Trail Design

Once the field inventory was completed and the data recorded, a number of typical trail designs were developed that could then be applied to the actual field conditions. A wide range of conditions exists in the field, but these were chosen as representative of most. Each section depicts a fifteen-foot minimum offset from the edge of the trail to the edge of the nearest rail. This offset is consistent with MDOT policy.

Wherever practical, the trail to follow the existing topography, minimizing the extent of the cuts and fills. There will be some areas where this is not possible.

Sections A-D are all proposed variations of level terrain field conditions. These will be the less expensive trail segments to construct and are described below:

Section A – Level Terrain

Along much of the corridor, the railroad is situated on a slight berm within level or gently sloping terrain. In these areas the trail will be constructed fifteen feet from the tracks. Work will include clearing and grubbing, cut or fill as required, grading and placement of the trail structure. The three trail types are stonedust, asphalt and compacted earth for the dirt trail as described earlier in the report.

Section B – Elevated Railroad

In other areas, due to the grade requirements of the railroad, the berm is considerably higher. Rather than build a costly retaining wall or platform to construct the trail, the trail would be constructed at the bottom of the slope. Since the side slopes of the berm are high and the right-of-way is typically only 33 feet from the centerline, easements may be necessary in these areas.

Section C – Utility Corridor

Utility corridors parallel the Calais Branch Railroad in several locations. In locations where the utility corridor is immediately adjacent to the railroad, the trail would be built on the same side as the utility corridor as long as this side connects well with other trail segments. The fifteen-foot offset would still be held. These utility rights-of-way would provide a number of advantages in the construction of the Downeast Trail. The terrain is close to that of the railroad, minimizing grading efforts. The corridor is generally free of the larger trees, minimizing the expense for clearing.

Section D – Utility Corridor (Varying Offset)

Another option that the utility corridor provides for the Downeast Trail is to provide alternatives from the ordinary, relatively straight segments of trail. Using the utility right of way, it may be possible to move the trail further from the railroad. This would give provide an opportunity to create a meandering trail through the utility corridor. Weaving around large rock outcrops or other obstacles would also reduce project cost.

There are some areas where A-D will not work because the terrain is not level or perhaps is wetter than other sections. Sections E & D show two such conditions and recommended treatments:

Section E – Minor Berm Widening

This design applies most specifically to existing double-track sections. One example of this is Goodwin Siding in Township 7 (T7SD). There are two existing tracks, one serving as a "passing track". The recommendation would be to remove the southerly track and extend the berm eight or nine feet to the south. This would provide the room necessary to construct a ten-foot trail with a fifteen-foot offset from the rails.

Section F – Major Berm Widening

This treatment would be applied to sections where a single track exists on a berm through a "wet" area. Since it is not feasible to remove a single-track section, the berm would need to be widened by about nineteen feet to provide the space necessary for a ten-foot trail and a fifteen-foot offset. An example of this is at Schoodic Bog. A most beautiful scenic locale, the berm would be widened toward the existing utility poles that are about thirty feet from the berm. If the rails need to be removed during upgrade of the railroad service, then impacts might be reduced by widening the existing berm on both sides.

There are also a large number of locations where there would be a need for some sort of non-bridge structure. Sections G and H provide such structures with a description of their application.

Section G – Timber Platform

Timber platforms would be constructed where there is active cross-flow beneath the railroad tracks or adjacent water. At existing stone box culverts, stream crossings or adjacent streams (e.g., Tunk Stream in Steuben), these platforms would allow bridging the area with minimal impacts on existing water flows.

Section H – Low Retaining Wall

The low retaining wall would be used, where possible, to build the trail with a fifteen-foot offset and stay on the slope. In many locations, this would minimize the trail’s impact on wetlands. The retaining wall would be built at the bottom of slope prior to meeting the wetland, and the trail would be built atop the retained earth.

Cost Estimate

When preparing the cost estimate, we used our GPS Field Inventory Data overlaid with the National Wetlands Inventory to locate potential wetlands. We then went through the entire corridor and approximated the lengths of each type of treatment as described above. A unit price (cost per linear foot) was applied to those lengths broken into specific segments in order to arrive at the segment costs.

The unit prices were reviewed by the Maine Department of Transportation and approved based on the work described. Many of the unit prices that were used came from actual bids for the Brunswick Trail. A summary of the project costs by segment is provided in a subsequent chapter.

Back To Top