Marlyn Park Master Site Plan Lansdowne Borough · Marlyn Park Master Site Plan Lansdowne Borough Submitted to: Borough of Lansdowne 12 E. Baltimore Avenue Lansdowne, PA 19050 May

Marlyn Park Master Site Plan Lansdowne Borough

Submitted to:

Borough of Lansdowne 12 E. Baltimore Avenue

Lansdowne, PA 19050

May 26, 2010

Submitted by Campbell Thomas & Co.

1504 South Street Philadelphia, PA 19146-1636

215-545-1076 www.campbellthomas.com

in association with Arora and Associates, PC

This project was financed in part by a grant from the Community Conservation Partnerships Program, Keystone Recreation, Park and Conservation Fund, under the administration of the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Bureau of Recreation and Conservation. Additional funding was provided by Lansdowne Borough

DCNR Project Numbers: BRC-TAG-12-243 The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Pennsylvania Department of Natural Resources, nor any of their sub-agencies.

Marlyn Park is a Wonderful Oasis

Marlyn Park Master Plan

Master Plan for Marlyn Park May 26, 2010 for Lansdowne Borough Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Summary Page 5

A. Background B. Goals C. Recommendations

II. Introduction / The Project Partners / Public Involvement Page 6

A. Introduction B. Study Committee C. Neighbors and Residents D. Lansdowne Borough E. Consultants

III. Parameters and Limits of Study Page 7

IV. Background and Community Page 8

A. History B. Neighborhood Information

V. Summary of Property Information Page 9

A. Actual Boundaries B. Observed Boundaries C. Other Boundary Items

VI. Site Analysis Page 10

A. Site Condition B. Use and Access D. Maintenance and Management

VII. Recommendations – Site Maintenance and Management Page 11

A. Site Program Summary B. Key Recommendations in Greater Detail



View Down the Park Path

VIII. Recommended Phasing of Improvements Page 28

IX. Opinion of Probable Cost of Construction & Continuing Maintenance Page 29

A. Probable Cost of Construction B. Continuing Maintenance Costs

X. Funding Sources Page 31



Junction of Avery Run into Falls Run

Appendix Page 32 & Following Opinion of Probable Costs

Maps:

Historic Map of Lansdowne, South Part Marlyn Park Boundaries

Marlyn Park Existing Site Plan Marlyn Park Master Plan Site Issues Plan*

Stream Bank Restoration Concept Marlyn Park Master Plan Stream Bank Restoration Design*

Areas of Rear Yard Expansion Lansdowne Borough Map with Bikeways

Lansdowne Area Transit Map

Supporting Documents Key Interview Summary Sheet

Landscape Analysis Elements of the Design

PNDI Environmental Review Land Engineering Properties

Hydrologic Soil Groups Funding Sources

*These drawings constitute the drawn portion of the Master Plan



The following members of the Lansdowne Borough Community gave their time, efforts and expertise in guiding the Marlyn Park Master Plan:

Shelley Grant Jeff Hayden Jack Kelly Virginia Maroun Jenette Reinhart Barbara Silzle Steve Simkins Jeri Staiber Joe Urban



Spring in Marlyn Park

Summary

Background: Marlyn Park provides a passive green space along two streams that feed into Darby Creek near the Lansdowne Swim Club. It has a single entrance at the intersection of West Strafford and Willowbrook Avenues and is substantially bordered by the rear yards of houses along surrounding streets (see map in Appendix A). Much of the area is low lying and falls within a flood plain adjacent to the streams with steep slopes up to the level of adjacent housing. For many years it has served as a restful glade within its community. Over time, what is perceived as park land no longer coincides with the actual boundaries. Facing questions regarding its use and links to nearby public areas as well as concern for maintaining Marlyn Park’s public service; Lansdowne Borough commissioned this study to examine:

Park Preservation and Stabilization • The possibilities for pathways through the park that would reach to Eldon Avenue

near Bryn Mawr Avenue and to Baltimore Avenue. • Recommendations for park maintenance. • Landscaping improvements that would blend with the community and Marlyn

Park’s continued passive use. • Resolution of park boundary issues along with use of park space by the adjacent

community members.

To accomplish this, Lansdowne Borough along with their consulting team led by Campbell Thomas & Co. formed a local study committee of stakeholders and interested residents to review the issues, meet with the community, examine the existing conditions and formulate a Master Site Plan for Marlyn Park’s future.

Goals:

• Preserve the passive nature of Marlyn Park’s green space and enhance the parks service to the community.

• Resolve several issues regarding the “perceived” versus actual park boundaries to clarify access and maintenance.

• Offer suggestions and options for developing a passage through Marlyn Park that would link to other Borough recreation areas as well as public transit and neighborhoods.



• Provide a long term plan for both maintenance and preservation that will retain the park’s natural beauty and feel through a natural landscape along with Borough and local community efforts.

• Develop probable costs for any capital improvements to Marlyn Park along with a maintenance / operation budget for the future. Define recommended responsibilities for this work.

Recommendations: Entrances:

• Main Entrance off Stratford Ave.: Rehabilitate into a gated accessible entry with new fencing and a stabilized turf main path. o Provide for a new entrance from Eldon Rd. at the northwest corner using the

Bryn Mawr Ave. right of way and existing paving. Park Space and Borders

• Develop easement agreements with interested neighbors along the plateau portions of the north and west borders regarding their use and care of park land adjacent to their property. The nature of these agreements will vary to accommodate each property’s specific conditions

• Reach agreements with the Swim Club and neighbors along the south border at Falls Run to allow Borough use and maintenance of that stream bed area that is now in private ownership.

• Provide a link via culvert /bridge across Avery Run to allow better access to the area for use and maintenance and permit passage through the park from an existing entrance to the proposed one.

Maintenance and Long Term Care: Provide stream bank stabilization via various means to develop low maintenance systems which preserve the area around the two stream beds. Aesthetic and Capital Improvements:

• Replace the “cobra-head” general lighting with efficient fixtures having limited sky pollution and set on a night-only motion detected control system.

• Landscape around the raised man-hole units with climbing plant materials. • Provide one or two stone sitting walls / benches.

II. Introduction / The Study Team / Public Involvement

Introduction: Lansdowne Borough undertook The Marlyn Park Master Plan to insure the park’s passive nature and continued service to its surrounding neighborhoods. Originally set aside over seventy years ago, the valley that forms the park is now fully surrounded by mature development. The Plan addresses its use and preservation for the next generation.



Walsh Estate with Marlyn Park c.1900

Study Committee: We particularly appreciate the time, encouragement, and constructive criticism offered by the residents and Borough officials who offered their time to act as a Study Committee for the project. Over the course of our numerous meetings, all have endeavored to address the civic and local residents’ concerns for the continued success of Marlyn Park.

Neighbors and Residents: We appreciate, as well, the efforts and input from Marlyn Park’s immediate neighbors many of whose properties immediately adjoin the park land itself. They have met with the consultants through both the development and review of this Master Plan. Without their concern and interest, Lansdowne Borough, the study committee and their consultants would not have been able to successfully address issues regarding Marlyn Park’s continued service and maintenance.

Lansdowne Borough: Early discussions with the Borough Planning Commission as well review and comments by Borough staff contributed significantly to the consultants understanding and direction for this study. Their concern and direction reflect a continuing commitment to the Lansdowne community.

Consultants This study and report was performed and prepared by a multi-disciplinary consultant team led by Campbell Thomas and Company of Philadelphia, PA, Robert P. Thomas AIA (Partner-in-Charge), Peter Goldring, RA (Project Architect), and Michael Szilagyi (Project Designer), in association with Timothy Wilson RLA, LEED AP, and Jeff Case, PE of Arora & Assoc., PC, engineers and landscape architects.

Funding for this study has been generously provided by a grant from The Pennsylvania Department of Conservation & Natural Resources (DCNR) with matching funds from Lansdowne Borough.

III. Parameters and Limits of Study

The work of this Master Plan is based upon limited visual field surveys performed by Campbell Thomas & Co. (CTC) and Arora & Assoc. engineers during 2009 and 2010. These were integrated with available mapping and information provided by Lansdowne Borough and other organizations currently working on planning efforts in the greater Baltimore Ave. corridor.

The area of the study was limited to Marlyn Park itself plus portions of the immediate community which borders the park along Marlyn and Bryn Mawr Avenues to the north, Eldon Avenue to the west, Willowbrook Ave to the east and the cul-de-saq of Martin Drive to the South. The



Gladstone Hall

team also looked at those areas along the south of Falls Run which immediately border the park.

The project goal is to develop a long term plan which preserves the passive nature of the park and its service to the community. The limited recommendations for changes were based on this goal and developed to allow for implementation over a period of time as budgets permit. Preservation and restoration of the stream beds are the most immediate of these objectives, forming a basis from which the remaining goals can be achieved.

IV. Background and Community History: Located in a newer section of Landsdowne, the Marlyn Park community was developed during the 1940’s on northern portions of Gladstone, the estate of Philip J. Walsh. Originally, there was a small lake near the current location for Lansdowne Swim Club’s pool. The Club and pool date from the late 1950’s period when the Eldon Avenue community was built. Much of the park area is clearly defined on a 1909 map though the surrounding development took place later. Interestingly some of the stores along Baltimore Pike appear in this map along with the Manor House. Pennock florists’ greenhouses lay just north of Marlyn Park in 1909 along with several of the family’s homes which were scattered throughout the area. (See appendix A for historic maps)

Neighborhood Information: With the exception of the land owned by Lansdowne Swim Club, Marlyn Park is entirely surrounded by residential communities. Most of the homes are single family with a small number of duplex units. The housing rests at the higher elevations overlooking the park and stream beds which feed rainwater into Darby Creek. With the current entry at the intersection of Stratford and Willowbrook Avenues, the park best serves those houses which border it plus the immediate community surrounding the entry. However, due to a lack of access, and awareness of Marlyn Park, it does not serve much of the Eldon Avenue neighborhood which borders it to the West. In fact, some of these neighbors have indicated that they were unaware of the park in spite of its proximity.



V. Property Information

Actual Boundaries: The boundaries of Marlyn park can be best described as the rear lot lines of the surrounding properties along Marlyn and Bryn Mawr Avenues to the north, Eldon Ave to the west and Lansdowne Swim Club and 22 and 25 Martin Drive on the south, all joining at the intersection of Willowbrook and Stratford Avenues at the entrance to the east. For the casual observer, these lines fall along the line of utility poles at the rear of the Marlyn Avenue properties, in line with the rear yard fencing that exists for several of the homes on Eldon Avenue and running in a path just north of Falls Run on the south side. Overall, the park is just over three acres.

Current Observed Boundaries: Due to both the slope of the land at the plateau behind many of the Marlyn Avenue homes and the private landscaping in this area, the northern edge of the park appears to end about fifty feet short of the actual rear property lines for these homes. Similarly, some of the rear yards of the Eldon Avenue properties have been landscaped into the park with private improvements. This area however does not have a natural grade separation from adjacent portions of the park. The reverse situation occurs along the Falls Run stream bed. The park lands appear to extend across the stream to the base of the steep slope which rises towards Baltimore Avenue. This land, a strip from fifty to eighty feet wide is actually privately owned.

Other Boundary Items: Records show the existence of three paper streets which affect the boundaries of the park. Paper streets are land set aside for future streets during the initial planning process for an area but never developed. At the northwest corner of Marlyn Park the paper continuation of Bryn Mawr Avenue into Eldon Avenue provides an opportunity for another entry to the park as discussed below. The other paper streets



occur as an extension of Stratford Avenue along the line of the stream bed to a point near the eastern boundary of the Lansdowne Swim Club and then south to Baltimore Avenue.

The Borough is currently researching the status of these areas as well as a small triangle of Borough land which exists at the northwest corner of the park and connects to the Bryn Mawr Ave.- Eldon Ave. link described above.

Recently the Borough agreed to take over land at the stream bed adjacent to the southern retaining wall next to 36 Willowbrook Ave. at the property owner’s request.

VI. Site Analysis

Site Condition

Landscape and Topography: Aesthetically the park maintains a good balance of open space to undeveloped areas. The stream beds frame the major public portion behind Marlyn Avenue which extends to the open field across Avery Run to the slope behind the Eldon Ave. homes. The Falls Run stream bed defines the southern edge of this area with the remaining land to the south overgrown and untended. There are trees throughout the space with denser growth towards the edges particularly along Avery Run as it emerges from the Northwest corner. Both the raised manholes and utility poles interfere with this composition. Overall, the park creates a small natural oasis in a relatively dense inner ring suburban setting. Other elements, such as the chain link fencing, conflict with the natural sense of the space.

Species: Marlyn Park is populated by a combination of natural native species, grass and plant material brought into the area. Much of the area bordered by the houses along Marlyn and Bryn Mawr Avenues has been re-planted by residents. Some of these species are not beneficial to the Park and should be replaced over time.

Drainage: Both stream beds, as well as a rainwater path from Marlyn Ave. serve as feeders conducting excess surface water to Darby Creek. Significant portions of the park lay in a flood plain and one can see both the extent of the flow during heavy storms and the resultant damage to the stream beds and remaining portions of retaining walls. This renders much of the area unusable for some time after a rainfall. In several areas along Avery Run, the erosion has damaged trees, undercutting the root systems.

Uses and Access Uses: Marlyn Park serves mostly as a quiet respite to walk and enjoy the setting. Occasionally, it has been used to host community events, serve as a background for wedding photographs, or has been used for small private events. Dogs are walked here and, though closed at dusk, it is frequented by teens often during warm evenings.



Access: The Park’s single entrance at the end of Stratford Ave. creates a limited access to the space making it available to the streets immediately adjacent to the entry point but difficult to reach for the residents of Eldon Ave. who do not abut the park, and their immediate neighborhood. The current entry and path do not permit comfortable access for the disabled. Moreover, once in the park, one cannot easily cross Avery Run to reach the portion of the field at the western end. A path exists from Eldon Ave. along the Bryn Mawr Ave. paper street to public land adjacent to the park. From here there is a narrow worn trail into the western side of the park (behind the houses on Eldon Ave.). Not all of this trail along Avery Run is on public property and without crossing at Avery Run, one cannot pass from the trail to the Stratford Avenue entrance.

A second paper street access point exists at Baltimore Ave. to the east of a small group of shops. It is blocked by a chain link fence and leads steeply downhill to Falls Run following along the rear of properties on Martin Drive and then turns to run towards the park entrance at the end of Stratford Ave. Currently the Borough is working to clarify the status and exact location of this section of the property.

Maintenance and Management: Age, erosion, limited attention and difficult access have all contributed to deterioration and limited maintenance at Marlyn Park. Repeated vehicle entries from Stratford Ave. have left ruts in the soft land adjacent to Falls Run. Lack of attention to fallen retaining walls along with limited stream bed landscaping have resulted in a wider stream bed. Mowing and maintenance of the area behind Eldon Avenue requires either crossing the Avery Run Stream bed or gaining access through one of the private residential yards. With limited resources the goal is to develop much of the park in a self sustaining manner using various methods of stream bank restoration and appropriate plantings and landscaping to keep the natural areas intact.

VII. Recommendations

Site Program Summary: The program’s purpose is to address many of the issues facing the continued use and enjoyment of Marlyn Park and to create a phased plan for implementation as well as a direction for long term maintenance and management. Briefly the key elements are:

Boundaries and Easements: Provide an equitable plan for allowing private use of park border areas which fall on the plateau along Marlyn and Bryn Mawr Avenues. Residents taking advantage of the easement opportunities will be required to maintain those areas within defined parameters of use and landscaping. Develop a voluntary agreement with the property owners along the Falls Run stream bed regarding public use and access, and restoration and maintenance of the stream bed. Determine what additional land, if any,



may need to be acquired to provide a second entry off of Eldon Ave. at the northwest corner and see whether a purchase or exchange can be made with the appropriate property owner(s).

Initial Maintenance: Perform a thorough cleanup of the park removing dead and fallen trees, abandoned improvements left by former residents on Borough Property and clearing of invasive species as recommended.

Stream Bank Restoration: Stabilize and restore the banks to limit further deterioration. Provide recommended plantings and other means as needed to limit further deterioration

Landscape Development: Institute a program of long term tree maintenance and replacement. Set up a guide for appropriate plantings and their location(s). Resolve run-off issues from Marlyn Ave. Provide a decorative camouflage for the manholes.

Access and Paths: Stabilize the main entry path for future maintenance and emergency vehicle us as well as accessible passage within the park. Add a second entry from the northwest corner off of Eldon Ave. with walking path into the main portion of the park. Complete this route with a pedestrian and service crossing of Avery Run just north of its intersection with Falls Run. Provide for handicapped access and vehicular control at the existing entry.

Park Amenities: To be developed on an incremental, as funded, basis.

• Site lighting: Provide ground directed site lighting using underground wiring. Use high efficiency lighting fixtures with both photo and motion detection controls.

• Fencing:

o Provide an entry ‘gate’ system to limit vehicular access.

o Replace existing utility fence with fencing compatible with the nature of the park.

• Bollards: Provide bollards to protect vehicles from reaching the stream at the end of Stratford Road.

• Provide an accessible drinking fountain with a utility spigot.

• Provide one or two sitting walls at key viewpoints.

• Provide a small bike rack at each entry.

• Provide an informative historical sign at the park entry.

Long Term Maintenance Plan: The Park is viewed as a maintained glade bordered by natural areas to the south of Falls Run and toward the northwest where Aver Run enters the park through steep wooded banks.

• Work with Pennsylvania Horticultural Society and Borough Tree Advisory Board on a long term tree replacement plan.

Split Rail Fence with Guard



• Continue with sustainable and native plantings that require minimum maintenance.

• Develop a recommended planting(s) list for neighbors who choose to adopt available easement areas.

Key Recommendations in Greater Detail:

Stream Bank Restoration Program Avery Run and Falls Run both feed Darby Creek and are two of the key natural resources within Marlyn Park. Over time and with increased regional development, more stress has been put on these tributaries to convey an abundant amount of stormwater in the event of a large rainfall. This increase of concentrated stormwater discharge upstream of Marlyn Park has affected the park and its stream banks and has developed an erosive condition. Although the erosive condition is not severe to the point that it would require a major engineering effort, it is at a point that restoration is applicable and needs to be accomplished as part of the park improvements. This restoration effort needs to occur to improve the integrity of the stream banks, replenish and improve the riparian vegetation and ecology, and improve the aquatic habitat that has been affected by sediment laden waters. Prior to any stream bank restoration work within Marlyn Park, upstream conditions need to be addressed along with the removal of any major stream obstructions such as fallen trees. Otherwise, storm water flows could destroy any restoration work. It will be important to implement boulder check dams at the heads of Avery Run and Falls Run as they enter Marlyn Park. This corrective measure will impede and slow the velocity of stormwater as it enters the park reducing the chance or replicating the previous erosive condition. Falls Run near the entrance of Marlyn Park already has a small check dam system that should be enhanced a bit with larger boulders to reduce water flow velocity. After the boulder check dams are installed and are functional, the remaining stream bank restoration activities can begin. It is recommended that the stream banks be “hand” prepared for restoration. The banks of Avery Run and Falls Run are not eroded to the point where large scale excavation operations need to be executed. The stabilization techniques recommended for Avery Run and Falls Run within Marlyn Park will be the previously mentioned boulder check dams, live plantings and “hard armoring” with boulders along some of the banks. Live native plantings will provide stream bank soil stabilization as they develop a sturdy root network. At first, soil stabilization blanketing should be employed as the plant root network develops and become self sustaining.



Although Avery Run and Falls Run will use the same stabilization techniques, they will be used a little differently based on the nature of the streams. Avery Run is an irregular channel pattern which actually means it’s more or less a straight shot. Falls Run is considered meandering. The following is how each should be treated: Avery Run: Irregular stream channel

• Boulder Check Dams – should be implemented at the head of the stream where it enters the park. Given the straight nature of this stream, a series of boulder check dams should be used through the dense wooded area in the Northwest corner of the park. These should reduce any further erosion and it will create small waterfalls and plunge pool which will help restore aquatic habitat.

• Live Native Plantings – should be used along the stream bank for most of the stream corridor. In the dense wooded Northwest corner of Marlyn Park, ferns and shade tolerant plants such as Spicebush, Virginia Creeper and Trillium (to name some) should be used as bank stabilization. Out of the denser wooded areas

where there is intermediate sunlight, grasses, showy flowers and smaller wet tolerant woody plants should be used.

• “Hard-Armoring” with Boulders – should be used at the confluence of Avery Run and Falls Run to stabilize the point on the East bank of Avery Run. It is evident that this is an area of washout and erosion. Using large boulders at this point will give the bank the integrity it needs to stand up to pounding it takes by water flows.

Falls Run: Meandering stream channel

Boulder Check Dams – should be used to enhance the existing smaller check dam where flows exit the existing stormwater infrastructure. This is the only area that this technique will be needed for the meandering stream.

Live Native Plantings – should be used along the stream bank for most of the stream corridor and interspersed with the “hard-armoring” boulders to create an integrated and natural stream bank stabilization design.

“Hard-Armoring” With Boulders

Live Native Plantings



“Hard-Armoring” with Boulders – should be used at the confluence of Avery Run and Falls Run to stabilize the point on the West bank of Falls Run. It is evident that this is an area of washout and erosion. Using large boulders at this point will give the bank the integrity it needs to stand up to pounding it takes by water flows. This technique should also be employed as deflectors on the portions of the stream bank that take a concentrated flow head on. This will provide the receiving bank the stabilization it needs to absorb this force without eroding.

Recommended Plant Material Native plants to Pennsylvania shall be used in the planting design for Marlyn Park. Native plant material is advantageous to use because: they are unlikely to be invasive or complete



with other native plants; they are generally adapted to the climate and typical rainfall amounts and require less active watering and general maintenance; they provide food sources for native wildlife and promote biodiversity; they reduce the need for pesticides; and enhance aesthetics and general visual quality of the landscape. The following roster of native plant material reflects plant material that would thrive within Marlyn Park based on the existing park conditions, shade toleration and annual rainfall.

Recommended Native Plant Material for Marlyn Park

Medium to Large Trees

Common Name Scientific Name Bloom Period Height Notes

Red Maple Acer rubrum Mar-Apr 40-60 ft. Red flowers; adaptable; fall color

Sugar Maple acer saccharum Apr-May 60-75 ft. Yellow flowers in spring; fall color; maple syrup

Yellow Birch Betula alleghaniensis Apr-May 60-80 ft. Catkins in winter

Black Birch Betula lenta Apr-May 45-55 ft. Catkins in winter

River Birch Betula nigra Apr-May 60-80 ft. Catkins; striking bark

Eastern White Pine Pinus strobus N/A 50-80 ft. N/A

White Oak Quercus alba Mar-Jun 50-100 ft. Edible nuts

Chestnut Oak Quercus montana May-Jun 40-75 ft. Fall color; nuts attractive to wildlife

Small Trees and Shrubs


Smooth Alder Alnus serrulata Mar-Apr 6-10 ft. Yellow catkins; multi-stemmed; needs wet soil

Serviceberry Amelanchier arborea Mar-May 15-25 ft. White flowers in spring; edible berries; fall color

Alternate-leaved Dogwood Cornus alternifolia May-Jun 15-25 ft. White flowers in early summer; blue berries

Flowering Dogwood Cornus florida Apr-Jun 10-30 ft. White branches in spring; red berries

Winterberry Ilex verticillata May-Jun 6-10 ft. Showy berries in winter; multi-stemmed

Mountain Laurel Kalmia latifolia May-Jul 7-15 ft. White flowers; evergreen; multi-stemmed; PA state flower

Spicebush Lindera benzoin Mar-May 6-12 ft. Berries and foliage in fall; multi-stemmed; herbal uses

Wild Plum Prunus americana Apr-May 15-25 ft. White flowers; edible fruit; nulti-stemmed

Elderberry Sambucus canadensis Jun-Jul 5-15 ft. White flowers; multi-stemmed; edible berries & flowers

Highbush Blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum May-Jun 6-12 ft. White flowers; multi-stemmed; edible berries; fall colors

Arrow-wood Viburmun recognitum May-Jun 3-15 ft. White flowers in late spring; multi-stemmed

Virginia Creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia July 10-40 ft. Fall color; berries important for wildlife; considered a vine

Grasses (Perennial)




Lurid Sedge Carex lurida Jun-Oct 1-2 ft. Wetland plant; interesting seeds

Bottlebrush Grass Elymus hystix Jun-Aug 2-4 ft. Grass that grows in shade

Virginia Wild-rye Elymus virginicus Jul-Sep 2-4 ft. Grass that tolerates a wide range of conditions

Ferns (Perennial)


Maidenhair Fern Adiantum pedatum N/A 1-2 ft. Grows in clumps; delicate texture; herbal uses

Evergreen Shield Fern Dryopteris marginalis N/A 1-3 ft. Evergreen; clump-forming; attractive

Interrupted Fern Osmunda claytoniana N/A 2-4 ft. Grows in clumps; distinctive fronds

Christmas Fern Polystichum achrostichoides N/A 1-2 ft. Evergreen; grows in clumps

Showy Flowers (Perennial)

Common Name Scientific Name Bloom Period

Height Bloom Color & Notes

Wild Columbine Aquilegia canadensis Apr-Jun 1-3 ft. Red & Yellow - Commonly cultivated; hummingbirds

Jack-in-the-pulpit Arisaema triphyllum Apr-Jun 1-3 ft. Green-purple - Unusual flower; bright red berries

Wild Ginger Asarum canadense Apr-May < 1 ft. Maroon - Edible and herbal uses

Butterfly-weed Asclepias tuberosa May-Sep 1-3 ft. Orange - Butterfly plant; tolerates dry conditions; taproot

Turtlehead Chelone glabra Jul-Sep 1-3 ft. White - Tolerates wet areas; herbal uses; hummingbirds

White snakeroot Eupatorium rugosum Jul-Oct 2-3 ft. White - Tough plant; can grow in dry shade; cultivars availible

Wood Geranium Geranium maculatum Apr-Jul 1-2 ft. Rose - Adaptable plant; long bloom time; herbal uses

Common Sneezeweed Helenium autumnale Aug-Oct 2-6 ft. Yellow - Tolerates wet areas; showy flowers; herbal uses

Sunflowers Helianthus sp. Jul-Sep 4-6 ft. Yellow - Often aggressive; showy flowers; good for birds

Oxeye Sunflower Heliopsis helianthoides Jul-Sep 1-5 ft. Yellow - long bloom time; butterfly plant

Alum-root Heuchera americana May-Aug 1-2 ft. Greenish - Long bloom time; many culitvars and hybrids

Cardinal Flower Lobelia cardinalis Jul-Sep 2-5 ft. Scarlet - Long bloom time; butterfly and hummingbird plant

Great Blue Lobelia Lobelia siphilitica Jul-Oct 1-3 ft. Blue - Long bloom time; white cultivars; hummingbirds

Partridge-berry Mitchella repens Jun-Jul < 1 ft. White - Evergreen; ground cover; berry edible and showy

Bee-balm Monarda didyma Jul-Aug 2-5 ft. Red - Showy flowers; aromatic; butterfly plant; herbal uses

Phlox Phlox divaricata May-jun 1-2 ft. Lilac - Aromatic; butterfly plant

Phlox Phlox maculata Jul-Sep 1-3 ft. Purple - Aromatic; showy flowers; butterfly plant

Phlox Phlox paniculata Jul-Oct 2-5 ft. Pink - Aromatic; showy flowers; butterly plant

May-apple Podophyllum petatum May 1-2 ft. White - Ground cover, edible fruit; mottled foliage

Jacob's Ladder Polemonium reptans Apr-Jun 1-2 ft. Blue - Attractive flowers; slow spreader; herbal uses

Solomon's Seal Polygonatum pubescens Apr-Jun 1-3 ft. Yellow - Not fussy; blue berries; herbal and edible uses

Showy Flowers (Perennial)



Plant Material to Camouflage Manholes: Use Virginia Creeper which is native to the area. To speed and direct growth, provide a fabric net around the manhole for the plants to grow up. Keep the manhole covers free of plant material to allow for occasional service access.

Resolution of the Marlyn Ave. Run-off Marlyn Park is generally sloped from North to South from Marlyn Avenue down to Avery Run and Falls Run. Stormwater run-off sheet flows in this same direction from the residences on Marlyn Avenue down to the Runs. In a few areas of concentrated flow, an erosive condition has presented itself. Riling has occurred and threatens to get worse if action isn’t taken within the proposed improvements for Marlyn Park. Since these areas of erosion bisect the park, it is recommended to rectify this problem with a sub-surface drain. This would involve excavating out the full length of the eroded channel to a depth of 1.5’ and a width of 2’ and install a 6” perforated pipe as shown in the following before and after sections. The drain tile should start at the upslope position where the erosive condition is stemming and continue down to discharge to a rip-rap apron before depositing into either Avery or Falls Run. The before shows the existing erosive condition while the after shows the implementation of a sub-surface perforated drain tile in a bed of AASHTO # 57 stone and wrapped in geotextile fabric. This will convey the existing run-0ff into the streams leading to Darby Creek.

Common Name Scientific Name Bloom Period Height Bloom Color & Notes

Black-eyes Susan Rudbeckia hirta May-Sep 2-3 ft. Orange - Bright daisy-like flowers; long bloom time

Bloodroot Sanguinaria canadensis Mar-May < 1 ft. White - Red juice; herbal uses

Golden Ragwort Senecio aureus May-Jul 1-2 ft. Yellow - Long bloom time; early daisy-like flowers

False Solomon's Seal Smilacina racemosa May-Jul 1-2 ft. White - Plume like flower; re berries; herbal uses

Wrinkle-leaf Goldenrod Solidago rugosa Jul-Nov 2-6 ft. Yellow - Aggressive; tough plant; butterfly plant

Tall Meadow-rue Thalictrum pubescens May-Jun 2-8 ft. White - Wet to moist soil; tall plant; delicate flowers

Foamflower Tiarella cordifolia Apr-Jun < 1 ft. White - Attractive, long-blooming flower; many cultivars

Trillium Trillium grandiflorum Apr-Jun 1-2 ft. White - Showy flowers

American Dog Violet Viola conspersa Apr-May < 1 ft. Violet - Delicate plant and flower; edible

Common Blue Violet Viola sororia Apr-May < 1 ft. Violet - Delicate plant and flower; edible

Golden-alexanders Zizia aurea Apr-Jun 1-2 ft. Gold - Not fussy; attracts good insects



Culvert Crossing Suggestions Marlyn Park is currently bisected by Avery Run which must be traversed to reach the side of the park that is adjacent to the homes on Eldon Avenue. Right now this makes for logistical issues from a maintenance and park accessibility standpoint. Maintenance crews reportedly have permission to access the western portion of Marlyn Park from Eldon Avenue with the approval of one of the current homeowners to go through their property. Although it is appreciated that the homeowner is allowing this access, there could potentially be a problem if that homeowner decides to move or starts restricting access for one reason or another and crews are unable to maintain that side of the park. It is recommended that a culvert over Avery Run near the confluence of Avery Run and Falls Run be implemented within the final design for Marlyn Park. The culvert could be designed and treated in a way to make it aesthetically pleasing by way of concrete form liners and stains. This treatment would be carried out on the wing walls and top parapets of the culvert (possibly as depicted in the photograph).

A study within the engineering phase of the culvert design will be needed to understand the hydrology of Avery Run to accurately design the culvert. This will indicate what the culvert box size needs to be based on potential flooding and clearance needed.



Lighting Recommendations Replace Existing Site Lighting System: The current lighting within the park provides general park lighting via a series of pole mounted, overhead street lights which illuminate both sky and ground. Though the park closes officially at dusk there is both a safety and occasional night use concern. Considering that Marlyn Park is mainly made of mature deciduous trees with a high towering canopy, using solar/photovoltaic lighting would not be the most feasible because of the constraint of harnessing the necessary sunlight to be optimally functional.

It is recommended that free standing architectural LED site lighting poles anchored in concrete with underground electrical service be used. The luminaires should be shielded or designed to project light downward. This is to protect Marlyn Park’s natural habitat and ecology from excess un-natural light that would otherwise be shed to the night sky and possible impede wildlife migration patterns through the park.

The proposed lighting replacement addresses these issues while improving both the aesthetics and efficiency. It entails:

• Removal of the existing lighting and poles.

• Provision of underground electrical feeds for lighting system and available power which follows the main path from entry to the proposed crossing of Avery Run.

• Pole mounted decorative park fixtures which provide controlled lighting towards the ground. Use of long lasting, energy efficient LED lamps to lower both energy and replacements costs.

• A combined photovoltaic and timed motion sensor control system set to react to off-hours human presence in the park.

o This requires a dual modality sensor system which can distinguish between human and deer.

Tree Care/Replacement Tree Care: Tree care is important to sustaining and guiding responsible tree growth in Marlyn Park. Trees and other woody plant material respond biologically to pruning in specific and predictable ways. Careful study of these responses has lead to pruning practices that can best develop, preserve, and enhance the structural integrity, beauty and functional value of trees. Through pruning, one can maintain or direct plant form; enhance health and appearance; influence flowering, fruiting, and vigor; regulate growth; control plant size; and invigorate declining plants. Tree pruning should occur annually but may be needed in emergency situations. The following are high and medium to low priorities for emergency pruning.



• High Priority: 1. Trees or limbs that have fallen and caused accidents or personal injury. 2. Trees or limbs that have fallen and caused damage to vehicles or structures. 3. Trees or limbs that are in immediate danger of falling or breaking. 4. Broken hanging limbs adjacent to structures, roads, or picnic or play areas. 5. Trees or limbs that block roads or access points.

• Medium to Low Priority:

1. Trees or limbs that have fallen and are not an immediate hazard. 2. Trees or limbs that have fallen and are not blocking roads or access points. 3. Hanging tree limbs that may not be in immediate danger of falling. 4. Dead or severely declining trees without a target present.

Timing or tree pruning can vary. Trees deemed as hazardous should be pruned immediately and during any season. Generally, light pruning can be done at any to during the year on most species if the trees are in good health. Most deciduous plants can be pruned during the dormant period between leaf fall and the end of wither. This can minimize the risk of pest problems. Avoid pruning broadleaf trees in early to late spring. Evergreens will be set back the least if they are pruned in the late winter. It is recommended to evaluate each tree before pruning and avoid large scale pruning efforts during the bird nesting season. There are many types of pruning practices to achieve certain desired results. Pruning can be performed for tree: structure; general cleaning; thinning; raising; reducing; and restorations.

• Pruning for Structure – Structural pruning is the removal of live branches and stems to influence structural integrity. It usually follows four procedures: 1) Canopy cleaning by removing dead, broken, diseased and dying branches, 2) development or re-establishment of a dominant leader, 3) establishment of the lowest permanent scaffold limb and 4) establishment of scaffold limbs by removing competing stems or branches.

• Pruning to Clean – Cleaning is the selective removal of dead, diseased, detached,

rubbing and broken branches. This type of pruning is done to reduce the risk of branch failure and the transmission of decay, insects and diseases.

• Pruning to Thin – Thinning is the selective removal of small live branches to reduce

crown density. Branches are 0.25 to 1.00 inches in diameter. 10-15 percent of live foliage can be removed at one time. If more pruning is desired, it should not exceed 25 percent in a single year. Excessive removal of small branches on the lower two-thirds of a branch or stem is called lion tailing and may have an adverse effect on the tree – it is not an accepted practice.



• Pruning to Raise – Raising is the selective removal of branches to provide vertical clearance. Caution must be taken to not remove too many lower branches. This can cause slow development of trunk taper, cause cracks or decay in the trunk, or transfer too much weight to the top of the tree.

• Pruning to Reduce (Drop Crotch) – Reduction is the selective removal of branches

and stems to decrease the height and/or spread of a tree. This type of pruning is done to minimize the risk of failure, to reduce height or spread, for utility clearance, to clear vegetation from buildings or other structures, or to improve tree appearance. Crown reduction shall be accomplished with reduction cuts rather than heading cuts.

• Pruning to Restore – Restoration is the selective removal of branches, sprouts, and

stubs from trees that have been topped, severely headed, vandalized, lion –tailed, broken during a storm, or otherwise damaged. Full restoration usually requires several pruning events over a number of years.

• Pruning Conifers – Conifers are primarily pruned to control the density of

branching, the shape of young trees, and the size of older ones. They are intolerant of topping or heading. Conifers typically have an excurrent growth habit, which is usually maintained throughout the lifespan of the tree. Thinning, by the selective removal of small branches, is the most appropriate method when pruning conifers.

Tree Removal, Replacement and Planting Trees should be removed in Marlyn Park for the following reasons: the tree is dead or dying; it is diseased; it is damaged or injured to the extent that is likely to die and become a hazard, or is constituted as a hazard. Nuisance trees should be removed when the tree causes or is about to cause impairment to the park. It is most desirable to replace a tree of the same (native) species in the same place from which it was removed, but sometimes crowding and other physical constraints make it impossible to replace the tree in the same spot. In this case, finding an alternate location is the best option. Undesirable species (non-native) are not to be replaced. It is a responsible and environmentally friendly idea to plant desirable, sustainable trees in Marlyn Park. The ideal park tree is a shade tree with minimum susceptibility to wind damage and branch crop, does not require active watering, does not require frequent pruning, is deep rooted, has few serious pest and disease problems, and tolerates a wide range of soil conditions. Many of these traits can be found within native tree species. Recommended Resident Easement Programs For some time, several properties have landscaped and made use of parkland adjacent to their properties as an extended yard. Many of these fall on land separated from the bulk of the park by a significant change in grade or other natural separation. A few have simply grown onto adjacent park land. Over the years, with changes in families and ownership,



abandoned improvements in these areas such as stairs, walls and landscaping have returned to the park and become overgrown. The borough anticipates correcting these conditions and seeks to develop a plan address this issue. The study team recommends two landscape easement programs based on the relationship of the area to the park. Each requires the property owner to assume responsibility and maintenance for the area involved. Landscape Easement Program for Residents Whose Yards Fall Along the Plateau Area Behind Marlyn and Bryn Mawr Avenues and Where the Plateau Extends Into Park Land: These easements will be negotiated on an individual basis to reflect the conditions at each property but will require:

• The home owner(s) are to maintain the area of the easement in accord with Borough codes and regulations. The Borough will retain the right to terminate an easement whose homeowner ceases to properly maintain the easement area.

• The property owner shall retain liability for use and activity within the easement area.

• Any new landscaping or improvements within the easement by a property owner shall meet with Borough and Master Plan guidelines for improvement and landscaping within Marlyn Park.

• Legal Costs for the easement shall be the responsibility of the home owner.

• The easement and responsibilities shall transfer with any sale of the property. The rights and responsibilities, at any given time, will belong to the Owner.

o Currently existing non- conforming structures or improvements on park land shall be removed by the current home owner prior to sale of the property.

• The Borough will retain access to all of the park land. Fencing will not be permitted.

Landscape Easement Program for Residents of Eldon Avenue Whose Yards Currently Extend Into Park Land: The study team felt that these easements fell on park land that was contiguous and not significantly set apart by grade from the major portion of Marlyn Park. As a result, we recommend that these easements will be similar to those above but shall expire at the next sale of the property and not be transferrable to a new owner.

Borough Easement/Acquisition Program Borough Acquisition of Land Along Falls Run Creek Bed: The Borough seeks to acquire long term rights or ownership of land crossing Falls Run to a reasonably maintainable elevation along the hillside parallel to Baltimore Pike and the stream.

• The acquisition shall be by mutual agreement with current owners of this land and in accord with existing deeds and easements.



• Once acquired, the Borough will assume responsibility for maintenance and liability for this property.

• The Borough will pay all legal and related costs involved in either the purchase or long term lease of the property.

• The Borough will insure that current property Owners do not lose or diminish existing zoning and development rights related to their properties via the granting, sale or lease of the land.

Borough Acquisition of Land Required to Complete the Proposed Entry from Eldon Ave.: The Borough seeks to acquire sufficient land at the juncture of Borough owned property off of the south side of the Bryn Mawr Ave. paper street and the northwest corner of the park where the two parcels meet at a point.

• This land falls along the western stream bank of Avery Run and appears to be part of a parcel at 198 Bryn Mawr Ave. However, portions of the rear yard of 77 Eldon Ave may also be involved.

• The acquisition shall be by mutual agreement with current owners of this land through purchase, long term easement or exchange of a portion of the park parcel for the private parcel.

• The Borough will pay all legal and related costs involved in either the purchase or long term lease of the property.

• The Borough will insure that current property Owners do not loose or diminish any existing rights related to their properties via the granting, sale of lease of the land.

Additional Park Entries: Potential Additional Entries Several potential additional entries were reviewed. Two involved use of the paper streets which show on the property maps. Developing an entry off of Baltimore Pike behind the properties on Willowbook Ave. provided little advantage to simply arranging for safer bicycle travel down Willowbrook Ave., itself. The second, from Eldon Ave., utilizes the paper street portion of Bryn Mawr Ave. which lies to the west of Avery Run and already has an existing concrete walk that leads toward Marlyn Park. This is shown in more detail below. The consultants and study committee reviewed an entry through the Lansdowne Swim Club parking lot along the line of Falls Run. Suggested by bicycle path planners, this would provide a relatively flat path for walkers and cyclists to pass to the center of Lansdowne from Clifton Heights (see bike map in the appendix). However the current configuration of the club building and swim area do not leave space for this route. The study team also considered bridging the stream gorge at the end of Bryn Mawr Ave. with a pedestrian bridge that would complete the original street design and allow easier access to the current Stratford Road entry. This was viewed as too expensive and out of the scope of the Marlyn Park Master Plan effort.



In all cases, an additional entry which increased community access to the park was seen to improve park security through increased use, greater activity and the elimination of the current dead end arrangement. Elements of a new Entry from Eldon Ave connecting through the park to the existing entry at Stratford Ave.

• Clear the existing walk off Eldon Ave. and provide park entry signage.

• Acquire right of way to connect existing Borough land at the entry point to the northwest corner of the park (see above):

• Create a stabilized walking path along the west side of Avery Run from the entry to the open field.

• Provide a crossing of Avery Run near the juncture with Falls Run.

Operations and Maintenance Program The mission of an operation and maintenance program for Marlyn Park is to create a regularly scheduled routine, reactive and preventative maintenance system that guides the



municipal stewardship of Marlyn Park in a way that provides a safe, sustainable, aesthetically pleasing park that is operational for public use. Marlyn Park is a passive recreation park that receives low to moderate visitation rates. With improved park access, amenities and increased awareness, the park visitation rates will grow. The following routine preventative maintenance program and schedule has been fashioned to reflect the projected amount of use in the parks post improvement state.

Grass and Stabilized Turf Care – Cut once every 10 working days. A grass clipping deposit area should be designated on site for composting. Aeration of grass area is not necessary unless grass quality indicates a need or an application of fertilizer is anticipated. Reseed and sod only when major bare spots are present. Weeding shall ensue when grass is 50% weed infested or grass quality is low in 15% or more of the surface.

• Fertilizer – Apply only when grass vigor seems low. Low level applications can be administered on a once per year basis.

Irrigation – No irrigation should be anticipated. Planting Beds – Landscape bed areas should be kept in a weed, leaf and debris-free condition. Plants should be trimmed to maintain desired shape and to maintain natural growth habit of plant species. Litter Control – Litter service is needed two times a week or as necessary. In times of warmer weather and increased use, litter control may be more frequent. Disease and Insect Control – Done only on epidemic or serious complaint basis. Pest, weed and rodent control measures may be put into effect when the health or survival of the plant material is threatened or where public’s comfort is concerned. Snow Removal – Snow removal shall only be necessary for emergency and maintenance response vehicles to access the park. Snow removal shall be accomplished by the day following the snowfall. Lighting – Replacement or repair of fixtures when a report is filed or when a malfunction is detected by Borough staff. Amenity and Permanent Structure Repairs – Should be accomplished immediately when safety or function is at question. General Inspection – Once weekly



Annual Maintenance Frequencies – Marlyn Park Frequency

Operation Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Annually As

Needed Stabilized Turf (access drive)

Inspection x Repair x Mowing turf surface 2x Remove litter x Remove snow x

Permanent Structures Park Bridges

Inspection x Repair x

Retaining Walls Inspection x Repair x

Culverts Inspection/Clear Obstructions x Repair x

Landscaping

Mowing 2x Trimming x Leaf removal x Tree pruning x x Tree replacement x Seasonal plantings x Weeding x Mulching x Fertilizing/Chemical Treatment x x Watering/Irrigation x

Cleaning

Empty trash cans 2x Remove Litter 2x x Clean stream surface/edge 2x Remove stream obstructions x

Amenity Maintenance Lighting

Inspection x



Repair/replace x

Frequency


Needed Signage

Inspection x Frequency


Needed Cleaning x Repair/replace x

Railings/Fencing Inspection x Repair/replace x

Furnishings Inspection x Repair/replace x

Bollards/Gates Inspection x Repair/replace x

Other Services

Update kiosk information x Security patrol x Graffiti removal x River bank repair/stabilization x

Community Participation –The community has expressed some interest in assisting with the long term maintenance and enhancement of Marlyn Park. Several opportunities exist for members to help out with planting work and maintenance of portions of the grounds. However, we recommend that these efforts be carried out under the guidance of the Park and Recreation Board and in accord with the overall plan. Some possibilities for direct participation include:

• Having the community provide and maintain a small area at the entry. • Community assistance with keeping trash and litter off the park. • Gardening assistance with the camouflage for the manholes. • A possible sculpture competition for the design of bike racks, gates and bollards.

VIII. Recommended Phasing of Improvements

Phasing: The phasing of the work has been developed to provide for progressive improvements that build on one another over a period of time. This permits the Borough



to target dates and budget amounts in order to complete the scope of the Master Plan with limited impact on the overall Borough budget. Phase 1:

• Clear Fallen Trees and debris. • Trim existing older trees to remain • Develop long term maintenance / replacement schedule for trees to remain • Work out details of easement program(s) and provide a timed offer to affected

neighbors include: o List of permitted improvements and landscaping o Recommended planting materials o Responsibilities of those undertaking an easement agreement regarding

maintenance and liability. o Understanding of transfer of easement at property sale. o Inform those not requesting an easement of changes or removal of

improvements (walls stairs, certain plantings) left in the park.

• Develop a community group under the Borough’s Park and Recreation Board to help with maintenance, clean-up and special plantings.

• Pursue acquisition by purchase or granted easement of the lands at the Falls Run stream bed.

o Clarify maintenance responsibilities and potential stream bed liability.

• Pursue land exchange or purchase required to complete new entry access from Eldon Ave.

Phase 2:

• Constructed Stream Bank Stabilization o Avery Run o Falls Run (dependent on ownership – see phase 1)

• Planted Stream Bank Stabilization o Avery Run o Falls Run

• Resolution of Marlyn Park Run-Off

Phase 3:

• Stratford Ave. Entry Improvements: o Curb Cut o Gate o Entry Fencing o Bollards

• Stabilized Path



o Fencing Adjacent to Path o Trenching, Conduit and stub-ups for future lighting

• Avery Run Crossing (Bridge or Culvert)

Phase 4:

• Eldon Ave Entry o Signage o Path o Required Fencing

Phase 5:

• Lighting and Utilities o New Lighting and Controls o Removal of existing lighting and poles o Water Feed, Water Fountain and Frost Free Spigot

Phase 6:

• Decorative Landscaping o Manholes o Park Entry Garden

• Interpretive Signage at Stratford Ave Entry

• Accessible Parking Space at Stratford Ave Entry

• Benches

• Bicycle Racks

IX. Opinion of Probable Cost of Construction and Continuing Maintenance

Probable Cost: The attached spread sheet (first page of the appendix) provides the Architect’s and Engineer’s opinion of probable costs both at current rates and aged for 3 and five years. These are based on standard industry guidelines and experience based on the scope of work indicated and do not represent actual construction estimates.

Continuing Maintenance Costs: The Master Plan includes several concepts to reduce long term maintenance cost for Marlyn Park. These include:

• Plantings and other stream bed retaining devices designed to reduce on-going stream bed care.



• Provision of an stabilized access path to limit the damage from maintenance vehicles

• Efficient lighting which is activated on an as needed and operational basis and not on all night unless so desired.

• Gating to limit unwanted vehicular access and resulting damage.

X. Funding Sources:

Various federal, state, local and private grants are available to assist with preserving open space, improving natural areas and providing for more sustainable communities. A partial list of opportunities has been provided in the appendix.



Junction of Avery Run into Falls Run

Appendix Opinion of Probable Costs

Maps:

Historic Map of Lansdowne, South Part Marlyn Park Boundaries

Marlyn Park Existing Site Plan Marlyn Park Master Plan Site Issues Plan*

Stream Bank Restoration Concept Marlyn Park Master Plan Stream Bank Restoration Design*

Areas of Rear Yard Expansion Lansdowne Borough Map with Bikeways


Supporting Documents Key Interview Summary Sheet

Landscape Analysis Elements of the Design

PNDI Environmental Review Land Engineering Properties

Hydrologic Soil Groups Funding Sources

*These drawings constitute the drawn portion of the Master Plan

Marlyn Park - Opinion of Probable Costs of Construction**

Item Qty. Unit Unit Cost Item Cost Sub Total Base Cost Ph. 1 Ph. 2 Ph. 3 Ph. 4 Ph. 5 Ph. 6 Item Cost

Sub Total 3 YearCost

1 Initial Clearing & Grubbing 2,500$ 2,500$ X 2,800$ 2,800$ 3,013$ 3,013$ 1,2,5,9,10

2 Removal of existing abandoned resident improvements 1 Allow $ 5,000 5,000$ 5,000$ X 5,600$ 5,600$ 6,025$ 6,025$ 1,5,10,163 Stream Bank Stabilization Sub Total for Stream Bank Stabilization 70,870$ X Sub Total for Stream Bank Stabilization 79,374$ 85,398$ 1,2, 5,7,8,9,10,14,16,17a Slope Stabilization Matting 680 SY 9$ 6,120$ 6,854$ 7,375$ b Live Plantings 1 Lump Sum 18,000$ 18,000$ 20,160$ 21,690$ c Hard Armoring 625 SY 75$ 46,750$ 52,360$ 56,334$

4 Resolve Marlyn Ave Runoff Sub Total for Marlyn Ave Runoff 970$ X Sub Total for Marlyn Ave Runoff 1,086$ 1,168$ 1,5,16a 6" Perf Drain Tile 150 LF 2$ 225$ 252$ 271$ b AASHSTO #57 Stone 55 SY 8$ 413$ 462$ 497$ c Geo Textile Fabric 120 SY 1$ 132$ 148$ 159$ d Outfall Rip Rap 4 SY 50$ 200$ 224$ 241$

5 Neighbors Easement Plan* 1 allow 4,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ X 4,480$ 4,480$ 4,820$ 4,820$ 1,5,166 Borough Acquisition, Easement (Mgt. Costs only) 1 allow 3,500$ 3,500$ 3,500$ X 3,920$ 3,920$ 4,218$ 4,218$ 1,5,6,9,10,16,177 Stratford Rd. Entry Sub Total for Stratford Ave. Entry 10,824$ X Sub Total for Stratford Ave. Entry 12,123$ 13,043$ 1,5,12,16a Curb cut for accessible entry 1 ea 1,824$ 1,824$ 2,043$ 2,198$ b Gate 1 ea 2,100$ 2,100$ 2,352$ 2,531$ c Protective Guard Rail (6 Wd Post w/ 3x10 rail) 25 LF 88$ 2,200$ 2,464$ 2,651$ d Decorative Entry Fencing (Match other parks)) 30 LF 54$ 1,620$ 1,814$ 1,952$ e Entry Signage 2 ea 500$ 1,000$ 1,120$ 1,205$ f Accessible Parking Space ‐ Stablilized Turf with Signage 1 ea 2,080$ 2,080$

8 12' wide Stabilized Turf Path 500 LF 32$ 16,000$ 16,000$ X 17,920$ 17,920$ 19,280$ 19,280$ 1,2,4,5,7,8,11,13,169 Replace Fencing along Path (split rail) 100 LF 27$ 2,700$ 2,700$ X 3,024$ 3,024$ 3,254$ 3,254$ 1,5,1610 Bridge over Avery Run Sub Total for Culvert Bridge 83,000$ X Sub Total for Culvert Bridge 92,960$ 100,015$ 1,2,4,5,7,8,11,13,16

a Culvert 1 ea 35,000$ 35,000$ 39,200$ 42,175$ b Install 1 ea 15,000$ 15,000$ 16,800$ 18,075$ c Hydrologic Study 1 ea 12,000$ 12,000$ 13,440$ 14,460$ d Culvert Engineering + Permitting 1 ea 21,000$ 21,000$ 23,520$ 25,305$

11 Eldon Ave Entry Sub Total for Eldon Ave. Entry 8,650$ X Sub Total for Eldon Ave. Entry 9,688$ 10,423$ 1,2,4,5,7,8,11,13,16a Clean up and repair existing portion of entry path 1 allow $ 750 750$ 840$ 904$ b Provide walking path 5' wide 275 LF 16$ 4,400$ 4,928$ 5,302$

Land Acquisition Easement for Connection 1 allow 3,500$ 3,500$ 3,920$ 4,218$ 12 Entry & Main Path Lighting Sub Total for Lighting 42,790$ X Sub Total for Lighting 47,925$ 51,562$ 1,2,4,5,7,8,11,13,16

a Removal of Existing Ltg 1 allow 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,600$ 6,025$ b Service 1 ea 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,600$ 6,025$ c LED Decorative Fixtures w/ Poles 8 ea 2,200$ 17,600$ 19,712$ 21,208$ d Trenching w/ Conduit 500 LF 12$ 6,150$ 6,888$ 7,411$ e Pull Boxes 4 ea 435$ 1,740$ 1,949$ 2,097$ f Sonotube Concrete Base w/ Mtg Plate 8 ea 350$ 2,800$ 3,136$ 3,374$ g Misc. fittings 8 ea 250$ 2,000$ 2,240$ 2,410$ h Ltg Control Package 1 ea 2,500$ 2,500$ 2,800$ 3,013$

12 Drinking Fountain Sub Total for Drinking Fountain 4,150$ X Sub Tot. for Drinking Fount. 4,648$ 5,001$ 1,5,16a Outdoor Accessible Fountain with Spigot 1 ea 2,100$ 2,100$ X 2,352$ 2,531$ b water feed 60 LF 30$ 1,800$ 2,016$ 2,169$ c frost free cut‐off box 1 ea 250$ 250$ 280$ 301$

13 Bicycle Rack 2 ea 600$ 1,200$ 1,200$ X 1,344$ 1,344$ 1,446$ 1,446$ 1,5,1614 8' Stone Sitting Walls 2 ea 1,850$ 3,700$ 3,700$ X 4,144$ 4,144$ 4,459$ 4,459$ 1,5,1615 Planting Around Manholes 6 ea 75$ 450$ 450$ X 504$ 504$ 542$ 542$ 1,5,16

SUB TOTAL 17,250$ 71,840$ 144,931$ 11,141$ 65,047$ 10,324$ 289,210$ 291,540$ 311,159$ 313,666$ General Design and Engineering Fees (@15%)

Bold Numbers are sub‐totals of Numbers in Italics TOTAL 299,349$

* Neighbors Easment may require those seeking an easement to cover Base (current) Est. Cost TOTALcosts involved in the easement arrangement** Probable Costs represent the Architect's estimate based on experience and standard construction industry cost guidelines.Fees as a percentage of construction vary based on project size. *** any actual land aquisition costs are not included+ See Funding Source List in the appendix for references

37,640$ 34,985$

Year 1Potential Funding

Opportunities+

Estimated Costs 3 Yr. Delay Estimated Costs 5 Yr. Delay

PHASING

260,304$ 39,046$

326,525$ 351,306$

March 22. 2010Rev. May 25, 2010

Estimated Costs 5 Yr. Delay

Phase 1 & 2 Costs @ Current Rates with Design Fees***

Phase 3 & 4 Costs @ 3 Year Rates with Design Fees

Phase 5 & 6 Costs @ 5 Year Rates with Design Fees

89,090$

Estimated Costs 3 Yr. Delay Year 3 Year 5

156,072$ 75,371$

Probable Costs V004_5‐25‐2010.xls5/25/2010Campbell Thomas Co. Marlyn Park Master Plan Lansdowne Borough

KEYParks & FieldsSchoolsBusiness DistrictTrain Station Borough Hall, Library,20th Century ClubOn‐road BikewaysOff‐road BikewaysLansdowne Loop (4 MI)

2nd DRAFTBIKEWAY PLAN

to Yeadon, Darby

to Newtown Square Rail Line Trail

to Upper Darby, Havertown

to Philadelphia

to western Delaware Co

pgoldring

Oval

pgoldring

Typewritten Text

MARLYN PARK

pgoldring

Line


Marlyn Park

Marlyn Park – Elements SITTING WALLS

Split Rail Fence

FENCING STABILIZED TURF

PNDI Project Environmental Review Receipt Project Search ID: 20090615197358

Page 1 of 4

1. PROJECT INFORMATIONProject Name: Marlyn ParkDate of review: 6/15/2009 12:17:08 PMProject Category: Recreation,OtherProject Area: 37.6 acresCounty: Delaware Township/Municipality: Lansdowne,Clifton HeightsQuadrangle Name: LANSDOWNEZIP Code: 19050Decimal Degrees: 39.93946 N, --75.28448 WDegrees Minutes Seconds: 39° 56' 22.1" N, -75° 17' 4.2" W

2. SEARCH RESULTSAgency Results ResponsePA Game Commission No Known Impact No Further Review Required

PA Department of Conservationand Natural Resources

No Known Impact No Further Review Required

PA Fish and Boat Commission No Known Impact No Further Review Required

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service No Known Impact No Further Review Required

As summarized above, Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) records indicate no known impacts tothreatened and endangered species and/or special concern species and resources within the project area.Therefore, based on the information you provided, no further coordination is required with the jurisdictionalagencies. This response does not reflect potential agency concerns regarding impacts to other ecologicalresources, such as wetlands.


Page 2 of 4

Note that regardless of PNDI search results, projects requiring a Chapter 105 DEP individual permit or GP 5, 6,7, 8, 9 or 11 in certain counties (Adams, Berks, Bucks, Carbon, Chester, Cumberland, Delaware, Lancaster,Lebanon, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Schuylkill and York) must comply with the bog turtlehabitat screening requirements of the PASPGP.

3. AGENCY COMMENTSRegardless of whether a DEP permit is necessary for this proposed project, any potential impacts to threatenedand endangered species and/or special concern species and resources must be resolved with the appropriatejurisdictional agency. In some cases, a permit or authorization from the jurisdictional agency may be needed ifadverse impacts to these species and habitats cannot be avoided.

These agency determinations and responses are valid for one year (from the date of the review), and are basedon the project information that was provided, including the exact project location; the project type, description,and features; and any responses to questions that were generated during this search. If any of the followingchange: 1) project location, 2) project size or configuration, 3) project type, or 4) responses to the questions thatwere asked during the online review, the results of this review are not valid, and the review must be searchedagain via the PNDI Environmental Review Tool and resubmitted to the jurisdictional agencies.

PA Game CommissionRESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concernspecies and resources.

PA Department of Conservation and Natural ResourcesRESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concernspecies and resources.

PA Fish and Boat CommissionRESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concernspecies and resources.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceRESPONSE: No impacts to federally listed or proposed species are anticipated. Therefore, no furtherconsultation/coordination under the Endangered Species Act (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.is required. Because no take of federally listed species is anticipated, none is authorized. This response does notreflect potential Fish and Wildlife Service concerns under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act or otherauthorities.

4. DEP INFORMATIONThe Pa Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) requires that a signed copy of this receipt, along with anyrequired documentation from jurisdictional agencies concerning resolution of potential impacts, be submitted withapplications for permits requiring PNDI review. For cases where a "Potential Impact" to threatened andendangered species has been identified before the application has been submitted to DEP, the applicationshould not be submitted until the impact has been resolved. For cases where "Potential Impact" to specialconcern species and resources has been identified before the application has been submitted, the applicationshould be submitted to DEP along with the PNDI receipt, a completed PNDI form and a USGS 7.5 minutequadrangle map with the project boundaries delineated on the map. The PNDI Receipt should also be submitted


Page 3 of 4

to the appropriate agency according to directions on the PNDI Receipt. DEP and the jurisdictional agency willwork together to resolve the potential impact(s). See the DEP PNDI policy athttp://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us.


Page 4 of 4

5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONThe PNDI environmental review website is a preliminary screening tool. There are often delays in updatingspecies status classifications. Because the proposed status represents the best available information regardingthe conservation status of the species, state jurisdictional agency staff give the proposed statuses at least thesame consideration as the current legal status. If surveys or further information reveal that a threatened andendangered and/or special concern species and resources exist in your project area, contact the appropriatejurisdictional agency/agencies immediately to identify and resolve any impacts.

For a list of species known to occur in the county where your project is located, please see the species lists bycounty found on the PA Natural Heritage Program (PNHP) home page (www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us). Alsonote that the PNDI Environmental Review Tool only contains information about species occurrences that haveactually been reported to the PNHP.

6. AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATIONPA Department of Conservation andNatural ResourcesBureau of Forestry, Ecological Services Section400 Market Street, PO Box 8552, Harrisburg, PA.17105-8552Fax:(717) 772-0271

PA Fish and Boat CommissionDivision of Environmental Services450 Robinson Lane, Bellefonte, PA. 16823-7437NO Faxes Please

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceEndangered Species Section315 South Allen Street, Suite 322, State College, PA.16801-4851NO Faxes Please.

PA Game CommissionBureau of Wildlife Habitat ManagementDivision of Environmental Planning and Habitat Protection2001 Elmerton Avenue, Harrisburg, PA. 17110-9797Fax:(717) 787-6957

7. PROJECT CONTACT INFORMATION

Name:______________________________________________________________Company/Business Name:______________________________________________Address:____________________________________________________________City, State, Zip:_______________________________________________________Phone:(_____)_________________________Fax:(______)___________________Email:_____________________________________________________________

8. CERTIFICATIONI certify that ALL of the project information contained in this receipt (including project location, projectsize/configuration, project type, answers to questions) is true, accurate and complete. In addition, if the projecttype, location, size or configuration changes, or if the answers to any questions that were asked during thisonline review change, I agree to re-do the online environmental review.

__________________________________________ _______________________ applicant/project proponent signature date

Engineering Properties

This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineeringproperties for the layers of each soil in the survey area.

Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.

Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in thefraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example,is soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percentsand. If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, anappropriate modifier is added, for example, "gravelly."

Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classificationsystem (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association ofState Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004).

The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use asconstruction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution ofthe fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquidlimit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW,GP, GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH,and OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties oftwo groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML.

The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affectroadway construction and maintenance. In this system, the fraction of a mineral soilthat is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution, liquid limit, and plasticity index.Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay). Atthe other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils areclassified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection.

If laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and A-7 groups are further classifiedas A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6. As an additionalrefinement, the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a groupindex number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade materialto 20 or higher for the poorest.

Rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches in diameterare indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. Thepercentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage inthe field to weight percentage.

Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated sieves is the percentage of thesoil fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The sieves,numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00,0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory testsof soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made inthe field.

Liquid limit and plasticity index (Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticitycharacteristics of a soil. The estimates are based on test data from the survey areaor from nearby areas and on field examination.

Engineering Properties–Delaware County, Pennsylvania

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey

11/5/2009Page 1 of 4

References:American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of samplingand testing. 24th edition.American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classificationof soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.




11/5/2009Page 2 of 4

Report—Engineering Properties

Absence of an entry indicates that the data were not estimated. The asterisk '*' denotes the representative texture; otherpossible textures follow the dash.

Engineering Properties– Delaware County, Pennsylvania

Map unit symbol and soilname

Depth USDA texture Classification Fragments Percentage passing sieve number— Liquidlimit

Plasticityindex

Unified AASHTO >10inches

3-10inches

4 10 40 200

In Pct Pct Pct

GnB2—Glenville silt loam,3 to 8 percent slopes,moderately eroded

Glenville 0-10 *Silt loam ML, SM A-4 0 0 85-100 85-100 70-95 45-80 25-35 3-10

10-16 *Silt loam, Channery loam,channery silty clay loam

GM, ML,SC, CL,CL-ML

A-6, A-4 0 0-10 70-100 60-100 60-95 45-80 25-40 5-13

16-50 *Silt loam, Channery loam,silty clay loam

ML, SC,CL, CL-ML,GM

A-6, A-4 0 0-10 65-100 60-100 55-95 45-80 25-40 5-13

50-70 *Channery loam,Channery fine sandyloam, very channerysandy loam

CL-ML,GC,GM,SC,ML, SM

A-1, A-2,A-4

0 0-20 45-90 20-75 10-75 5-65 25-35 5-10

Mc—Made land, silt andclay materials

Made land — — — — — — — — — — — —




11/5/2009Page 3 of 4

Engineering Properties– Delaware County, Pennsylvania

Map unit symbol and soilname

Depth USDA texture Classification Fragments Percentage passing sieve number— Liquidlimit

Plasticityindex

Unified AASHTO >10inches

3-10inches

4 10 40 200

In Pct Pct Pct

Me—Made land, schistand gneiss materials

Udorthents, schist andgneiss

0-3 *Silt loam CL-ML,ML, CL

A-4 0 0-5 85-100 80-100 70-95 50-75 25-35 5-10

3-40 *Gravelly silt loam, Loam,clay loam

ML A-6,A-7-6

0 0-5 90-100 80-100 70-100 55-95 35-45 10-15

40-60 *Gravelly silt loam, Loam,clay loam

ML A-7-6,A-6

0 0-5 90-100 80-100 70-100 55-95 35-45 10-15

Data Source Information

Soil Survey Area: Delaware County, PennsylvaniaSurvey Area Data: Version 6, Feb 24, 2009




11/5/2009Page 4 of 4

Eldo

n Ave

Baltimore Ave

Greenwood Ave

Willow

brook Ave

Rose L

n

Essex Ave

Wals

h Rd

Marlyn Rd

Ardm

ore Ave

Defore

st Rd

Mansfield A

ve

Mansfield Rd

Martin D

r

Richards Ave

Burmont D

r

Winderm

ere Ter

Stratfo

rd Ave

Eldon Rd

Bryn Mawr Ave

Gladstone Rd

Burmont D

r

Ardmore Ave

Bryn Mawr Ave

Me

GnB2

Mc

Mc

475680

475680

475760

475760

475840

475840

475920

475920

476000

476000

476080

476080

4420

640

4420

640

4420

720

4420

720

4420

800

4420

800

4420

880

4420

880

4420

960

4420

960

4421

040

4421

040

4421

120

4421

120

4421

200

4421

200

0 200 400 600100Feet

0 60 120 18030Meters

39° 56' 27''

75°

16' 4

5''

39° 56' 5''

75°

16' 4

5''

39° 56' 5''

39° 56' 27''75

° 17

' 5''

75°

17' 5

''

Map Scale: 1:3,160 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet.

Hydrologic Soil Group—Delaware County, Pennsylvania

Natural ResourcesNatural ResourcesNatural ResourcesNatural ResourcesConservation ServiceConservation ServiceConservation ServiceConservation Service


11/5/2009Page 1 of 4

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI)Area of Interest (AOI)

SoilsSoil Map Units

Soil RatingsA

A/D

B

B/D

C

C/D

D

Not rated or not available

Political FeaturesCities

Water FeaturesOceans

Streams and Canals

TransportationRails

Interstate Highways

US Routes

Major Roads

Local Roads

Map Scale: 1:3,160 if printed on A size (8.5" × 11") sheet.

The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:20,000.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate mapmeasurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation ServiceWeb Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.govCoordinate System: UTM Zone 18N NAD83

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as ofthe version date(s) listed below.


Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 4/13/1999

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines werecompiled and digitized probably differs from the backgroundimagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shiftingof map unit boundaries may be evident.

Hydrologic Soil Group–Delaware County, Pennsylvania



11/5/2009Page 2 of 4

Hydrologic Soil Group

Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Delaware County, Pennsylvania

Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

GnB2 Glenville silt loam, 3 to 8 percentslopes, moderately eroded

C 5.0 22.9%

Mc Made land, silt and clay materials C 0.4 1.9%

Me Made land, schist and gneissmaterials

B 16.4 75.2%

Totals for Area of Interest 21.8 100.0%

Description

Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils areassigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when thesoils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitationfrom long-duration storms.

The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) andthree dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:

Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughlywet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands orgravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.

Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. Theseconsist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drainedsoils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soilshave a moderate rate of water transmission.

Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consistchiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water orsoils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of watertransmission.

Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) whenthoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swellpotential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layerat or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.

If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter isfor drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in theirnatural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.

Rating Options

Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition




11/5/2009Page 3 of 4

Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified

Tie-break Rule: Lower




11/5/2009Page 4 of 4

Physical Soil Properties

This table shows estimates of some physical characteristics and features that affectsoil behavior. These estimates are given for the layers of each soil in the surveyarea. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for these andsimilar soils.

Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.

Particle size is the effective diameter of a soil particle as measured bysedimentation, sieving, or micrometric methods. Particle sizes are expressed asclasses with specific effective diameter class limits. The broad classes are sand,silt, and clay, ranging from the larger to the smaller.

Sand as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are 0.05 millimeter to2 millimeters in diameter. In this table, the estimated sand content of each soil layeris given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimetersin diameter.

Silt as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are 0.002 to 0.05millimeter in diameter. In this table, the estimated silt content of each soil layer isgiven as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimetersin diameter.

Clay as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are less than 0.002millimeter in diameter. In this table, the estimated clay content of each soil layer isgiven as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimetersin diameter.

The content of sand, silt, and clay affects the physical behavior of a soil. Particlesize is important for engineering and agronomic interpretations, for determinationof soil hydrologic qualities, and for soil classification.

The amount and kind of clay affect the fertility and physical condition of the soil andthe ability of the soil to adsorb cations and to retain moisture. They influence shrink-swell potential, saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat), plasticity, the ease of soildispersion, and other soil properties. The amount and kind of clay in a soil alsoaffect tillage and earthmoving operations.

Moist bulk density is the weight of soil (ovendry) per unit volume. Volume ismeasured when the soil is at field moisture capacity, that is, the moisture contentat 1/3- or 1/10-bar (33kPa or 10kPa) moisture tension. Weight is determined afterthe soil is dried at 105 degrees C. In the table, the estimated moist bulk density ofeach soil horizon is expressed in grams per cubic centimeter of soil material that isless than 2 millimeters in diameter. Bulk density data are used to compute linearextensibility, shrink-swell potential, available water capacity, total pore space, andother soil properties. The moist bulk density of a soil indicates the pore spaceavailable for water and roots. Depending on soil texture, a bulk density of more than1.4 can restrict water storage and root penetration. Moist bulk density is influencedby texture, kind of clay, content of organic matter, and soil structure.

Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) refers to the ease with which pores in asaturated soil transmit water. The estimates in the table are expressed in terms ofmicrometers per second. They are based on soil characteristics observed in thefield, particularly structure, porosity, and texture. Saturated hydraulic conductivity(Ksat) is considered in the design of soil drainage systems and septic tankabsorption fields.

Physical Soil Properties–Delaware County, Pennsylvania



11/5/2009Page 1 of 5

Available water capacity refers to the quantity of water that the soil is capable ofstoring for use by plants. The capacity for water storage is given in inches of waterper inch of soil for each soil layer. The capacity varies, depending on soil propertiesthat affect retention of water. The most important properties are the content oforganic matter, soil texture, bulk density, and soil structure. Available water capacityis an important factor in the choice of plants or crops to be grown and in the designand management of irrigation systems. Available water capacity is not an estimateof the quantity of water actually available to plants at any given time.

Linear extensibility refers to the change in length of an unconfined clod as moisturecontent is decreased from a moist to a dry state. It is an expression of the volumechange between the water content of the clod at 1/3- or 1/10-bar tension (33kPa or10kPa tension) and oven dryness. The volume change is reported in the table aspercent change for the whole soil. The amount and type of clay minerals in the soilinfluence volume change.

Linear extensibility is used to determine the shrink-swell potential of soils. Theshrink-swell potential is low if the soil has a linear extensibility of less than 3 percent;moderate if 3 to 6 percent; high if 6 to 9 percent; and very high if more than 9 percent.If the linear extensibility is more than 3, shrinking and swelling can cause damageto buildings, roads, and other structures and to plant roots. Special designcommonly is needed.

Organic matter is the plant and animal residue in the soil at various stages ofdecomposition. In this table, the estimated content of organic matter is expressedas a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters indiameter. The content of organic matter in a soil can be maintained by returningcrop residue to the soil.

Organic matter has a positive effect on available water capacity, water infiltration,soil organism activity, and tilth. It is a source of nitrogen and other nutrients for cropsand soil organisms.

Erosion factors are shown in the table as the K factor (Kw and Kf) and the T factor.Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion bywater. Factor K is one of six factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE)and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) to predict the averageannual rate of soil loss by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year. Theestimates are based primarily on percentage of silt, sand, and organic matter andon soil structure and Ksat. Values of K range from 0.02 to 0.69. Other factors beingequal, the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill erosionby water.

Erosion factor Kw indicates the erodibility of the whole soil. The estimates aremodified by the presence of rock fragments.

Erosion factor Kf indicates the erodibility of the fine-earth fraction, or the materialless than 2 millimeters in size.

Erosion factor T is an estimate of the maximum average annual rate of soil erosionby wind and/or water that can occur without affecting crop productivity over asustained period. The rate is in tons per acre per year.

Wind erodibility groups are made up of soils that have similar properties affectingtheir susceptibility to wind erosion in cultivated areas. The soils assigned to group1 are the most susceptible to wind erosion, and those assigned to group 8 are theleast susceptible. The groups are described in the "National Soil SurveyHandbook."




11/5/2009Page 2 of 5

Wind erodibility index is a numerical value indicating the susceptibility of soil to winderosion, or the tons per acre per year that can be expected to be lost to wind erosion.There is a close correlation between wind erosion and the texture of the surfacelayer, the size and durability of surface clods, rock fragments, organic matter, anda calcareous reaction. Soil moisture and frozen soil layers also influence winderosion.

Reference:United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. (http://soils.usda.gov)




11/5/2009Page 3 of 5

http://soils.usda.gov

Report—Physical Soil Properties

Physical Soil Properties– Delaware County, Pennsylvania

Map symboland soil name

Depth Sand Silt Clay Moistbulk

density

Saturatedhydraulic

conductivity

Availablewater

capacity

Linearextensibility

Organicmatter

Erosionfactors

Winderodibility

group

Winderodibility

indexKw Kf T

In Pct Pct Pct g/cc micro m/sec In/In Pct Pct

GnB2—Glenville siltloam, 3 to 8percentslopes,moderatelyeroded

Glenville 0-10 -30- -55- 10-15- 20 1.20-1.40 4.23-14.11 0.16-0.20 0.0-2.9 2.0-4.0 .32 .32 3 5 56

10-16 -19- -54- 20-27- 35 1.40-1.60 4.23-14.11 0.12-0.16 0.0-2.9 0.0-0.5 .24 .32

16-50 -20- -54- 20-26- 35 1.60-1.80 0.42-4.23 0.08-0.12 0.0-2.9 0.0-0.5 .24 .32

50-70 -44- -41- 5-15- 25 1.40-1.60 1.41-4.23 0.06-0.12 0.0-2.9 0.0-0.5 .24 .64

Mc—Madeland, silt andclay materials

Made land — — — — — — — — —

Me—Madeland, schistand gneissmaterials

Udorthents,schist andgneiss

0-3 -27- -54- 15-20- 25 1.00-1.45 0.42-4.23 0.14-0.18 0.0-2.9 1.0-2.0 .37 .43 4 5 56

3-40 -20- -54- 25-26- 35 1.30-1.60 0.42-1.41 0.14-0.20 3.0-5.9 1.0-2.0 .37 .37

40-60 -20- -54- 25-26- 35 1.30-1.60 0.42-1.41 0.14-0.20 3.0-5.9 1.0-2.0 .37 .37




11/5/2009Page 4 of 5

Data Source Information





11/5/2009Page 5 of 5

Interviews Campbell Thomas & Co. Marlyn Park Master Plan

Updated: 1/8/2009

Priority Name Mee

ting

Tele

phon

e C

all

Mai

ling

Owner/Agent/Contact R. T

hom

as

T. W

ilson

M. S

zila

gyi

Mtg Date Interviewed's Response Other NotesDon Kortan, Chief of Police 11/5/2009 Juveniles are a problem after dark. Would like to ensure 1) that

vehicular access from Willowbrook Av. is maintained and 2) better lighting be installed near the confluence of the streams (now an underage drinking spot)

Mary Lou Jennings Tree Advisory Board 11/5/2009 Likes the park as is. Remove invasives such as knot-weed, including careful use of herbicides

Hazel Pelletreau Long-Time Resident 11/9/2009 Prefers passive uses such as sledding hills and schools doing environmental field trips. Is ambivalent about the prospect of connecting paths or trails thru the park

Ellen Lustgarten Lansdowne Economic Development Corp, Borough council member and neighbor (on Willowbrook Av)

11/5/2009 Wants to see the park kept as passive as possible. Expressed ambivalence regarding the prospect of connecting paths or trails through park

Gloria Carpenter real estate 11/5/2009 Would like to see footbridge that would join isolated sections of the park. Passive parks such as Marlyn are used as a selling feature when marketing homes.

Greg Sciubba Chair of Lansdowne Swim Club 12/8/2009 There is an issue of the damming of the creek by trees - may be interested in cooperating with the Borough on storm-water mgt and stream-bank restoration issues. In regard to having an entrance from the Swim Club into the Park, he is not certain, as there is an issue of this being an "attractive nuisance". He would like to know the insurance impact of linking the Park to the Club before forming an opinion.

Matt Schultz No special interest -- asked to be kept informedJane Young Mayor 11/9/2009 Sees this natural area as an asset to the borough. Believes that

neighbors should have a say in any future plans.Dick Burke Ex-Boro councilman and former chair of

Lansdowne Swim Club (no longer a member) / Now serves on Delco Park and Rec'n Board

01/08/2010 Mr. Burke believes the Club would be amenable to selling unneeded land to the Borough. Any public route from Marlyn Park to Darby Creek, if developed, must not go through a secure part of the Club, but around it. He believes the Club would welcome cooperation with the Borough on streambacnk restoration, as the Club is short of capital funds for such work. We discussed possible cooperation on streambank restoration in return for a secure public access route.

ZMS called on 11/5/09 and left a voicemail message / RPT left messages as well on 11/30/09 and 12/08/09

Bob Bartman Not interested in discussing the project at this time. Mr. Bartman had contributions to make to the study at the Planning Commission meeting of 12-9-2009.

Kevin Laverty sewer technician 12/4/2010

In the 3 years he has been with the Borough there has been a couple of time they had to repaint the sewer manholes because of spray paint, but other than that, on other vandalism has taken place. The Borough is going to reline the Sanitary Sewer pipes through the park at the earliest next year. After that, there will be little to no maintenance required unless of an unforeseen emergency. There are no glaring issues with access. The only need is to keep a large enough access way to allow there trucks in if needed. When asked about easements, Kevin said, that he believes there is an easement but is not represented on plans he has (check with Craig T. at the Borough). When asked about the possibility of aesthetic treatments to the exposed manholes, he said that he would not be opposed to them. It would be up to the Borough to make that decision. Kevin also mentioned the need for some stream bank restoration.

Jack Kelly Park and Recreation Board David Bennett Chair of Delaware Co. Cycling Committee,

Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia,9/3/2009 Park could be a link in a future Lansdowne bike/ped loop, and a link

to the future regional Darby Creek TrailAmy Floresta, AIA Lansdowne Borough Planning Commission 9/3/2009 asked to be kept informed

g:\lns-marl\log\Interviews list 2010-01-07.xls

G:\Funding Sources\Log\Funding Sources\Funding Sources List Updated 2010-04-1 for LNS-MARL.doc

Campbell Thomas & Co. 1504 South Street Philadelphia PA 19146-1636 Tel: 215-545-1076 Fax: 267-336-0209 Email:[email protected] Web:www.campbellthomas.com

Architecture Preservation Community & Transportation Planning James C. Campbell AIA, LEED AP Robert P. Thomas AIA Partners

page 1 of 8 Appendix 1

Funding Sources (Numbers are referenced in the funding source column of Probable Construction Costs) Parentheses area in title gives general application of particular grant to Merlyn Park)

FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES Federal funding sources can be used creatively to enhance and restore parks, open space, wetlands, and wildlife habitat and also to fund interpretation of cultural and natural resources. 1. US Dept of Housing & Urban Development Community Development Block Grants

(CDBGs) - (All construction)

HUD provides these grants to communities for neighborhood revitalization, economic development and improvement of community facilities and services, especially in low and moderate income areas. These grants require no match of funds or services from the community. HUD provides entitlement to each of these communities annually and the community develops its own programs and sets funding priorities.

Recreation planning and development in low-income urban areas is an acceptable use of these funds. Seattle and Maryland have used these funds to develop rail-trails through urban areas—such trails can greatly enhance the quality of life in these areas and potentially bring new economic vitality to neglected areas.

More information on CDBGs can be found at: http://mf.hud.gov:63001/dgms/gpi/display.cfm? program=25

Delaware County Contact: [email protected]

2. US Dept of Housing & Urban Development, US Department of Transportation and EPA – Sustainable Communities Initiative Grants - (Work Related to Through Path)

These grants, unveiled in 2010, provide funds for community planning under the CDBG program (above). Among the key goals of this program is the support of existing communities that provide affordable transit oriented living.

3. Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) (See #5 for application)

[Note: This program is administered for Pennsylvania by the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources through its Community Conservation Partnership Program (C2P2). Please refer to that program under “State Grant Programs”]

The LWCF was established in 1965 to help provide “close-to-home” park and recreation opportunities throughout the nation. Money for the fund comes from the sale or lease of non-renewable resources, primarily federal offshore oil and gas leases and surplus federal land sales. A large portion of the annual LWCF allocation goes toward acquisition of land for federal land management agencies; however, a portion of the money is provided to cities, counties and park districts to acquire land and develop parks. LWCF funds are provided to each state annually by the National Park Service. State funding is based on a population formula. A state administers the program through a State Liaison Officer, who recommends projects to the National Park Service for





approval. Local governments are eligible applicants. Communities must be able to match LWCF grants with a 50 percent provision of funding or services.

In order to qualify for funding, a project must meet two criteria. First, the project must be primarily for recreation purposes, not transportation. Second, the organization leading the project must guarantee that the project will be maintained in perpetuity for public recreational use. Any deviation from recreational use must be approved by the National Park Service, and property of at least equal recreational value must be provided to replace the loss.

Americans for Our Heritage and Recreation provides an overview of the LWCF program at http://www.ahrinfo.org/lwcf_overview.html and links to the National Park Service and State Liaison Officers

The National Park Service maintains the LWCF website: http://www.ncrc.nps. gov/wcf/

Pennsylvania’s State Liaison Officer may be contacted at:

Bureau of Recreation and Conservation PA Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources P.O. Box 8767 Harrisburg, PA 17105 Tel: 717-783-2659

4. SAFEEA-LU Safe Routes To School Program – (Work related to through path)

Many of us remember a time when walking and bicycling to school was a part of everyday life. In 1969, about half of all students walked or bicycled to school. Today, however, the story is very different. Fewer than 15 percent of all school trips are made by walking or bicycling, one-quarter are made on a school bus, and over half of all children arrive at school in private automobiles.

This decline in walking and bicycling has had an adverse effect on traffic congestion and air quality around schools, as well as pedestrian and bicycle safety. In addition, a growing body of evidence has shown that children who lead sedentary lifestyles are at risk for a variety of health problems such as obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. Safety issues are a big concern for parents, who consistently cite traffic danger as a reason why their children are unable to bicycle or walk to school.

The purpose of the Federal Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Program is to address these issues head on. At its heart, the SRTS Program empowers communities to make walking and bicycling to school a safe and routine activity once again. The Program makes funding available for a wide variety of programs and projects, from building safer street crossings to establishing programs that encourage children and their parents to walk and bicycle safely to school.

This website provides an overview of the Program, as well as specific Program Guidance to the States in the administration of SRTS funds. http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferoutes/

Also see the National Safe Routes To School Clearing House, a centralized resource of information on successful Safe Routes to School programs, strategies and State specific information: http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/

For Pennsylvania's Transportation Enhancements, Home Town Streets and Safe Routes To School Programs see http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Penndot/Bureaus/CPDM/Prod/Saferoute.nsf.





STATE GRANT PROGRAMS 5. Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) Community Conservation Partnership Program (C2P2) Grants – (All work)

This program, one of the most commonly used sources of funds for planning, acquisition of land, and the development and construction of trails, is accessed through a single application for the C2P2 program. The next round of applications is due April 21, 2010, and currently every year thereafter.

Refer to the 2009-2010 DCNR Community Conservation Partnership Program (C2P2) Grant Application Manual and Forms at http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/brc/grants

Regional Advisors are responsible for providing technical assistance to potential applicants and will meet with applicants at the proposed project site. Such a meeting with a Regional Advisor is strongly encouraged before making an application.

Contact the Regional Advisor for Region I (Southeastern Pennsylvania) at:

Southeast Regional Office (Philadelphia) 908 State Office Building 1400 Spring Garden Street Philadelphia, PA 19130 (215) 560-1182 or 1183

6. Keystone Acquisition and Development Grant Program – (Martin Drive property easements)

The Keystone Acquisition and Development Grant Program includes three components:

• Community Grants • Rails-to-Trails Grants • Rivers Conservation Grants

Although these bear the same names as grant programs under the PITA grants, they are separate programs with distinct features.

Under the Community Grant Program, municipalities, COGs and some authorities are the only eligible applicants. These grants provide funding for the purchase of land for park, recreation, or conservation purposes, and the rehabilitation and development of park and recreation areas and facilities, including greenways and trails. Generally, funding is provided for up to 50% of eligible costs. Small Communities/Small Projects grants are included for municipalities with a population of 5,000 or less. Grants are limited to a maximum of $20,000 and will provide up to 100 percent funding of material costs and professional design fees. Grants are for the rehabilitation and development of basic outdoor park and

The Rivers Conservation Grant Program, funding is available to both municipalities and appropriate organizations for acquisition and development projects recommended in an approved Rivers Conservation Plan (such as those created under the PITA Program). To be eligible for acquisition or development funding, the Rivers Conservation Plan must be listed in the





Pennsylvania Rivers Registry. The state will fund up to 50 percent of the project up to a maximum of $50,000.

7. The Pennsylvania Recreational Trails Program – (Work related to through trail)

In addition, the Pennsylvania Recreational Trails Program provides grants between $2,500 and $100,000 for a wide range of trail development categories for both motorized and non-motorized trails: maintenance and restoration of existing recreational trails; development and rehabilitation of trailside and trailhead facilities and trail linkages; purchase and lease of recreational trail construction and maintenance equipment; construction of new recreational trails (with the exception of new trails on federal land); and acquisition of easements or property for recreational trails or trail corridors. The state will provide up to 80 percent of the funding (up to a maximum of $100,000) except for acquisition projects, which require a 50 percent match. “Soft match" (credit for donations of funds, materials, services, or new right-of-way) is permitted from any project sponsor, whether a private organization or public agency. The Commonwealth may also use up to 5 percent of its funds for the operation of educational programs to promote safety and environmental protection related to the use of recreational trails.

The Department will also give consideration to projects that provide for the redesign, reconstruction, non-routine maintenance, or relocation of recreational trails to benefit the natural environment. Project sponsors are encouraged to enter into contracts and cooperative agreements with qualified youth conservation or service corps to perform trail construction and maintenance.

8. Home Town Streets (HTS) and Safe Routes To School (SRS) Programs - (Work related to through trail) -

Aimed at improving Pennsylvania’s quality of life, Home Town Streets and Safe Routes to School are initiatives created by Governor Rendell in 2004 to improve downtowns, neighborhoods and walking routes by providing funds for sidewalks, curbing, street lights, pedestrian safety crossings and other downtown enhancements. The program seeks to facilitate the redevelopment of traditional downtown streetscapes and neighborhood corridors and to promote improved safety conditions for children going to and from school via non-motorized means (either walking or riding a bike.)

The HTS and SRS are federally funded programs administered at the state level. Similar to the Transportation Enhancements Program, both programs are designed to fund transportation and transportation-related improvements that often would not be funded using other available transportation monies. Like the TE Program, HTS and SRS require the applicant to provide a 20% match to the 80% federal/state transportation funds set aside for the project. Both HTS and SRS are organized to make it easier for the applicant to obtain the required matching funds. Unlike TE, both HTS and SRS have a $1,000,000 maximum project cost limit.

For Pennsylvania's Transportation Enhancements, Home Town Streets and Safe Routes To School Programs see http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Penndot/Bureaus/CPDM/Prod/Saferoute.nsf or http://www.dot.state.pa.us/penndot/Bureaus/CPDM/Prod/Saferoute.nsf/guidance?OpenPage

9. Growing Greener Grants – Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection:- (Work related to streambank restoration)





Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection provides grants to assist applicants with improvements to the environment. Past awards have addressed waste systems improvements as well as improvement of watershed areas and flood protection. Upcoming information and applications can be obtained from the Department of Environmental Protection’s Web Site.

LOCAL and COUNTY FUNDING PROGRAMS

10. Delaware County Conservation District Mini-Grant Program - (Work related to streambank restoration)

Small grants offered by Delaware County to community based organizations for land conservation and restoration projects. Applications can be obtained from Delaware County Conservation District, Rose Tree Park, 1521 N. Providence Rd. Media, PA. 19063. Email [email protected]

11. Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission- Transportation and Community Development Initiative (TCDI) – (Through trail work as part of an overall area plan)

Provides funding for design initiatives for enhancing communities in relation to their transportation potential. Goals include “Improving the overall character and quality of life within these communities…” Target communities include the older suburbs. Contact Karen Cilurso, senior planner at DVRPC: 215 592-1800

FOUNDATION GRANTS AND OTHER PRIVATE FUNDING Numerous large community, family, and corporate foundations make grants to greenway and trail groups. Copies of directories of foundations can be found in local libraries. The directories provide information on each foundation’s grantmaking history and philosophy. One of the most well-known directories is Environmental Grantmaking Foundations, published annually by Resources for Global Sustainability, Inc., which maintains a database of over 47,000 grant programs that can be searched by keywords to determine the foundations serving a particular area and type of project. The directory is available as hard copy or on cd-rom. Foundations can also be located by searching the internet. Other resources for grant information include economic development agencies and trust officers at local banks, who manage small family foundations and charitable trusts.

12. Pew Charitable Trusts – (Historic Information and Signage)

The Pew Charitable Trusts, based in Philadelphia, are a national philanthropy established 48 years ago. Through their grantmaking, the Trusts seek to encourage individual development and personal achievement, cross-disciplinary problem solving and innovative, practical approaches to meeting the changing needs of a global community. Each year, the Trusts make grants of about $180 million to between 400 and 500 nonprofit organizations in six areas: culture, education, environment, health and human services, public policy, and religion. In addition, the Venture





Fund supports independent projects outside of these six areas that take an interdisciplinary approach to broad issues of significant interest or concern.

In particular, the Culture program selectively supports programs for artists and cultural organizations in Philadelphia and has funded history interpretive programs—the Heritage Investment Program has provided technical assistance and challenge grants to historic sites in Philadelphia and the region, and the Philadelphia History Exhibitions Initiative has assisted Philadelphia-area history museums in producing high-quality, innovative exhibitions. Such programs could be used to fund interpretation of trail related historic resources and sites.

More information on the Pew Charitable Trusts grants programs is available on their website: http://www.pewtrusts.com/grants/

13. Recreational Equipment, Incorporated (REI) Conservation and Recreation Grants – (Trail and path enhancement)

REI awards conservation grants to organizations for the protection and enhancement of natural resources for use in outdoor recreation. Small grants of up to $5,000 are offered to accomplish the following:

• Preservation of wildlands and open space • Advocacy oriented education for the general public about conservation issues • Building the membership base of a conservation organization • Direct citizen action campaigns on public land and water recreation issues • Projects working to organize a trails constituency or to enhance the effectiveness of a trails

organization’s work as a trails advocate at the state or local level

In addition to preserving and protecting the environment, REI also encourages people to get outdoors for recreation. Outdoor recreation grants support projects that do the following:

• increase access to outdoor activities • encourage involvement in muscle-powered recreation • promote safe participation in outdoor muscle-powered recreation and proper care for

outdoor resources

More information can be found at REI’s website: http://www.rei.com/reihtml/ about_rei/grants.html

14. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation – (Streambank and natural habitat restoration)

A nonprofit established by Congress in 1984, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation sustains, restores and enhances the Nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats. Through leadership conservation investments with public and private partners, NFWF is dedicated to achieving maximum conservation impact by developing and applying best practices and innovative methods for measurable outcomes.

The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation provides funding on a competitive basis to projects that sustain, restore and enhance the Nation’s fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats through our Keystone Initiative Grants and other Special Grant Programs.





15. Surdna Foundation – (trail and path enhancement related to reducing traffic)

This foundation is a national leader in funding greenway efforts and has funded the Florida Statewide Greenways Program. Surdna supports government, private and volunteer actions that produce a sustainable environment. They encourage the restoration of suburban and urban environments by public and community involvement in education, planning for and advocating environmental appreciation. One area of focus is alternative transportation, particularly reducing vehicle miles traveled and maximizing accessibility over mobility.

Information on their grants programs can be located at the Surdna website: http://www.surdna.org/programs/

16. William Penn Foundation - Environment and Communities Grants Program – (Inner ring suburb park revitalization)

The mission of the William Penn Foundation is to improve the quality of life in the Philadelphia region through efforts that: strengthen our children's future; foster rich cultural expression; and deepen our connections to nature and community. The foundation has provided substantial and consistent funding during the past few decades for greenway and trail planning and development in the Philadelphia area, including a bi-state greenway project on the Delaware River, greenways development along the Delaware and Raritan Canal, and funding for the Mid-Atlantic Coordinator position associated with the East Coast Greenway in Pennsylvania. Religious organizations, non-profits and government agencies are eligible applicants.

The foundation’s Environment and Communities grants program focuses on two priorities:

Sustainable Regional Development: Our approach is based on the belief that older, urban neighborhoods, even those that have suffered decades of urban decline, have unique assets that distinguish them from their suburban counterparts. By enhancing and leveraging these assets, urban communities can reconnect to the regional economy and become more attractive places to live and do business. The changing field of community development highlights the need for comprehensive solutions that include systems change and market-oriented approaches.

Sustainable Watershed Assets: Our approach emphasizes the essential relationship between land use and water quality. The Foundation has a long history of grantmaking to advance protection and restoration of watersheds: the lands that drain into a river system. Past initiatives have included major grant programs to protect and restore the Delaware and Schuylkill Rivers – waterways that historically have played important roles in shaping the growth and development of Greater Philadelphia and serve as major sources for drinking water.

Information about the foundation’s Environment and Communities grants can be located at http://www.williampennfoundation.org/info-url_nocat3569/info-url_nocat.htm

Information on Sustainable Regional Development can be located at http://www.williampennfoundation.org/info-url_nocat3569/info-url_nocat_show.htm?doc_id=117092

17. PECO’s Green Region Open Space Program – (Streambank restoration)





Over the past several years PECO (electric utility) has been promoting open green space in the areas it serves. The grants are handles through the Natural Lands Trust. Contact Holly Harper, Administrator, Green Region % Natural Lands Trust 1031 Palmers Mill Rd., Media, PA. 610-553-5587 18. TreeVitalize Program of the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society ( Tree maintenance) Provides grants to develop a private public partnership to address tree coverage in Southeastern, PA Contact: Pennsylvania Horitcultural Society 215-988-8874. Website:www.treevitalize.net