As previously mentioned, all of the existing trails on the mountain are considered advanced, therefore it is important to also offer beginner and intermediate level trails. Additional loop configurations branching off of this loop offer expanded hiking and biking options. a 1 a r 0 4 ° moo oa cps 0 vet' f 1 0 0! c0 o t yc 8e inner Loop ' _� r e -' C IO C O O _l /J ° ai 0 Landfill Area 2O( + f (°0000 0 �, �,0 ` OC)OO P Parking &Trail Hub LOWER BLUFF TRAIL (3.4 MILES) This trail, designated by the blue color, would be a two -foot wide intermediate level trail that generally follows the contour of the land and skirts the base of the bluff line. The trail serves multiple purposes. First, this trail provides access to the existing trail system and ties into the East Bluff Trail, proposed to run along the upper portion of the bluff line. Second, it connects the trail system to two proposed secondary trailhead/parking areas: ADA Hilltop Trailhead and Kessler Mountain Road Trailhead. In addition, the trail provides a much - needed intermediate level trail experience, adding to the diversity of use, challenge, and experience. This trail can be accessed from the main parking area near the former landfill and provides loop configurations and educational opportunities along the base of the bluff showcasing geology, springs, and wildlife. The upper leg of this trail follows the contours along a natural bench at the base of the east bluff line. There are many big boulders, sheer bluff walls, springs and other ecologically rich zones to view. The goal of this trail is to take users to these locations in a responsibly designed way creating a unique natural experience and introducing visitors to the wonders of Kessler Mountain and Ozark ecology. It will be very important to provide trail etiquette, educational, and interpretive signs to direct people to stay on the trail and illustrate the importance of this natural amenity. This may be one of the most frequented areas due its proximity to the Regional Park, making it of paramount importance to contain users on the proposed trail. However, providing the opportunity to experience this terrain without having to travel deep into the trail system targets the goal of providing unique and educational opportunities at an accessible distance for a variety of trail users. 52 1 Chapter 8: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Leaving the upper leg of this trail and ascending through breaks in the bluff line are two connector trails that, will provide access to the proposed East Bluff Trail. Both of these connector trails utilize existing roadbeds that, offer direct routes up the mountain. Unfortunately, the grades of these roadbeds are too steep (exceed 20% grade for the acceptable maximum length) to establish a sustainable trail. Therefore, switchbacks must be integrated to reduce the grades and make the trail more comfortable to navigate. Through strategic design, the majority of the road bed can be used. This is the preferred option because the corridor has already been impacted and minimizing any further disruption should be considered a top priority during the final design phase. From a recreational standpoint, the Lower Bluff Trail offers a great place for mountain bikers, trail runners and hikers to exercise, challenge themselves, and experience a moderate trail that gently flows along the contour of this open wooded terrain. This will serve as the next level of skill progression from the Beginner Loop as well as a gateway trail to the more advanced and challenging trails located higher on the mountain. Piftn" a 4 ID 3 SAL or a ae, �° obp, v oa Q1 G Q�L7 �3Ac7 ca. *? ♦_ { s - U . Qt3¢ p'51p.S+ QV aOil o p9�a Q qr % IL. a: dfill Area .?'J( I� Y} Gri .----- J or o �. Qyoon®�P Parking Trail Huh y �� V O1Oc,.t.fi b 40 6O '%_ 0 I F EGlONAL PA r a e Og o Bluff Trail i Lower ! Y 8c,n:.. °tea o ' rr m� °ancxorro° v po . �� 'r uvp�Q:r�°° '' ���aoQgap�D° fl r .- S. N l r '- KE55LERPy1O UNTAINRDA[3 1 P "`�►1+ Chapter 8: €'r po e Tr; :. 53 �- Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan EAST BLUFF TRAIL (1.7 MILES) Designated by the magenta color, the East Bluff Trail will be an eighteen -inch to two -foot wide backcountry single-track trail similar to the existing trails. This trail will run along the top of the east bluff line offering outstanding views to the east and overlooks of the Regional Park and the City of Fayetteville. This trail has the potential to become one of the most popular trails in the park due to its natural beauty and proximity to the trailhead. The trail can be accessed from the main trailhead utilizing two trail connections by way of the Lower Bluff Trail as well as from a connection to Crazy Mary Trail. These connections offer a variety of short and long distance loop options. They, also serve as a link to the southern and more remote western portions of the existing trail system through a series of switchbacks on the south end that connect to Crazy Mary Trail, taking users to the highest point on Kessler Mountain. 54 1 Chapter 8: r( J ,'r u. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan PAVED ACTIVE TRANSPORATION TRAIL AND REGIONAL PARK TRAIL LOOP Though the alignment of many of the paved paths are not finalized, a trail concept to make a north - south connection over the mountain has been illustrated in this plan. This trail is currently included in the Active Transportation Master Plan and would serve as part of the Rupple Road extension from the Ozark Smokehouse to the Regional Park. There is also a concept for a paved path around the Regional Park, which is shown on this plan. This path will be fully accessible and provide a trail opportunity within the Regional Park development. An overlook on the hillside above the baseball fields was identified as a desirable destination for access In conjunction with the Regional Park development, plans for an extension of Fayetteville's paved trails system to the park are currently being prepared and construction is expected to be completed by Fall 2016. This will be identified as the Cato Springs Trail and will access the park by trail from the northeast, providing connections to the Town Branch Trail and the Razorback Greenway. Reference Appendix A. Existing Condition Studies and Plans for more information. Chapter 8: Pr rr: r -.: , i - I,n, I 55 %- Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan TRAILHEADS There are a total of five proposed and future trailheads to access the trail system. Tempoary Trailhead Phase I construction of the Regional Park features the construction of four baseball fields and a large parking lot facility. Main Trailhead This is the primary trailhead positioned on the far western end of the Regional Park at the base of the old landfill area. D 0 This parking facility will serve as a temporary trailhead for public access until the main trailhead is constructed in later phases of the Regional Park development. This will be a large parking area with restrooms and a trail kiosk. This facility is anticipated to be constructed in a later phase of the Regional Park development. U.;- - - - . ill Parking Trail Hub _ j{ - n 0000 56 1 Chapter 8: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Judge Cummings Road Trailhead Currently serving as existing access to the Kessler Mountain trails, this will continue to serve as secondary trailhead to the mountain or a main trailhead for greenway users. Kessler Moutain Road Trailhead This is a future concept to provide a small parking area on the south end of the trail system off Kessler Mountain Road. This could eventually connect to future trail development to the south. ADA Trailhead Located at the top of Judge Cummings Road near the water towers, this trailhead would be reserved for users with special needs to provide access to key overlooks and trails. It is approximately 0.4 miles east of the Main Trailhead and the soft surface trails. JUDGE CUMMINGS ROAD l 1 Q � UNT'AAD P Potential Secondary Parking & Trailhead Senior Citizens ADA' Parking & Trail Hub r � � #� .Chapter 8: ; ; .'posed i,ark; 1 57 F I a vy .. r' y I ? ; F 1 I''TTI..TTII1TTT II - I�r za !1I a q�yrar�;• H "1 ..bra Y � w _ " 1 I it ' r I. I,R _. .i Ik 1 I F. i t; i re F i. I . •sl Iy, ■ i '1' •�.� Y rll�. Ji '. � � t + C'1 �. Sf I C ter�6 As1ditianal 7'; aI pRNnit es 4.Li Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan ,Kvt OVERVIEW This chapter identifies additional opportunities for bikers and hikers. These opportunities are considered to be future considerations for the development of Kessler Mountain in conjunction with the Regional Park. INTRODUCTION Additional opportunities for trail and bike amenities are proposed in this section and address requests made by City and public during input periods, as well as trends and potential future needs. A few of these concepts are outlined below. Note: These are only meant to be conceptual ideas to meet future recreational needs based on current trends. BIKE PARK A bike park is a purpose-built skills park for bicyclists. It is meant to provide fun and challenge for all skill levels. The former landfill is a perfect canvas for a world -class bike park. The grades are perfect for this use and its placement at the main trailhead makes it ideal for skills -building amenities. The landfill has strict management restrictions limiting its use and development to activities that will not penetrate the newly installed clay cap. This makes the area ideal for use of a bike skills park since this is best accomplished by importing more fill dirt to construct the features and that will further buffer the new cap. A bike park would bring a The landfill at Kessler Mountain has strict management restrictions limiting its use and development to activities, but acts as the perfect canvas for a world -class bike park. Chapter 9: tfd1lior�alirailOppotltPniues 159 s� Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan unique recreational asset to the Regional Park and the City of Fayetteville. INTERPRETIVE NATURE (HIKING ONLY) ACCESSIBLE TRAIL This type of trail is designed for education and accessibility. It is typically located in gentle terrain and preferably surfaced with a crushed stone. There are a few locations that could work for this type of trail. One is the area around the Regional Park, specifically around the streams, This trail could replace the concrete path in places or work in conjunction, as an alternate trail winding back and forth over the stream with boardwalks. Another opportunity is near the water towers on the north end, leaving the ADA parking area and accessing the overlooks. PURPOSE-BUILT DOWNHILL MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL These types of trails are extremely popular among mountain bikers. They are directional downhill trails designed for challenge and fun. Kessler provides an especially unique opportunity in Northwest Arkansas due to its elevation change and natural technical features. There is a great opportunity for one of these types of trails coming off the high point (near radio towers) on the south end dropping down to either the western or eastern sides of the mountain. This could become more feasible if the private land to the southwest, where the existing Spellbound Trail is located, were officially acquired. Should this be a possibility, it would be especially important to separate this trail from other trails as much as possible, as well as conduct an ecological study within the trail corridor to avoid impact to any high value natural resources. Above are examples of intrepretive nature accessible trails. These trails can present opportunities to typically unaccessible areas and provide users with the unique experience of learning about something about thier local landscape. Below and Opposite Page: bottom 3 images are examples of intrepretive signage along soft surface trails. The bottom two images are examples of a purpose-built downhill mountain bike trails and bike parks. I' 60 1 Chapter 9: °: t n Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan r hutuf d yaM% nqr°° ^" _ +4 across this ►etr 'La. VJtct+ as - rh t {an i ac k+s:.a .,Jul lasrnc.lr ¢. w a•acsicd� 4[i!iU'[7 natnt t ~ ti kit arul Carrtat. tiny V{11 d. \{nru a• r LS cr ttmr, t� ta�i1 rv.eranx rwcs 4• ai,a t1yx+. irS lrxcuy r tharl a hlrrl.lml ntrflx+re wxesly ti! wrkSll+ i+. ytlsn'�+r snlc xfr taa4 acrd parrs WIANS encS rr4i rnvattn:r, ii- t rn ata i1StrntSh f" R t 1L —h ,sa the V4 eserrn bibticg,dn%, vrhi44t tC1y +ia wk� at�.S + . is{nFm tictn ,f this i1' - u.rc c ark. ter,••..i. t r + Kessler Mountain Traits Master Plan •, �` ti' 1. '� ', yi 'r x ,� y:.:". - � v. .- ,k�ca+*' � `1 ti` �^'��?$'Z:►r7" its:: �� 9� Fk 4M1, Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter outlines the phasing plan for the improvements to the existing trail system, proposed additions, and a construction budget. PHASING PLAN The implementation of this plan and the proceeding recommendations are contingent upon funding and other approvals. All construction could be implemented at once or could take place over the course of years. Below are the recommendations in order of priority from Progressive Trail Design. Initial Efforts Private Property: Since use of existing trails on private property are critical to the design of the overall trail system, a primary recommendation of this plan is for the City to initiate contact with affected property owners to begin discussions on approved use of these corridors. This effort will be required before other alternative connections are further developed. Final use of private corridors will be based on acquisitions or agreements approved through the City Attorney's Office. Existing Trail: Aside from approved use of private property, the highest priority is to improve the outlined in Chapter Seven: Existing Trails. Since the opening of Kessler Mountain as a public park, there has been a substantial increase in the volume of trail traffic. Because of this increase in ak5 f p Pi11 a 'j saps"a, . )) ri "tl� (11T Connector Trail: see following page for description Chapter 10: Phasincj PIa 163 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan existing trail system by implementing the likely consist of segments of the blue and green recommendations trails. Additionally, the trails were not designed for the Final Design: Final GPS and flagged trail alignment high-level of use they are receiving now. Many on all new proposed trails will be necessary in segments of the trail are poorly aligned, have order to plan and prepare future trails to be bad sight lines, or intersect in poor locations. It constructed. Please refer to the section, later in is important to address these areas as soon as this chapter, entitled Implementation of New Trails possible to mitigate user conflict and ensure safety for more information. and sustainability. Finally, many parts of the trail Beginner Loop & Lower Bluff Trails (Green & system need sustainable standards reapplied Blue) with the consideration of "trail flow". This plan recommends doing this in a way that enhances the These trails would add an element of skill system and in no way detracts from the natural progression in the system and provide access character and technicality of the trail tread and the for a variety of users, therefore they should be backcountry trail experience that Kessler Mountain constructed as soon as possible. Please refer to is known for. Chapter 8: Proposed Trails to see a description of these trails and for more information about the Signage: Due to the high traffic and the fact purpose of these trails. that Kessler Mountain is now a public park, it is important that a good signage and wayfinding East Bluff Trail system is put in place. Signage is needed to easily As mentioned in the previous chapter, this trail interpret location, manage risk, and educate the has the potential to be one of the most popular public on the ecologically sensitive areas of Kessler trails on the mountain due to its location along the Mountain. Existing signs have been recently top of the bluff line and proximity to the trailhead. installed by volunteers. It is recommended that However, due to similarity in style to the eight the Northwest Arkansas Soft Surface Signage Plan miles of existing trail, this is not a trail -type that is be implemented, as this is the new standard for as much of a priority as the other new proposed all local soft surface trail systems in Northwest trails. Arkansas. In addition, trail etiquette and Paved Active Transportation Trail and Regional educational signage should he installed as soon as possible. Please refer to Chapter 11: Signage and Park Trail Loop Risk Management for more information. These trails will be developed in conjunction with the Regional Park development. Connector Trail: There is one connector trail recommended for immediate construction. This trail is necessary to connect the baseball parking IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW TRAILS lot (acting as the temporary trailhead until the As previously mentioned, all new trails are main trailhead is constructed) to the top of the conceptual in alignment. Prior to the construction mountain near the water towers. This trail would of any trail, the proposed final route would be center -line flagged with some allowable deviation 64 1 Chapter 10: P}oinn ,1;,o Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Budget Fayetteville, AR Mar -16 *This is a design/build budget based on a mid to high range for estimated trail construction costs. * Items and quantites are approximate and based on field work. All are subject to change NEW TRAIL: Item #: Description: I Total: Notes: 1. BEGINNER LOOP (1.5 mi) $74,896.00 Estimated Build Time: 3 weeks 2. LOWER BLUFF TRAIL (3.4 MI) $182,197.60 Estimated Build Time: 7 weeks 3. EAST BLUFF TRAIL (1.7 MI) $98,324.8O Estimated Build Time: 5 weeks 4. TRAIL REROUTES (1 MI) $55,824.00 Estimated Build Time: 3 weeks $411,242.40 New Trail Total=7.6mi. Est. Build Time: 18 weeks (4.5months w/one crew) EXISTING TRAIL REPAIRS: Item #: Description: I Total: Notes: 5. CRAZY MARY TRAIL $25,245.00 Estimated Build Time: 3 weeks 6. WESTERN MYTH TRAIL $10,780.00 Estimated Build Time: 1 week 7. EGGBEATER TRAIL $10,092.50 Estimated Build Time: 1 week 8. SPELLBOUND TRAIL $25,905.00 Estimated Build Time: 3 weeks 9. TRENT TRAIL $29,810.00 Estimated Build Time: 1 week 10. ROCK CITY TRAIL $39,600.00 Estimated Build Time: 4 weeks $141.432.50 Estimated Build Time: 13 weeks (3.25 months w/one crew) TRAILHEADS & PARKING Item #: Description: Total: Notes: 11. TRAILHEADS $35,000.00 Estimated Build Time: 4 weeks 12. PARKING LOTS $225,000.00 $260,000.00 TRAIL TOTALS: NEW TRAIL TOTAL: $411,242.40 EXISTING TRAIL REPAIRS TOTAL: $141,432.50 TRAILHEADS & PARKING TOTAL: $260,000.00 SIGNAGE ALLOWANCE: $50,000.00 for existing system, signage budget is included in "new trails" SUBTOTAL: $862,674.90 3% ESCALATOR: $25,880.25 GRAND TOTAL: $888,555.15 -• I •'tS ':•. rwii , I I Signage e and Risk $J4 Management _ _ . _____ r. • - .�+• w wr " •'. e'' j I . ,y L '� 'Sjs I oaf � , r � �� * 4 ��1 :�i4 +tom �`•'�� -- r. "+�e'�-� ' ''tea:._ ""�'s��� .y _ ,� _1. �•. r �� j., •' `y�y � ~,..� +�I^k * F `1 f Y wh rc r{lil . ,Li� � �'r _ (maji •�•�r ! ��� � _ � � �, } �,P, ___,, .., . �� 5v a !i �, b� '�► � 7� �. .�i �, ,* s'♦tl @' .�. '� ' Rte.` fir. �. �'•��'i x x *f rr� `a '.. r e .��:._ e! � ~'4 'y+' � .•-aa'� "!C�_ � i � �F _ - �'+' +� 7�� �; {wt�� qy4.� - � :�� •mot* I__ ;.- ,. .r,'�'t+�'�� ,�' ,.- max. __-`�'r"r }�>,j a �ir,: x ..�,.y ._. a •, t,�-•, ..F +# C'+ � P T = Ia 4 4s.J t� i I _ �j ,�� I w• I _iy���, e�7C i . - . _ _ ��" _ °'3. ' " i t. k �'Ps'k �r.w � ,�• L rT at 4 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter provides guidelines to be used in providing signage for wayfinding and emergency access. This chapter also outlines considerations for maintenance and inspection following the development of the trail network. INTRODUCTION Signs are the most important communication mechanism between users and land management agencies. A well -implemented and maintained sign program can enhance the user experience, allowing users to navigate through the trail network and customize their trail experience. Signs also play a critical role in managing risk and the rapid deployment of emergency services. A strategic and frequent sign program meets the needs of all trail users, from the savvy, daily trail user to a first-time visitor. Because signs sometimes intrude on the natural outdoor experience, balancing these competing interests is the key to developing a successful sign program. The Northwest Arkansas Soft Surface Signage Plan was developed by Alta Planning + Design and Progressive Trail Design and is being implemented in all the soft -surface trail systems throughout Northwest Arkansas in an effort to standardize signage and organize the systems. These signs can be adapted to fit the needs of each system, though some will require custom signs. For example, Kessler will need educational signs for ecologically sensitive areas and "stay on trail" signs throughout. Chapter 11: Siynagc,,rd -t„ r:. ,;,a^: rne:ft 1 67 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan &� | -..... «mmn & 681aaGe 11: mg, «d Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan L. E G L N D NOTE: ALL TRAIL LENGTHS AND ALIGNMENTS ARE APPROXIMATE EXISTING TRAILS 10 b BIKING ALLOWED `��` 6 Miles (Within Park Boundary) 0000 0o 0 0 000 BEGINNER LOOP 1.5 Miles (4'WIDE) II jj RESTROOMS PARKING AREA ®® e® LOWER BLUFF TRAIL 3.4 Miles (2'-3'WIDE) ABANDONED TRAILS ••• • EAST BLUFF TRAIL • °°• 1.7 Miles (16"-2'WIDE) 00�0o TRAIL REROUTES `w�` 1 Mile TRAILHEAD KIOSK M INTERSECTING TRAIL SIGNS ❑ ❑ TRAIL MARKERS TRAIL CLASSIFICATIONS PAVED TRAILS - PROPOSED Proposed by City of Fayetteville 2c:kJ 9 FUTURE PAVED TRAILS Proposed by the City of Fayetteville EMERGENCY ACCESS ROUTE EMERENCY PICKUP LOCATION (NUMBER) S fl� KESSLER MOUNTAIN RISK MANAGEMENT :EGIONAL PARK AND EMERGENCY ACCESS PLAN JUDGE CUMMWNGSROAD I 'dI , O The recommendations for emergency access and o wayfinding signage are shown on this graphic. fThere are three proposed types of wayfinding o � signage: trailhead kiosk, intersection trail signs, _ and trail markers. Emergency access routes ''- _ ��) �.` are identified with the yellow buffer line with emergency pickup locations marked with the red circle. I p (l II 0 P Potential Secondary Parking &Trailhead CIlaptei, 11: : : 1 G9 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan NORTHWEST ARKANSAS SOFT- SURFACE SIGNAGE PLAN Front/Bock Option 2 for (2) 4"x 6" Post "Double Fare Option s`rn' r .1; 1h/141111' '?'1 r I c 11i0I 70 I Chapter 91: rrlrl:fe anti Rr,k +adage,. ent Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan ,r Trail Markers intersecting Trail Signs -Signs to show full treil system and blown -up sedlons of trail systP_n. 'kh I:I•.1• A'AiwrM§x•,►Lss Mr vyyn larr.. AccAsdk kr U}+3xlr � gnFace24 x 1B x..25' Afbpa dwr&pUV -_. e�re,wlAnt:Gr ThriLam. .75" Thix Hardwarr. .25'x 40" Chapter 11: .r+icl fi%k tJ,�F oen►r-r1! 1 71 sir Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan RISK MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES Below are some principles of trail design, construction techniques and management strategies for managing risk: Warnings • Signs play a vital role in managing risk. • Consider a perimeter (fence, vegetation - every user is warned of potential risk no matter how they enter the trail system). • The main trailhead kiosk could describe trail difficulty using a trail rating system. + Provide signage that alerts users to elements of increased risk. • Use language that appeals to users. • Include warnings about natural outdoor hazards (such as deadfall, weather, animals, etc.). Ak RU& Thts`II ItDVANCEi� ONLY! 'lam 4*4 JUMP Filters • A trail filter, sometimes referred to as a gateway or qualifier, is a high -skill -level, low - consequence obstacle that demonstrates the difficulty of the upcoming trail or trail feature. • Consider using filters at the beginning of each advanced trail and just before technical features. • By making the entrances to technical trails and features difficult, you prevent unprepared riders from overstepping their abilities. • Build with low consequence, easy exit. • Filter must be path of least resistance. Provide Option Lines • Consider offering an easier, alternate route around a mountain biking technical feature to accommodate other trail users. • Allow different ability -level riders to ride together. • Make easier trail longer, more difficult trail shorter. • Alternative trails can potentially be in the same corridor as the main trail; for example, a drop-off could vary in height from one side of the trail to the other. T"L GUI@EUNE$ _ES OF THE TRAIL I OPEN TRAIts DNIY IU TRACE L YO€DR RICYCtE YIELD THE TRAIL SCARE ANIt1ALS HEAD nin+ KrrnusiNir, 72 1 Chapter 11:...,.r.rK said R' •:... '• Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Introduce challenges to users sequentially so they can enhance their skills in a managed environment. Provide good sight lines • Create sight lines at intersections and bi-directional trails. Communicate to emergency responders about how to locate users on trail systems - create an incident response plan • Include waypoint signage link to GIS map. • Provide access to locked areas. • Familiarize EMS with relevant maps. Self -extraction is ideal - use signage • Provide users with address for emergency services. • Provide directions to nearest health care facilities and hours of operation. • Place signs along the trail to facilitate location communication to EMS. TRAIL DIFFICULTY AND SIGNAGE Mountain Bikers: The International Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA) developed a standard method for categorizing the relative technical difficulty of recreational bicycle trails, known as the IMBA Trail Difficulty Rating System. This standard rating system was adapted from the International Trail Marking System used at ski areas throughout the world. Many trail networks use this type of system, most notably resort -based mountain biking trail networks. Hikers: The Universal Trail Assessment Process (UTAP) is an objective measurement system for documenting the conditions on any outdoor path of travel (e.g., sidewalk, recreation trail, shared use path, etc). It is a series of measurement procedures that enable information about trail conditions (e.g., grade, cross slope, surface, width, obstructions) to be collected in an accurate and repeatable manner. It is solely a system intended to provide objective information to a prospective user allowing them to determine their ability in relation to the trail's difficulty. This system can: • Help trail users make informed decisions • Encourage visitors to use trails that match their skill level • Manage risk and minimize injuries • Improve the outdoor experience for a wide variety of visitors • Aid in the planning of trails and trail systems The criteria to rate a trail is as follows: Rate Technical Challenge Only The system focuses on rating the technical challenge of trails, not the physical exertion. It is not practical to rate both types of difficulty with one system. Consider, for example, a smooth, wide trail that is 20 miles long. Chapter 11.3 - _ ns,, ark;;- „n ,I 73 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan The technical challenge of this trail is easy, yet the distance would make the physical exertion difficult. The solution is to independently rate technical challenge, and indicate physical exertion by posting trail length, and possibly even elevation change. Collect Trail Measurements Use the accompanying table and collect trail measurements for each criteria. There is no prescribed method for tallying a "score" for each trail. Evaluate the trail against the table and combine with judgment to reach the final rating. It is unlikely that any particular trail will measure at the same difficulty level for every criteria. For example, a certain trail may rate as a green circle in three criteria, but a blue square in two different criteria. Include Difficulty and Trail Length on Signs and Maps Trail length is not a criterion of the system. Instead, trail length should be posted on signs in addition to the difficulty symbol. A sign displaying both length and difficulty provides lots of information, yet it is simple to create and easy to understand. Likewise, elevation change is not a criterion. Evaluate Difficulty Relative to Local Trails Trails should be rated relative to other trails in the region. Do not evaluate each trail in isolation. Consider all the trails in a region and how they compare to one another. This will help rank the relative difficulty of each trail and will help trail users select an appropriate route. Use Good Judgment Rating a trail is not entirely objective. It's best to combine tangible data with subjective judgment to reach the final rating. For example, a trail may have a wide range of tread surfaces - most of the trail is easy, but some sections are more difficult. How would it be rated? Use personal experience to consider all elements and select a rating that best matches the style of trail. Consider Other Trail Qualities Do not forget to consider trail qualities beyond the objective criteria. A wide variety of features could contribute to a trail's difficulty. For example, exposure - the feeling of empty space next to and below the trail tread - provides an added psychological challenge beyond the steepness or roughness of the trail. Other qualities to think about are corridor clearance and turn radius. Use Common Sense and Seek Input No rating system can be totally objective or valid for every situation. This system is a tool to be combined with common sense. Look at trails with a discerning eye, and seek input from trail users before selecting the rating. Remember, a diverse trail network with a variety of trail styles is a great way to ensure content users. Provide both easy and difficult trails to spread users and meet a range of needs. By indicating the length and difficulty of trails with a clear signage system, users will be able to locate their preferred type of trail easily. CRITERIA TO CONSIDER Tread Width: The average width of the active tread or beaten path of the trail. For the existing Kessler Mountain trail system, tread width ranges from one to two feet wide. The implementation of proposed trails will conform and be consistent with the standards established by the existing trail system. 74 1 Chapter 11: SE Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Tread Surface: The proposed Kessler Mountain trail system will contain a variety of both natural and technical The material and stability of the tread surface is a trail features. These features and their difficulty determining factor in the difficulty of travel on the can range for different types of trail users. These trail. Some descriptive terms include: hardened features can progressively become more difficult (paved or surfaced), firm, stable, variable, widely in remote sections of the proposed trail system, variable, loose and unpredictable. Typical tread while also providing obstacles and features at a surfaces in the existing Kessler Mountain trail more accessible distance for less experienced systems range from firm to loose soils as well as feature areas of native stone tread at steep grades users. or areas prone to erosion. Cross Slope Trail Grade (maximum and average): For some trail users, the degree of cross slope (or out -slope) in the tread also contributes to Maximum grade is defined as the steepest the difficulty rating. Generally, a tread should be section of trail that is more than approximately constructed with two to five percent degree of out - ten feet in length and is measured in percent with slope to positively shed water. However, an out - a clinometer. Average grade is the steepness of slope of five percent or greater becomes difficult to the trail over its entire length. Average grade can easily navigate, particularly for users with impaired be calculated by taking the total elevation gain of mobility or confined to a wheelchair. the trail, divided by the total distance, multiplied by 100 to equal a percent grade. Grades for the A particular trail's tread width, grade, out -slope, proposed Kessler Mountain trail system will be surface, and obstacles are all considerations to be subject to the terrain of the landscape, but will provided at the trailhead to offer information on a contain a variety of difficulties for a wide range of trail's universal accessibility. users. TRAIL DIFFICULTY AND SIGNAGE Natural Obstacles and Technical Trail Features: The proposed Kessler Mountain trail system can feature a variety of signage types signifying Objects introduced along the trail can add wayfinding, trail difficulty and length, access points, challenge by impeding travel. Examples include: educational purposes, and obstacle or feature rocks, roots, logs, holes, ledges, drop-offs, etc. The designation. Each type of signage is outlined below height of each obstacle is measured from the tread for the purposes of this plan: surface to the top of the obstacle. lithe obstacle is uneven in height, measure to the point over which Trail Access Points: it is most easily ridden. • Trail map / kiosk Technical trail features are objects that have been • Difficulty rating system introduced to the trail to add technical challenge Examples include: rocks, logs, elevated bridges, Trail Name Markers: teeter-totters, jumps, drop-offs, etc. Both the • Featured at all trail intersections height and the width of the technical trail feature • Distance markers on shared -use, paved trail are measured. systems Chapter 11: iu <i_e'znis=:1t ==r.=€tIEI"I 75 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Educational Signage: • Historic features • Natural features • Wildlife and wetland area Technical Trail Features (TTF): • Difficulty level signs at approaches and exists to all technical features • Signage to be placed at five to ten foot distances before the feature, in some cases even further away to account for sight distances and design speeds. Trail Difficulty Rating System EMERGENCY ACCESS Implementing emergency access points that are marked and maintained throughout a trail system is crucial. Along with these access points, there should also be an Emergency Rescue Plan in place that land managers and rescue departments can implement in case of an emergency. The graphic below displays the proposed locations for emergency access points in the proposed Kessler Mountain trail system. DEVELOPING AN EMERGENCY RESCUE PLAN: • Install "Safety Point" signs at proposed locations throughout the trail system featuring good access (e.g. ATV/Jeep roads). Each "Safety Point" sign should display a corresponding access point wLintt Ezcy rtorr pifflrult Vory D iflicvlt Waremary b fflculif W1I1e riraa Green cinla alao S[luaro Biac! viamnn,f obi BLaiit Vlamwkd number. 0 0 + • Collaboration between City Trail Width 72' r;r mr.,, i. • nr mrrc 2a'• Sr el:i.'C 12nr n,7,,' t3" ar mnrr Parks and Recreation staff and Trsad surfarn i+drdrnr r..r �hm.ans7 Nl tly r:ac r V,1eiy •,.,ral-ee ,Addy pariauir emergency response staff (Fire, :,,r faced sl rule u4th ;,nd :,nprsd rtablr •err •ea^iahi Police and EMS) should be ts; i:y conducted on -site to discuss avarage Trail Gradc I rs than ;-: 5', a ... lr.•ra C,, Ietc lsrr or cc, 25% -ur rr,nrr the Emergency Rescue Plan, as Maximum '.est 1r_, r :,x - rci. x r', <x M,iU 15 n,• rr:7. ls'-, nr well as identify all access Trail Grades greater greater greater point locations and conduct training 1-laturalOb,tader '€nnr ;1^.n•:oiunh'^ Unaac:. ;i.;hLr. Sinaacd!hlr l."Enaac„dahle and Technical •::bscocies DU-.h,r:r-, n Wit: r�r.. nh,rac:r: runs. Special products can be Trait Features 2' ta'I or let'. R' cal= ,r r -s 15" tar iv cc'. 25' hal a, gevm,r ITTfl purchased, such as a wheeled +-::?idahla A•,- d::hlc• Avsd.:nlr a,rr:iahle s ales r ay n •tars•. ,u._,• nt±+teri- .n.,,• nh.le,:r, ma,• back board for back country trail .-c proses; he present he ; recrn: hr rr,rni rescue, in addition to a utility Ii na,nia.ah'•• Urra.t::rL:hle r,l,t- inn _oI- 1*1 ,'. =nrl.:day vehicle equipped with medical nr n -cu', 24" nr-ir-tc' gear. TT1', 2' h:gh nr Unaenidu hle knave d;xhlr I`c'c "'id;h of br:dgrs hrdgc-s • Dispatch is informed of the deck is gear^r 24" nr rvid,,r 24' nr narrc.wr,r r=a, 1'2the Emergency Rescue Plan and height TTi's 4' -<.:gh nr TT>'-. 4' hick or lcc,. old;'- f greater, ' Mdre- of has a reference map in case of derk is rt!•., than desk is 112 the nri ht un;:rrirL5bicr emergency. Short Sr, LI, ri l,' -,:n,' srrtin.ls • Users are to be informed of the may rec--^d n,ay racrsd criteria criteria Emergency Rescue Plan at all trailheads. 76 I Chapter 11: a it rnt.l it ,tr11o: l+a r Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION Maintenance and Inspection (M&I) will vary depending on the facility being maintained. A typical single-track trail, for instance, will vary in maintenance needs depending on the landscape supporting the trail. Therefore, there is no single plan that can fit all facilities. It will be the land manager's responsibility to determine the best plan of action relative to the trail's accessibility, amount of use, and intended level of difficulty. Maintenance Overview: For general maintenance needs, the best approach is adoption of the park or facility by a volunteer group, such as a local cycling club, hiking organization, nature club, etc. This is the primary policy of IMBA and should be encouraged by every community. This type of community buy -in is priceless and integral to the success of the facility through increase user involvement. However, it is important that the stewards of the facility are well organized and trained. They must be directed by at least one knowledgeable trail builder in order to properly maintain the facility. It is also recommended that a maintenance log be kept in order to keep track of volunteer hours. Inspection Overview: Inspection is to be conducted by the managers of the facility (i.e. city staff) since it is ultimately their responsibility. Inspectors should be trained by a professional trail builder and required to keep an inspection log. This is particularly important for the inspection of Technical Trail Features. Inspectors need to know what safety hazards to look for and how to repair them. Some major maintenance and inspection needs for the trail system can be beyond the expertise of the land manager or local volunteer groups, therefore professional services can be sought. General Trail Maintenance Recommendations: • Create a Comprehensive Maintenance/Risk Management Plan. • Designate one land manager/city employee as - "Trails Supervisor". He/She will be responsible for executing the maintenance and risk management plan. This is not a full-time position. They will primarily perform routine inspections (weekly) on all trails, conduct simple maintenance tasks, help facilitate events, and communicate with the local volunteer group. • Keep maintenance and inspection log with routine inspections of all features. • Create a partnership with the local club. Most local clubs become stewards of the park, performing the overall maintenance of the facility under the guidance of the "Trails Supervisor". A well -organized club should be able to perform 90% of minor maintenance needs before they advance into a major maintenance need. • All wooden trail features should have a life span of approximately twenty years if built using the proper materials and techniques, and maintained properly (i.e. sealed annually). All wooden features should be inspected routinely and TTF's should be given extra care, specifically fall zones and approaches. • Trail tread should be groomed to ensure that it maintains 5% outslope. The most common problem is cupping of the tread due to displacement and compaction. In which case, you must de -berm the downside of the trail to ensure that water sheet flows across. Also, knick (open fan -like drainage) the troughs of all grade reversals. • Trim corridor regularly. Sight lines are especially important. • Estimated Maintenance Budget: $5-20k annually (depending on the need for trail). Professional maintenance services could range from $.25 per foot to $1.00 per foot for an overhaul. Chapter 11: S gra and Risk vi: €:sc. zr. .:;t 1 77 *. l sser Mauntaln Traits Master Plan "� __ - _f— E!1;:i: I "!! : — I k !!:. Appendix A: Existing Conditions Plans ii -�! pry•.. :G • S y�y, t _'!y �i • �' _ ,s, �^ r-ra �F� 1.Tr-!�� : #i�'9 ;� F _ a`,� r.._ _ ,L. lye _y,�`��' r •. , ��� '12' _ # •d ter_ ° y I 4 P Chapter S gna e and RPsI<Mana rr? nt Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Tyr Mt. Kessler Trail Connections To Bentonville MsllRFrol3Pim y O �93 � Oiaiww 5i _ x r • , U V&Pe Mull}. js avow crony Yww►hlp it / • Q} a L r t l3+ � f1rr R}�4R - R'cr Rkinm�v, • � � tM1,+ur,• •�. R: -a I,RY t:Rr Ret A i <<�wM1l, •1 _o 40 ■ `n r� ta ■ O r.JR*R wr r �r N <syfr d r ; ra:. alker rR .,,t�,.:, Par +► 7vwn Brariclt Trail ,., ,•, xr c. r s Cato5�4s Err■ Mt. Kessler #� Future Regional Park Le end ■ ■ ■ Proposed Mt. Kessler Multi -use Trail Connections Razorback Regional Greenway Mlles Existing Multi -use Trail Appendix A: F :5'cti; _ tons t.: ,rN_ ._r3? n> 1 79 ss er Mountain Trails Master Plan Vitt,t - - t k 4 •' .. , J t ■ r ' .J Appendix B: Public Input U&W'l t1'IMIP! .P iw',d s w I - I A * - S TIS yy W + `� e• `1 y Chapt 1 BSI `i n Risk Mama enFxB�7C ii. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan Public Meeting Comment Sheet Summary The most common opinion of the public, that left comment sheets, is to not disturb or add construction to the preserve area where the exiting trails are. All the comments had different focuses, but most all stated that there should be no paved trail near the existing trails and to protect and preserve the natural area. The following are reoccurring public opinions from the Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan Meeting held on August 31St, 2015. • No paved trails in the Kessler Mountain natural preserve area. • Identify and preserve the unique geographical habitat in the natural preserve area. • Adopt a comprehensive maintenance plan for the existing trails. • Address problem sections of trail and reroute with foot traffic in mind. • Information on trails condition/skill level and system to control wet weather trail traffic. • No new trails in preserve area. • Keep existing trails as is. • Add new beginner/intermediate level trails and build them away from the preserve area. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan rrs€ e �.. ... .:y,�........ rrw+_+.y�wN� fwaf'r.-.pP ft ! LANDFILL .. . 1 /1 {tbGtr?ra11 + Th / ' PARK ) / / / TL' L / / �.,` .'�:.-.`'' KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS �� • I r�UGlS5T �,fl15 1�,r p-� 'k �I yt LTF4 T 1 L " �k'""l` M•+w. I,J1= .f n..^ Na �4,a� 'rf .a.� ARKANSAS 1Z or Jr �.x in+EJ still tf l?" rw l i. rw1 , p i 4s .. f+c r yf" N �� Y�� ! ";..tflj+ G h�* +C•iiaM. A:W aW k �i• v .-..�. • ' rS. -k--. ,;• ( 1 ors a -t it 1{.�.1J • x' 1 it w! �;........, ""4+ �+w, .s t rt - I..- 14 / 4s }r.,"" . si rf „�+. � ��' ." ".pr. ...s _.,/.. �' sa.. L ,.•"'.. ..t. ii i. L. !`loaf ..n. U.. C4�•Ly st '•e,Y rl" 82 1 Appendix B: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan PUBLIC INPUT MEETING #1 To find a creative and fun for gather public input, Alta Planning + Design put together a photo booth where indivivuals could display the type of user group they identified with in regards '"" 7t klAll Of Crail ttser to activity at Kessler Mountain. Options users could choose from were hiking, mountain biking, nature watching, photographing, educational user, mountain climbing, ad people watching. Appendix B: 83 ��11'Itl Gr �+RII'u�.Yi II Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan Public Meeting Comment Sheet Summary There were only a few public comment forms received from the Kessler Mountain Public Meeting. In most of the forms there was repeated appreciation of protecting the sensitive areas and ability to accommodate to city and public input. The following are reoccurring public opinions from the Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan Meeting held on December 14th, 2015. • Approval of varying skill level of new proposed trails. • Approval of protecting and rerouting current trails to avoid sensitive areas. • No paved trail. • Reroute current trails or design new trails more hiker friendly. • Concerns of maintaining current and new trails. Who will do it and how much will it cost... • Approval of proposed reroutes of existing trails and new trails. • Kessler Mountain needing directional downhill mountain bike technical trail. • The need for the City of Fayetteville to embrace the progressive movement and encourage mountain biking/outdoor recreation. • Protect the current trails and become more aggressive in developing outdoor recreation. The following are reoccurring public questions from the Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan: • How will the signage be done? • Will there be signage on the trails difficultly levels? • Who and how will the trails be maintained? • How will the sensitive areas be protected? • How will safety concerns be addressed? Appendix B: 1 85 s y Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan PUBLIC INPUT SURVEY QT: The -City is currently in the process of constructing a new Regional Park, which Is to be located directly east ofK Kessler Mountain, would you conthine your actMties at Kessler Mountain with those offered at the new Regal Park? Anrd: 161 srd: i 1ti't' ll Bey ho Mori ,'u. 0: 3f+3 i 3 1 �% 50% FrL% lrj% &7% xr% '0 Q7: The City is currently In the process of constructing a new Regional Park, which is to be located directly east of Kessler Mountain, wo uld you combine your activities at Kessler Mountain with those offered at the new Regional Park? Answared: 151 Skipped= '1 yy An+tire Ciwucn, knwlinl.rn t7.SF . 1 oral i5f 8fi I Appendix B: i.Ll iL.". Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Q8: Of the following examples, what do you feel is important to maintain/create in terms of space for activities at Kessler Mountain? Answered: 151 Skipped:1 alts i Li tL !'3I i -— u1. Otpr lhft Arrsv 1l.11titaf ,rii L�**. t7jrrlfhnRA Iotlfr,teRti� rtia Ifs+f rrrr and fealtrrurg Jrair/es ;,,rae t nlrlrprsrf [.HtIl,6ttpf itntwwe nitcrplet tMf f*altutf,q v,ppt•ritw-N to allure-. at Kf», operr.,» ivr et ., athct .l, t:tirl rtrrlarc dnp1.yt to rm 'a f Mrwxt Q8: Of the following examples, what do you feel is important to maintainlcreate in terms of space for activities at Kessler Mountain? Anfwerec: 1&1 Skipped, I k s kqqpp ,y�', f T I S alter V -V In uml. l III Hnr Tta! Wlr4t d .' i l 191.• , C -i l-- _ Imptvliaer kgp®ffsttf Avt+p{fc 3.11` 40,'Y .3n� iT.ir., 78-€8'-. Y1.1 r, 751i•n 9.1T°. 4.}q•.., =s flwnrr ... .•. •r Y,r•}3 74_b8`. SS-ir. Ins. ... . wv+r• Sd.3. ld.k•°., tici`, r9I•. 3r ✓. r.:a-. w✓v.-rrl"r r,} itio- 1t,1r. 12.4.1 . , t... ......-. 1.1 - i.4r - Y'1C r•. 6&331... Appendix B: Public rut 1 87 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Q�: What activity would encourage you to visit Kessler Mountain? Please select all that apply. Answerer{: 151 Skipped 1 Q9: What activity would encourage you to visit Kessler Mountain? Please select all that apply Answered: 151 Skipped I Msf R{fr skr. , 3$.0 lisa rrs&�tx.) 'k�.7b F_syay�y �rs�.+r+r�sa-e�ct�.R c�txsrrw.ea 3€_� �3?pilj fd [xti714a L$p LS`SEkr r�;��niis=3 �rA.-!s Fo?a f71Y.4 4..T4AEt }Iia 88 1 Appendix B Publkk input Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan, QIO: In your opinion, what are the most important benefits and uses of a natural surface trail system? Please select all that appiy. Ans rod:151 Skipped:l � idl 'D alt eve ee � k , iK 7 V SAS QIO, In your opinion, what are the most important benefits and uses of a natural surface trail system`s please select all that apply. Answered: 151 Skipped; I ille Am""tf! o• pakan� Tti 17,11 Racer nvl U.41' txs?asset stwxa� �! F4 a 'n"tsac r¢ = ! 77.;1 ltrad !sys€v at�*st ii Ea j':-' It_, n_t1Ya F, , DOM if.]iK c r`' ' r1 Fa9kp jW'tj! f �15� law It pothk % fll Appendix B: H. ! I 89 ,, Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Qi1: Would a unique natural environment attract you to Kessler Mountain? Answeaedn t51 Skippect t R.. \'C� til _W Oil, Would a unique natural environment attract you to Kessler Mountain? .ru aa. 151 ,Skipped. f i1'4' tdl Ana+Nr� +CtintRcr Rexyronxrx •1.IE- 90 1 Appendix B: !:. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan iy r Q12: What type of trails would you like to see more of at Kessler Mountain? Please select all that apply. Answered:151 S pied:1 r71tc3 h \ ill' illness walko e Wdy'Ian4 hLlbJ Murstal bIkwgl k1ei pr eliwe Id �p Iu 4thil4r view" FM1Msx tlatib06 at ... ld rammpin islnq� 11W( 1pi en. %prC ly! Q12: What type of trails would you like to see more of at Kessler Mountain? Please select all that apply. ��, Answemd: 151 Sktpped: 1 ` lD _ a' is .. P.e xpor�ae. SS,53'„ "I. dal Pa ii,I ttn. sS1 Appendix B: Pub=s:: lr,ptt 1 91 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Q14: When using Kessler Mountain as a recreational amenity, which user group do you most identify with? Please select only one. Answeled:151 Skp I M�IMMJUA II Warts ea 44nnacl Ir A Q14: When using Kessler Mountain as a recreational amenity, which user group do you most identify with? Please select only one. AnSWffid:151 Sstdpp&d:1 � site R►m~ Chok" ilr►jnmtrra « a- IiyiCI l0.. r.aa-, 92 1 Appendix B: ill. !, . I . r v L; r. ssjer Mountain Trails Master Plan } _� '5 ` ' i r w� „}, F'!: :zi Chapter 11: Signage and Risk Management Appendix C: Species of Conservation Concern I 5 • Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan � �,1,:�- fit,°��,�,�• t� i C1kt1 Vi]4 1 a(Cf'!V 1, W YJM drn,xa ly-- no p o 'ROCK CITY p �-3 � O �o❑ �� 9 t� PRCIPERTY BOUND 5En1ar Citizens AD. o� 0 �' L 4� od ° I A � `•fJ' o a �\ as r A" o a • rlc'rk _ ., in &Trail Hl 3 I G b O e $d,.� G I,fJ d I . _ F'RePER7Y BOUNDARY •• " • • _ J F� • KESSLFR MOUNTAIN ROM 94 1 Appendix C: s,.:'esc!`Craot5r,tiorxCpste�'i i Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan LEGENDNOTE: ALLTRAIL LENGTHS AND ALIGNMENTS ARE APPROXIMATE EXISTING TRAILS BIKING ALLOWED 6 Miles (Within Park Boundary) y p 0p000 o0 BEGINNER LOOP Ili RESTROOMS p 000 1.5 Miles (4 PARKINGAREA C1 • o®°°0 0 LOWER BLUFFTRAIL LOWER I '� © oo© 3.4 Miles (2'-3'WIDE) ABANDONEDTRAILS ••• •� • •°° EAST BLUFF TRAIL • 1.7 Miles (18"-2'WIDE) FUTURE PAVED TRAILS 0p000 00 TRAIL REROUTES Proposed by the City of Fayetteville 0 000 1 Mile PAVED TRAILS - PROPOSED Proposed by City of Fayetteville :EGIONAL PA 00 JUDGE CUMMINGS ROAD 60Qpq Potential Secondary Parking &Trailhead ECOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT A{RE}AS AND HABITATS SHALE BARRENS BLUFFS OLD GROWTH POST OAK WOODLAND I I RIPARIAN HABITAT Information taken from Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission. Ecological Assessment prepared byTheo Witsell on February 2015 KESSLER MOUNTAIN SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN PLAN The areas noted on the plan are species of conservation concern at Kessler Mountain. These species are located per the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission and the Ecological Assessment prepared bt Theo Witsell on February 2O15. Special care will be administered when flagging, laying -out, and constructing trail near these areas. Appendix C: ttec:o.s ..I ;scrt;rt} : Cta,1i•; r, 1 95 RESOLUTION NO. 40-14 A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE MAYOR JORDAN TO APPLY FOR AND ACCEPT A 50/50 MATCHING GRANT FROM THE WALTON FAMILY FOUNDATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,500,000.00, TO USE THIS GRANT AND $1,600,000.00 OUT OF RESERVES TO PURCHASE ABOUT 328 ACRES OF MT. KESSLER FROM CHAMBERS BANK AND TO BUILD A TRAILHEAD, TO APPROVE A LAND SWAP WITH CHAMBERS BANK, TO SUPPORT A PARKLAND DEDICATION OF ABOUT 48 ACRES FOR FUTURE PARKLAND CREDIT AND TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED BUDGET ADJUSTMENT WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville has a unique opportunity to work with the Walton Family Foundation, Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association and Chambers Bank to acquire and preserve 376 acres of Mt. Kessler for $3,000,000.00 and parkland dedication so that the Regional Park will grow to almost 600 contiguous acres of amenities running the gamut from developed sports fields to mountain biking and nature trails; and WHEREAS, the City will also need to spend about $100,000.00 from reserves to develop a public trailhead for the many nature, hiking, biking and recreational trails already established and to be established and enhanced as part of the Regional Park. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves the City of Fayetteville application for the 50/50 matching grant with the Walton Family Foundation, extends its deepest appreciation and gratitude to the Walton Family Foundation for this grant, agrees to accept and match this $1.5 million donation with City funds from reserves, agrees to use this Three Million Dollars to purchase about 328 acres from Chambers Bank, agrees to build the public trailhead for about $100,000.00 from reserves and authorizes Mayor Jordan to sign all necessary documents and agreements necessary to accomplish this grant, purchase and project. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby agrees to support and recommend that the Fayetteville Planning Commission accept a parkland dedication of about 48 acres by Chambers Bank to be used for future parkland credit. Section 3: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby agrees to swap those parcels of City land with Chambers Bank for the Chambers Bank parcels and trail easements all as identified on the map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Page 2 Resolution No. 40-14 Section 4: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves the attached Budget Adjustment recognizing grant revenue of $1.5 million from the Walton Family Foundation and expenditures of $3.1 million for purchase of the Mt. Kessler property and construction on the trailhead. PASSED and APPROVED this 18th day of February, 2014. APPROVED By: ATTEST: SONDRA E. SMITH, City C'lcrk/Treast.trer 4�1tlttltltfr,, `l`1. Alf v1t l-+ ti Ken Eastin Submitted By \ANAbn vamA) FOUA" 6 *�_,6Ie\/ Orv-l_rW I�—Ptcf� City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2016-0484 it M City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 10/12/2016 Parks & Recreation / Parks & Recreation Department Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of a request to apply for a Walton Family Foundation grant for the purpose of implementing the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan by making recommended repairs on the existing trails, constructing one new trail to improve access and route opportunities, implementing recommended signage, and establishing a primary and secondary trailhead. 4470.900.9470.5814.05 2250.520.9255.5806.00 Account Number 14013.1 16010 Project Number Budgeted Item? No Does item have a cost? No Budget Adjustment Attached? No Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Original Contract Number: Comments: 95-16 Budget Impact: Sales Tax Fund Kessler Mountain Acquisition & Natural Surface Trail Development Current Budget Funds Obligated Current Balance Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget Project Title V20140710 Approval Date: 10 -Irl ()_ t!I CITY OF � j�r �-�lY.eA5 TO: Mayor Lioneld Jordan THRU: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Connie Edmonston, Parks and Recreation Director Alison Jumper, Park Planning Superintendent FROM: Ken Eastin, Park Planner II DATE: October 12, 2016 STAFF MEMO SUBJECT: Application submittal for a Walton Family Foundation Grant for matching funds in order to begin implementation of the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan resulting in existing trail improvements and new trail development RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a request to apply for a Walton Family Foundation grant for the purpose of implementing the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan by making recommended repairs on the existing trails, constructing one new trail to improve route and access opportunities, implementing recommended signage, and establishing a primary and secondary trailhead. BACKGROUND: Through the authorization of Resolution 40-14, the City of Fayetteville purchased and preserved over 350 acres on Kessler Mountain in a partnership with the Walton Family Foundation, Chambers Bank and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association in 2014. Located in the southwest corner of Fayetteville, Kessler Mountain reaches 1,856 feet above sea level and consists of steep bluffs and rock -covered woodlands with about 8 miles of existing trails that traverse through stands of old -growth forest and rock outcroppings, showcasing many native flora and fauna species. Resolution 40-14 also directed Parks and Recreation to establish a public trailhead at the Regional Park in order to provide public access for the approximately 8 miles of existing nature, hiking, biking, and recreational trails previously established on Kessler Mountain. Furthermore, it was determined that a master plan be prepared to assess the condition of the existing trails and make recommendations on new trails to be established on Kessler Mountain. A Request for Proposal (RFP 15-02) was drafted and advertised on March 16, 2015 and opened April 10, 2015. Two proposals were received. Through review by a selections committee, Progressive Trail Design, LLC was selected to prepare the master trails plan at a cost of $26,320. Mr. Jeremy Pate noted in his February 4, 2014 memo to the City Council for the purchase of the land that the city's vision was to utilize already forged partnerships with groups to develop programs at Kessler Mountain that emphasize and expand upon established outdoor recreation in the form of mountain biking, hiking, and nature study. To meet this advisory need, various group representatives formed a stakeholder/ steering committee to aide in the preparation of a Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.tayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 Master Trails Plan that will guide natural surface trail development within the forested mountain property. The active stakeholder group consists of representatives from the Walton Family Foundation, Beaver Watershed Alliance, Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Fayetteville Public Schools, Illinois River Watershed Partnership, International Mountain Bicycling Association, Kessler Greenways, NWA Audubon Society, NWA Land Trust, Ozark Off -Road Cyclists, Ozark Regional Land Trust, as well as the City of Fayetteville's Active Transportation Committee, Development Services, Parks and Recreation, and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Professional consultants on the project consists of Progressive Trail Design, Alta Planning and Design, Ozark Ecological Restoration, Inc. and Amy Reeves Robinson, group facilitator. This stakeholder group initially met on August 3, 2015 and began an extended process for preparation of the master plan. An initial public meeting was held on August 31 to gather input from the general public on the content of the plan to be developed. From this beginning, the consultant and team of stakeholders met a total of five times and ultimately came to consensus on improvements to the existing trails system and recommendations for new trails to meet the user needs of Fayetteville. This concensus resulted in a final draft of the plan. This draft was then presented back to the general public in an open meeting held on December 14, 2015. Following, the stakeholders met one final time to review public comments. From this meeting, final revisions were made which culminated in the draft plan presented to the Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) at a specially -scheduled meeting held on April 12, 2016. After a presentation of the plan by the consultant, the PRAB opened the floor to public comment on the plan. After comment and discussion, the PRAB unanimously approved and made recommendation to the City Council for official adoption of the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan by the City of Fayetteville. On May 3rd, 2016, the Kessler Mountain Master Trails Plan was presented to the City Council for review and discussion. After this discussion, the Council unanimously voted to accept and adopt the plan for implementation and authorized Resolution 95-16 for this purpose. DISCUSSION: With the preparation and adoption of the Master Trails Plan complete, Parks and Recreation will now focus on implementation efforts. As indicated in the Plan, the majority of trail work of immediate concern at Kessler Mountain is repairing existing trails to ensure their sustainability and providing informational, regulatory, and educational signage for use of the trails. Each of these needs take priority over the construction of any new trails; however, there is new trail immediately needed to provide improved access to the existing trails, and also to provide some gentler trail options for visitors to the newly constructed Regional Park. Currently, Fayetteville Parks and Recreation has a budget dedicated for implemention of the Plan. In order to address recommendations from the Plan that will have immediate benefit on the trails facility, it is advisable to maximize the budget through a trails grant opportunity available through the Walton Family Foundation. With the benefit of this matching grant, staff will be able to implement a large portion of the Master Plan recommendations. Without this grant, a portion of the major maintenance needs of the existing trails will not be addressed, as well as the construction of new trail for improved access. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: This grant application is for $209,622. Staff is requesting approval to make a 50/50 matching grant request with detailed outputs and outcomes as outlined in the attached application. If the full grant request is awarded, the City will be responsible for using existing trails park funds as the match. These matching funds are available in project 14013.1, Kessler Mountain Acquisition and project 16010.1 Natural Surface Trail Development. Attachments: Draft WFF Application Kessler Mountain Trails Plan Resolution 40-14 Resolution 95-16 W�` i hr �` A L O N F M L 1� F () U N 1 e A T 1 ) N r Walton Family Foundation Grant Application Name of Organization: City of Fayetteville Name of Project/Proposal: Kessler Mountain Trails Construction Project By submitting this request for funding, the requesting organization acknowledges that the Walton Family Foundation has not previously made any promise to provide the funding requested herein and that the requesting organization has not relied to its detriment upon any statement by the Walton Family Foundation or its representatives to obtain the funding requested herein. The requesting organization further acknowledges that any approval of its grant proposal will be communicated only by, and is contingent upon execution of, a written grant agreement between the requesting organization and the Foundation signed by the Foundation's Executive Director. Organization Name: City of Fayetteville Organization Address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Organization Telephone: 479-444-3416 Tax ID Number: Government Entity Head of Org/Authorized Signatory: Lioneld Jordan Signatory Address (if different than above): Head of Org Email: Mayor@fayetteville-ar.gov Key Contact: Ken Eastin Key Contact email: keastin@fayetteville-ar.gov Key Contact phone: 479-444-3472 Project Name: Kessler Mountain Trails Construction Project Total Requested: $209,622.00 Proposal Date: Grant Period: From 11/1/2016 To 11/1/2019 Total Requested Year 1: $209,622.00 (by year if multi- year): WFF Program Ryan Hale Officer: 1. Request/Purpose of Grant Briefly summarize the purpose and need for the project/program, the requested amount, and any requested terms (such as multiple years or matching). The budget template attached is the location for detailed financial information. This space is really just an abstract of the proposal. Kessler Mountain is a 403 -acre natural woodland located in southeast Fayetteville adjacent to the City's recently developed 211 -acre Regional Park. In 2014 the City, in partnership with the Walton Family Foundation, was fortunate to have the opportunity to purchase this property and permanently preserve these natural assets for the Fayetteville community. After the land purchase, one of the first tasks identified was the need for a Trails Master Plan. The City of Fayetteville partnered with Progressive Trail Design and Alta Planning to undertake an extensive master planning process with the input of over 300 residents and stakeholders. The Fayetteville City Council adopted the Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan (KMTMP) on May 3rd, 2016. Parks and Recreation staff is now focused on the initial implementation actions as outlined in the plan. The KMTMP called for four initial actions: possible acquisition of additional private lands that contain existing mountain bike trails, improvements to the existing mountain bike trails, the development of a signage package that communicates trails layout, distances, difficulty levels, user rules, etc., and the construction of new trails to provide improved access. With this grant application, the City is prepared to address the following action items; • Repair and general maintenance of the existing trails and re-routing them onto City property, • Creation and installation of a comprehensive signage package that enhances the user experience on the mountain, and • Construction of the proposed 3.4 mile Lower Bluff Trail which will allow users to easily access the existing trails from the Kessler Mountain Regional Park. The City of Fayetteville is committed to providing match funding in the amount of up to $419,244 for this project. 2. Background Include a basic description and history of the organization (2-3 paragraphs). Please also note the other organizations with which you are collaborating The City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Department was established in 1967 and our mission is "to meet the parks and recreational needs of all by providing a safe and diversified park system that encourages community pride, visionary planning and operations and environmental stewardship." Currently, the city of Fayetteville manages over 4,300 acres of parkland, including 35 parks, 16 natural areas and 17 trails. The crown jewel of the Fayetteville Parks system is the recently completed 211 -acre Kessler Mountain Regional Park and the adjacent 403 -acre Kessler Mountain. The first phase of the regional park included six lighted soccer fields, four lighted baseball fields and other associated infrastructure such as; restrooms, refreshment stands, water/sewer/power utilities, access roads and parking. Future phases include additional ball fields, pavilions, basketball courts, tennis courts, trails and a playground. The adjacent Kessler Mountain contains approximately eight miles of existing mountain bike and hiking trails. The Parks and Recreation Department will be collaborating with the Northwest Arkansas Land Trust on the design and construction of all trail improvements on Kessler Mountain. 3. Output and Outcome Performance Measures Outputs And Outcomes Who will do what and how much? Bwyen? Measured or evaluated by? "Goal.Kest By October 1, 2018 the City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Department commits to constructing a 3.4 mile trail from the parking area near the baseball fields in the Regional Park to the existing trail near the water towers on Kessler Mountain. The Department also plans to connect the southern section of the proposed Lower Bluff Trail up through the bluffline, along a portion of the planned East Bluff Trail, and connect into the southern end of the Crazy Mary Trail. This new trail will serve as a primary entryway to Kessler Mountain and will effectively open a new section of the mountain that is not currently trail accessible. The Crazy Mary tie-in will also provide an additional route to the top of the ridge, as well as provide an additional loop opportunity. Parks and Recreation staff will provide a detailed report including an accounting of material and labor costs and photographic documentation of this completed trail. By October 1, 2018 the City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation department will continue to assess and repair and/or re -construct portions of the existing Kessler Mountain trails that have deteriorated through use and erosion. The City will also re-route sections of the existing trail to remove them from environmentally sensitive areas and/or to locate them on City owned property. The Parks and Recreation Department will document the trail repair and re-route process with before and after photographs and a The Parks and Recreation department will keep a detailed budgetary accounting record of material and labor costs necessary to 10/01/18 construct the Lower Bluff Trail access. Parks and Recreation Staff will photographically document the before condition and the completed trail and provide a cost breakdown of the project in a final report. The Parks and Recreation Department will provide a detailed written report upon 10/01/18 completion of the trail repair and re-route project along with before and after photographic documentation that will show that the outcome has been accomplished. detailed written report upon completion. By October 1, 2018 the City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Department will install two informational kiosks at the primary trail access points. These kiosks will communicate the overall map of the trails system including distances, difficulty levels and user rules and ethics. The City will also install trail signage that provides users with directional and distance information at the four primary trail intersections. And finally, an interpretive sign package will be installed that describes Kessler Mountain's flora and fauna, the City's partnership with the NWA Land Trust and applicable environmental protection considerations. Outcomes The Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Department will install guest sign -in registers at the kiosk locations, just off the parking area adjacent to the start of the Lower Bluff Trail and at the newly constructed easternmost parking lot. These guest registries will have compelling signage that encourages visitors to sign the log books. The number of visitors will be recorded by Parks and Rec. Staff each month along with additional information such as where they are from and what type of activity they are enjoying: hiking, biking, bird watching, etc. Visitor information will be very useful to see how Kessler Mountain is being used as a regional asset. The Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Staff will install two Eco-Counter Multi -Nature systems to count the number of trail users on Kessler Mountain. These counters are designed to be permanently installed and can differentiate between pedestrians and cyclists The Parks and Recreation Department will produce a final written report that details the 10-01- development and installation of the Kessler 18 Mountain sign package. This report will document the installation of the informational kiosk, directional signage and interpretive signage. The Fayetteville Parks and Recreation staff will collect user data from the registration 10/01/18 kiosk monthly and record it in an excel spreadsheet. Data will be aggregated and analyzed on a monthly and annual basis. Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Staff will collect and compile direct counts from the 10/01/18 Eco-Counters on a monthly basis and provide an annual reporting of the exact number of trail users accessing the mountain 4. Evaluation of Proposed Project Please describe how you will evaluate the project moving forward. You do not need to restate what is in section 3. Here you only say how the information will be collected. Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Staff will be compiling user data obtained from the guest registries and trail counters on a monthly basis for a two year period starting after trail construction completion (2017- 2019). Staff anticipates that we will see month over month, and year over year, increases in trail users as Kessler Mountain becomes an increasingly popular outdoor destination within the Northwest Arkansas 5. Financial Information/Sustainability Also, please briefly describe the plan to make the project or organization sustainable after the grant period (if applicable). The City of Fayetteville is committed to the long-term viability of the Kessler Mountain as a permanent natural area that is open to the public and can be easily accessed. The Parks and Recreation Department is obligated to the long-term maintenance of this infrastructure and the natural resources of Kessler Mountain. 6. Board Members Please provide us with a list of your organization's board members Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board • Richie Lamb, Chair • David Priest, Vice Chair • Wade Colwell • Terry Lawson • Charles "Chuck" Maxwell • Kyle McHan • Phillip McKnight • David Proffitt • JL Jennings 7. Management/Key People Involved Proiect and Organization Management: List the 1-3 people involved in managing the project and give 2-4 sentence bios. Connie Edmonston — Director, Parks and Recreation Department, City of Fayetteville Connie Edmonston has a B.S. and M.E. in Recreation. She is a NRPA Certified Parks and Recreation Professional. Connie has worked for the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Parks and Recreation Department for 30 years and has been the Director for the past 18 years. Alison Jumper — Park Planning Superintendent, Parks and Recreation Department, City of Fayetteville Alison is a graduate of the University of Arkansas Landscape Architecture program, is a licensed Landscape Architect and a member of the American Society of Landscape Architects. She has over 15 years of experience in park planning and design for the public sector and has been employed with the City of Fayetteville since 2003. Ken Eastin — Park Planner II, Parks and Recreation Department, City of Fayetteville Ken is a graduate of the University of Arkansas Landscape Architecture Proaram, is a licensed Landscape Architect, a member of the American Society of Landscape Architects and the Professional Trailbuilders Association. Ken has worked the majority of his career in the field of outdoor recreation and resource management. He worked as a professional trail builder from 1997 until 2013, at which time he began working for Fayetteville Parks and Recreation. 8. Applicant self -assessment of risks to success Please identify any risks to project success. Fayetteville Parks and Recreation is confident that we can complete this project on time and on budget and will be capable of collecting relevant and useful data upon construction completion. Lessons Learned - If you have previously been a grantee of the Walton Family Foundation, please discuss any missed targets, the lessons learned, and how you aim to address those moving forward 9. Project Budget - please complete both tabs (budget numbers and budget narrative) on attached spreadsheet Budget Narrative: Project Budget Narrative Guidance for WFF Proposals For each budget category, include a brief description for the requested funds Expense Categories & Narrative Requirements Personnel • Salaries: List names and titles of staff and percent time on project • Benefits: Explain basis for calculating benefits rate • Other: Other personnel items could include intern stipends, temporary help, etc Direct Expenses • Travel: List estimated number of trips and cost per trip. • Meetings/Events: Describe meetings/events and estimated cost per meeting. • Printing/Publications/Electronic: For project purposes only. Describe basis for budget estimate. • Postage: For project purposes only. Describe basis for budget estimate. • Teleohone: For uroiect ourooses oniv. Describe basis for budget estimate. Supplies: For project purposes only. Describe basis for budget estimate. Equipment: For project purposes only. Describe basis for budget estimate. Other: Provide short description of item. Include separate line for each different item. Partner Expenses • Consultants: Identify each consultant, what they will be doing, and estimated cost. • Sub Grants: Copy and paste a section for each Sub Grant, giving it a title and description. IV. Overhead • Describe % of total request to WFF. Overhead must comply with WFF's overhead restrictions. 10. Other information Comparable organizations and programs — Please list any other organizations that provide similar programs or services to your direct beneficiaries and describe how your program or service is different N/A 11. Other attachments i) Any organizational plan related to the Grant Request ii) IRS Determination Letter iii) Latest available IRS Form 990 for your organization iv) Latest available FYE statement or audit as well as current Income Statement and Balance Sheet v) Other optional narrative as necessary to explain project or organization vi) The organizational budget and board list vii) Other optional supporting illustrations or exhibits (e.g. maps, project/organization logic models) RESOLUTION NO. 40-14 A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE MAYOR JORDAN TO APPLY FOR AND ACCEPT A 50/50 MATCHING GRANT FROM THE WALTON FAMILY FOUNDATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,500,000.00, TO USE THIS GRANT AND $1,600,000.00 OUT OF RESERVES TO PURCHASE ABOUT 328 ACRES OF MT. KESSLER FROM CHAMBERS BANK AND TO BUILD A TRAILHEAD, TO APPROVE A LAND SWAP WITH CHAMBERS BANK, TO SUPPORT A PARKLAND DEDICATION OF ABOUT 48 ACRES FOR FUTURE PARKLAND CREDIT AND TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED BUDGET ADJUSTMENT WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville has a unique opportunity to work with the Walton Family Foundation, Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association and Chambers Bank to acquire and preserve 376 acres of Mt. Kessler for $3,000,000.00 and parkland dedication so that the Regional Park will grow to almost 600 contiguous acres of amenities running the gamut from developed sports fields to mountain biking and nature trails; and WHEREAS, the City will also need to spend about $100,000.00 from reserves to develop a public trailhead for the many nature, hiking, biking and recreational trails already established and to be established and enhanced as part of the Regional Park. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves the City of Fayetteville application for the 50/50 matching grant with the Walton Family Foundation, extends its deepest appreciation and gratitude to the Walton Family Foundation for this grant, agrees to accept and match this $1.5 million donation with City funds from reserves, agrees to use this Three Million Dollars to purchase about 328 acres from Chambers Bank, agrees to build the public trailhead for about $100,000.00 from reserves and authorizes Mayor Jordan to sign all necessary documents and agreements necessary to accomplish this grant, purchase and project. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby agrees to support and recommend that the Fayetteville Planning Commission accept a parkland dedication of about 48 acres by Chambers Bank to be used for future parkland credit. Section 3: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby agrees to swap those parcels of City land with Chambers Bank for the Chambers Bank parcels and trail easements all as identified on the map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Page 2 Resolution No. 40-14 Section 4: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves the attached Budget Adjustment recognizing grant revenue of $1.5 million from the Walton Family Foundation and expenditures of $3.1 million for purchase of the Mt. Kessler property and construction on the trailhead. PASSED and APPROVED this 18th day of February, 2014, By: ATTEST: By: _•t___.• J► }t f. CC, SONDRA I<. S9I 1'11, City Clcrk!1reasttrer \\\��11t1tlirtrrr�,,�. �rrr►rwjj stttttttt 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Resolution: 95-16 File Number: 2016-0211 KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS MASTER PLAN: A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND ADOPT THE KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, on February 18, 2014, the City Council approved Resolution No. 40-14 authorized the purchase of 376 acres on Kessler Mountain with the assistance of the Walton Family Foundation, Chambers Bank and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association; and WHEREAS, on June 2, 2015, the City Council approved a contract with Progressive Trail Design, LLC for the development of a Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan; and WHEREAS, after more than eight months of stakeholder group meetings and public input sessions, a final draft of the Master Plan was presented to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, which approved the plan unanimously; and WHEREAS, the proposed plan makes recommendations regarding improvements to the existing trails and proposes the construction of 7.6 additional miles of public use trails. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby accepts and adopts the Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution. PASSED and APPROVED on 5/3/2016 Page 1 Printed on 5/4/16 Resolution: 95-16 File Number: 2016-0211 Attest: L4E L Sondra E. Smith. City Clerk t�tirllrrr/y Treasurer �� ` ^ p Ffir f•. gyp] �1 ,..` ffff``'l�rirlt'rrt+�et�'`4°�,~ Page 2 Printed on 5/4116 ■ ■ N •"' Y P'�i �rC 1.33t�'W'ti'T' 5 e I!JWA YVARKANSAS Prepared fir tl3e City of Fayetteville TRAIsIt SSdVi t'ttAi L 'dCN Prepared by Progressive Trail �)esign Alta Planning + resign PLANNING + DESIGN Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Acknowledgements Thanks to the 300+ local residents, business leaders, and government staff that participated In the development of this plan through meetings, events, volunteer€ng, interviews. online surveying, comment forms, and plan review. Special thanks to those who participated as stakeholders, staff and advisors, listed below. ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED PROJECT STAFF & ADVISORS Walton Family Foundation Nathan Woodruff Progressive Trail Design Alta Planning+ Design Clayton Woodruff Progressive Trail Design Beaver Watershed Alliance Brett Budol€son Progressive Trail Design City of Fayetteville Active Transportation Committee Jon Bryan Progressive Trail Design City of Fayetteville Development Services City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association Fayetteville Public Schools Illinois River Watershed Partnership International Mountain Bicycling Association Kessler Greenways NWA Audubon Society 1 Arkansas Audubon NWA Land Trust Ozark Ecological Restoration Inc. Ozark Off -Road Cyclists Ozark Regional Land Trust Progressive Trail Design CITY of 'tteVile ARKANSAS PARK ran r1FCRFAfl PROGRESSIVE T'RrtttSIGN "�' PROJECT CONSULTANTS Joe Woolbright, Ozark Ecological Restoration, Inc. Kent Laughlin, Alta Planning + Design Erin Rushing, Alta Planning+ Design Amy Reeves Robinson -Stakeholder Meeting Facilitator PROJECT CONTACT Ken Eastin, Park Planner City of Fayetteville Parks & Recreation Deportment 479-444-3472 1 keastln@foyetteville•ar.gov aIt a Prepared for the City of Fayetteville Prepared by Progressive Troll Design Alta Planning + Design PLANNING + DESIGN I Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Table of Contents CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Project Overview.....................................................................5 Background..............................................................................6 CHAPTER TWO. HISTORY Settlement................................................................................9 Kessler's Winery...................................................................10 Modern Development.........................................................1 1 CHAPTER THREE: EXISTING CONDITIONS November 2013 - Mount Kessler Reserve byFrank Sharp...................................................................... 14 February 2015 -A Rapid Terrestrial Ecological Assessment of Kessler Mountain Reserve by Theo Witsell..................................................................... 15 August 2013 - An Analysis of Old Growth Forest Parcels on Kessler Mountain by Alan Edmonston ....................... 16 February 2012 - City of Fayetteville Regional Pork Plan by Lose & Associates, Inc.................................................. 17 CHAPTER FOUR: OBJECTIVES Project Objectives...............................................................19 Project Scope of Work ........................................................20 20 CHAPTER FIVE: THE PLANNING PROCESS CHAPTER SIX: THE TRAIL PLAN DesignApproach................................................................. 27 Concept.................................................................................. 28 Sustainable Trail Guidelines ............ ................................. 28 TheTrail Plan....................................,.................................... 30 CHAPTER SEVEN: EXISTING TRAILS Condition/Prescription Survey Map...............................34 Condition/Prescription Survey Assessment................36 TrailClosures......................................................................... 44 PrivateTrail............................................................................ 45 Former Roadbeds/ Trent Trail.........................................46 CHAPTER EIGHT: PROPOSED TRAILS Beginner Loop (1.5 miles) .........N ........... ......_... ..................56 Lower Bluff Trail (3.4 miles)...............................................50 East Bluff Trail (1.7 miles)........................ ..........................:52 Paved Active Transportation Trail and Regional Park Trail Loop....................................................53 Trailheads...............................................................................54 CHAPTER NINE. ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES Interpretive Nature (Hiking Only) Accessible Trail...... 57 BikePark................................................................................. 58 Purpose -Built Downhill Mountain Bike Trail................58 CHAPTER TEN: SIGNAGE, RISK MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE Risk Management and Emergency Access Map ........_64 NWA Soft -Surface Signage Plan.......................................66 Risk Management Guidelines ...........................................68 68 Trail Difficulty and Signage................................................69 Emergency Access............................................................... 72 Developing an Emergency Response Plan...................72 Maintenance and Inspection...........................................73 CHAPTER ELEVEN: PHASING PLAN & BUDGET PhasingPlan................................................:......................... 75 Construction Budget..........................................................77 APPENDIX A: KESSLER ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION CONNECTIONS APPENDIX B: PUBLIC INPUT APPENDIX C: SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN Table of Contents , 3 9 t &*'frf!Vj �.. Introduction --'vi1 ,+ t � _ "ter'• r .". t.. 6Y"`.'t.',r y .+4i Y,°•.`;,,, a y 4 •�" 4 Chapter 1: Introduction »f r • y' ^+• Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter provides a brief overview of the project, in terms of how this plan came to be, as well as some general background information about Kessler Mountain as it is today. PROJECT OVERVIEW Kessler Mountain is a 387 acre natural area located in southeast Fayetteville adjacent to the 232 -acre Regional Park with easy access to 1-49 and the rest of the Northwest Arkansas Region. Kessler Mountain exemplifies the quintessential natural features that make the Ozarks region such a beautiful place to live, work and play. Over the years, mountain bike enthusiasts constructed approximately eight miles of natural surface trails on Kessler Mountain. Ultimately, these trails provided access for citizens and community leaders to experience this special property to determine that Kessler Mountain had intrinsic value as a preserved open space. In 2014, the City of Fayetteville, in partnership with the Walton Family Foundation, was fortunate to be able to purchase this property and permanently preserve these natural assets for the citizens of the City of Fayetteville. One of the first tasks identified by the City of Fayetteville was the need to create a Trail Master Plan for this property. The intent of this Plan is to identify, design and prioritize improvements to existing and future shared -use trails on Kessler Mountain. Through a request for proposals process, the City of Fayetteville selected Progressive Trail Design (PTD) in collaboration with Alta Planning and Design and Ozark Ecological Restoration to develop this Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan. The implementation of the recommendations contained in this Plan will ultimately result in an improved network of varied and functional trails that will be accessible to hikers and bicyclists of all abilities. Chapter 1::rr;:; c l 5 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 71 W r,1,.4' '<u ?i.1 '�yy" 1- il� a7 °� (trs} f p Ch�l ego„1 .., irra�lfRwjr Fayetteville s' -- W 15ti St Farmington sere o �$7 " !.i .7.?:, Appleby "d R`p1 4wf *• . '; `j � t✓l ¢i2„ Ivy �..- _yet Greenland S$ el A)rk la]1 f L1 yi fa15i} PrAine Grc ve r., J t Kessler Mountain and the Regional Pork ore nestled into a central location with access to recreational, cultural, historical and educational points of interest. Adjacent destinations include the University of Arkansas, the Razor bock Regional Greenway, and Prone Grove Battlefield. BACKGROUND Kessler Mountain is in fact a plateau. As such, it is The Atoka sandstone formation caps Kessler above an ideal place within our urban environment to see the Boyd formation with exposed Trace Creek the natural forces that provide the basis for living shale and outcroppings of Kessler Limestone. The in our area. Fossils associated with marine animals complex geology weathers the parent material are visible. Soils resulting from the breakdown of into many soil types allowing for great biodiversity. the ancient plateaus provide for the diverse flora, The area receives an average of 46 inches of as well as many species of birds and other living precipitation annually. The Ecological Society of creatures such as butterflies. These change with America recognized the ecological importance the season, making interesting repeat visits to of Kessler Mountain in their 1926 publication Kessler. "Naturalist Guide to the Americas". Kessler Mountain is located in the southwest corner of Fayetteville, Arkansas (Washington County). The elevation reaches 1,856 feet above sea level allowing both northern and southern biota. 6 . Chapter 1: i ..._....:1.,. . Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 'tip Kessler Mountain has a rich history of settlement from the mid -1800's and has a unique advantage of being a property that exists today without much change from that time period. Blessed with an abundance of native flora and Fauna, stands of native old -growth Ozark tree species, rock outcroppings, significant view sheds, and changes in topography and ecosystem, the property is a perfect opportunity for citizens from the region and beyond to engage in discovery of the Ozark forest, for both recreational and educational opportunities. ,_: qtr _'• i �.. Y• h n,t,�'�.. 1f ��f His Cory Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter summarizes the history of Kessler Mountain from the roots of the John and Hannah Rieff Family to the strong-willed property owners of today, like Frank Sharp, who fought for the preservation of this local and specia natural amenity. INTRODUCTION In 1951, after a hike atop Kessler Mountain, Miss Jobelle Holcombe wrote: "As / looked out over the surrounding picturesque hills at the distant mountains against the blue sky with its gray clouds, and at the valleys between the rolling hills, i could well understand why]ohn and Hannah Rieff would settle here to hew out of the wilderness an abiding place for the generations to come."- Miss]obelle Holcombe SETTLEMENT Modern settlement of Kessler Mountain began in 1838 when John and Hannah Rieff bought twenty acres on the mountain for $35.00. Resettling from Wilson County, Tennessee, the couple began to carve a homestead. This. modest beginning led to the establishment of a new and prosperous family in the City of Fayetteville. An image of the original winery found at Kessler Mountain. There arena remnants of the Kessler Winery today, other than the stone wine cellar; which can be accessed via the Wino Trail. Chapter 2: 9 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan KESSLER'S WINERY Phillip Kessler was born to a wine making family in Germany and brought to Springfield, Missouri at a young age. He married Kate, who was also born in Germany, and they soon had a daughter, Clara Elizabeth.. The Kessler's arrived in Fayetteville in 1866 "in a brand new surrey with four beautiful horses and $11,000 in gold". The Kessler's purchased thirteen acres on top of the mountain, because it reminded them of stories they were told about Germany. They built a house, dug a well and wine cellar and established probably the first vineyard and winery in the State of Arkansas. The wine business was in full operation by 1869. Between 1869 and 1873, notices in local papers advertised a "full supply of native grape wines and celebrated Champagne Cider. The trade supplied for sale at Dorman's Bakery," Kessler's Wine Hall opened, on West Center Street in Fayetteville, featuring "Kessler's celebrated wines and peach and apple brandies... drinks ten cents or three for twenty-five cents." The local paper described the Wine Hall as "where bad little boys of town congregate at nights and shove billiards." The lost remaining remnant of the Kessler Winery. This is a very intriguing article from the past that stands even after years and years of exposure to the natural elements and the threat of development. The natural stone arch makes this fre! like a natural wonder. 'f4 10 l Chapter 2::: ,- d"L T L Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan %,,v Today, nothing remains of the Kessler house and winery except the hand -dug well and wine cellar adjacent to the beautiful, two-story, stone Mount Kessler Inn. And still today, Kessler Mountain continues to support many private homes and acreage. it is still largely forested, providing habitat for a wide variety of wildlife. I�"F:KHJ.EdTI`i!, �Ni-V kslfa •/•! ,` .x., 1.•r .IfT�,+'•1 1v nr,r. 7lv.w,li ..'f1.1M le 7�a Ri- ►'7l. r`r,.... .,',, ,Iy4U.. v.., fl$. ft !'..pce1.. ,.• U . ,•1 I.. o.. Mwa.d a lrorre� sa....-k ... ii.. .y... Native GF•ape Wine, 4W1. q✓trfl. OY..f p.s./O (' 1 1) E it_ f-.. 11. e.•11.- .1 12:11.. I , .r. .!s ter.#., I., RU . ,•I...11,ra..... O*4 's%'iuzcaz,f .-\t' l,.craeea. I liP.4 'mrn To-i, ,,iL r n.hJTd, S.J%IC g+M 0, S74 9 The image above is a clipping from the new,uaper around the lime the Kessler Minery ,vos at its peak in popularity. The local paper described the Wine Nall as "where bad little boys of town congregore at nights and shove biliio: ds," MODERN DEVELOPMENT Beginning in 2002, Fayetteville began looking for a possible location for a Regional Park. An initial list of 18 potential sites was eventually narrowed down to four sites, ultimately resulting in the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board's recommendation of the 800 -acre Cummings property on the east slope of Kessler Mountain as the most suitable Regional Park site in August 2003, The Board recognized the site's potential to meet a variety of developed and natural recreation needs through its unique character, existing forest land, and topography varying from gentle grades to rugged mountainside. These were all recognized as assets in offering diverse recreational opportunities. The site provided ample developable topography for active sports fields, as well as an adjacent rugged landscape for forest -based recreation. Moreover, other attributes of the site such as visibility, an accessible location, and available adjacent property contributed to the selection. As a potential public/private partnership, this 800 acre property was purchased by SouthPass Development Company for a proposed large mixed -use development, which called for new neighborhoods interspersed with greenspace and parkland. This development, known as SouthPass, included a proposed donation of 200 acres to the City for the Regional Park. Although SouthPass was never realized, Chambers Bank, which held the property, donated the land for the Regional Park to the City in 2010. The groundbreaking for phase one of the new Regional Park was held on March 18, 2015. Meanwhile, numerous individuals and groups, led by the tireless efforts of Kessler Mountain resident Frank Sharp, promoted the acquisition, preservation, and public enjoyment of much of this forested mountain. This effort was very popular and generated a great deal of interest in this acquisition. Chambers Bank agreed to the sale of much of the remaining Cummings property to the City, resulting in the acquisition of 387 acres of Kessler Mountain in March 2014. This acquisition was made possible with a generous grant of 1,5 million dollars from the Walton Family Foundation, an agreement with the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association to assist in raising a portion of the remaining funds, and to create a conservation easement to assist with the protection and management of the property. Chapter 2: I..,' ! 11 unt 1 a5 y k1,.. Exist►ng Conditions '' .' 1 ` • ! ��' any ,may....•, v g ; +r �_„y . ,:.i,�,;'���''Ir'�r �? 'r � y"�•* r,.•y, 1� _ "� r .. KCB �° r .r; ?a � �'r �:�� r• ,*� •,�' y� � �1'4�t .'Jemmy w •,4 -�-Y{,� ` �,,•a ��-a•., � , y.y�R - I - �'•�;tea kr�J.� �� ♦ � r"�W �! �, v � �W� � ► �*nti '� `r e.�l � ��e�� �`� ��t 1 . x w•' n.e„y�'� � . �k'f ,� �.y,.1 J+ . 5 1 e" - b *r� .,a. y f4 L..� rye(• ¢�r�`y - F -+na e .. ' ,y.. w•�` } yrr w J. S?: Chapter ' Exist{pg Conditions -'... y�r '• . -, •`' °V' a; i r )---- :. - -.S•^s , Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter describes documents and studies used for guidance in the master planning process for the sensitive development of Kessler Mountain. INTRODUCTION Existing documents and studies related to Kessler Mountain have been a driving force behind the plan. These documents and studies have served as a guide and reference for planning with natural systems, wildlife habitats, cultural and tourism attractions, land use and access easements, and positive and negative control points. The studies provided valuable information regarding the feasibility of new trails in particular areas, where existing trails could be improved, and also served as a guide for ecologically sensitive areas and associated restrictions. This plan has acknowledged and utilized the existing studies, which are summarized below. Chapter 3: 13 r Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2013, NOVEMBER - MOUNT KESSLER RESERVE BY FRANK SHARP Frank Sharp, Kessler land owner and champion for its protection, compiled a document advocating the acquisition and protection of Kessler Mountain in 2013 while the land was still privately owned. The document includes history of the mountain, the current state, ecological & geological studies, many letters from users, and trail use data Full report can be downloaded from the FNHA website: http://www.fayettevillenatural.org/ rFran'r, Sharp, Kessler land ownef and champion fords pro;eci0n, compiled a document advocating the acquisition and protection c,` Kessler Mountain in 2013. 14 I Chapter 3: r.. t TRAIL LOG - —.d'.'—•• •r��.:7nxa-a-- r-.,FP►.Ta+efl-.C, •rl As.r e • .........or nn .as *, a.': na w r a, w a &'nl a., r..y.. a,..x -n. a. �•u m.® a...., �. r.....^,a i.a« arwx.-.� m - :ra.y=. ate, vsR � w h.l's¼*.--. rtina +aiaJl at - I'. tW C.! .r -a' lY. - gin Hwy aMa. I.; .t,� a. tii' w1r="a. l r... or r n,� n• ..�-.- - .. , as a. rrrrvl ..aa��-,n.-. • :' :1______ Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2015, FEBRUARY - A RAPID TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF KESSLER MOUNTAIN RESERVE BY THEO WITSELL The Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission (ANHC), under contract with the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association (FNHA), conducted a rapid ecological assessment of the Kessler Mountain Reserve from April through October, 2014. This report summarizes findings based on six separate inventory trips to the reserve (15 days total) by Theo Witsell, Botanist and Ecologist with the ANHC. This inventory documented 11 natural communities or habitats and 544 plant species present in the study area. Five areas or habitats were identified as being especially ecologically significant to the site. Populations of at least nine plant and animal species of state conservation concern (rare species) were documented and at least two of them are considered to be of k aaW T.n.w A1$k.14.1 n* ""M*n R+.+" rnyd iwAtrri4e, wa.euyecnCa r,AA y d-, .s . V. d...wws.^>.3 .r •tm.. �..•.v... fr. b.q..wnn...r'•.+W r*!# �..x wr�n•ty .ca Eyr.._.v.;; Waw rW r. .a: r .. e , ...r.w.r nv. .. n x. wrA+i.m.rwcs mod-"�'.+'r m..%n. •r-.x.'.'z�.uf...<.n —'..M W W wwf d. global concern. One globally rare plant species, Missouri groundcherry, had not been documented in Arkansas in more than 60 years. A second, Church's wild rye, was not previously known in Washington County. This report presents an ecological overview of the site, descriptions of the natural communities present, maps and brief descriptions of ecologically significant areas, maps of known occurrences of species of conservation concern, and an annotated list of plant species documented from the study area. It also makes recommendations for ecological management and provides an annotated list of those non- native invasive plant species present that are considered to be a threat to the integrity of natural communities on the reserve. Ecologically sensitive areas and habitats shown on the graphic plan maps were determined from this study. Full report can be downloaded from the FNHA website: http:// www. fayettevill enatural. org/. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2013, AUGUST - AN ANALYSIS OF OLD GROWTH FOREST PARCELS ON KESSLER MOUNTAIN BYALAN EDMONDSON "The forest on Kessler Mountain is mixed oak -hickory hardwoods. There are some areas on Kessler Mountain where remnants of old growth forests have escaped logging. These stands of ancient post oak (Quercus stellato) and chinkapin oak (Quercus muehlenbergii) were not cut because they were not fit for commercial timber." Alan Edmondson Full report can be downloaded from the FNHA website: http://www.fayettevillenoturol.org/. Cverstory Relative Frequency Site A t Pqy PN e+Kwvmn rrm 3w ♦W#N 1� •Dsu dxKCsk l •FKaCen +t'•C•ear Fkun tXprliti.r}."- +ch<Y ratO LIxr. ur't Understory Relative Frequency Site A rkwe Th %t£acr... rrraLt y Pt OF Gtadt ar4msceep re.* Slh!N r.u..dcp! 6.. su A'1 . m- rH•172• t. ra.• 3017 er. •,_• p,,, w. •ty.,t3 tAterstory Relative Frequency Site 8 F"'l*, RellOve OF f]csrprrm tt 0st- 9tt�r( Understory Relative Frequency Site 8 in Z% 2% F*Urr9b.ftwNermqutr�ty[> rAARlp.OakExar®rne-tVr,sor 16 I Chapter 3: It> Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2092, FEBRUARY - CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL PARK PLAN The Regional Park consists of 232 acres immediately adjacent to and on the east side of the Kessler Mountain property. The Regional Park will provide an area for developed, active recreation while Kessler Mountain provides a natural, backcountry complement largely preserved in its natural condition. This will provide a park setting with a wide, diverse range of both active and passive, natural and developed recreation opportunities. The first phase of the Regional Park is under construction and will open in the fall of 2016. This initial development consists of four baseball fields, six soccer fields, two concession/ restroom/ storage facilities for both baseball and soccer, as well as roads, parking, and utilities necessary for operation. When fully completed, the park will have seven soccer fields, eight baseball fields, four softball fields, trails, playgrounds, a great lawn, pavilions, tennis courts, basketball courts, volleyball courts, water features, an amphitheater, and park maintenance and office facilities. The Regional Park will serve as the gateway and primary trailhead for trail activities on Kessler Mountain, The park will be connected to the City's paved transportation trail system and will contain a paved loop for fully accessible trail use within the park. Trails immediately adjacent to the trailhead will be relatively easy, yet the trails will become progressively more challenging as users travel farther away from the park development. r I f � YY rj 14 I. r'_j r IL. M LA4G.A y-7F3IX;14iEIA, : FAY FTEVILLE. REGIONAL PARK MA Ii PI N E AY1--7T1E.V11,l_E, ARKAV'SAS Chapter 3: 1 ,. 1 1 17 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 2013, AUGUST - KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILHEAD LOG DATA: BASELINE TRAIL USAGE AND USAGE FROM 07/14/14 TO 05/12/15 The efforts by Frank Sharp and the City of Fayetteville to document the amount and type of users frequenting Kessler Mountain have resulted in the information outlined in the section of the plan. The baseline data was collected from Frank Sharp's trail use log and was collected from August 12, 2013 until July 13, 2014. The most recent data was collected from July 14, 2014 until May 15, 2015, wich coincides with the opening date of the public trailhead located alongJuclge Cummings Road. Kessler Mountain Trailhead Log Data Baseline Trail Usage 09/12/2013 - 07/13/2014 Monthly Unique Group Logs Public Trailhead Private Trailhead 'Totals 12 -Sep -13 288 288 October -15 349 349 November -13 852 852 December -13 207 207 January -14 503 503 February -14 284 284 March -14 710 710 April -14 745 745 May -14 745 745 June -14 375 375 13 -Jul -14 290 290 0 5348 5348 Kessler Mountain Trailhead Log Data 07/14/2014 - 05/12/2015 Public Trailhead Private Trailhead Totals Unique Logs 1975 2770 4745 Total Users 4178 6604 10782 Baseline Trail Users: 5348 38 ,70% 6.30% 1 100% •Groups with 10+ 12 31 43 _ TYPES OF USERS Other 6% Cite _ r 1z, c. 4k. M'k ./{Ian ®•)II, Types of User Groups Hike 2942 5615 8557 Bike 513 451 964 Run 487 455 942 Other 236 83 319 4178 6604 10782 IMonthly Unique Group Logs P Total Monthly Unique q Logs at-, a, �..�.� ++.,. as _ k° .k4} n-' c 3 ~ y Ltry a" at , dp v' 4. '� ' c3 zr Jr, 9ate July -14 173 143 378 August -14 142 236 378 September -14 159 287 446 October -14 228 350 578 November -14 203 320 523 December -14 132 185 317 January -15 319 341 660 February -15 146 237 383 March -15 167 244 411 April -15 237 292 529 12 -May -15 69 135 204 1975 _ 2770 4745 18 I Chapter 3: E: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Kessler Mountain Trailhead Log Data I j Total Morfihly Users gpp - 7Lgf ems 150 FN! tF L !! l t s(',:, 4 ` - . e ti t ,+ t� r o `� v ... a City I, oto ---- IMonthly Total Users July -14 301 312 613 August -14 239 517 756 September -14 258 680 938 October -14 506 791 1297 November -14 607 865 1472 December -14 289 452 741 January -15 629 811 1440 February -15 320 565 885 March -15 382 546 928 April -15 503 808 1311 12 -May -15 144 257 401 4178 6604 10782 Kessler Mountain Trailhead Log Data Chapter 3: 19 a ' ! V rr s Objectives ` # 31 v sr`p • r 4 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter outlines the objectives, which were developed in the stakeholder meetings through the consensus building efforts of the facilitator. These objectives were used to create a comprehensive trails plan that will serve as another set of guidelines for the development of the Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan. INTRODUCTION This comprehensive trails plan serves as a foundation for creating new trails, improving existing trails and adding trail amenities to provide a wide range of users with a variety of trail experiences, as well as expand outdoor recreation and education opportunities on the mountain. The proposed trails will be purposefully designed to allow trail users to experience the beauty of Kessler on foot or bicycle while minimizing user conflict and environmental impact. The plan focuses on soft -surface trails, however it does include some conceptual paved trails that are in line with the City of Fayetteville's Active Transportation Master Plan. Through a request for proposal, the City of Fayetteville selected Progressive Trail Design, with Alta Planning + Design, and Ozark Ecological Restoration Inc. (OERI) to assist with the development of this comprehensive trails plan. Chapter 4: ;"rje:: I 21 PROGRESSIVE TRAIL DESIGN (PTD): A highly skilled Trail building/Bike Park Development company based in the rugged Ozark Mountains of Northwest Arkansas with an office in the foothills of the Colorado Rockies. PTD is a member of the Professional Trail Builders Association (PTBA) and specializes in the development of "progressive recreational facilities'; mountain bike parks, municipal park renovations and enhancements, and a wide variety of purpose-built trails (i.e. equine trails, motorized trails, bike trails, interpretive hiking trails, etc...). SCOPE OF WORK: • I Overall Site Assessment - Inventory the entire site, determine property boundaries, analyze and identify opportunities and constraints, identify environmentally sensitive areas (through the assistance of OERI and referencing Witsell's Report), identify positive and negative control points, and identify a preliminary concept of trail expansion feasibility. 2.: Existing Trail Assessment - Assess all eight miles of existing trail. Identify any poorly aligned segments, drainage issues, and/or flow issues. Make recommendations for improvements and GPS the recommendations to be shown on the overall map. r,a Conceptual Layout - Through input from the public and stakeholder meetings, determine the desired amount and type of new trail that is appropriate for Kessler Mountain and begin to layout conceptual alignments. • Final Layout - Once a consensus has been established regarding which of the new trails, reroutes and additions are acceptable, PTD will begin to ground truth the trails and GPS their general alignment. These alignments will go on the first draft for review and comment. This is a conceptual layout and does not include final flagging and alignment. Deliverables - Master Plan Proposal - After comments and revisions, PTD staff will compile the map, all field notes, proposed trails with descriptions and support images, and a budget for construction into one comprehensive document along with a separate map/plan. I '; r ! + "._ r ;w, .era • '�,.. '* - -;:Ifl;' ',-J e• •• • ...II r•___ C { Wh �o-, n, Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan b ,. 1. ti r r - Planning Process Iii, I. rot, I. .... . as 4 I Chapter 5: Planning Process / Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan ti / OVERVIEW This chapter describes the process performed to gather input involving the general public and stakeholder groups. Public input was gathered in variety of ways, ranging from conversational feedback to different forms of media. INTRODUCTION The trails plan was developed through the input of the city, the public, private organizations and professionals. The process began in mid -2015 and continued over the course of six months. The biggest challenge in developing this plan was to find the balance between preservation and recreation. Through the input of the public and the collaboration of the diverse group of stakeholders, a compromise was reached which resulted in the plan presented in this document. The Rapid Terrestrial Ecological Assessment Plan by Theo Witsell and the Analysis of Old Growth Forest Parcels by Alan Edmonson were utilized as a basis for proposing new trails and improving existing trails. A stakeholder group comprised of over 20 individuals representing various user groups and organizations was formed to guide the direction of the plan throughout the process. In total, there were six stakeholder meetings and four public input sessions. In addition, Alta Planning+ Design created a public survey in which 150 respondents provided their feedback. This data was also critical in the development of the plan. Chapter 5: <.,: ;: _u. ; c I 25 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan • Walton Family Foundation • Alta Planning + Design • Beaver Watershed Alliance • City of Fayetteville Active Transportation Committee • City of Fayetteville Development Services • City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation • City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board • Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association • Fayetteville Public Schools • Illinois River Watershed Partnership • International Mountain Bicycling Association • Kessler Greenways • NWA Audubon Society / Arkansas Audubon • NWA Land Trust PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY:• Survey results and a summary of comments received from the public input sessions are included in Appendix B: Public Input from the two public input sessions. Below are general statements from different user groups that highlight common desires and concerns. Two main categories emerged from the public and stakeholder comments: Preservation and Recreation. The biggest challenge of this plan was to find the balance between these two opposing viewpoints. The end goal was to respect the natural environment and key sensitive areas outlined in the ecological assessment, while still providing access to new areas and proposing new trails to build skill level progression into the trail system. Given that an existing eight -mile trail system has been on the mountain since the early 2000's, users have already grown to love it for 26 1 Chapter 5:' • Ozark Ecological Restoration Inc. • Ozark Off -Road Cyclists • Ozark Regional Land Trust • Progressive Trail Design its natural beauty and remote back country feel. Almost all users unanimously agreed that they wish to keep that experience intact. Differences are primarily centered on the amount of new trail appropriate for the mountain and where proposed trails should be located. Through the use of existing studies and the feedback of different user groups, this plan was developed to address this balance of users' needs. The two primary user groups are hikers and mountain bikers. The hiker group includes anyone on foot: trail runners, birdwatchers, photographers, backpackers, etc. The mountain biker group includes anyone on a bike; however, this group also falls into the hiker group, because many who bike also hike and run. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan ,r Based on the feedback gathered during the public input process, hikers are linked to enjoying short loops and destinations, such as a bluff, overlook, or spring. Their focus is not so much on the trail itself, but the efficiency or finding a unique location and the experience of getting there. Mountain bikers, on the other hand, are linked to longer, exciting, flowing trail loops. They desire a unique experience with a focus on a variety of trail types and challenges. In order to meet the desires of these two groups, it was equally important to provide new trails as well as improve the existing trail system. ht a Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan '•1 t r '"'w ^•,- � ,' X51 ' � r r� ;��.�, �""t �, MT. KESSLER.a "� `, ��4 :9w `r•R' 'R ." _ *+ r --A �'".'• �je;� 1 �+ .s {1# �',{ti : },. �` •- 7 °tai �( v a�.wt fir: Iry tvr•= ,'.• 'kJ:y,.',• ���,., r ` «r rt"ps` -t '� r `.•w�,..�r yf''`v °._ „th ` vT v�`'� '� ' �e 4�V� d :+ �a' /�L.ryr' 1 y * .- % i' e 1 .. F�r7 .. x. e r V" ....s �. ti.a`'_Wt:.ir7 °w � # Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter provides a brief overview of the project, in terms of how this plan came to be, as well as some general background information about Kessler Mountain as it is today. INTRODUCTION The overall trail master plan map for Kessler Mountain includes three primary components. Each of these will be detailed in the following pages. DESIGN APPROACH When developing a trail system, the primary goal is to build sustainable trails and protect environmentally sensitive areas. Supplementing this goal with trail experiences that appeal to a variety of user groups and minimize user conflict, maximizes the overall experience. In order to create this experience, user group are typically either segregated or integrated depending on the size of the site and the type and volume of users, For Kessler Mountain, the goal was to create a shared -use trail system that would work well for the widest variety of use. Through strategic and sustainable design, this plan has been created to address the needs of all users; hikers, bikers, nature enthusiasts, trail runners, groups, and users with special needs. Another critical component that drives design is positive and negative control points. The positive control points are the places you want to take the trail to, such as an overlook or a waterfall. The• negative control points are those areas you want to stay away from, such as a sensitive ecological habitat, or a wet area. To put it simply, the goal is to identify all the positive control points and connect Chapter 6: P 29 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan the dots in a sustainable fashion while avoiding the negative control points. CONCEPT Input from both the stakeholder group and the public raised a concern about user conflict, specifically between pedestrians and cyclists. This is a common concern and one that has been addressed in the design of the trail system. There are a number of solutions to mitigate user conflict. First and foremost, it is important to create a well -organized progressive -based trail system. This is achieved by providing a variety of trails at varying levels of difficulty: beginner, intermediate, and expert. This applies to all user groups and is signified by the character of the trail itself. Steeper, rocky trails are considered expert while smooth trails on gentle grades are considered beginner. This helps to provide an opportunity for beginner level cyclists, less ambitious hikers or less mobile users to enjoy nature in a more comfortable fashion. Given that almost all of the existing trails on Kessler are considered difficult and expert level, it is important to integrate some beginner and intermediate level trails into the plan. The area below the bluff line on the east side of the mountain provides the perfect terrain for these types of trails and is immediately accessible to the developed Regional Park, The new trails will create a "stacked -loop trail system." This means that one loop is connected to the previous loop in a stacked formation. This allows the system to develop with the easier trails near the tra:lhead and each connected loop becoming progressively more challenging as they advance in distance. This helps to segregate users and disperse traffic- The topography of Kessler caters well to this progressive -based, stacked. - loop trail system because the bluff line circling the perimeter of the mountain acts as a natural separation between the more distant, rugged trails and the more accessible, easier trails. The more advanced cyclists and adventurous hikers/ runners will use more of the system and travel to the remote areas; whereas, the beginners and less ambitious will generally stay closer to the trailhead on these more accessible trails. This also provides for a variety of loop configurations. SUSTAINABLE TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES There are two documents established for trailbuilding and are referred to as the industry standard: United States Department of. Agriculture's (USDA) Trail Construction and Maintenance Notebook as well as the International Mountain Bicycling Association's (IMBA) Sustainable Trail Design Standards. Though IMBA is a mountain bike trail advocacy organization, these trail guidelines are commonly accepted by all trail builders as the standard for sustainable trail design. ! i..�. Trar . 5 . Cons ruction and ra. TA rint(noncc-, y There are many valuable resources to njer to regarding natural surface trail design. 30 I Chapter 6: '" NATURAL SURFACE TRAIL DEFINITION: A natural surface trail is any type of trail utilizing native mineral soils as the primary final tread surface. Comprised of a "full bench cut", these trails commonly follow the land contours and pass by or incorporate terrain features. Developing these trails with moderate grades, mild undulation and limited surface variation delivers a very sustainable resource. However, grades and surface may be adjusted to provide a variety of textures and experiences. Tread can range from eighteen (1&) inch wide single track to five (5) foot wide double track. This kind of trail can be produced to accommodate any type of user group. The "full bench cut" simply means that the tread is completely carved out of undisturbed soil with none of the excavated fill used as a part of the tread. This provides a more durable, sustainable trail. TWO CRITICAL TRAILBUILDING TIPS: AVOID THE FALL LINE. Fall -line trails usually follow the shortest route down a hill - the same path that water flows. The problem with fall -line trails is that they focus water down their length. The speeding water strips the trail of soil, exposing roots, creating gullies, and scarring the environment. AVOID FLAT AREAS. Flat terrain lures many trailbuilders with the initial ease of trail construction. However, if a trail is not located on a slope, there is the potential for the trail to become a collection basin for water. The trail tread must always be slightly higher than the ground on at least one side of it so that water can drain properly. FIVE SUSTAINABLE TRAIL PRINCIPLES: Ideally, a trail would simultaneously incorporate all of these principles. THE HALF RULE THE 10 -PERCENT AVERAGE 2 GUIDELINE 3 MAXIUM SUSTAINABLE GRADE 4 GRADE REVERSALS 5 OUTSLOPE SUSTAINABLE TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES: ,l Keep water off the tread and users on it. 2 Build with the contour of the land and use frequent grade reversals. Follow the half -rule: A trail's grade should not exceed half the grade of the cross slope. Maximum grade should be 15 percent (except for natural or built rock structures). Average grade should stay under 10 percent (with grade reversals). Route trails to positive control points (viewpoints, water, and other attractions). Use bench -cut construction and excavate soil from the hillside. Provide an tread out -slope of three to five percent in order to encourage rapid water removal from the tread. For reroutes, reclaim the old trail thoroughly, both the visual corridor as well as the trail tread. tl For highly technical trails where grade will L-L.I sometimes exceed 15 percent, use natural rock, rock armoring or other rock features to add challenge and improve sustainability. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan e e PERTY BOUNDARY 32 1 Chapter 7: a4 ,tier n n 1pt `t7t � Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan LEGENDNOTE: ALLTRAIL LENGTHS AND ALIGNMENTS ARE APPROXIMATE EXISTING TRAILS BIKING ALLOWED 6 Miles (Within Park Boundary) [)� OOOOO OO BEGINNER LOOP [lif l 11 RESTROOMS o 000 1.5 Miles (4'WIDE) P PARKING AREA CJ 00000o LOWER BLUFF TRAIL J 1 00o00 3.4 Miles (2'-3'WIDE) ABANDONED TRAILS ®®® m EAST BLUFF TRAIL 1,7 Miles (18-2 WIDE) FUTURE PAVED TRAILS Proposed by the City of Fayetteville OOOOO 0o O OOO TRAIL REROUTES 1 Mile 4 PAVED TRAILS -PROPOSED Proposed by City of Fayetteville ECOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS AND HABITATS SHALE BARRENS BLUFFS OLD GROWTH POST OAK WOODLAND r:z j RIPARIAN HABITAT Information taken from Arkansas Natural Heritane Commission. Ecolooical Assessment EGIONAL PARK Potential Secondary Parking &Trailhead 00 KESSLER MOUNTAIN TRAILS MASTER PLAN The plan presented on this page represents the JUDGE CU�RROAD Kessler Mountain public area integrated with the planned development of the Regional Park. The 0 plan proposed by Prgressive Trail Design highlights tiQ the concept of a stacked loop trail system integrating the existing trail system wtih a range of difficulty for all trail users to experience. 0 The plan used to illustrate the City of Fayetteville's Regional Park plan can be viewed in entriety in Appendix D: City of Fayetteville Regional Park Plan. torniJW. Chapter 7: : i Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter outlines the current conditions and the recommendations from Progressive Trail Design for the six miles of public use tra Mountain. INTRODUCTION The existing trail system on Kessler Mountain is approximately eight miles. Six miles of this system are on city property, while the remaining two are on private property. The two miles on private property were assessed in this report and are discussed in more detail in the following pages, at Kessler As previously mentioned, all existing trails were built by volunteers, primarily Ozark Off -Road Cyclists, over the last 15 years with the permission of previous and existing landowners. There was no master plan for these trails. It was simply a group of volunteers building trails slowly over time. All the trails were built by hand to maximize the trail experience in the best terrain for mountain biking. It is important to note that all existing trails are considered "expert" level according to IMBA Guidelines. These trails are all one to two feet wide singletrack that are very rocky and technically challenging in nature. For most hikers this is not a problem, but a mountain biker must be an advanced rider to navigate these trails comfortably. Therefore, beginner and intermediate level trails for all users are one of the most critical needs of the trail system. Most of the existing trails today have stayed in relatively good shape, however, as expected, there are some design and sustainability issues that must be addressed, This report will result in recommendations to resolve some of these issues and problem areas. As such, Progressive Trail Design conducted a full assessment of all existing trails. The assessment identified problem areas and poorly aligned trail segments and prescribes solutions to these areas. This has resulted in a condition/prescription survey in order to make the trail system sustainable in accordance with the industry accepted guidelines for building sustainable trails. The intention of this trails improvement plan was to maintain the alignment and character of the existing trail system. Recommendations for reroutes in areas where the trail is either too steep, located in perpetually wet zones, or have alignment issues that hinder traffic flow (aka "trail flow"). All problem spots, including small reroutes, are indicated on the Existing Trail plan with recommended solutions and are expanded upon later in this chapter. Any reroutes that were significant are indicated on the plan as a separate, proposed trail. Chapter 7: air 35 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan 35 Chapter 7: SpellboundRepairs OSD1 CONDITION: Al IhrintmrA406CWhh5Yettwrn Mjdhtlr. drnllsegr Puny daYrR SPMII1cm1d. PPESCRIPTJO N= 'r pO'arlutd so Nlos f4r1b51hl'uzset-gn,rsIu rlibh anddr•IRnagn 07 CONDITION: Pam dralnaprnn nisi droplrnping. PRE5CRIPTIO El. Ctell0bsettWE llriltilJtl sod SO raci, ar,nnrlrlg O CONDSEILINC Catam I;:wrlydld 51551 lrlsl gtnda 1ls stiv;p eautSg PT 515 450 PRCSCfIIPTION: 7EE' rcrtus,te to 5,5158 adkcarid.mpmsmdrmalge- B4 CONDITIONI nulidy 55,111 Road PRPSCRIPTITIN: srr op lll lNfllxfnO g$. CIO NDITION: SIemgi tool grads rlld Timor di,skn.gvbofvHt=arnr. PR"ES RRPTtDTb RE gn fww upsiopa far lhr (' ow4d1I,tilro5s• 96 cofltlTltld: P1101 P14110550 Is C.Isle!. PRE5CHIP71Ok h^ tooled c,:lmN for mps'Es1 draIna7 2eRIY1 CONDITION, Parr 5155 nigee.ss the mrn, nrlE 1OR Of Wes[vrn Myth LJ PR€.CIPIMT0ik I rr! rrwl.n waUnw Pw holm lnlbncl 4l Sdflon dnl l011150 -rd d, alnvge- CONDITION; Torgr.1,]P Mr,m'M 0m ,nsrrnlw0 yrd,r of ISr as Insole O TtKWJo-dd311rlet. PAESCRIi5TIONe 5Dgr nmuso iellr n Elimblvig hlmsts replace rrod grabns and bvlrvr allyrl 55111 soil roof Rax- CONDITION+ Error Ioca1105, 05151 Prignmentel lrolls .r5 lr5l•,sn;0q,r 0101 Egg0taiiu. PADSCR11PTiONt SCC eerornn itpbotrin MV'aisioNM Wx«Iinlans1 �+-.� Mlplatdd 5115511105.1 E)CONDITION. lgsp atrIT ctdt?d ma.*7mlro gloln r1151 rllleIrirry SUITS 1PREOCRIPE1OIt Re1O(45511)11th 115555155115511 Y'S`beWmIzwmr,l 1rxw: tort n nrdw to 1OO;tre gradnt �rot CONDITTON15 s Poor 154 5ENS aiN d, '+...f PRESCRIPTION: Duldrn Owe p400 dl55smlmpr esSl•sIn,s Trent-Trall Repairs Tl GONDITWNt. SEory CPUWSIp sslud51YtondO ed PREURIIPTIOts 4405 Nn'aa 51011111D4' td mgR arntoing.Tl:ss ltlltaIslet rl iIi moron. . elrinlnr. arev:w the Si:nlralr.s,rl,hown nn the moil Rock City Trail Repairs Oae CONDITION! Turns eaceeds maximum made (or dlmbing rims PRESCRIPTION: Corner 1 -Rebuild asa miling<mwnswrerback Cnrner2- Rebuild asa roll ing,rowri 05.+5rr,irl1lak sv,dl sHx3O'L cr,b wall retaining backsdn of lure Io ma:nlaln eels[ing dralnage from road. Regrade ball between between lures -to improve drainage lr� 1 CONDITION: Largebeulderbincking lrartcrn narrow slesaler.epte arnu'M. ,1 PRESCRIPTION: Rullda 2kelotoelbwalirou:olrnasafeaouslalt.rhle routeareund boulder. ® CONSRr1ON: :'.arg+EvulGlvf5R onto earl tT.:Jnny ihCsrld ceupnp usm tog, elf �!al qa al'Pil} PRESCRIPTION: 'Ae a tkgR O0a14a+ and r,nrahllrh m:gasal trip a;l5Rtnerd- P CONDITION: Sleep sorb51 f II 1 net 1 for secret, 10',,- poordrainag, and iLigrrlCo ode fvl. PRESCRrPTIO511Cp1 r Joy rna•ll 'PP µ19n lion-.Iwp54 usbsg rwlwspgleataw and rock armoring . Op L2{prefenem3OO rerouleapsl,pe from exlslrng trail alignment using grade reoernals for water nsana0enust. CONDITION:NC) 1e gaf rurmg.nruna,rnrvrnfioll'y, causing users to g, around. PRESCRIPTION::Opt1 Remnvc Inc fiber lMplc. Opt?. 3O're,oure down stuns CON DITION:OId tree 5Prmp m f!aa Ire's d PRESCRIPTION: Rrmove slump CONDIT1PTIOepcaus rig muddy lm:1!se-sd PRESCRIPTION: 5O rorkarmonng. CONDITION: Seep causing muddy [railtreart V PRESCRIPTION: 3O'rock nrmnnnq. ®CONDITIOM5c+rp uus,ng muddy Ira bread. PAESCRIPTIONe 1OO rerouleond recta n,orng O-Ct CONDITION:Md-us ofcorners Icon 19151 rausr.g s'r5 p,;rnardy;m main l,leers to snag effera I PRESCRIPTION: Reltwa lecnme! 5:1 1, 371" rernnry 715 aRn+Sne11Lt5A nom nl}ak}.• RC1 CONDITIONoTexdIreerncnmur causng a 1,11, PRESCRIPTION: Remwedead:ee In porn radius of corner. CONDITION: Seep flouring muddy ball tread PRESCRIPTION: 1OO' rack annoeo g.O . CONDITION: Ms -p ds%sN difisn loll tgd:ln iralH bxolesVtooruw<M a tw'l.odree fence. makkig t dangerous In, sees PRESCRIPTION! 5OO mmwe'ncl,ul rig 20I mbwg 1s,rns and 3O',frevk armoring 1, span seep. Tins',mulewul also flop t, control shespeeds of mountan bikers. Closeold Mil. O CONDITION:Radosoluaorerlsrenlolsrcausmgusers.peirearrlymnumaiseblkerrlo slesp edtrad The corner is also tea close eel bmbed yore feoee, making r[danger us far users PRESCRIPTION: Olsen radius el corner and alnny with 050' resole do-oehll from carne, eCOIIDITIDMO,:•i'oesiwetsoarcd a soewltra.I matcreases adlmct roulefolhe Shale Rarmn. PR CC$C1trPT1O1b RerO.art Ntre,Dr5h SP en:al., separationa,rd inztal''stay on rmlp rigr¢ CYneuidl5ltacN. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan S,detCapa {faal lioe slop.), Cx i+ trd t ,.,r Tieod grades. :mil= Frcx - rya . o -t r •s` Tread dip. L.C. . r._ d. -.r- Treed crest. i?a ra Cr tr ti nr fJ f;:•';,}Fptyl ;.Cy, r 4c siF , Hardened tread. -so s' - 5f ianp6rC ncin^e +R+Y Climbing Turns PRESCRIPTION TREATMENTS This section is to familiarize the reader with terms and types of treatment proposed in the Kessler Mountain Existing Trails Condition/Prescription Survey. The terms discussed in this section are: rock armoring, inline drainage features, climbing turns, rolling crown switchback, knick construction. Rock Armoring bri lunge CroSx ng• fr44d Climb Edge buffer. .'F:•C'] t r k.�sn:Y it r eaf, t� * �rcr rl A turn where the grade of the trail as it passes through the fall line is exactly the same as the grade of the slope being traversed. Rolling Crown Switchbacks Rolling crown switchbacks are sustainable turns on a hillside engineered for drainage. The trail is routed onto a Rock armoring can be used for drainage crossings, crowned deck .r=.--. __c/ trail a roaches, pp where it makes and steep trail;•-�,, , . a transition to sections that need the opposite - y'. additional protection direction. The _• from erosion. Rock upper approach y x" .*�` - ' •-�� armoring tends to •• is nsloped tobe _ relatively low clra-n water out maintenance and , ' the back of the landing, while the lower approach visually appealing, is outsloped,. while also stabilizing challenging trail sections. Inline Drainage Inline drainage features are typically used on existing treads where the tread has already been established and there is little space for a large, wide, relatively clog -proof dip and outlet formed through alignment. Please refer to the image on page 47 for more information. Knicks ore constructed into existing trail tread in order to drain puddles from flat areas. 38 1 Chapter 7: • f ti Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Knick Construction water has a place to drain. A knick is a shaved down A knick is an effective outsloped drain constructed semicircle about ten -feet long that is outsloped into existing trails. For a knick to be effective, the about fifteen percent in the center. Knicks should trail tread must have lower ground next to it so the be unnoticeable to users ROCK CITY TRAIL Rock City Trail Rock City Trail Recommendation #1 Recommendation #3 C.11tIii Latitidue: N36 02.394 + . Latitidue: N36 02.382 Longitude: W94 13.248 Longitude: W94 13.185 $6,500.00 $500.00 s w • s ! Turns exceed maximum grade for climbing turns. Large boulder fell onto trail blocking the tread causing users to go off trail to avoid. Corner 1 - Rebuild as a rolling crown switchback Corner 2 - Rebuild as a rolling crown switchback Move large boulder and reestablish original trail with 5'Hx30'L crib wall retaining backside of turn to I alignment maintain existing drainage from road. Regrade trail Rock City Trail between turns to improve drainage Recommendation #4 Rock City Trail Latitidue: N36 02.442 Recommendation #2 Longitude: W94 13.175 s s Latitidue: N36 02.384 �• + $3,400.00 Longitude: W94 13 215 tT : r at mswsirmmS800.00 ar�iei�= Steep rocky fall -line trail for approx. 200' causing poor drainage and difficult navigation for some users o s � Large boulder blocking trail causing narrow unsafe route around, Option 1: Stay on existing trail alignment. Repair using rolling grade dips and rock armoring. Build a 2'Hx10'L crib wall to create a safe a Option 2 (preferred): 300' reroute upslope from sustainable route around boulder. existing trail alignment using grade reversals for water management. Chapter 7:::: ( 39 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Rock City Trail s Recommendation #5 6�# fir! v_`i8p'9Ae: Latitidue: N36 02.336 Longitude: W94 13.032 $200.00 Narrow tree gate for mountain bikers specifically, causing users to go around Opt.1: Remove the Silver Maple. Opt.2: 30' reroute down slope. •Rock City Trail Recommendation #6 Latitidue: N36 02.324 `err` Longitude: W94 13,027 7E g• r $200.00 Old tree stump in trail tread. Remove stump. Rock City Trail Recommendation #7 Latitidue: N36 02.221 Longitude: W94 13,007 $2,250.00 n Seep causing muddy trail tread. 50' rock armoring. Rock City Trail Recommendation #8 Latitidue: N36 02.159 Longitude: W94 13.029 $1,350.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. 30' rock armoring. Rock City Trail Recommendation #9 Latitidue: N36 02.150 Longitude: W94 13.065 $800.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. 100' rock armoring Rock City Trail Recommendation #10 Latitidue: N36 02.159 Longitude: W94 13.114 a� t4' aq $1,800.00 Radius of corner is too tight causing users, primarily mountain bikers to stray off trail. Relocate corner with a 75' reroute to allow for better turn radius. 40 1 Chapter7:..,. Y� �G Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Rock City Trail Rock City Trail Recommendation #11 Recommendation #14 Latitidue: N36 02.131 Latitidue: N36 02.006 Longitude: W94 13,114 Longitude: W94 13.111 • $200.00 - i .. $1,500 00 Dead tree in corner, causing a tight radius. Radius of corner is too tight causing users, primarily mountain bikers to stray off trail. The corner is also Remove dead tree to open radius of corner. too close to a barbed wire fence, making it dangerous for users. Rock City Trail ' ' ' • Recommendation #12 Open radius of corner and along with a 50' reroute downhill from corner. EM=Latitidue: N36 02.090 Longitude: W94 13.093 Rock City Trail • $4,500.00 Recommendation #15 • ' • Latitidue: N36 01 921 Seep causing muddy trail tread, Longitude: W94 13.080 $800.00 100' rock armoring. v � a Rock City Trail Hikers have created a social trail that creates a direct route to the Shale Barren. Recommendation #13 a. � 3) l Latitidue: N36 02.026 Reroute turn north to create separation and install Longitude: W94 13.112 "stay on trail" signs. Close social trail. S7000.00 Seep drains down trail and the trail is located too close to a barbed wire fence, making it dangerous for users. 500' reroute including 2 climbing turns and 30' of rock armoring to span seep. This reroute will also help to control the speeds of mountain bikers. Close old trail. Chapter7: :. '':':- I 41 t �. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan EGGBEATER TRAIL Eggbeater Trail Recommendation #1 Latitidue: N36 01.924 Longitude: W94 13.049 $800.00 50' fall line trail. 100' reroute to mellow grades. Eggbeater Trail Recommendation #2 Latitidue: N36 01.903 Longitude: W94 13.061 $3,375.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. 75' of rock armoring. WESTERN MYTH TRAIL Western Myth Trail Recommendation #1 Latitidue: N36 01.814 Longitude: W94 13.094 $3,200.00 At the intersection with the Eggbeater trail the drainage runs directly down the Western Myth trail paired with steep grades and poor drainage for an extended distances. 400' reroute to the north to allow for a better intersection location and reduce the trail grades. Western Myth Trail Recommendation #2 + +- Latitidue: N36 01 721 Longitude: W94 13.148 $1,600.00 Trail grade is too steep for an extended distance 200' reroute to reduce the trails grade. 42 j Chapter 7: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan SPELLBOUND TRAIL ft Spellbound Trail Recommendation #1 r ' Latitidue: N36 01.615 Longitude: W94 13.184 $800.00 • i e. At the Intersection with Western Myth the drainage runs directly down Spellbound Trail. 100' reroute to allow for better intersection location and drainage. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #2 Latitidue: N36 01.821 Longitude: W94 13.212 s a $900.00 p(Poor drainage on rock drop landing Create better drainage and 50' rock armoring. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #3 Latitidue: N36 01 863 Longitude: W94 13.214 $1,600.00 Corner is too tight and trail grade too steep causing poor drainage. 200' reroute to the north reduce grades, open turn radius, and improve drainage. OSpellbound Trail Recommendation #4 Latitidue: N36 01.734 Longitude: W9413.214 $2,250.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. 50' rock armoring Spellbound Trail Recommendation #5 Latitidue: N36 01.384 Longitude: W94 13.265 $1,000.00 Steep trail grades, tight turn radius, and poor drainage in and out of turn. Realign corner upslope and to south for improved drainage. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #6 Latitidue: N36 01.340 Longitude: W94 13.257 $1,500.00 Poor drainage before turn. 60' reroute of turn for improved drainage. Chapter 7: 43 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OSpellbound Trail Recommendation #7 Latitidue: N36 01.358 Longitude: W94 13.237 $1,200.00 4 f 5 4 9 Poor drainage at the intersection of Western Myth. 150' reroute to the north for better intersection location and improved drainage. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #8 + + Latitidue: N36 01.348 Longitude: W94 13.212 $4,000.00 Trail grade exceeds the maximum grade of 15% for an extended distance. 500' reroute with a climbing turn to reduce trail grades and better align trail and trail flow. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #9 zed A x. �y Latitidue: N36 01.411 Longitude: W94 13 147 $1,600.00 Poor location and alignment of trails at intersection with Eggbeater. 0 200' reroute for better intersection location and improved drainage. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #10 Latitidue: N36 01.434 Longitude: W94 13.121 $3,200.00 Two turns exceed maximum grade for climbing turns. Relocate both turns approx. 75' behind current location in order to reduce grades. Spellbound Trail Recommendation #11 + * Latitidue: N36 01.341 Longitude: W94 13.095 $500.00 Poor drainage on old road bed. Build in -line grade dips to improve drainage. TRENT TRAIL Trent Trail Recommendation #1 O Latitidue: N36 01 820 Longitude: W94 13.040 $9,600.00 Seep causing muddy trail tread. 400' reroute with 100' of rock armoring This is also part of the major reroute around the Shale Barren shown on the map. 44 Chapter 7: .... Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan CRAZY MARY TRAIL Crazy Mary Trail Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #1 Recommendation #4 + + Latitidue: N36 01.314 Latitidue: N36 01.425 Longitude: W94 13.054 Longitude: W9412.943 i1ItMI11!IiI1.1 $1,600,00 •*111M17sJI $800.00 Steep grade with poor drainage. Seep and bad trail alignment causing poor drainage and wet trail tread. 200' Reroute to reduce grade and improve drainage. 100' Reroute to improve drainage. OCrazy Mary Trail Recommendation #2 Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #5 •• ' Latitidue: N36 01.315 Longitude: W94 13.026 IW21[I1 Latitidue: N36 01.466 IIM14I(�1t $800.00 Longitude: W94 12.901 IIWJM1I(.1 $1,350.00 + Seep causing muddy trail tread. ' r ' 2 seeps causing wet trail tread. + 100' Reroute above seep. 30' Rock ArmoringO . Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #3 Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #6 e +T Latitidue: N36 01.398 Longitude: W94 12 967 Latitidue: N36 01.532 Longitude: W94 12.878 + $400.00 $500 00 s s r Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage Poor drainage. 50' Reroute to improve drainage. + Inline drainage feature. Chapter 7: 45 I. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #7 'i + ��• Latitidue: N36 01.564 Longitude: W94 12.845 ¶1.200.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 150' Reroute to improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #8 a fi 9•� Latitidue: N36 01.602 Longitude: W94 12.852 $1,700.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 150' Reroute to improve drainage Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #9 Latitidue: N36 01.672 Longitude: W94 12.855 OR + a,. $'160(3.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage 200" Reroute to improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #10 Latitidue: N36 01 775 Longitude: W94 12 873 $800.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage 100' Reroute to improve drainage. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #11 iir'111 Latitidue: N36 01.847 Longitude: W94 12 890 SS800.00 Bad trail alignment causing poor drainage. 100' Reroute to improve drainage Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #12 *tl*'1DJl Latitidue: N36 01.945 Longitude: W94 12 832 $6,400.00 Bad trail separation. The trail comes close to itself as it snakes down the slope 800' Reroute. Move upper leg upslope and taper down to the double rock drop. After drop, middle leg will traverse slope instead of climbing. Move lower leg downslope then traverse slope back to trail. This is shown or. the map as one of the main reroutes. 46 1 Chapter 7: '' Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan CRAZY MARY TRAIL CONT. Crazy Mary Trail Recommendation #13 I'1d[S1i Latitidue: N36 01.973 _ Longitude: W94 12.680 $500.00 Poor drainage & meandering trail around sinkhole. Inline drainage features & 200' Reroute to connect overlooks REROUTES The most significant reroutes are primarily to avoid ecologically sensitive areas, avoid private property, or realign trails to be sustainable and have better separation. There are three significant reroutes: Spellbound Reroute - As part of the two miles of trail located on private property, the section of the Spellbound Trail in the southwest corner of the property has been identified for rerouting due to the need for public access. This reroute will serve as an alternative to the current alignment, but could become the permanent trail especially if the City is unable to attain an easement or acquire this piece of private property to publically accommodate the existing trails. This reroute is not ideal because it shortens the trail system and makes this area more congested, but this reroute will be considered as an alternative. SEE BUDGET ON PAGE 63 FOR TOTALS ON ALL EXISTING TRAIL REPAIRS Shale Barren Reroute - As identified by Theo Witsell's ecological assessment, the shale barren is a rare and sensitive ecological amenity and unique to Kessler Mountain. To accommodate this ecologically -sensitive area, reroutes around this area are proposed in order to avoid damaging the delicate fauna and flora. To enhance this reroute recommendation, educational signage will be required in order to keep users from accessing this sensitive area as well as informing the importance of this ecological amenity. More information regarding the shale barren can be viewed in Appendix B: A Rapid Terrestrial Ecological Assessment of Kessler Mountain Reserve by Theo Witsell. Chapter]: I 47 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Crazy Mary Reroute —To support the primary goal of building sustainable trails and protecting environmentally sensitive areas, two sections of the Crazy Mary Trail are in need of rerouting. One of these areas is located at the Crazy Mary and Trent Trail intersection near the top of the mountain, while the other is located near the northern end of the Crazy Mary Trail above the bluffline. This proposed reroute is needed in order to reach sustainable grades and to provide better trail separation where turns are condensed and limited in maneuverability. TRAIL CLOSURES Abandoned trails and corridors are generally closed by eliminating the existing tread while disguising the open corridor. Existing tread can be removed by scarifying the compacted soil to encourage new vegetation growth, placing organic tier and debris in the tread, and breaking the orevious tread's continuity with logs, stones or other material. The open corridor can be more difficult to disguise. Vertical elements such as the placement of a fallen tree, especially cedar, is helpful to visually remove the open corridor line which attracts the eye. These vertical elements will ideally last through a couple of growing seasons until natural growth can be established. In some cases, this is even accomplished with the planting of live trees and shrubs. Again, the intent is to completely camouflage the corridor. If people can see it, they will reopen it, especially if it's a short- cut for hiiers. PRIVATE TRAIL There are approximately two miles of trail on private property. These trails have existed for many years and are considered to be an integral to the existing system. In order for these trails to be open for public use, the City must gain access through an easement or land acquisition. Appropriate alternate solutions have been provided assuming that the City is unable to gain access. However, these trails have been included in the assessment should they become part of the public trail system. There are three trails located on private property: Rock City Trail - This trail is approximately one mile and crosses a few different property owners, one of which has been a champion for Kessler Mountain and has gone as far as providing access to the trail and creating a small trailhead and sign -in sheet. This has been one of the main access points to the trail system for years and holds some of the most beautiful terrain on the mountain. Spellbound Trail - This is a one mile segment of trail on the far southwest end that climbs up the mountain. it is. the connection between all west side trails Wino Trail -This is a spur trail to the historic stone wine cellar. 6e/ow arc 1[ro -,s , 71)V,% n 1(0/1 (00 h;° cins°d ofi or,rub!ic usr- Providing am obvious obsrucrion is the easieri wcrr; but blending the fog m,er cor idor into ncc' !ndscope is the /0051 sustainable. 48 I Chapter?:' Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan FORMER ROADBEDS - TRENT TRAIL The Trent Trail is actually a historic road bed that served as the main road over the mountain during the late 1800's when Kessler was being used as a winery (please refer to Chapter 2: History for more information). Today, the trail functions as the primary north -south connector trail that is situated as the main spine of the trail system. The trail starts near the water towers on the northeast end of the property and continues west to the shale barren and then turns south along the top of the ridge to the radio towers at the far south end of the property. For purposes of analysis, the trail can be broken into two segments: Water Towers to Shale Barren - The trail/old roadbed is approximately eight feet wide and continues directly up the mountain along the [all -line (prevailing slope), therefore exceeding maximum grades for sustainable trail. However, given that this segment of the trail is already established and provides the only motorized access on the mountain, it is recommended that the existing path be improved and remain as an emergency access and maintenance route for the City. This path should remain open as a public use trail for those preferring a more direct route or climbing challenge. Also recommended is to regrade and install inline grade dips to mitigate erosion due to the steep alignment of the trail. A minimum of six feet width should be established to accommodate utility vehicles for emergencies and maintenance. This does not mean that the trail tread width must he six feet, rather the corridor must be cleared of any trees, downfall, rocks, or other obstacles that would impede a UTV from traveling down the trail, The tread itself would more likely become four feet wide like it is today. Shale Barren to Radio Towers - There are a few places where the trail has been routed around deadfall that have caused some steeper grades and trail flow issues, Progressive Trail Design recommends these areas be addressed with the installation of inline drainage features in any place where the trail is straight down the fall line for extended periods. Again, a minimum of six feet width should be established to accommodate utility vehicles for emergencies and maintenance. The diagram be/ow is on, example o; inline grade dips, which ore o proposed solution to erosion issues on steep grades (or the Kessler Mountain trail system. CONSTRUCTED TREAD DIP CONFIGURATIONS �`. [J �-` •' _-._,.�.--ter _r-.,�� - +7`�. R f s t_'r J' � ,h.. !n t '-... � -•,... 'sc ' :.r , ,� ' .sr i .t . Cc' M .' % ...7•, Siw; (7{I �.+:'i''4'"-w�' 'r ±. ` 1 . X35 ; • r•r ..mot r . , 'i P"+: Chapter 7: i.. 49 r` U 4�$L T � a 4.r �.. Y Lt'•}Ry: •n �� P!!I Proposed Trails, ■L. {• r. « f L Y [�`.Y yip. ! - a . r 11,.. ,%}• \A+� ' �4_ ' 4 rd 1' - � ` f.� tisy� '�$,+y = w '� '�!• r r'+"� �':�e` g�*�.�, a` }..•..l d' _ c1 4 f x.3. 1 t / - 1 - � �''t'Ir:w, f4 `r a '• u •! .4-_ N,r' -K'i- ���� stn Y, r - - r• r' All-.'�A 7� -- _ i • .e 'MIL '• f •�►. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter outlines the proposed trail system from Progressive Trail Design for an additional 6.6 miles of public use trails at Kessler Mountain. INTRODUCTION There are a total of four proposed trails: These trails total approximately 6.6 miles, excluding the paved or hard surface paths. The focus of this master plan is primarily on the soft surface trail. The shared -use, paved paths were not included in the scope of this plan; however, high-level concepts based on the City's Regional Park Plan and Active Transportation Plan were included. It is important to note that all proposed trails in this plan are conceptual alignments based on field work and the public input process. They are all subject to be further refined on the ground during the pre -construction final design phase. Much thought, debate and field study has gone into the proposed locations. This plan is meant to be used as a guide for the future development of the Kessler Mountain Trail System. All of the proposed soft surface trails are intended to be "natural surface trails" (see definition below) that will range in width and character. They are proposed to address the need of providing more diverse experiences for a variety of users, introducing difficulty level progression by adding beginner and intermediate options, and accessing key attractions. The following pages are a description with support images of the different types of proposed trails. Chapter B: 1 I, 51 / Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan BEGINNER LOOP (1.5 MILES) This trail, designated by the green color in the image below, would be an approximately four- to five-foot wide natural surface trail that serves as a hiking or beginner level mountain biking loop. With proximity near the main trailhead at the Regional Park, this loop offers an easily accessible recreational opportunity for a variety of users. The trail is aligned at the base of the mountain and skirts the edge of the recently capped landfill, which will soon be restored to prairie -like conditions. It begins and ends at the main trailhead and navigates through the woods along gentle slopes. This trail type is needed in order to provide better access to the mountain for all users and skill progression in the trail system. As previously mentioned, all of the existing trails on the mountain are considered advanced, therefore it is important to also offer beginner and intermediate level trails. Additional loop configurations branching off of this loop offer expanded hiking and biking options. o o r 8 Ifr. s Beginner Loop -' Landfill Area coo GG77 � c3' c'U ri a 00 0 .--- a A ^: r3; ice,. y ap(�c3:70 to, P Parking &Trail Hub LOWER BLUFF TRAIL (3.4 MILES) This trail, designated by the blue color, would be a two -foot wide intermediate level trail that generally follows the contour of the land and skirts the base of the bluff line. The trail serves multiple purposes. First, this trail provides access to the existing trail system and ties into the East Bluff Trail, proposed to run along the upper portion of the bluff line. Second, it connects the trail system to two proposed secondary trailhead/parking areas: ADA Hilltop Trailhead and Kessler Mountain Road Trailhead. In addition, the trail provides a much- needed intermediate level trail experience, adding to the diversity of use, challenge, and experience. This trail can be accessed from the main parking area near the former landfill and provides loop configurations and educational opportunities along the base of the bluff showcasing geology, springs, and wildlife. The upper leg of this trail follows the contours along a natural bench at the base of the east bluff line. There are many big boulders, sheer bluff walls, springs and other ecologically rich zones to view. The goal of this trail is to take users to these locations in a responsibly designed way creating a unique natural experience and introducing visitors to the wonders of Kessler Mountain and Ozark ecology. It will be very irriportant to provide trail etiquette, educational, and interpretive signs to direct people to stay on the trail and it ustrate the importance of this natural amenity. This may be one of the most frequented areas due its proximity to the Regional Park, making it of paramount importance to contain users on the proposed trail. However, providing the opportunity to experience this terrain without having to travel deep into the trail system targets the goal of providing unique and educational opportunities at an accessible distance for a variety of trait' users. 52 Chapter 8: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Leaving the upper leg of this trail and ascending through breaks in the bluff line are two connector trails that, will provide access to the proposed East Bluff Trail. Both of these connector trails utilize existing roadbeds that, offer direct routes up the mountain. Unfortunately, the grades of these roadbeds are too steep (exceed 20% grade for the acceptable maximum length) to establish a sustainable trail. Therefore, switchbacks must be integrated to reduce the grades and make the trail more comfortable to navigate. Through strategic design, the majority of the road bed can be used. This is the preferred option because the corridor has already been impacted and minimizing any further disruption should be considered a top priority during the final design phase From a recreational standpoint, the Lower Bluff Trail offers a great place for mountain bikers, trail runners and hikers to exercise, challenge themselves, and experience a moderate trail that gently flows along the contour of this open wooded terrain. This will serve as the next level of skill progression from the Beginner Loop as well as a gateway trail to the more advanced and challenging trails located higher on the mountain. 1 a n r 01 0 40 P-. pa �� 400f9p 'h7 41 ti506060000 *10 ,a +e a J7tJ060 c , e '% OC IL . w landfill Area n / 3 ,�•,�3I Parking rTrail Hub •�ghh..C/�- I REGIONAL PA QOQyy h -'j{ �Oa vawa40a� 5a Qa6'"n� 0 a Lower Bluff Trail `• , `"� I Lac. Ji _ D .716 6ft c160t1{f 9t1'3r'�� tY fJF/ �yP J417a �QSJ4c1 �jJ Cr r33 90 ,�. s• r r r• r"..; +r. - y- - m 090 0 Q 00th'", 1 %,-• - 10 wai La,._� SSLERMQUNT, aN ROACH Chapter 8: :. . . ; 53 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan EAST BLUFF TRAIL (1.7 MILES) Designated by the magenta color, the East Bluff Trail will be an eighteen -inch to two -foot wide backcountry single-track trail similar to the existing trails. This trail will run along the top of the east bluff line offering outstanding views to the east and overlooks of the Regional Park and the City of Fayetteville. This trail has the potential to become one of the most popular trails in the park due to its natural beauty and proximity to the trailhead. The trail can be accessed from the main trailhead utilizing two trail connections by way of the Lower Bluff Trail as well as from a connection to Crazy Mary Trail. East Bluff Trail These connections offer a variety of short and long distance ioop options. They, also serve as a link to the southern and more remote western portions of the existing trail system through a series of switchbacks on the south end that connect to Crazy Mary Trail, taking users to the highest point on Kessler Mountain. a� %Ooar�aaO P I Parkin 54 1 Chapter 8:: ,<: :r Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan PAVED ACTIVE TRANSPORATION TRAIL AND REGIONAL PARK TRAIL LOOP Though the alignment of many or the paved paths are not finalized, a trail concept to make a north - south connection over the mountain has been illustrated in this plan. This trail is currently included in the Active Transportation Master Plan and would serve as part of the Rupple Road extension from the Ozark Smokehouse to the Regional Park. There is also a concept for a paved path around the Regional Park, which is shown on this plan. This path will be fully accessible and provide a trail opportunity within the Regional Park development. An overlook on the hillside above the baseball fields was identified as a desirable destination for access by this trail. In conjunction with the Regional Park development, plans for an extension of Fayetteville's paved trails system to the park are currently being prepared and construction is expected to be completed by Fall 2016. This will be identified as the Cato Springs Trail and will access the park by trail from the northeast, providing connections to the Town Branch Trail and the Razorback Greenway. Reference Appendix A: Existing Condition Studies and Plans for more information. Chapter 8: i.- 55 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan TRAILHEADS There are a total of five proposed and future trailheads to access the trail system. Tempoary Trailhead Phase I construction of the Regional Park features the construction of four baseball fields and a large parking lot facility. Main Trailhead This is the primary trailhead positioned on the far western end of the Regional Park at the base of the old landfill area. 0 6 U I O°OC) C) This parking facility will serve as a temporary trailhead for public access until the main trailhead is constructed in later phases of the Regional Park development. This will he a large parking area with restrooms and a trail kiosk. This facility is anticipated to be constructed in a later phase of the Regional Par': development, P Parking &Trail Hub �)6 Chapter 8; ... Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Judge Cummings Road Trailhead Currently serving as existing access to the Kessler It is approximately 0.4 miles east of the Main Mountain trails, this will continue to serve as Trailhead and the soft surface trails. secondary trailhead to the mountain or a main trailhead for greenway users, JUDGE CUMMINGS ROAD Kessler Moutain Road Trailhead This is a future concept to provide a small parking area on the south end of the trail system off Kessler Mountain Road, This could eventually connect to future trail development to the south. ADA Trailhead Located at the top o[Judge Cummings Road near the water towers, this trailhead would be reserved for users with special needs to provide access to key overlooks and trails. ! ® DO - .. .L . iUNTAIN ROAD Potential Secondary Parking &Trailhead Senior Citizens ADA 'iParkinci &Trail Hub Chapter 8: 57 Vt dD r4Vlountain Tra't &t�hr� • ii 'Ti' Additional Trail Opportunities 4I i - r ."I ,, I4 rid, a_ . r ► b � w iii ,k 74 � „r� vk F e k R + Chapter 9. Additiorral Trfpp t }r.ities ° t'x Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan OVERVIEW This chapter identifies additional opportunities for bikers and hikers. These opportunities are considered to be future considerations for the development of Kessler Mountain in conjunction with the Regional Park. INTRODUCTION Additional opportunities for trail and bike amenities are proposed in this section and address requests made by City and public during input periods, as well as trends and potential future needs. A few of these concepts are outlined below. Note: These are only meant to be conceptual ideas to meet future recreational needs based on current trends. BIKE PARK A bike park is a purpose-built skills park for bicyclists. It is meant to provide fun and challenge for all skill levels. The former landfill is a perfect canvas for a world -class bike park. The grades are perfect for this use and its placement at the main trailhead makes it ideal for skills -building amenities. The landfill has strict management restrictions limiting its use and development to activities that will not penetrate the newly installed clay cap. This makes the area ideal for use of a bike skills park since this is best accomplished by importing more nil dirt to construct the features and that will further buffer the new cap- A bike park would bring a The landfill of Kessler Mountain has strict manogement restrictions limiting its use and development to octiviries, but acts as the perfect canvas for o world -class bike park. Chapter 9: ..... , 1 59 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan unique recreational asset to the Regional Park and the City of Fayetteville. INTERPRETIVE NATURE (HIKING ONLY) ACCESSIBLE TRAIL This type of trail is designed for education and accessibility. It is typically located in gentle terrain and preferably surfaced with a crushed stone. There are a few locations that could work for this type of trail, One is the area around the Regional Park, specifically around the streams, This trail could replace the concrete path in places or work in conunction, as an alternate trail winding back and forth over the stream with boardwalks. Another opportunity is near the water towers on the north end, leaving the ADA parking area and accessing the overlooks. PURPOSE-BUILT DOWNHILL MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL These types of trails are extremely popular among mountain bikers. They are directional downhill trails designed for challenge and fun. Kessler provides an especially unique opportunity in Northwest Arkansas due to its elevation change and natural technical features. There is a great opportunity for one of these types of trails coming off the high point (near radio towers) on the south end dropping dog -✓n to either the western or eastern sides of the mountain. This could become more feasible if the private land to the southwest, where the existing Spellbound Trail is located, were officially acquired. Should this be a possibility, it would be especially important to separate this trail from other trails as much as possible, as well as conduct an ecological study within the trail corridor to avoid impact to any high value natural resources. Above ore examples of intrepretive nature accessible trails. These mails con present opportunities to typically unaccessihle areas and provide users with the unique experience of/earning about .something about chic, local landscape, Be/ow and Opposite Page: bottom 3 images ore examples of intrenretive signage along soft surface trails. The bottom two images ore examples of a purpose-built downhill mountain bike trails and bike parks 60 1 Chapter 3: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan , ,{ i=ce 1� . � f r Chapter 9: ' " T. . 1 61 - Jc ` ttF L 5 T.#r. Sig g • -•-__ Risk Management & Main ten an ce s �.�•: 'f, �' ' �'' .: n'".-►''' s�-,lc'R' ���y '� _fir '"� � :i t � rl. 4 } t 1 �FY • - �;. r4'""Gi.�''��__ 'r � ;� `f` ".~ WV Y , s � yr _* 5 s L 4�`' .� '� '�• f � L S 'Fr �4c � �" �''.t A kn {r w ' `�'_ - � :5 i z, + .. i i r $wy �?m_QI'*� , � •' �1` +r',., d W` •' .'� ` ; � - : ♦ � r. � a���� � "�- ca s y: r "a•?� a ^yr � A+ � •�� ��.7, �", y.° //��,p ♦ 1. ^ - '•Gj � d• _ r �_ - ,c }, '�,� lV p'� a JA i3P��4' ��� �W:k �� �`l: '.Y �C `j �•.��. g ; �. "'�� ^�' �a •�1.}W Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan tip, OVERVIEW This chapter provides guidelines to be used in providing signage for wayfinding and emergency access. This chapter also outlines considerations for maintenance and inspection following the development of the trail network. INTRODUCTION Signs are the most important communication mechanism between users and land management agencies_ A well -implemented and maintained sign program can enhance the user experience, allowing users to navigate through the trail network and customize their trail experience. Signs also play a critical role in managing risk and the rapid deployment of emergency services. A strategic and frequent sign program meets the needs of all trail users, from the savvy, daily trail user to a first-time visitor. Because signs sometimes intrude on the natural outdoor experience, balancing these competing interests is the key to developing a successful sign program. The Northwest Arkansas Soft Surface Signage Plan was developed by Alta Planning + Design and Progressive Trail Design and is being implemented in all the soft -surface trail systems throughout Northwest Arkansas in an effort to standardize signage and organize the systems. These signs can be adapted to fit the needs of each system, though some will require custom signs. For example, Kessler will need educational signs for ecologically sensitive areas and "stay on trail" signs throughout. Chapter 10: 1 63 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan \\jlI�- H ❑ I� o ° Q Ultra existing trails are 1) tanilnlJsnian+sc�s+ S+� to wi"Iv Vary@. ty O 's r od Q o r ROC1S CITY ❑ o + o PR{iRFRi� 80UI+il3 t] Senior Citizens ADD O o °p o o . Parking &Trail Hub 6 �+Q $ r S4 ask tiE p Qa - 1 O' t �• K a8m 6 4Spp'Pf/�1 I GO r y 8 � �. 1 r\G � L l L7a oo Sa 64jI a - ' O ld+ pp + try vl 4 OQQ l5 a ! aacooR5ao°uv C'a x Va O p ,.t nJJ �Raa �i `96if 1 Landfi ll Area i goc • p P p mry 1 iY 0p�m om6p ' + IS ¢ fl ♦ d f �� {V 4 g �y�,7y¢ 'Parking &Trail Hub I:=] Gl• r w r� +iu y49 o r � f� �w Q The nntnntialrnmule of thn /.a' . r L PL: a e 1 64 I Chapter 10;: . Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan LEGENDNOTE: ALL TRAIL LENGTHS AND ALIGNMENTS ARE APPROXIMATE 4\ EXISTING TRAILS BIKING ALLOWED `� 6 Miles (Within Park Boundary) !r RESTROOMS BEGINNER LOOP L" III }oo sr o �oO 1.5 Miles (4'WIDE) O 0 [-p- PARKING AREA LOWER BLUFFTRAIL WI 3.4 Miles (2'-3'DE) ABANDONED TRAILS A Qc,@ m EAST BLUFF TRAIL PAVED TRAILS - PROPOSED tI 1.7 Miles (18"-2'WIDE) % U Proposed by City ofFayettevville �4,►'=` TRAIL REROUTES 1 Mile , FUTURE PAVED TRAILS Proposed by the City of Fayetteville TRAILHEAD KIOSK EMERGENCY ACCESS ROUTE M INTERSECTING TRAIL SIGNS {- EMERENCY PICKUP TRAIL MARKERS ``. ` LOCATION (NUMBER) TRAIL CLASSIFICATIONS 110 AL PARK_"nj Ji7y JUDGE CUMMING5 ROAD L 'r- - ca 0 sra�S r o r Potential Secondary Parking&Trailhead : ID KESSLER MOUNTAIN RISK MANAGEMENT AND EMERGENCY ACCESS PLAN The recommendations for emergency access and wayfinding signage are shown on this graphic. There are three proposed types of wayfinding signage: trailhead kiosk, intersection trail signs, and trail markers. Emergency access routes are identified with the yellow buffer line with emergency pickup locations marked with the red circle. Chapter 10: !: ' . , I' " 't PO' 1 65 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan NORTHWEST ARKANSAS SOFT- SURFACE SIGNAGE PLAN Front/Berk Option 2 for (2) 4"x 6" Post Double Face Option "r'JWi! i +�rAl nin r^rruHW 1f Prof le 66 1 Chapter 10: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan, Trail Markers . i2i'tirl 'FtiVt1;1 MF'ri7Jl[ flitA�M30 p . ited!Nile ievrf 8.0p 7,LtlrifM W,,rvtx• '5arw1 Intersecting Trail Signs 6a(,a)j �Q uhf S, fl�ierrri s3fScr; OvrJ fj(0 r1-cipS&-tiuiI:itl{ rI �y'sfrrfi. 1W1A1 f 4Ai'A' T4" $ da••.. .1� A A%pA>1!r1Yd tAv k;A (it' r. j u Q,;'rirJA11 Lime. .,, 1.-.. _. ¼($ 1U.J rare. 1 .. Chapter 10, , 67 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan RISK MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES Below are some principles of trail design, construction techniques and management strategies for managing risk: Warnings • Signs play a vital role in managing risk. • Consider a perimeter (fence, vegetation - every user is warned of potential risk no matter how they enter the trail system). • The main trailhead kiosk could describe trail difficulty using a trail rating system. • Provide signage that alerts users to elements of increased risk. • Use language that appeals to users. • Include warnings about natural outdoor hazards (such as deadfall, weather, animals, etc.). Filters • A trail filter, sometimes referred to as a gateway or qualifier, is a high -skill -level, low - consequence obstacle that demonstrates the difficulty of the upcoming trail or trail feature. • Consider using filters at the beginning of each advanced trail and just before technical features. • By making the entrances to technical trails and features difficult, you prevent unprepared riders from overstepping their abilities, 0 Build with low consequence, easy exit • Filter must be path of least resistance, Provide Option Lines • Consider offering an easier, alternate route around a mountain biking technical feature to accommodate other trail users. • Allow different ability -level riders to ride together. • Make easiertrail longer, more difficult trail shorter. • Alternative trails can potentially be in the same corridor as the main trail; for example, a drop-off could vary in height from one side of the trail to the other. IRAN- Qulio v+. .K nor,.,lMa , 14�1ui glt IMBA RULES OF THE TRAIL av . r .,.. fa.+ ,ter n 0 ROE ON OPEN TRAILS ONLY P `�""" }•• LEAVE NO TRACE .ww . 0 CONTROL YOUR BICYCLE `/q. 0 ALWAYS YIELD THE TRAIL �,...,._� * ^ �f ty i' y J 4j NEVER SCARE ANIMALS =--.— ,^ A. ° 0 PLAN HEAD W... JUMP A►rl-MB-A 68 I Chapter 10: .fr y�i Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Introduce challenges to users sequentially so they can enhance their skills in a managed environment. Provide good sight lines • Create sight lines at intersections and bi-directional trails. Communicate to emergency responders about how to locate users on trail systems - create an incident response plan • Include waypoint signage link to GIS map. • Provide access to locked areas. • Familiarize EMS with relevant maps. Self -extraction is ideal - use signage • Provide users with address for emergency services. • Provide directions to nearest health care facilities and hours of operation. • Place signs along the trail to facilitate location communication to EMS. TRAIL DIFFICULTYAND SIGNAGE Mountain Bikers: The International Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA) developed a standard method for categorizing the relative technical difficulty of recreational bicycle trails, known as the IMBA Trail Difficulty Rating System. This standard rating system was adapted from the International Trail Marking System used at ski areas throughout the world. Many trail networks use this type of system, most notably resort -based mountain biking trail networks. Hikers: The Universal Trail Assessment Process (UTAP) is an objective measurement system for documenting the conditions on any outdoor path of travel (e.g., sidewalk, recreation trail, shared use path, etc). It is a series of measurement procedures that enable information about trail conditions (e.g., grade, cross slope, surface, width, obstructions) to be collected in an accurate and repeatable manner. It is solely a system intended to provide objective information to a prospective user allowing them to determine their ability in relation to the trail's difficulty, This system can: • Help trail users make informed decisions • Encourage visitors to use trails that match their skill level • Manage risk and minimize injuries • Improve the outdoor experience for a wide variety of visitors • Aid in the planning of trails and trail systems The criteria to rate a trail is as follows: Rate Technical Challenge Only The system focuses on rating the technical challenge of trails, not the physical exertion. It is not practical to rate both types of difficulty with one system. Consider, for example, a smooth, wide trail that is 20 miles long. Chapter 10: 69 ,v Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan The technical challenge of this trail is easy, yet the distance would make the physical exertion difficult. The solution is to independently rate technical challenge, and indicate physical exertion by posting trail length, and possibly even elevation change. Collect Trail Measurements Use the accompanying table and collect trail measurements for each criteria, There is no prescribed method for tallying a "score" for each trail. Evaluate the trail against the table and combine with judgment to reach the final rating. It is unlikely that any particular trail will measure at the same difficulty level for every criteria. For example, a certain trail may rate as a green circle in three criteria, but a blue square in two different criteria. Include Difficulty and Trail Length on Signs and Maps Trail length is not a criterion of the system. Instead, trail length should be posted on signs in addition to the difficulty symbol. A sign displaying both length and difficulty provides lots of information, yet it is simple to create and easy to understand. Likewise, elevation change is not a criterion. Evaluate Difficulty Relative to Local Trails Trails should be rated relative to other trails in the region. Do not evaluate each trail in isolation Consider all the trails in a region and how they compare to one another. This will help rank the relative difficulty of each trail and will help trail users select an appropriate route. Use Good Judgment Rating a trail is not entirely objective. It's best to combine tangible data with subjective judgment to reach the final rating. For example, a trail may have a wide range of tread surfaces - most of the trail is easy, but some sections are more difficult. How would it be rated? Use personal experience to consider all elements and select a rating that best matches the style of trail.. Consider Other Trail Qualities Do not forget to consider trail qualities beyond the objective criteria, A wide variety of features could contribute to a trail's difficulty. For example, exposure - the feeling of empty space next to and below the trail tread - provides an added psychological challenge beyond the steepness or roughness of the trail. Other qualities to think about are corridor clearance and turn radius. Use Common Sense and Seek Input No rating system can be totally objective or valid for every situation. This system is a tool to be combined with common sense_ Look at trails with a discerning eye, and seek input from trail users before selecting the rating. Remember, a diverse trail network with a variety of trail styles is a great way to ensure content users. Provide both easy and difficult trails to spread users and meet a range of needs. By indicating the length and difficulty of trails with a clear signage system, users will be able to locate their preferred type of trail easily. CRITERIA TO CONSIDER Tread Width: The average width of the active tread or beaten path of the trail. For the existing Kessler Mountain trail system, tread width ranges from one to two feet wide. The implementation of proposed trails will conform and be consistent with the standards established by the existing trail system. 70 Chapter 10: , Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Tread Surface: The material and stability of the tread surface is a determining factor in the difficulty of travel on the trail. Some descriptive terms include: hardened (paved or surfaced), firm, stable, variable, widely variable, loose and unpredictable. Typical tread surfaces in the existing Kessler Mountain trail systems range from firm to loose soils as well as feature areas of native stone tread at steep grades or areas prone to erosion. Trail Grade (maximum and average): Maximum grade is defined as the steepest section of trail that is more than approximately ten feet in length and is measured in percent with a clinometer. Average grade is the steepness of the trail over its entire length. Average grade can be calculated by taking the total elevation gain of the trail, divided by the total distance, multiplied by 100 to equal a percent grade. Grades for the proposed Kessler Mountain trail system will be subject to the terrain of the landscape, but will contain a variety of difficulties for a wide range of users. , Natural Obstacles and Technical Trail Features: Objects introduced along the trail can add challenge by impeding travel Examples include: rocks, roots, logs, holes, ledges, drop-offs, etc. The height of each obstacle is measured from the tread surface to the top of the obstacle. If the obstacle is uneven in height, measure to the point over which t is most easily ridden. Technical trail features are objects that have been introduced to the trail to add technical challenge. Examples include: rocks, logs, elevated bridges, teeter-totters, jumps, drop-offs, etc. Both the height and the width of the technical trail feature are measured. The proposed Kessler Mountain trail system will contain a variety of both natural and technical trail features. These features and their difficulty can range for different types of trail users. These features can progressively become more difficult in remote sections of the proposed trail system, while also providing obstacles and features at a more accessible distance for less experienced users. Cross Slope For some trail users, the degree of cross slope (or out -slope) in the tread also contributes to the difficulty rating. Generally, a tread should be constructed with two to five percent degree of out - slope to positively shed water. However, an out - slope of five percent or greater becomes difficult to easily navigate, particularly for users with impaired mobility or confined to a wheelchair. A particular trail's tread width, grade, out -slope, surface, and obstacles are all considerations to be provided at the trailhead to offer information on a trail's universal accessibility. TRAIL DIFFICULTYAND SIGNAGE The proposed Kessler Mountain trail system can feature a variety of signage types signifying wayfinding, trail difficulty and length, access points, educational purposes, and obstacle or feature designation, Each type of signage is outlined below for the purposes of this plan: Trail Access Points: • Trail map / kiosk • Difficulty rating system Trail Name Markers: • Featured at all trail intersections • Distance markers on shared -use, paved trail systems Chapter 10: `:.:.:;:.. , : __ , l 71 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Educational Sign age: • Historic features • Natural features • Wildlife and wetland area Technical Trail Features (TTF): s Difficulty level signs at approaches and exists to all technical features • Signage to be placed at five to ten foot distances before the feature, in some cases even further away to account for sight distances and design speeds. Trail Difficulty Rating System EMERGENCY ACCESS Implementing emergency access points that are marked and maintained throughout a trail system is crucial. Along with these access points, there should also be an Emergency Rescue Plan in place that land managers and rescue departments can implement in case of an emergency. The graphic below displays the proposed locations for emergency access points in the proposed Kessler Mountain trail system. DEVELOPING AN EMERGENCY RESCUE PLAN: • Install "Safety Point" signs at proposed locations throughout the trail system featuring good access (e g. ATV/Jeep roads). Each "Safety Point" sign should display a corresponding access point EML101M Easy M. tlellvukt 'ay DII11 sI1 letru,nrtY DMfraur Whtxa t3r.1e Grtlnn'[ht^k Irrwa tnwlra 40.1sk nktmmfr lard w t t}la,rrrrwf number. • Collaboration between City Wait W,d^th 72" w m— 36" or morn i4' nr r,.,rr, 12' or move 6' ur mc+ia Parks and Recreation staff and W,ad Surfaca +lardaned or Firm and Mo5ll, ;olrly variable, 116WpN vafo7@h emergency response staff (Fire, sllrfatod ,table ✓Atl. and unn'x•dirtalilP Police and EMS) shoud be 16 TIN far lahi:it} conducted on -site to discuss ,�®r4g4 W1Coda _ail th.stl y'.. ax or DM 1O%r:r Icsi 15°.F nr 1pss m"+term the Emergency Rescue Plan, as Maximum Van Ias•. Max 15 . Max TS*, a. Ma,I 15% w r>aax 1S% nr well as identify all access point -Baal Grade greatxr g,"wr $water locations and conduct training Haeura1Ob5tadax tlono U,tavoidahlrr 'Jemgidaflir LJnayslidabta Unavrxd4I, ana iptrftl¢al r:lrttlstla3 oftt]rtrt a11[tiH1.N cbseatien runs. Special products can be Wail Features 1" 1 all nr lass ii" 1.111 rr rrs' 15" tall or Easrr 1stall ar grater purchased, such as a wheeled , .idabke A'lr:,tfahle A ddably Avnida_hle --su rlrKr. v nhtta.r!r m. -€Mattes may nbo.emmay back board for back country trail Dr pio+Nnt b' r, —', ba pro"-€ bs W4'inht rescue, in addition to a utility U*uroidahlr Uwvcidablr Ma y incl:tdc May inrlrafa vehicle equipped with medical eeidgrg hrdgrs 1rm&tar*% loxa rocks 16" ar ≥4' n; Mrr- gear. c ; i•,kyh nr Unslunrjale Unam�dahi,i ti�l1. ,Sidle r,' bridge! briagm • Dispatch is informed of the alerir i..;'rati:r 24' or wider 24` or narrc>avn, Emergency Rescue Plan and hoighl rr6k 4' high or TrF't 4' hggh or Iris, widtht>rf 0.4ter,wkfttlp.i has a reference map in case of deck is 1i, than: de'k is 1n the haicht tl„pritdirfabla emergency. 5"'. Serlwrtr,s Mary sir[tinrel ■ Users are to be informed of the l fliArN1 lrrlSlrle Emergency Rescue Plan at all trailheads. 72 1 Chapter 10: . Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION Maintenance and Inspection (M&I) will vary depending on the facility being maintained. A typical single-track trail, for instance, will vary in maintenance needs depending on the landscape supporting the trail. Therefore, there is no single plan that can fit all facilities. It will be the land manager's responsibility to determine the best plan of action relative to the trail's accessibility, amount of use, and intended level of difficulty. Maintenance Overview: For general maintenance needs, the best approach is adoption of the park or facility by a volunteer group, such as a local cycling club, hiking organization, nature club, etc. This is the primary policy of IMBA and should be encouraged by every community. This type of community buy -in is priceless and integral to the success of the facility through increase user involvement. However, it General Trail Maintenance Recommendations: • Create a Comprehensive Maintenance/Risk Management Plan. • Designate one land manager/city employee as - "Trails Supervisor". He/She will be responsible for executing the maintenance and risk management plan. This is not a full-time position. They will primarily perform routine inspections (weekly) on all trails, conduct simple maintenance tasks, help facilitate events, and communicate with the local volunteer group. • Keep maintenance and inspection log with routine inspections of all features. • Create a partnership with the local club. Most local clubs become stewards or the park, performing the overall maintenance of the facility under the guidance of the "Trails Supervisor". A well -organized club should be able to perform 90% of minor maintenance needs before they advance into a major maintenance need, is important that the stewards of the facility are • well organized and trained. They must be directed by at least one knowledgeable trail builder in order to properly maintain the facility. It is also recommended that a maintenance log be kept in order to keep track of volunteer hours. Inspection Overview: Inspection is to be conducted by the managers of the facility (i.e. city staff) since it is ultimately their responsibility, inspectors should be trained by a professional trail builder and required to keep an inspection log. This is particularly important for the inspection of Technical Trail Features. Inspectors need to know what safety hazards to look for and how to repair them. Some major maintenance and inspection needs for the trail system can be beyond the expertise of the land manager or local volunteer groups, therefore professional services can be sought. All wooden trail features should have a life span of approximately twenty years if built using the proper materials and techniques, and maintained properly (i.e. sealed annually). All wooden features should be inspected routinely and TTF's should be given extra care, specifically fall zones and approaches. • Trail tread should be groomed to ensure that it maintains 5% outslope. The most common problem is cupping of the tread due to displacement and compaction. n which case, you must de -berm the downside of the trail to ensure that water sheet flows across_ Also, knick (open fan -like drainage) the troughs of all grade reversals. • Trim corridor regularly. Sight lines are especially important. • Estimated Maintenance Budget: $5-20k annually (depending on the need for trail). Professional maintenance services could range from $.25 per foot to $1.00 per foot for an overhaul, Chapter 10: ._ r. 1 73 (y �`� cwt �` � ��-� •; •`•""`�3 ti.`", 0F r( Phasing Plan Budget fl ..s r a:•r f f. +,..w `IP n.. - .arl-r - _ �_"`,. _`..�'�'"" 1• _.*'�4. '� f"•'Y of '� i� �' _ f � ' —. tr- � • � I. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan,. OVERVIEW This chapter outlines the phasing plan for the improvements to the existing trail system, proposed additions, and a construction budget. PHASING PLAN The implementation of this plan and the proceeding recommendations are contingent upon funding and other approvals. All construction could be implemented at once or could take place over the course of years. Below are the recommendations in order of priority from Progressive Trail Design. Initial Efforts Private Property: Since use of existing trails on private property are critical to the design of the overall trail system, a primary recommendation of this plan is for the City to initiate contact with affected property owners to begin discussions on approved use of these corridors. This effort will be required before other alternative connections are further developed. Final use of private corridors will be based on acquisitions or agreements approved through the City Attorney's Office. Connector Trail: see following page for description Chapter 11' 75 V Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Existing Trail: Aside from approved use of private property, the highest priority is to improve the existing trail system by implementing the recommendations outlined in Chapter Seven: Existing Trails. Since the opening of Kessler Mountain as a public park, there has been a substantial increase in the volume of trail traffic. Because of this increase in use, much damage has been caused to the trail and adjacent area. Additionally, the trails were not designed for the high-level of use they are receiving now. Many segments of the trail are poorly aligned, have had sight lines, or intersect in poor locations. It is important to address these areas as soon as possible to mitigate user conflict and ensure safety and sustainabillty, Finally, many parts of the trail system need sustainable standards reapplied with the consideration of "trail flow". This plan recommends doing this in a way that enhances the system and in no way detracts from the natural character and technicality of the trail tread and the backcountry trail experience that Kessler Mountain is known for. Signage: Due to the high traffic and the fact that Kessler Mountain is now a public park, it is important that a good signage and wayfinding system is put in place. Signage is needed to easily interpret location, manage risk, and educate the public on the ecologically sensitive areas of Kessler Mountain. Existing signs have been recently installed by volunteers. It is recommended that the Northwest Arkansas Soft Surface Signage Plan be implemented, as this is the new standard for all local soft surface trail systems in Northwest Arkansas. In addition, trail etiquette and educational signage should be installed as soon as possible. Please refer to Chapter 10: Signage and Risk Management for more information. Connector Trail: There is one connector trail recommended for immediate construction. This trail is necessary to connect the baseball parking lot (acting as the temporary trailhead until the main trailhead is constructed) to the top of the mountain near the water towers, This trail would likely consist of segments of the blue and green trails. Final Design: Final GPS and flagged trail alignment on all new proposed trails will be necessary in order to plan and prepare future trails to be constructed. Please refer to the section, later in this chapter, entitled Implementation of New Trails for more information. Beginner Loop & Lower Bluff Trails (Green & Blue) These trails would add an element of skill progression in the system and provide access for a variety of users, therefore they should be constructed as soon as possible. Please refer to Chapter 8: Proposed Trails to see a description of these trails and for more information about the purpose of these trails. East Bluff Trail As mentioned in the previous chapter, this trail has the potential to be one of the most popular trails on the mountain due to its location along the top of the bluff line and proximity to the trailhead. However, due to similarity in style to the eight miles of existing trail, this is not a trail -type that is as much of a priority as the other new proposed trails. Paved Active Transportation Trail and Regional Park Trail Loop These trails will be developed in conjunction with the Regional Park development. IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW TRAILS As previously mentioned, all new trails are conceptual in alignment. Prior to the construction of any trail, the proposed final route would be center -line flagged with some allowable deviation for adjustment during construction. All trail alignments will be approved by the Parks and Recreation Department to ensure that they are aligned in a sustainable fashion and avoid any sensitive areas. Final trail designs may change in character or alignment at the time of development in order to address current user needs or unforeseen factors, 76 I Chapter 11: i• *`er Mountain Trails Master Plan • "+" " a w ate . Cr k a Appendix A: Kessler Active Transportation Connections r-�-', . I_ -U-• gy .q�y.>;raa rii.i b,s iY gyp. 1 • � `•�' Jam•. �•�.70, Chapter 11: Sign,age and Risk r4anagement. y { L Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Mt. Kessler Trail Connections � - To Bentonville ldusMr TraU AWn _ [fir ►• �t s V iM Mulll.j,, U 4 sP _ l'i'M WMp s! ♦ ._..... .unU+fi Y! j ..7� • I M 1 i• a I J �p ,� r ' Rt r a O• N O / -Aq a St • t o ..J .,• fi a , "'li'awn s anch i; i Cato�tj`�� t i1#R - . ♦7 4t. Kessler Future Regional Park ........... /: I-. Legend R ■ ■ Proposed Mt. Kessler Multi -use Trail Connections Razorback Regional Greenway Miles Existing Multi -use Trail p p, Appendix A; -i :) l�ss)er Mountain Trails Master Plan�': : a r w r j.-,. - - J I3LJ S Appendix B Public Input V am —_-4 .' Irrf_ t � :a r i / •'L. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan Public Meeting Comment Sheet Summary The most common opinion of the public, that left comment sheets, is to not disturb or add construction to the preserve area where the exiting trails are. All the comments had different focuses, but most all stated that there should be no paved trail near the existing trails and to protect and preserve the natural area. The following are reoccurring public opinions from the Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan Meeting held on August 31St, 2015. • No paved trails in the Kessler Mountain natural preserve area. • Identify and preserve the unique geographical habitat in the natural preserve area. • Adopt a comprehensive maintenance plan for the existing trails. • Address problem sections of trail and reroute with foot traffic in mind. • Information on trails condition/skill level and system to control wet weather trail traffic. • No new trails in preserve area. • Keep existing trails as is. • Add new beginner/intermediate level trails and build them away from the preserve area. Appendix B: 81 r�"!t ,r Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan h1J ' Y�+ 1 ! , 7� ,J 7�kDiill, j. III r Th.`.--. r F+AAK �f by,r� l� a qua '13.,r / / I : KESSL�ER MOUNTAIN TRAILS ,...,►t Off 1 ARKAN5A5. ~ ` t . . VJ iw�. �rc.riRrr wl.r r+.C s�Me.?'Slerus 4�v-'tk ' -y. .... 4-.. spar hiw .,.ir , I.+. wlrY,je ..,•' «• .�.,,.. -. - - Y I - — �.•t.-.0 1 w'L r +aw.w�'I w�L ri. ,. 82 ' Appendix B: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan PUBLIC INPUT MEETING #1 To find a creative and fun for gather public input, Alta Planning + Design put together a photo booth where indivivuals could display the type of user group they identified with in regards to activity at Kessler Mountain. Options users could choose from were hiking, mountain biking, nature watching, photographing, educationa' user, mountain climbing, ad peoo'e watching. 000 0 4, Appendix 6: ! 83 brt,ruu..� 1r�wrf ''••••, yy. . L T1i.{ —... _ fi `'lr. _ _ i fi Rt liRif rN�9 rzIl ra `s i t Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan % Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan Public Meeting Comment Sheet Summary There were only a few public comment forms received from the Kessler Mountain Public Meeting. In most of the forms there was repeated appreciation of protecting the sensitive areas and ability to accommodate to city and public input. The following are reoccurring public opinions from the Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan Meeting held on December 14th, 2015. • Approval of varying skill level of new proposed trails. • Approval of protecting and rerouting current trails to avoid sensitive areas. • No paved trail. • Reroute current trails or design new trails more hiker friendly. • Concerns of maintaining current and new trails. Who will do it and how much will it cost... • Approval of proposed reroutes of existing trails and new trails. • Kessler Mountain needing directional downhill mountain bike technical trail. • The need for the City of Fayetteville to embrace the progressive movement and encourage mountain biking/outdoor recreation. ■ Protect the current trails and become more aggressive in developing outdoor recreation. The following are reoccurring public questions from the Kessler Mountain Trail Master Plan: • How will the signage be done? • Will there be signage on the trails difficultly levels? • Who and how will the trails be maintained? • How will the sensitive areas be protected? • How will safety concerns be addressed? l •L Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan PUBLIC INPUT SURVEY Q7: The City is currently In the process of constructing a new Regional Park, which is to be located directly east of Kessler Mountain, would you combine your activities at Kessler Mountain with those offered at the new Regional Park? Answrred:151 Skipped:1 ' `;c alttaa Q70 The City is currently in the process of constructing a new Regional Park, which is to be located directly east of KesslerMountain, would you combine your activities at Kessler Mountain with those offered at the new Regional Park? Anawened 151 Skipped: ! ?'r\ alta l,,A_:,,_ ail -°� _ Ainw.t C)W C.. uaypoua.. ..rra 86 Appendix B: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan , Q8: Of the following examples, what do you feet is important to maintain/create in terms of space for activities at Kessler Mountain? Answered 151 Skipped I alta iI Oppmtu E Also. it.tws AYrraa in=+•at Y, I'rrrrlon ■ COry TwCU NitsIIi,iI Tor ilk" ri alruM'q {N M M Y 'iI Cal 1 wlypa4J cir"419 llmrie HrSt+ J W1d 1, akii J 43 Ortura W461n,_ Old— tµfr°45... ,w - ( .pr{r.r rhei+t_ urAr,lr— '. d'q attJV 1i(t +,4'S 14'COw I'le'!S! IM%*wN7.d5fd Q8 Of the following examples, what do you feel is important to maintaintcr'eate in terms of space for activities at Kessler Mountain? Answered 151 Snapped I ;' ' t at.1 aria Vr-V 117rpw1Wa rlerA-1 lWt {aids W -%"r$ i� Y11 !L M41AINA Iryrq'p #rA /ZwMa10's r , �+r�- It1A 7117'. f1Y1'. fls"- -/i. Ir,d', SY.9a. 75 !r. YY1'. ryi'rc f r,i I a.. , 1 1:.+' . r. rr. i facer', 133Y. 7a It 11 r -h.. •jr' .p, 1P.aa'., Appendix B: 87 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Q9 What activity would encourage you to visit Kessler Mountain? Please select all that apply. A+rswered 151 , alta Q9; What activity would encourage you to visit Kessler Mountain? Please select all that apply. Ansmemd:151 Skp�serf I If "Y~h 3ttA Ann— F [I.nwrw ifartw.nr+ }} d 14 �� % Fi ` ! I. rl3.fx.4 Yrow� ii }t`a 1'Y�,g4g�aM17 66 ..k . r.�atW.wrr.Amxw is! 88 1 Appendix B: ;~ !,;c. Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Q10: In your opinion, what are the most important benefits and uses of a natural surface trail system? Please select all that apply. Ans terJ: is: sal c e e: i ` /'\ elt€n Irx].irwlstfurc tue.._. y 4 61rc/es1 r ➢WO. work •Illy]+€W fl r Il. 1 r orao]I I� e7msn�ldenn 1.11¢1IIE(w NWI (Ah.r IP]eiaa .�1dCRir O10: In your opinion, what are the most important benefits and uses of a natural surface trail system? Please select all that apply. Ans.vwed 151 : kip;lt tl i r r f r 4C site AHiir1 Cfwltfi -'.4. firf(1(]rM•Y 13.91. . ...r.. C1. ff'. 411;'. q ••ir . -... ..M^t�]]"•p'.I�i 'rr VII y.. r. f(FAV, ,.' '.-I. ,.,. Ji ]i•� IalalNe+wpen4r*a 81 Appendix F3: °' Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Q114 Would a unique natural environment attract you to Kessler Mountain? Answered 151 Skipped, 1 �cti'I�X alta ��' uu QI1: Would a unique natural environment attract you to Kessler Mountain? Answvrnd:151 Sklggreci. , _ F;\alts hawwe� C►i0Ka• ni,,,,.,- 4,4J' 1 rM.i : 4 90 1 Appendix B: I rC Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Q12: What type of trails would you like to see more of at Kessler Mountain? Please select all that apply. Ansrreced. 151 Sit -pried I ti `! alter C. lI L t I*n . * rnu ?,GIs l% . 534 M34 :OE f% ;C?% ILK'% Q12: What type of trails would you like to see more of at Kessler Mountain? Please select all that apply. Ans•n,tr3L1.16r1 Sl p'd.1 I r`' c' 11C 1 An1Y�N I_ h4k441 N VII°f,iI.*. �S�e,at r.,,I i* 91l1t m. 4'.. K..'tTi �i i1k f�4ARsspncrdwens r¢1 Appendix B::;'c €:.c 91 Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan Q14: When using Kessler Mountain as a recreational amenity, which user group do you most identify with? Please select only one. AnSd%ol id. 151 ShKipe6; 1 9 p tt8 Ley l#1 '� f Wa ui suur..0 WA C% k[1t rY. 'cs t1h �.% 014: When using Kessler Mountain as a recreational amenity, which user group do you most identify with? Please select only one. Arr,w*dISa Skopae: i alta L l\Ii� r , e ,fir AbaftiM thorn ' &stE {w, ilda4 rs }ice- VAR% ♦aLf 11! 92 1 Appendix B: � ;M iie55,�2r Mountain Tails Master Plan y js(q.'�yy7jr • r,^ per _ st A Appendix C: Species of Conservation Concern L•i 1 •Zrw� c A tRzr VV ' 4 R , X/' — a z'r► VkSU +-'r 4m_P :", } yr' _ - ��• .. 1 V 42 Chipkcr11:Signaa and Ris}s Management ,�,• ; it - � Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan O 00 ❑1Q�Q � P r� o o� L A e� 6 � �� ca •Q 1 n 0 m o o m d O O� `)•a i Appendix C: Kessler Mountain Trails Master Plan LEGEND NOTE: ALLTRAIL LENGTHS AND ALIGNMENTS ARE APPROXIMATE EXISTING TRAILS BIKING ALLOWED 6 Miles (Within Park Boundary) �k J BEGINNER LOOP I> III #I RESTROOMS 1.5 Miles (4'WIDE) A [ PARKING AREA o Q LOWER BLUFFTRAIL r, 3.4 Miles (2'-3'WIDE) '� ABANDONED TRAILS °®® EAST BLUFF TRAIL ® 1-7 Miles (18"-2'WIDE) FUTURE PAVED TRAILS Proposed by the City of Fayetteville 0000 00 TRAIL REROUTES 1 Mile PAVED TRAILS -PROPOSED Proposed by City of Fayetteville ECOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS AND HABITATS ! a SHALE BARRENS BLUFFS OLD GROWTH POST OAK WOODLAND RIPARIAN HABITAT Information taken from Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission. Ecological Assessment prepared byTheo Witsell on February 2015 IONAL PARK � j JUDGE CUMMINGS ROAD ,E l Of •- r / J r j oan c� i / 1/ '•i P ""'„ Potential Secondary Parking &Trailhead KESSLER MOUNTAIN SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN PLAN The areas noted on the plan are species of conservation concern at Kessler Mountain. These species are located per the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission and the Ecological Assessment prepared bt Theo Witsell on February 2015. Special care will be administered when lagging, laying -out, and constructing trail near these areas. Appendix C: • l 95