Augusta greenway a park proposal

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

AUG

N WA

1986
ti

Cl-@ STAL ZO-C--
INFORMATION CENTa-,",
x 1.6

SB
485
.A94
065
1986
by
KENNEBEC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

AUGUSTA
GREENWAY

A PARK PROPOSAL

JULY 1986

Jean M. Oplinger, text and graphics
Margaret A. Kilkelly, printing and production

Financial assistance for this report was provided by a grant from
Maine's Coastal Program, through funding provided by the U.S.
Department of Commerce, Office of Ocean & Coastal Resource
Management , under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as
amended.

k
Sz@

F.*Zl

I -

A f I t I I I I

The Augusta Greenway study is being undertaken as
a result of a Resolution ... to create a Greenway on
the East Bank of the Kennebec River in Aucrusta (H.P.
1017-L.D. 1468) passed by the State Legislature in
June, 1985 and also as the result of a successful
application for funds under the Maine Coastal Program
Planning Grant made by the City of Augusta in August,
1985. The Resolution proposes a study area of the
State-owned Augusta Mental Health Institute (AMHI)
property, while the Planning Grant Award encompasses
the larger area extending from the Edwards Dam to the
Chelsea Town Line on the east side of the River. The
timing is highly appropriate in light of the
legislation initiated by the Governor and passed in
March, 1986: An ACT to Enhance the Sound Use and
Management of Maine's Coastal Resources. (L.D. 2167)
and An ACT to Authorize a General Fund Bond Issue in
the Amount of $10,500,000 for Coastal Access, Harbor
Improvements, and Marine Laboratory Improvements.
(L.D. 2250).

L.D. 2167 is concerned with identifying and
designating "Heritage Coastal Areas ... areas
containing an assemblage of geological, botanical,
zoological, historical or scenic features of
exceptional state or national significance." The
location of Fort Western and the Kennebec Arsenal, as
well as the scenic features of the shoreline, make the
study area a likely candidate for designation as a
"Heritage Coastal Area." This same act also states
that "municipalities may extend or adopt zoning and
subdivision controls to protect anV public rights for
Physical or visual access to shoreline" as well as
"Promote public access to the shoreline." The
establishment of a municipal park in Augusta would
accommodate both the historic and coastal access
provisions of this legislation.

This analysis and proposal is the most recent of
a number of previous studies which have looked at
development possibilities along the Kennebec River
Corridor in general, and specifically, at park
development along the Kennebec River shore in Augusta.
The value and desirability of establishing a park
along the shore was recognized nearly thirty years ago
in the Preliminary Plan Report for the City of
Augusta. This document states that "on a river valley
basis, there would be justification for extensive
State Park holdings interspersed with federal, or
municipal, or county, or private holdings for
recreation, [and] for public preserve ... under land
use standards, all up and down both banks of the
Kennebec River." (Blackwell 1959:17). It also
proposed "... a 15 year to 30 year program of gradual
public land acquisition along both banks of the
Kennebec River throughout Augusta." (Blackwell
1959:36).

The most comprehensive park study was conducted
in 1974 by Moriece and Gary of Maine, Inc., with the
study area extending along the eastern shore of the
River from Fort Western southward to the Chelsea/
Randolph town line. Establishment of a State Park was
proposed to include the entire length of the study
area. The current proposal encompasses a smaller
area, and urges the establishment of the Greenway as a
municipal park facility of the City of Augusta; the
scale and focus of the two proposals differ, although
some elements of the Moriece and Gary plan are
incorporated in the present proposal. Both the
Kennebec River Greenway Feasibility Study and the
companion Master Plan Report are excellent sources of
background and reference material and should be
consulted in order to obtain a deeper understanding of
the historical and physical nature of the proposed
park site.

While previous studies and the recently enacted
coastal legislation can be viewed as positive action
and serve as incentives for developing parkland, there
are additional, more broadly based arguments which
lend strength to any park proposal, and when con-
sidered along with the specifics of this particular
proposal, make a convincing case for the Augusta
Greenway. These include concern for preservation and
conservation along with economic considerations and a
regard for aesthetic qualities.

Increasingly, preservation and conservation of
open space has become a major concern of federal,
State and local agencies and officials. Lists of open
space benefits have become popular among both planners
and preservationists; some of these can be extensive,
confusing and, more likely than not, redundant. In
order to make sense of the many preservation and
conservation issues, one must approach open space in
terms of some kind of basic function. There are
essentially three:

A "The first is for the establish-
ment of recreational opportunity.
A The second is for the establish-
ment of attractive community design,
a visually pleasant landscape, and
the environmental amenity this supplies.
A The third is for the maintenance of
natural processes - in a word,
conservation." (Little 1969:9)

These three functions are addressed briefly here,
but each of these, separately and together, are the
major influence on the park design which is presented
in a separate section of this report.

As will be discussed further, the City of
Augusta's Recreation and Parks department operates
eighteen park facilities, none of which, however,
provide the passive features nor the extent of
accessibility to the River which the proposed park
would provide.

The second and third functions, namely a
11visually pleasant landscape" and "conservation" can
be combined here for a common purpose. A minimum of
construction or development is proposed while the
larger elements of the plan recommend thoughtful
clearing of underbrush along the shoreline and slopes,
careful use of ornamental shrubs and flowers as
screening devices, and the design of trails or
footpaths utilizing natural or semi-hard non-permanent
paving surfaces. The intent is to produce a setting
which is pleasant for the user, visually stimulating
to the observer, and which also will not negatively
impact or be impacted by the natural processes which a
tidal river and its shoreline is subject to.

Thus far, economic considerations have not been
addressed, but they too are a positive inducement for
open space preservation and park development. Simply
stated, "open space produces municipal income
negatively - by costing less to service. It produces
positively by adding value to adjacent properties."
(Little 1969:91) The "negative" income as it applies

to the study area is admittedly not very significant,
but the "positive" income could be. The cost to the
City of some possible land acquisition, or of
acquiring easments - both of which could remove
property from the City tax rolls, would be compensated
ior by, at the very least, maintaining current
property values in the surrounding area, and more
probably by increasing them with a resultant increase
in assessed valuation. This has proven to be true in
a number of research studies throughout the country
specifically concerned with parks and their effects on
adjacent land use and land values. Moreover, this
positive effect can extend to the larger community-
accessible open space and parks promoting the image of
a more "livable" city. A recent conversation with
William Sprague, Jr., a local realtor, confirmed that
the premise - "municipal revenues increase with
amenity" - holds true for the Augusta area. While the
purpose of acquiring open space may not be a financial
one, acquisition nearly always requires financial
justification; there is evidence that open space and
parks "pay off" for a community.

Finally, the excellence of the site and its
proximity to water may be the most obvious and
compelling argument put forth for proposing this park.
Water has a natural attraction for people and is a
prime focal point for outdoor recreation. A report of
the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission
appointed by President Eisenhower in 1958 states that
"wherever they live, most people seeking the outdoors
look for water - to swim and fish in, to boat on, to
walk, picnic and camp by, and just to look at."
(Little 1969:11) This location in the heart of a
developed, urban area has the potential for providing
both availability and accessibility to the River and
its natural surroundings. Indeed, the position could
be taken that developing the park as a preservation
and conservation measure should be rather than could
be done. Landscape architects have urged that "the
more accessible the water body and its shores are to
user concentrations, the greater should be the value
placed on protecting or improving its aesthetic
qua.-lities." (Litton 1974:261) The Kennebec as both a
renewable and a renewing resource could be restored to
a position of importance and a source of pride for the
City of Augusta. (Kaplan 1978:186).

While the nearly completed Waterfront Park on the
west side of the River is a fine example of providing
an amenable public area on the Kennebec, it is,
however, restricted by size and the immediate
proximity of downtown buildings. The proposed park
will provide a larger site and a more natural park
setting; it would be the "rural" complement to its
more "urbanized" sister park across the River.

0 Atlal@sls

-1 1
I

City Park Facilities

The parks which are managed by the Parks and
Recreation Department of the City of Augusta meet the
recreational needs of Augusta's residents with one
exception - there is no large "district" park (20+
acres) owned and administered by the City. The
smaller and more localized parks are generally
balanced and fairly well distributed throughout the
City. The municipal park system is comprised of 9
playlots (.25-2 acres), 6 vest pocket parks (2-5
acres), and 3 neighborhood parks (5-20 acres). The
National Park Recreation and Open Space Standards
recommends one district park to serve a population of
between 10,000 and 50,000, and a service area with a
radius of 3 miles. Suggested special areas and
facilities in a district park include plazas,
historical sites, tree lawns, boating facilities,
trails, and an outdoor theatre/band shell. The
proposed Augusta Greenway Park is an appropriate
choice to fill the district park void.

The design proposal incorporates all of the
suggested special areas and the Park's accessability
and centrality of location are encouragements to its
use by the entire Augusta community.

The proposed park is ideally situated to serve as
a visual and physical link with the major cultural and
historical features located in Maine's capital city.
Among these are Fort Western, the Kennebec Arsenal
(both of these on the National Register of Historic
Sites), the State House, Blaine House, and the Maine
State Museum and Library. The park could serve as a
"thread of continuity between the past and the
present" - between the historic sites of early
settlement in Augusta and the current seat of Maine
government, by using the existing "natural areas of
10 river, field and trees to form frameworks that link
the old areas with the new." (Mann 1973:92). In
addition, a more unified park system would result from
linking the existing Capitol Park, Waterfront Park,
the Pine Tree Arboretum and the City Boat Launch with
the Greenway Park in order to provide a range of
active to passive recreational opportunities within
the urban center.

Topog raphy/Floodpl a in

For the most part, the study area from Fort
Western to the southern edge of the AMHI property and
roughly extending back 100 feet from the shoreline, is
characterized by a sloping river bank. The severity
of the slope ranges from moderate (8%-15%); to severe
(15%-25%) to extremely severe (+25%). Slopes of 15%
and greater are located in a thin band between the 20
foot and 30 foot contour lines below Fort Western and
the First Church of Christ Scientist. It resumes
again east of Sturgis Lane and continues, nearly
uninterrupted, through to the southern edge of AMHI
property. This long band occurs between the 20 foot
to 50 foot contour lines to the edge of the former
Kennebec Arsenal; from this point to the end of the
park, the slope is contained within the 10 foot to 40
foot contour lines. Soils on these slopes are fairly
unstable and have a potential for erosion, and
therefore unsuitable for high intensity recreational
development. The best use of this land would be of a
passive nature; a well designed trail/footpath along
the ridge would cause minimal disruption to the
natural topography and yet would occasion a feeling of
privacy and exciting views of the River below and the
opposite shore.

The areas of the shoreline which are not
appreciably sloped (between 0%-8%) are located within
the floodplain. The relatively flat parcels of land,
the shore below the banks of the Church and including
the Augusta Boat Launch and City property south of the
Memorial Bridge (Lots 188, A & B, and 10B) are all
within the 100 year flood level which at this location
is 38 feet above base elevation. This "flat" land is
ideally suited for more intensive recreational usage.
The design for this area should, however, discourage
construction of large permanent structures, and any
surfacing which may be done should be of materials
which can withstand the yearly flooding of the
Kennebec River.

There are, then, important physical constraints
which along with the natural processes off river
flooding and tidal ebb and flow, combine to limit the
design options and recreational uses of the Greenway.
This need not be a negative factor, since these very
constraints provide the opportunity for creatii7e
development of a park facility which will be truly
unique in the City.

6
.10

Land Ownership/Land Use
A land ownership inventory was conducted and
State Property, City Property and privately owned
property were mapped as part of this study. (Appendix
A) The section along the river from Cony Street
extending south to the beginning of the AMHI grounds
is held primarily by the City with three major
exceptions which are privately held. Lot 187 (Map 38)
belongs to the First Church of Christ Scientist, Lots
10A and 18-23 (Map 37) are held by the Kennebec Valley
Medical Center, and Lot 10 (Map 37) the Augusta Lumber
Company is the property of Helen Jones (trustee).
This parcel is currently for sale and acquisition of
all or part of it should be seriously considered. The
AMHI property Lot 8 (Map 10) and Lot 10 Map 13) are
State owned. South of AMHI and extending to the
Chelsea Town Line (map 82) all of the land is
privately owned.

Land Use for the study area was also mapped
utilizing the City of Augusta's land use definitions
and classifications. These include: Residential - a)
single family and b) multi-family; Commercial;
Institutions/Organizations; Transportation/Utilities;
and Open Space/Recreation. The map also indicates
hard surfaced parking areas associated with a
particular land use. The land adjacent to the study
area bounded by the Eastern Avenue Rotary (north),
Middle Street (east), Arsenal Street (west) and the
AMHI property boundary (south) is for the most part
Residential with Business/Professional uses
interspersed throughout. This is mentioned in order
to point out that a park development would serve a
significant local population.

West of Arsenal Street and extending to the AMHI
grounds uses are mixed. There is a small residential
component; two areas of non-conforming commercial use;
one large parcel (Augusta Water District) utility use
and the largest remaining area is nearly evenly
divided between institutional and open space use. The
entire AMHI property is categorized as institutional/
organizational. South of AMHI and continuing to the
Chelsea Town Line, residential use predominates; there
is an additional commercial use fronting and extending
back from Hospital Street, and open space represents
the large tracts of undeveloped land.

Land Use Regulation

The study area is presently regulated by an
overlap of General and Shoreland Zoning, as well as a
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. This brief review
describes aspects of each regulatory tool as it
applies to the proposed park area.

General.Zoning: Effective date - November 1983.

The study area largely exists in an EBP, East
Side Business and Professional District, with a small
area to the South in an RU, Rural zone. It is bounded
to the North by a CB, Local Business District and to
the East by Residential, RB1 and RA zones. The EBP
zone permits residential and business/professional and
government office development. Hospitals, clinics and
other large medical service facilities which could
create greater than normal impacts are permitted as
special exceptions. The stretch of study area existing
south of the AMHI property and extending to the
Chelsea line is in the Rural zone and permits all
types of develoment permitted in EBP and virtually all
other types of development under Special Exception
criteria. Dimensional requirements and standards are
delineated according to use proposed.

Shoreland Zoning: Effective Date - May 1974

Three shoreland protection zones exist within the
study area. These are General Development - GD;
Resource Protection - RP; and Limited Residential and
Recreational Area - LRRA. Uses permitted in these
districts are permitted if and only if other federal,
state and municipal codes are met. Virtually all of
the immediate riverbank from the southern border of
the First Church of Christ Scientist to the Chelsea
line exists in a Resource Protection zone. RP zones
permit the following: outdoor conservation and
recreational uses; piers, docks, floats for
recreational purposes if capable of seasonal removal;
forestry, agricultural, hoticultural and aquacultural
uses not requiring alteration of a shore, bank or
floodplain. Special exception uses include:
J accessory structures and uses related to permitted
uses; essential public works projects; single family
residences on 3 acre lots with standards for
subsurface waste disposal, setbacks and minimum
frontage. This area is bounded to the north to the
limit of the study area by a General Development zone.
The Fort Western museum as well as the Church
mentioned above exist in this zone.

The General - Development district permits
basically all types of development with some
standards. One use, campgrounds, requires Planning
Board review. The LRRA zone permits RP uses that are
permitted by right; agricultural. and forestry uses,
recreational uses provided by public and/or non-profit
agencies; residential (1 & 2 families) and accessory
structures subject to minimum dimensional and setback
requirements. Special Exception uses are accessory
structures and uses related and necessary for uses
permitted by right; sand, gravel and loam excavations;
municipal uses, churches, public utilities, home
occupations and state government activities.

Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance: Effective date
- February 1981

Finally, the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance is
directly related to the National Flood Insurance Act
of 1968. It identifies special flood hazard areas and
establishes a permit system and review procedures for
development activities in the designated areas. The
river itself and areas of its banks exist in Zone
Al-A30 - areas of 100 year flood with 38' contour, the
area most susceptible to severe flooding is the Boat
Landing Facility and existing snow dump area.
Development standards within these zones address new
construction; new or replacement water supply systems;
on-site waste disposal; electrical and other
utilities; flood carrying capacity of watercourse; new
or substantially improved residential and
nonresidential structures; as well as floodway
provisions.*

The City of Augusta is currently reviewing and
revising its Comprehensive Plan, and if the park plan
is accepted, it may be more efficient to combine these
existing ordinances into a single ordinance and amend
it in order to better accommodate park design and
goals.

Zoning information provided by Kathy Fuller, City
of Augusta Planning Department

Aside from land use regulation, there are
additional restrictions on some of the land within the
proposed park area boundaries. Land which is directly
beneath the Memorial Bridge is owned (fee simple) by
the Maine Department of Transportation under their
standard "Right of Way" arrangement. No structure can
be built and any changes in surfacing and/or
landscaping require their permission. The Augusta
Sanitary District holds easements for the "purpose of
installation, construction, reconstruction, repair and
maintenance of a sewer and drainage line." This
traverses private property between Brooks Street and
the northern boundary of AMHI property which is to the
east of Arsenal Street and roughly parallels the 50
foot contour line. The width is ten feet. The
easement is continued across the AMHI property; for
this stretch, the width is twenty feet. The easement
does not allow construction of a permanent building;
paving, walkways, and parking facilities are
permitted. The easements are mentioned here since
they have an influence on the subsequent design
proposal.
Work Program
There is, finally, a consideration of the
necessity of establishing a time scale and work
program for the park development. There are two
choices: development of the Park as one single unit
with work being done concurrently, or a program of
phased, consecutive development. Given the fact that
there are no intense development pressures on the land
in question and no urgency to "save" the land now or
lose it forever, it is advisable and more feasible to
plan, design and build the park in a consecutivelv
phased program. There are three strong arguments for
doincr so:

A Cost. Money can be more effectively
budgeted for a relatively short-term
development phase than for a larger long-term
development, e.g. inflation and cost increases
which are likely to occur during a multi-year
building program. Grant money is more likely
to be awarded for a single purpose project
which would be completed in a one or two year
period.

10
10

A Promotes Completion of the Total Planned
Program. Well thought out phases, however
many, which are relatively complete and
independent in themselves can, when finished,
serve as a building block or foundation for
the completion of subsequent phases. It is
important that each phase function as a
complement to another. As each component is
successful this stimulates the interest and
desire to have the entire park design
accomplished.

* Flexibility. A staged development allows
the luxury of assessment and re-evaluation at
various times - at completion of one phase
and/or before beginning a subsequent one.
Changes in design, as well as possible changes
in function and proposed usage, can be accom-
modated more easily.

Deslgli

. Froosal

What is presented here is really more of a conceptual
proposal than a final, fixed design proposal. What
will be the most suitable uses for the park
considering its site, topography, surrounding areas
and other factors of its situation? What is the best
way to maintain the special "natural" feeling of this
shoreland area? The basic idea which is central to
this design proposal is that of concentrating the more
active, intensive recreation near downtown and to have
the succeeding sections which extend south along the
River's edge to be used for the more passive manner of
recreation. This concept is due largely to
constraints of topography and recognition of natural
processes, as noted earlier; it is also influenced by
recent studies and various other greenway park
proposals which indicate that parks are used primarily
for passive pursuits; and that there is a dominance of
informal, passive activities. (Lavery 1975:117).

A well designed park facility can only further
enhance the current revitalization efforts occuring in
downtown Augusta and will significantly improve the
appearance of the eastern shore of the River. This is
an area of high visibility to Augusta residents as
well as people passing through the City; an amenable
park setting combined with the shopping and lunching
opportunities downtown and the nearby historical and
cultural facilities will hopefully encourage vistors
to stop and enjoy the Capitol City.

The proposed elements should be taken as
thoughtful suggestions for what the Greenway Park
could offer, in a unique setting, to the residents of
Augusta and the larger State community.

PHASE ONE

Clearing of any low scrub or undergrowth which
may be present as well as screening of unwanted visual
elements is mentioned in.the Phase One design, it will
be assumed as an element in the' subsequent phase
designs.

What is intended in Phase One (Figure 1) is to
provide the City with what has been and still is
lacking: a centrally located, large open area for
relaxation, activity and social contacts. It is
designed to serve as that common element in most New
England towns - the village green or town square.

There are three major elements. The first is to
provide a pathway directly linking Fort Western to the
current boat launch-picnic area. The second is to
design and landscape the City property south of
Memorial Bridge in a slightly more formal manner to
include some areas of hard surfacing so as to evoke a
44plaza" setting. The third takes advantage of a
natural "bowl" area at the back of the plaza and calls
for a simply designed and constructed amphitheatre.

Additional suggestions include lighting for
evening use, providing bicycle ranks, and providing an
artificial ice skating rink. This, as well as any
additional design features should encourage four
season use of the area.

PHASE TWO

The second phase (Figure 2) is designed to
function as a transitional area from active recreation
to more passive recreational opportunities. It calls
for a trail/path to be placed along the more level
ridge area of the riverbank. This could be for
walking, jogging and perhaps bicycle traffic. This
trail could be located to coincide with the Augusta
Sanitary District's easements which they have already
obtained. Occassional complete clearings should be
made for viewing the River and stairs provided for
direct access to the shore. The pathway would
continue along the Kennebec Arsenal grounds to the
Arsenal granite wall, where a more formal element
would include decorative benches and lighting and a
stylized railing, perhaps of iron with granite posts.
This would provide a striking view from across the
River. A break in the wall and a ramping down to a
former landing is still intact, although repairs are
needed. This landing provides an unobstructed view of
the River, north and south.

PHASE ONE Z

-4
NEW CITY CENTER

Fort Western

AREA
E3GENERAL PARK

current boat launch

and Picnic area

2 Proposed Iplazal

proposed stage & . . . . . . . . . .

60
amPhitheatre

CIO

Revisions SKPtDC, 1986 Figure 1

SOURCE: Original mapping compiled by JAMES W. SEWALL COMPANY
for the Coastal Zone Management Survey, 1978.

. . . . . . . . . .

PHASE TWO

..........

..............

.. ... ......
..........
GENERAL PARK and TRAIL AREA

Kennebec Arsenal Buildings

proposed lighted lesplanadel
....... ...
....... ....

j:::j:j:j

0
............

...................

Revisions SKPfDC, 1986 Figure 2

I
I

1
4

SOURCE: Original mapping compiled by j@MES W. SEWALL COMPANY
for the Coastal Zone Management Survey, 1978.

I
f

Other additional considerations include low
landscape lighting, interpretive facilities for the
Arsenal buildings and wall, and restoration of the
granite wall and walkway. IAdditional landscaping
should provide for an interesting and pleasant
surrounding for users as well as provide a dramatic
and inviting view for people across the River or on
the Memorial Bridge.
PHASE THREE

The large AMHI property provides the "pastoral"
and reflective section of the Park. It is basically a
continuation of the path along the ridge and following
the Sanitary District easment (Figure 3). The path
could be widened to include, if desired, a section of
physical exercise stations. These are becoming a more
common feature in park design and are in use in
Portland and Waterville. Again, visual clearings and
stairs to the shore are suggested.

A turn-in and parking area is provided off
Hospital Street. From this point, one has an
impressive and panoramic view of the City; the State
Capitol building is in almost direct alignment with
this area. An informational kiosk is suggested and
would be most helpful to visitors. Connecting trails
should be placed to join with the main trail as well
as an additional trail or directional sign for the
Pinetree Arboretum.

PHASE FOUR

This is viewed as the long range completion of
the park project (Figure 3). A footbridge, extending
from the coaling dock on AMHI property across the
river to Capitol Park, would be a pleasant and
efficient way to complete the loop from downtown to
the State Capitol and would effectively link all of
the City's historical and cultural facilities
mentioned previously. Visitors could spend the day in
the museums, see the historical sites, shop or lunch
downtown and enjoy some relaxation along the River -
all on foot and at their own pace without the
interruption of driving and parking a car three or
more times.

It is understood that this last phase will be
a costly one, but it is hoped that the success of both
the downtown improvements and the completion of the
previous park phases will generate the desire to have
the bridge built. A bridge will require the careful
consideration of the many parties involved - the City,
AMHI and the State. It should be pointed out,
however, that intelligent and suitable design can help
alleviate potential problems.
14

. X

704

L.J@j .:6f 'i- K\

PHASE THREE
L I IIt I
!@7/0 L\ FA
GENERAL PARK and TRAIL AREA -ALL. 1! V I if x N -1
-f-Ti \L I "j

coaling dock foundation r-A I
I Lj- V11

C:i
scenic lookout parking informati 11 1 V I'i
P, 1 11 N--

I A-
AMHI BUILDINGS STATE OFFICES
A N;

--T
=4)
.0 PHASE FOUR

CAPITOL P A R K x 'fi'@

PROPOSED FOOTBRIDGE
IL

)<,63 4
"'1 1.2

Revision* SKPtDC, 198

@4
1

SOURCE: Original mapping compiled by JAMES W. SEWALL COMPANY
for the Coastal Zone Management Survey, 1978.

R\eCommelfdaflolfs

I I

This study will, in many ways, raise questions
which are unable to be answered here, and additional
expertise from landscape architects, engineers and
recreational planners will be needed. Additional
recommendations are outlined below, but the first and
strongest of these is for the establishment of an
advisory committee comprised of City and AMHI
representatives, local residents, etc. This can
ensure that citizen needs, desires and concerns are
considered and hopefully resolved. Nothing is so
dismal as a facility, particularly a public park,
imposed with a minimal consideration of what is
desired on the part of the potential users.
Involvement in the planning and design process will
hopefully (and usually does) encourage maximum use and
enjoyment of the Park.

Recommendations also include:

- securing an alternative site for the current
snow dump

- assess parking demands for park uses; will
additional space be needed?

- consult with Department of Conservation Parks
and Recreation, Augusta Recreation and Parks,
landscape architect, recreational planner for
final design and layout of park facilities.

pursue land acquisition; (parcel 19, map 37,
the proposed amphitheatre site is owned by
Kennebec Valley Medical Center with an assessed
valuation of $400).

- obtain recreation easements from private
property owners; these would be an overlay on
the current Sanitary District easements.

ensure that final layout has provisions for
accessibility by handicapped/elderly persons

pursue possible funding sources: Department of
Conservation's Land and Water Fund; there is
also a Municipal Recreation Fund which is
presently seeking re-funding; Coastal Access
Fund (if bond is approved in November's general
election); additionally, private health care
providers have been a source of funding for
PARCOURSE equipment and installation (physical
exercise stations).

- unite the current Waterfront and the proposed
park as a single, identifible recreational
facility. Select a name and designate park as
"East" and "Nest."

- seek involvement and support from local groups
such as the Chamber of Commerce, Kiwanis, etc.

- promote community involvement; perhaps a
"naminges contest; also possibility of
developing a park "logo" for T-shirts, posters,
etc. to keep park in the public eye and to be a
minor source of fund raising for special
projects.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

REPORTS AND ORIGINAL STUDIES

Blackwell, John T.
1959 City of Aucrusta Preliminary Plan Report.
Boston, Massachusetts.

City of Portland. Planning Office
n.d. "Nillamette River Greenway." (as contained in
the Comprehensive Plan.). Portland, Oregon.

Duensing, Edward and Evelyn Klingler
1980 The Urban Waterfront as a Recreational
Facility. n.p: Vance Bibliography. (June).

Fiore, Frank and Tim Glidden
1973 Resources Evaluation and Development
Recommendations for the Lower Kennebec River
Corridor. n.p.: Maine State Planning Office.

Hardy, Joseph
1985 Maine Rivers Access and Easement Plan.
Augusta, Maine: Maine Bureau of Parks and
Recreation.

Kehoe, Betsy
1982 Rediscovering the Eastern River: An Access,
Visual and Site Analysis. n.p.: Center for
Natural Areas.

Mallar Development Services, Inc.
1982 The Kennebec. Augusta, Maine: Southern
Kennebec Valley Regional Planning Commission.

Mertes, James D. et al
1972 Trinity River Greenway: A Prototype. Lubbock,
Texas: Texas Tech University, Water Resources
Center.

Moriece and Gary of Maine, Inc.
1974 a Kennebec River Greenway Feasibility Studv.
Portland, Maine.
1974 b Kennebec River Greenway Master Plan Report.
Portland, Maine.

Potomac Planning Task Force
1967 The Potomac. Washington, D. C.: United States
Government Printing Office.

Rudner, Heidi and Charles F. M. Watson
1975 Kennebec River Basin Overview. n.p.: New
England River Basin Committee.

Schroeder, Timothy D.
1981 Local Parks and Recreation Services and
Property Values: a Review and Bibliography.
Public Admini.stration Series; Bibliography
P-640. (January).

State of Maine. Department of Conservation
1982 Maine Rivers Study. Final Report. n.p.

Townsend, Clint
1971 Kennebec River Corridor Proposal. n.p.:
Northern Kennebec Valley Regional Planning
Commission and the Natural Resources Council.

BOOKS AND MONOGRAPHS

Arnold, Joseph L.
1969 The New Deal in the Suburbs. Columbus: Ohio
State University Press.

Ashbaugh, Byron L. and Raymond J. Kordish
1971 Trail Planning and Layout. Washington, D.C.:
National Audobon Society, Inc.

Barlow, Elizabeth
.10 1972 Frederick Law Olmsted's New York. New York:
Praeger Publishers.

Fabos, Julius, Gordon T. Milde and V. Michael Weinmayer
1968 Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. Founder of Landscape
Architecture in America. n.p.: University of
Massachusetts Press.

Halprin, Lawrence
1972 Cities. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Lavery, Patrick, editor
1975 Recreational Geography. British Columbia:
David and Charles, Ltd.

Little, Charles C.
1969 Challenge of the Land. New York: Pergamon
Press.

Litton, R. Burton Jr.
1974 Water and Landscape. Port Washington, New
York: Water Information Center, Inc.

Mc Harg, Ian L.
1969 Design With Nature. Garden City, New Jersey:
Doubleday and Co.

Mann, Roy
1973 Rivers in the City. New York: Praeger Press.

Schmertz, Mildred F., editor
1970 Open Space for People. -Washington, D.C.: The
American Institute of Architects.

Shivers, Jay S. and George Hjelte
1971 Planning Recreational Places. Cranbury, New
Jersey: Associated University Presses, Inc.

Sutton, S.B., editor
1971 Civilisincr American Cities. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Whyte, William S.
1968 The Last Landscape. Garden City, New Jersey:
Doubleday and Co.

Wurman, R.S., Alan Levey and Joel Katz
1972 The Nature of Recreation. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: MIT Press.

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Elson, Martin
1979 "Recreation, greenbelts, and local plans."
Oxford Working Papers in Planning Education and
Research. vol. 37:34-72.

Jackson, Arthur
1982 "The Capitol Area Greenway Program- private
land goes public." Carolina Planning. 8:32-34.
Winter.

Kaplan, Rachel
1979 "Citizen participation in the design and
evaluation of a park." Environment and
Behavior. 12(4): 494-507.

no author
1979 "Green environment in urban areas."
Professional Institutions Council for
Conservation Report. 3(79).

Simpson, John D.
1979 "Bringing neighbors together in Street Parks."
Parks and Recreation. 14(10): 34-38.

iii

APPENDIX A

LAND OWNERSHIP INVENTORY

This inventory was conducted in January, 1986 and is
current to that date. Subsequent changes in ownership since
then may have taken place. The tax rate in January, 1986 was
$25.75 per $1,000.00 of the assessed value.

MAP 10

Assessed
Lot Property Owner Tax Value Valuation

8 State of Maine (AMHI) exempt 58,383,000
8A City of Augusta

MAP 13

9 Augusta Sanitary District
10 State of Maine exempt 10,200

MAP 37

1 Helen Jones (trustee) 172.52 6,700
8 Kevin Moriarty 847.17 32,900
9 Victor McCourtney 932.15 36,200
10 Helen Jones (trustee) 6,808.30 264,400
10A Kennebec Valley Med. Ctr. 1,524.40 59,200
10B City of Augusta exempt 17,500
11 Helen Jones (trustee) 87.55 3,400
12 $1 61 48.92 1,900
13 Gregg Distributors, Inc. 79-83 3,100
14 ft 11 82.40 3,200
14A it 11 18.02 700
15 11 172.52 6,700
16 Is 5,935.37 230,500
17 of 41.20 1,600
17A it 10.30 400
18 Kennebec Valley Med. Ctr. 110.72 4,300
19 Is so 10.30 400
20 exempt 2,000
21 exempt 3,800
22 exempt 2,600
23 exempt 2,600
24 Alexis Ouellette 999.10 38,800
25 Armand Brealt 620.57 24,100

MAP 3 8

Assessed
Lot Property Owners Tax Value Valuation

165 Augusta Water District 4,913.10 190,800
166 Cushnoc Title, Inc. exempt 8,100
167 Thomas Coughlin 785.37 30,500
168 Cushnoc Title, Inc. exempt 25,400
169 Maine Health Facilities Auth. exempt 17,000
170 Cushnoc Title, Inc. exempt 20,500
171 Effie Wilcox 724.15 26,200
172 Stanley and Mary Ann Campbell 1,163.90 45,200
173 Kenneth Vashon 754.47 29,300
174 Vesta Golden & Susan Gould 692.67 26,900
175 Robert Stram 1,027.42 39,900
176 combined with lot 175
177 Augusta Water District exempt 5,000
178 City of Augusta exempt 13,700
178A 11 of exempt 105F100
179 J. Concannon 723.57 28,100
1BO City of Augusta exempt 25,300
181 11 exempt 12,200
182 it exempt 9,900
183 to exempt 135,600
184 exempt 11,700
185 (Fort Western) exempt 181,000
186 exempt 60,700
187 First Church of Christian
science exempt 57,900
188 City of Augusta exempt 21,900
188A 11 11 exempt 7,600
188B It If exempt 10,000
189 Marcel Carrier 466.07 18,100
190 Jeannine A. Dostie 298.70 11,600
191 Armand & Jeannine Breault 38.62 1,500
192 City of Augusta exempt 51,400
192A Augusta Parking District exempt 16,900

j - - L
i

@
3 6668 14103 7467