Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 08-14-2001 - 9c 16 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 14, 2001 Action Agenda Item No. _9- C' SUBJECT: Recommendations from Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report DEPARTMENT: ERCD PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Map of Park Property David Stancil, 245-2590 LRPAC Interim Report Rich Shaw, 245-2591 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE: To consider the interim report of an advisory committee charged with determining the appropriate uses for the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area. BACKGROUND: Orange County and Durham County have acquired a 391-acre property for the new Little River Regional Park and Natural Area. Most of the land was purchased in November 2000, including all 136 acres located in Orange County. Durham County acquired the remaining 85 acres on July 31, 2001. As proposed, the park will offer low-impact recreational opportunities including walking trails, picnic areas and nature study, while also maintaining water quality in the Little River (a source of drinking water for Durham County residents) and preserving an important upland wildlife habitat in an area that is rapidly losing its open space. Acquisition and development of the Little River Park is a cooperative project among the local governments - Durham County and Orange County - and two non-profit land trusts, the Triangle Land Conservancy and the Eno River Association. All four partners contributed funds for land acquisition. The two land trusts raised over $170,000 in private donations and also participated in negotiating the purchase of land from the Triangle Community Foundation. Additional funds were received as grants from the NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund and the NC Parks and Recreation Trust Fund. The new regional park will be jointly owned and managed by Orange and Durham counties via an inter-local agreement to be developed. In November 2000, the project partners established the Little River Park Advisory Committee (LRPAC) to help develop plans for the future use of the parkland and the facilities that will be provided to accommodate the public. The attached interim report from the Committee contains a set of recommendations on what uses should be allowed within the new park. These recommendations are based on seven meetings held to date, during which members toured the park property, evaluated the property values and site limitations, received input from different user group representatives, and gathered citizen input on desired park uses and facilities. 2 40 This Interim Report is being presented at this time to both the Orange and Durham boards of commissioners for review and approval. The report presents committee recommendations of what uses should and should not be allowed in the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area. The recommendations are provided in three categories: a) allowed uses (hiking trails, picnic area, hard surface loop trail, playground, etc.); b) conditional uses (horseback riding, mountain biking, group camping); and c) prohibited uses (motorized vehicles, hunting, firearms). After the two counties agree on the park uses, the next step would have the counties develop a conceptual plan for park facilities. As proposed, the concept plan would be presented to the Orange and Durham boards of commissioners (Fall 2001) for consideration and approval, followed by development of a site plan in December 2001. Construction would occur in Spring 2002, and the park might be open to the public by August, 2002. Action on the proposed park uses is needed to ensure that the following steps occur prior to the September 2002 close-out date for the park development grant from the U.S. Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funding for park development comes from a $262,000 grant awarded from the LWCF (to be used by September 2002). However, some of the proposed uses would require future expenditures of County funds for park management and stewardship (primarily oversight of potential horseback and mountain bike trails), which are as yet unbudgeted by either County. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board : • Discuss and agree to the set of proposed uses for the Little River Park and Natural Area as recommended by the advisory committee, with revisions or changes as needed; and • Authorize ERCD and the Recreation and Parks staff to proceed with soliciting bids for a contractor to develop a concept plan for the proposed park facilities (funded through the LWCF grant mentioned above); and • Authorize ERCD and Recreation and Parks staff to work with Durham County to develop a draft interlocal agreement for park management and use, for the Board's review and decision at a future meeting. I I J I Vo C 3 ! r ,Q O ' r �a it eo _ a t ♦ t 1 , R t r 7 r t , r R � 1 \ R L L � L \ tIR _ Be d SIMON- , r �• $ Exst T Little River Regional park poc�� A+ox} and Natyral Area 2553 135 g� CQ ty 3gp.9�qp Tt N 4 Recommendations on Allowed Uses in the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area An Interim Report of the Little River Park Advisory Committee August 1, 2001 Project Partners: Durham County Orange County Eno River Association Triangle Land Conservancy Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 5 Recommendations on Allowed Uses in the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area Executive Summary This interim report from the Little River Park Advisory Committee includes a set of recommendations on what uses should be allowed within the new park. These recommendations are based on seven meetings held thus far by the committee (November 2000 to July 2001), during which members toured the park property, evaluated the property values and site limitations, received input from different user group representatives, and gathered citizen input on desired park uses and facilities. The Committee recommendations for uses to be allowed within the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area are provided in three categories: a) allowed uses, b) conditional uses and c) prohibited uses. Allowed Uses The Committee recommends allowing the following uses in the park for reasons described in the report: 1. Hiking/Nature Trails 2. Picnic Area/Shelter 3. Hard Surface Trail/Picnic Loop 4. Playground 5. Open Play Meadows 6. Fishing Conditional Uses The Committee recommends allowing the following uses in the park, but only if certain conditions can be achieved in terms of identifying enough suitable land area to sustain the activity and appropriate operating funds to maintain and manage the activity in an appropriate fashion. 1. Horseback Riding 2. Mountain Biking 3. Camping 1. Proposed Conditions for Allowing Horseback Riding a) There are adequate funds available for any special facilities and to ensure proper site management and stewardship. b) That there be at least 3-5 miles of suitable trails designated for public use. c) That the equestrian trails are located and designed to minimize adverse impacts on natural and cultural resources Page 1 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 6 d) That the equestrian trails are located so as not to cause significant adverse impacts to other park users or adjacent landowners. e) That there be a memorandum of agreement with a local group of horseback riders(an "equestrian council'9 for the provision of volunteer resources needed to design, construct and maintain equestrian trails within the park. 2. Proposed Conditions for Allowing Mountain Biking a) There are adequate funds a vailable for any special facilities and to ensure proper site management and stewardship. b) That the bike trails are located and designed to minimize adverse impacts on natural and cultural resources c) That the bike trails are located so as not to cause significant adverse impacts to other park users or adjacent landowners d) That there be a memorandum of agreement with a local mountain bike club for the provision of volunteer resources needed to design, construct and maintain bike trails within the park. 3. Proposed Conditions for Allowing Camping a) That camping be allowed only for groups such as scouts, youth associations and church groups on a reservation basis. b) There are adequate funds available for any special facilities and to ensure proper site management and stewardship. c) That camp sites)is located in area(s) that will not cause harm to adjacent private property or to natural/cultural resources found within the Park. Prohibited Uses The Committee recommends that the following uses be prohibited from the park for reasons described in the report: • Motorized vehicles • Hunting • Firearms The above recommendations are offered by the Little River Park Advisory Committee to the Durham and Orange county commissioners who will make final decisions on what uses will be allowed in the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area. The Committee will meet again in the late Fall to review and comment on the initial conceptual design for the Park. A revised plan will come back to the Committee for consideration at a public meeting. A site plan will then be presented to the Durham and Orange county commissioners in Spring 2002 for approval. Page 2 of 12 h Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 7 In the coming months staff will continue to research the following internal management issues and make recommendations to their respective managers and boards of commissioners: ➢ Development of an interlocal agreement between Durham and Orange counties, which will address budget, management, staffing, security and other issues important for ensuring safe and enjoyable experiences for park visitors and adjacent landowners. ➢ A capital improvement plan for potential future parkland acquisition and development. ➢ A policy for the naming of park facilities and trails. ➢ The feasibility of providing an on-site caretaker residence to help address security and operational needs. Copies of the full report on recommended uses are available from the Orange County ERCD at 9191245-2597 and from the Durham City/County Planning Department at 919/560-4137, Page 3 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 8 ' Recommendations on Allowed Uses in the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area This interim report from the Little River Park Advisory Committee (hereafter, ''the Committee's includes a set of recommendations on what uses should be allowed within the new park. These recommendations are based on seven meetings held thus far by the Committee (November 2000 to July 2001), during which members toured the park property, evaluated the property values and site limitations, received input from different user group representatives, and gathered citizen input on desired park uses and facilities. The Committee charge and list of members is provided at Attachment A. I. Property description The park property is comprised of 391 acres straddling the Orange/Durham county boundary (256 acres in Durham Co.; 135 acres in Orange). The main entrance to the park will be on Guess Road (NC 157). The areas to the west, north and east of the property are primarily woodlands. There is low-density residential development to the south along Summer Lane and within the adjacent North Fork Subdivision. There are two other public roads that provide access to the property: Summer Lane dead ends at the property and Runyan Road stubs out at the park boundary. Neither of those points is proposed for park access other than allowing pedestrian access for residents of those neighborhoods. A map of the property is provided as Attachment B. There is a 15-acre meadow near the Guess Road entrance to the park property. This area was used for agricultural production until 1995. Most of the park amenities are proposed to be developed in the meadow area. The rest of the property is wooded, primarily with pine in the uplands and hardwoods in low-lying riparian areas. The property boundary includes over one mile of frontage along the North Fork of the Little River. The property is located five miles upstream from the Little River Reservoir, which supplies drinking water to Durham. There are two unnamed perennial streams that flow through the property and into the Little River. The grant from the NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund stipulates that the parkland within 300 feet of the river and streams be protected by permanent conservation easements. That protection will help ensure the continued excellent health of these waters. A contour map of the property is provided as Attachment C. The property was once owned by Continental Can Company, which clear-cut most of the trees in the 1960s and replanted with loblolly pine. The pines were thinned in the early 1990s. Several of the old logging roads remain today, used as walking/riding trails. Today the wooded areas include 40-year-old pines with an understory of young hardwoods. The property is typical of a managed Piedmont Page 4 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 g loblolly forest in succession to an upland oak-hickory forest, which should predominate within the next 100 years. The forest consists mostly of hardwoods along the Little River (sycamore, red maple, and river birch). Portions of the site have downed trees from Hurricane Fran (Sept. 1996) and a May 2000 windstorm. II. Property Values Riparian buffers established by forming the park will help protect aquatic species in the Little River. The river supports populations of four freshwater mussels listed by the state as "threatened" (yellow lampmussel, Atlantic pigtoe, triangle floater, squawfoot), and another that is "significantly rare" in NC (notched rainbow). Three of the five mussel species are candidates for federal listing as threatened or endangered species. The presence of these mussels is evidence of the high water quality of the Little River. Wildlife known to use the property includes deer, wild turkey, beaver, river otter, weasel, salamanders and numerous migratory birds. The property includes a number of historic and archaeological features, including the old Law family farmhouse and outbuildings, remnants of old roads, and an old mill site, which likely served to meet the needs of the owners of this property and possibly some of the neighboring landowners. An archaeological survey of the entire property was recently completed to help identify the locations of important sites. The information from that survey will be used for siting future park facilities and for identifying areas of historic and cultural interest for interpretation. III. Public Meeting The Committee held a public meeting on March 1, 2001 at the Pleasant Green Community Center. The meeting started with short presentations about the park property, including the history of use, natural and cultural resources, site conditions, and proposed park facilities. Committee members and staff received comments and answered questions on topics ranging from site features to park design to future park management. Citizens were then provided an opportunity to "vote" on what uses they would like to see allowed in the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area. It was explained that the allowed uses would not be determined by popular vote, but the information would be useful to gauge the demand for certain kinds of proposed uses. A total of 44 people participated in the exercise. The results are provided as Attachment D. A summary of comments is provided as Attachment E. IV. Discussion of Proposed Uses The Little River parkland is being acquired with a combination of public and private funds. Since the beginning of the project the stated purposes of acquiring this land have been watershed protection, preservation of open space and wildlife habitat, and low-impact recreation, including hiking, picnic areas and nature study. Page 5 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 10 ' Horseback riding and mountain biking were also listed as potential uses on portions of the property that might accommodate those activities. Those purposes and potential uses were also stated in the applications for state grant funds that were awarded to Durham and Orange counties for land acquisition and were listed as possible uses in applying for park development funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). LWCF awarded a total of $262,000 for park development and further land acquisition. A preliminary site plan that was included in the LWCF application is provided as Attachment F. With those parameters in mind, the Committee spent a considerable amount of time discussing the proposed uses of the park and the ability of the land to accommodate and sustain those uses. The Committee sought community input on what kinds of trails were desirable and should be established. The LRPAC also recognized the need for park policies and rules to manage those uses, and determined that the level of resources (i.e., staff and operating funds) afforded to the park would help determine the ability to manage the variety of uses that are envisioned. The Committee felt that while some uses could be allowed from the beginning, other uses might need to be phased in at a later date, as more resources become available. Some uses should not to be allowed at all. Other factors were considered by the Committee, such as the possible effects that particular uses might have on neighboring properties. Some of those issues will enter into consideration during the design phase of the park. Also discussed was the fact that some uses, such as horseback riding, are considered by many as a traditional use of the property and the surrounding lands. The Committee determined that some uses would be relatively easy for the property to accommodate without any substantial or long-term impact on the landscape and the native biota, and which could be attained with minimal management costs. Those include hiking trails, picnic areas, a playground, and open play areas in what is now field. The LWCF grant anticipated those uses and will provide funds necessary for the initial amenities for the park. Specifically, the grant budget identifies funds for the following facilities: • Park entrance signage and landscaping • Entrance road (gravel) to the rear portion of the meadow • Parking lot and walkways • Picnic shelter and restrooms • Playground • Play meadow • Hard surface trail (1/4 mile) with picnic sites (ADA accessible) • Trail improvements (bridges, culverts, water bars, etc.) Page 6 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 11 Each of the proposed facilities above received a high level of support from members of the public that attended the Committee's March 1, 2001 public input meeting. The Committee determined that horseback riding, mountain biking and camping would also require some initial cost outlay, but would then also require a relatively greater long term investment in continual oversight, maintenance and enforcement of rules. The committee received good input from representatives of horseback riding and mountain biking user groups. Staff also provided information from a variety of sources, on the possible impacts to the park from these uses. Those sources included local park and recreation departments, equestrian and mountain biking clubs, N C State Parks, N C State University, N C Horse Council and extensive research by an intern working for the Durham Planning Department. A summary of that information is provided as Attachment G. V. Recommended Uses The Committee recommendations for uses to be allowed within the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area are provided in three categories: a) allowed uses, b) conditional uses and c) prohibited uses. A. Allowed Uses The Committee recommends allowing the following uses in the park for the reasons provided below: • Hiking/Nature Trails • Picnic Area/Shelter • Hard Surface Trail/Picnic Loop • Playground • Open Play Meadows • Fishing 1. Hiking/Nature Trails Hiking trails have been identified as one of the primary uses of this park. The former logging roads provide a base for a future network of pedestrian trails that would allow people to experience different features of the property, including the upland forest, stream crossings, the North Fork Little River and floodplain, and some of the identified historic and cultural areas (e.g., mill site, house sites, old road beds, etc.). LWCF grant funds are earmarked for improvements to existing trails and the creation of new trails (Attachment F). Volunteers will be used for trail construction and maintenance through a proposed volunteer site steward program. 2. Picnic Area/Shelter The meadow area (former agricultural field) would accommodate a picnic shelter and associated amenities in close proximity to the parking area and proposed restroom facilities. LWCF grant funds are allocated for a small picnic shelter, picnic Page 7 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 12 tables, well/pumphouse, toilet facility, and drinking fountain. These facilities should be located outside of the conservation easement area. 3. Hard Surface Trail/Picnic Loop A short (1/4-mile) hard surface loop trail is recommended for construction through a portion of the woodlands closest to the meadow. An adjoining, natural surfaced loop trail could be added for a longer hike—perhaps a Figure 8. Such a trail would enable many people to experience a woodland walk without having to travel very far from the parking area and associated amenities. Along the trail, there could be special plantings of native wildflowers to attract birds and butterflies. This activity would be designed to accommodate people with special needs, including disabled persons and people with baby carriages and strollers. 4. Playground Construction of a small playground is recommended close to the picnic shelter and toilet facilities. A non-traditional design would help it to blend in with the natural surroundings. LWCF grant funds are allocated for a small playground facility. 5. Open Play Meadows It is recommended that large portions of the existing meadow remain open areas for informal playing of games and for aesthetic enjoyment. Some of the open areas near the picnic shelter and playground could be mowed on a regular basis to accommodate Frisbee, volleyball, and other games. 6. Fishing It is recommended that fishing be allowed, but that no special facilities or management needs would be needed. People wanting to fish would need to carry their gear along the pedestrian trails to access the river. Depending on which part of the river is to be used, the walk could be from 1 to 2 miles. B. Conditional Uses The Committee recommends allowing the following uses in the park, but only if certain conditions can be achieved in terms of identifying enough suitable land area to sustain the activity and enough operating funds to maintain and manage the activity in an appropriate fashion. • Horseback Riding • Mountain Biking • Camping 1. Horseback Riding The Committee recommends allowing horseback riding within the park, but only under the following conditions: Page 8 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 13 a) There are adequate funds available for any special facilities and to ensure Proper management and stewardship. While most, if not all, facilities needs could be paid for using the LWCF grant, additional funds would be needed for operational needs Issues include management for the trail system to avoid damage to resources and improper use. b) That there be at least 3-5 miles of suitable trails designated for public use. This would require the acquisition of additional adjacent land for inclusion in the park or establishing an equestrian trail easement agreement with adjoining landowners. [Initial discussions with adjacent landowners have been positive.] c) That the equestrian trails are located and designed to minimize adverse impacts on natural and cultural resources Equestrian trails should avoid steep slopes and be located outside of the riparian areas and archaeological sites known to exist in the park. Any crossing of streams should be perpendicular to the corridor. d) That the equestrian trails are located so as not to cause significant adverse impacts to other park users or adjacent landowners: e) That there be a memorandum of agreement with a local group of horseback riders(an "equestrian council'9 for the provision of volunteer resources needed to design, construct and maintain equestrian trails within the park. Staff has met with a group that is interested in this proposal. 2. Mountain Biking The Committee recommends allowing mountain biking within the park, but only under the following conditions: a) There are adequate funds available for any special facilities and to ensure proper management and stewardship. While most, if not all, facilities needs could be paid for with the LWCF grant, additional funds would be needed to insure proper management and oversight of both the trails and trail users. b) That the bike trails are located and designed to minimize adverse impacts on natural and cultural resources. Bike trails should avoid steep slopes and riparian areas, should not impair or"fragment"the more sensitive natural areas, and should avoid archaeological sites known to exist in the park. c) That the bike trails are located so as not to cause significant adverse impacts to other park users or adjacent landowners d) That there be a memorandum of agreement with a local mountain bike club for the provision of volunteer resources needed to design, construct and maintain bike trails within the park. A Durham-based group has been developed and is interested in performing this function. This type of agreement has been successful at Parks managed by Wake County. 3. Camping The Committee recommends allowing primitive group camping within the park, but only under the following conditions: Page 9 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 8/1/01 14 a) That camping be allowed only for groups such as scouts, youth associations and church groups on a reservation basis Camping for general public use is not recommended, as camping sites are readily available at Eno River State Park, Falls Lake and Jordan Lake. b) There are adequate funds available for any special facilities and to ensure proper management and stewardship. No funds are budgeted for developing camping areas within the park. A site manager would be needed to reserve the camp site(s), provide user education, enforce campsite use and oversee campfires. c) That camp site(s) is located in areas) that will not cause harm to adjacent private property or to natural/cultural resources found within the Park. C. Prohibited Uses The Committee recommends that the following uses be prohibited from the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area for the reasons provided below: • Motorized vehicles • Hunting • Firearms 1. Motorized vehicles The use of motorized vehicles, such as "all terrain vehicles" (ATVs) or motorcycles, is considered an incompatible use of parkland that was acquired for protecting water quality and wildlife habitat. There is evidence of recent ATV use on the park property, some of which is causing erosion along riverbanks and the sedimentation of streams. These activities are not consistent with the intended use of the park for low-impact recreation use. 2. Hunting Hunting is a traditional use of this property and some of the neighboring properties. The land was managed for many years as gamelands under the supervision of the NC Wildlife Resources Commission. Changing this particular property from private woodlands to a public park with hiking trails and picnic areas creates an environment within which hunting would be an incompatible use. The potential danger to Park users far outweighs the need to allow hunting on the property. The Committee notes, however, that the,exploding nature of the White tailed Deer population in this area may warrant the counties to consider allowing periodic managed hunting to reduce the population and thereby reduce the negative impacts that population has on the park resources. Mecklenburg County Parks in Charlotte has this type of program. Page 10 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 3. Firearms 15 The same factors that make this property unsuitable for hunting make it unsuitable for the use of firearms of any kind except by authorized law enforcement personnel. The above recommendations are offered to the Durham and Orange boards of commissioners who will make final decisions on what uses will be allowed in the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area. VI. Park Development Timetable The following are current estimates for the length of time needed to complete each step of the way toward opening the new park for public use and enjoyment. April 2001: Cultural Survey of park property completed August 2001: LRPAC recommendations on use conveyed to Orange/Durham BOCCs Sept/Oct. 2001: Bidding/selection process completed for Conceptual Design/Site Plan Dec. 2001: Conceptual Design presented to LRPAC for Review and Comment Jan. 2002: Revised Conceptual Design presented to LRPAC (Public Meeting) March 2002: Site Plan submitted to Orange/Durham BOCCs April 2002: Construction bidding and selection process completed August 2002: Construction completed October 2002: Park opens to public (dedication ceremony) VII. Future Issues In the coming months, the Little River Park Advisory Committee will discuss and make recommendations on the design and construction of facilities for the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area. An initial conceptual design for the park will be presented to the Committee in December 2001. A revised plan will come back to the Committee for review at a public meeting. The site plan will then go to the Durham and Orange county boards of commissioners for their consideration and ultimate approval. In the meantime staff will continue to_research the following internal management issues and make recommendations to their respective managers and boards of commissioners: Page 11 of 12 Little River Park Advisory Committee Interim Report 811101 , 16 • Development of an interlocal agreement between Durham and Orange counties that will address budget, management, security, staffing, and operational needs etc. • Capital improvement plan for potential future-parkland acquisition and development. • Policy decision on the naming of park facilities and trails. • Feasibility of providing a caretaker residence to provide security and operational needs. Page 12 of 12 ATTACHMENT A 17 Durham County Orange County Eno River Association Triangle Land Conservancy Little River Park Advisory Committee Background Durham County and Orange County are purchasing a 391-acre property for the new Little River Regional Park and Natural Area. The parkland will offer low-impact recreational opportunities, including walking trails, picnic areas and nature study. The park will also help to maintain high water quality in the Little River (a source of drinking water for Durham County residents) and preserve an important upland wildlife habitat in an area that is rapidly losing its open space. The land purchase was completed on July 31, 2001. Acquisition and development of the Little River Park is a cooperative project among Durham County, Orange County and two non-profit land trusts, the Triangle Land Conservancy and the Eno River Association. All four partners contributed funds for land acquisition. The two land trusts raised over $170,000 in private donations and also participated in negotiating the purchase of land from the Triangle Community Foundation. Additional funds were received as grants from the NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund and the NC Parks and Recreation Trust Fund. The new regional park will be jointly owned and managed by Durham and Orange counties. Initial park development will be accomplished with a $262,000 grant from the Land and Water Conservation Fund. In November 2000, the project partners established an advisory committee to help develop plans for the future use of the parkland and the facilities that will- be provided to accommodate the public. The committee was set up to meet from November 2000 to October 2001. All recommendations of the committee will be presented to the Durham and Orange boards of commissioners for review, approval and implementation. The first report from the committee (June 2001) includes recommendations on what uses should be allowed in the park. Committee Charge The Little River Park Advisory Committee (LRPAC) was charged with developing recommendations for the following: 1. The kinds of uses to be allowed within the Park/Natural Area 2. The kinds of facilities to be available within the Park/Natural Area 3. The locations of facilities to be constructed 4. A timetable for the phased development of park facilities 5. Identifying sources of additional funds to develop park facilities 6. Other park related issues that become apparent A- + 18 Committee Membership The advisory committee consists of 10 members, each of who represents either a partner organization/advisory committee or is a member of the community that surrounds the park. Member Affiliation Lee Beck Durham Co. Open Space &Trails Commission Tom & Marci Campbell Adjacent or Nearby Property Owner (Durham) Steve Hiltner Eno River Association Becky Heron Durham County Board of Commissioners Barry Jacobs Orange County Board of Commissioners Loraine Kohorn Orange Co. Commission for the Environment Liz Pullman Triangle Land Conservancy Sandra Quinn* Orange Co. Recreation and Parks Council Ellen Reckhow Durham Co. Open Space &Trails Commission Kim Watkins Adjacent or Nearby Property Owner (Orange) * Ms. Quinn replaced Lorraine Parker on the committee in June 2001 Meetings Held To Date The LRPAC meets on a monthly basis and all meetings are open to the public. Meetings notices are sent to area newspapers and posted on the Orange County web site (http://www.co.orange.nc.us). 1. November 2, 2000 - Introductions, Committee charge, Project overview 2. December 10, 2000 - Toured the Little River park property 3. January 16, 2001 — Prepared a proposed timetable for park development; planning for public meeting 4. March 1, 2001 - Held public meeting to gather citizen input on desired park uses and facilities 5. March 19, 2001 - Reviewed and discussed public comments; began formulating committee recommendations on park uses 6. April 16, 2001 - Began finalizing committee recommendations on allowed park uses. 7. July 31, 2001 - Finalized interim report with recommendations on allowed park uses. Began discussing park development. A-L / ATTACHMENT B 19 IF r r � r r r , r 4a f' r i r / a S "1� S S S 1� 1 . r � i r t � t / u i i • m Be d INN r r F� e � `'^ Sl p,_,� o -�" ' Site -'VeaM Li o Oc;oVnT is ttte River Re9ia► ox� 2 and Natyral Anrea park 25 3�'es � � �J � �91��� � I�� I t 1�� `\ , . V�• � i �� � �� �� �� - � �' ��,� .,� , ��f ATTACHMENT 0 21 Little River Public Meeting 1-Mar-01 Desired Uses # Voters # Votes Rank Nature Trail/Hiking 38 143 1 Picnic Area/Shelter 22 48 2 Hard Surface Trail Loop 21 34 3 Open Play Meadow 19 31 4 Playground 14 21 5 Horseback Riding/Trails 13 38 6 Fishinq 13 21 6 Interpretive Center/Facilities 12 17 7 Mt. Bike trails 10 30 s Pond 5 6 9 Dog Park 4 12 10 Lighting 2 2 11 Total Voters 44 403 d-1 ATTACHMENT E 22 Little River Park Advisory Committee March 1, 2001 Public Meeting Pleasant Green Community Center Summary of Comments (Organized by subject) Park Uses Would like an area for dogs to run off leash Wants mountain biking allowed (suggests alternate days for bikes and horses). Wants Counties to allow horseback riding (a traditional use of this land). Suggests Counties consider allowing hunting to continue now or in future. Will Counties allow any overnight use? [No preference was stated] Park Design Traffic improvements will be needed to make the main entrance safe. Consider the need for road signs, clear sight lines, possible turn lane(s). Not interested in formal entrances to park from Summer Lane and Runyan, as long as residents in neighboring communities will be allowed to access park through traditional entranceways by foot. Intersection of Bromley Rd and Guess Rd is dangerous. Would like access for disabled persons. Would like the park be left mostly natural. Park trails should be loops rather than dead end at private property boundaries. Recommend that the entrance drive be gravel and not asphalt. Would like a display/kiosk(or interpretive center?) near entrance describing how the park came about. Recommends high-quality interpretive signage along the trails to describe natural and cultural history of property. Will there be any lighting in the Park? [It was unclear whether this person want lighting or was concerned with the effects of possible lighting on park and adjacent properties] E-I 1 23 Park Management Concerned with illegal hunting. Wants Counties to enforce this in future. Wants Counties to protect the adjoining landowners from park activities. Interested in the agreement for dual county management. Would like to see some of the downed trees removed from river and river's edge. Need to avoid forest fragmentation. Who do we call in case of illegal activity or if someone is injured? How are Counties going to stop the ATV use? Will there be any park staff? If so, who will provide it? There was a suggestion of establishing a volunteer staff to patrol the Park similar to what they do at the Mason Farm Biological Preserve. Miscellaneous Comments Recommends that Counties purchase additional land if at all possible. [The adjacent "Cavin tract" was mentioned as one opportunity for possible acquisition.] Counties should keep in mind the potential difficulties in attracting qualified design/ construction firms due to the impending UNC construction projects in addition to all of the other development going in Triangle area. E-Z 'ATTACHMENT F aaaatai�aea`Or `C0. brsfmrn Co. 24 Proposed Fatalities -. f ; . j . . : • : � ® Park access road—18 it graveled.-side r ' approx. ft Ion ' 'drainage swales,app 9 - © Park trails-on existing trails and new J j mi construction,approx.2 /4 miles ' _-- © Open play meadow 1 i' Parking for 20 cars— paved lot ' i-_ ' © Picnic facilities with restroom.and playground , O •{mot / • 1 • `., . jai;._ .• :.� ,;r, - - •sr ' o 1 t Little'River Regional Park . ..and liletYral Area x CWUTF Conserw-Mon a0° ° an F..c 255 Ades Our mRn County - E3c;Alcm O+ram Cow* F/ • • •• P., ,J Ta.:/s 3 � A+ae' al s-Td June 1:2000 9 1 ATTACHMENT G 25 Little River Regional Park: Impacts of Proposed Uses Prepared for the Little River Advisory Committee March 19, 2001 Proposed Uses: • Hiking • Hiking with companion dogs • Mountain biking • Horseback riding Challenges: • Protecting natural resources ■ Providing high quality user experiences • Maintaining user safety Protecting Natural Resources General Impacts of Trails and Human Use ♦ Trails can impact soils, vegetation, wildlife, and water quality ♦ Compaction of soils • Reduces water infiltration • Increases erosion • Reduces ability for plants to grow • Impacts on vegetation • Trampling and compaction reduce plant diversity • Introduction of exotic plants ♦ Impacts on wildlife habitat ■ 1 mile long, 10 foot wide trail 4 loss of an acre of wildlife habitat ■ Creation of an ecological edge ■ Alteration in plant species composition ■ Fragmentation ♦ Disturbance of wildlife • Impacts depend on frequency, predictability, and timing of the disturbance • Displacement from roosting, feeding, mating, nest building and rearing of young • Can lead to long-term abandonment of an area by a species • Can affect ability to survive and reproduce • Stress and flight 4 increased use of energy • Passive-defense response + less time to feed 4 less energy intake • Can reduce biodiversity • Sensitive species will be displaced • Replaced by generalist species ♦ Impacts on water quality • Increased sedimentation in the river • Pollution—trash, excrement G-I L 26 Specific Impacts of Proposed Uses Hiking ♦ Widening of trails to avoid muddy areas ♦ Compaction of soils at attraction sites (at edge of river, at scenic viewpoints) ♦ Shearing on downslopes in wet conditions Hiking with companion dogs ♦ Dogs can increase disturbance of wildlife • Less predictable • Sometimes chase and kill wildlife • Evoke a predator-alarm response ♦ Impact is less if dogs are on a leash and don't leave the trail Mountain Bikes ♦ Less compaction of soils (less downward force) ♦ Less shearing on downslope than horses or hikers only if riders don't ride breaks ♦ Shearing on uphill sections if wet due to wheel-slip ♦ Development of ruts 4 increased erosion • In wet soils • When riders skid with hard breaking ♦ Some riders form new trails (single-track) off established pathways Equestrian ♦ Loosen hillside soils and initiate erosion ♦ Shearing on downslope, especially in wet conditions ♦ Compaction of soils due to heavy loads but sometimes maintain permeability by loosening soils ♦ Deepen trails during wet periods 4 development of braided, parallel trails when hikers and horses avoid these deep trails ♦ Wear trails three times more than hikers ♦ Damage to trees from tying horses ♦ Introduction of exotics ♦ Less disturbance of wildlife—many animals are less afraid of horseback riders than hikers To Reduce Impacts ♦ Construct trails with proper drainage to reduce wet soils and pools on the trail ♦ Limit the number of trails ♦ Create narrower trails or utilize existing edges to reduce edge effects ♦ Provide adequate mileage and varied trails to reduce the creation of impromptu trails ♦ Leave undisturbed places for wildlife breeding and refuge ♦ Avoid building trail continuously close to riparian areas ♦ Design appropriate places to tie horses ♦ Educate users—"Leave No Trace" is-t 27 Providing high quality user experiences Need to: • Reduce user conflicts • Cater to specific user preferences • Provide a variety of experiences User Conflicts • Hiker/Equestrian users vs. Mountain-bike users • Perceptions of greater environmental impact • Perceptions of safety hazard -- speed • Perceptions that mountain biking is inappropriate in the environment • New, mechanized • Bright clothing Mountain-bike user complaints ■ Hikers are too possessive of trails—threaten trail closure ♦ To reduce conflicts: ♦ Some recommend separate trails ♦ Others suggest that separate trails might cause resentment, are difficult to enforce, and limit opportunities for communications between user groups ♦ Host joint events ♦ Volunteer patrols User Preferences Hikers ♦ Prefer loops ♦ 1 to 3 mile long trails (30 min. to 2 hr. hikes) Mountain-bikers ♦ 3 to 5 mile loop minimum ♦ 10 to 30 miles desirable ♦ Prefer natural settings and forested areas ♦ Less experienced riders prefer relatively wide and well-graded trails ♦ Intermediate/Experienced riders ♦ Want challenging physical and technical riding ♦ Prefer narrow, "single-track" trails Equestrians ♦ Loop trails between 7 and 10 miles ♦ Trails over 20 miles preferred by experienced riders ♦ Short stretches (1/2 mile) of straight alignment to run horses ♦ Adequate car/trailer parking facilities Provide Variety of Experiences ♦ Vary trail alignments ♦ Avoid"sameness" ♦ Take advantage of natural features —maximize scenic beauty G-3 28 F. ♦ Vary vegetative cover—utilize natural openings in forest stands ♦ Change grade ♦ Consider all the senses —avoid annoying smells and sounds ♦ Avoid straight lines (are monotonous) Maintaining User Safety Trail Standards Hikers ♦ Tread width of 2 feet minimum ♦ Clearing width of 4 feet minimum ♦ Height of clearing above trail —7 feet minimum ♦ Sustained gradients should not exceed 10% Mountain Bikes ♦ 10-30% maximum gradient (depending on user experience) ♦ Maximum sustained pitch of 10-15% ♦ When long grades greater than 4% occur, provide frequent, wide areas where cyclists can rest ♦ Turning radius of 6 feet (2 feet acceptable for experienced riders) ♦ Tread width • Two-way traffic— 8 feet desirable, 5 feet minimum • One-way traffic—should be at least 18 inches wide ♦ Clear all obstructions under 8 feet, 10 feet desirable ♦ Clear obstructions beyond the trail edge for a minimum of 2 feet ♦ Avoid sharp angles and short radius curves ♦ Leave in place rocks, roots, and other natural obstacles in the trail to act as natural speed barriers ♦ Maintain visibility ♦ Discourage or prohibit bike use on trails crowded with hikers and equestrians Equestrian ♦ Slope should not exceed 15% ♦ Wide enough for two horses ♦ Cleared to a height of 15 feet Multi-Use Trails ♦ 8 to 12 foot width ■ Some argue, though, that multi-use trails do not have to be wider. Narrower trails reduce speed. ♦ 8 to 10 foot clearance ♦ 150 foot line of sight G-y