1 / 25

Greater MN Regional Parks and Trails Strategic Planning Overview

Greater MN Regional Parks and Trails Strategic Planning Overview. October 12, 2012. The Greater MN System. The 25 year plan states the following: The Greater Minnesota system plays a major role in providing park experiences in Minnesota.

darryl
Download Presentation

Greater MN Regional Parks and Trails Strategic Planning Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Greater MN Regional Parks and Trails Strategic Planning Overview October 12, 2012

  2. The Greater MN System • The 25 year plan states the following: • The Greater Minnesota system plays a major role in providing park experiences in Minnesota. • Build an interconnected system with parks, trails, lakes, rivers and natural areas that are accessible to all Minnesotans. • Distribute Legacy funds in a manner that will be viewed by the citizens of Minnesota as reasonable. • Over time, achieve at least a reasonable degree of equity of funding among parks and trails of state and regional significance.

  3. 175 Study Legislative Requirements • Protocols to determine the origin of visitors, and projection of potential use • Collect and compile details on the facilities • Develop evaluation protocol and criteria to determine priorities for regional parks and trails 3

  4. Project Goal • Integrate 175 study requirements into a Greater MN Regional Parks and Trails Strategic Plan! • (Three study deliverables can’t standalone or be done in a vacuum …. really need to be part of an overall plan in order to implementable and valuable to decision making) 4

  5. Project Timeline • Plan adopted by GMRPTC membership at annual meeting October 11, 2012 • Fall 2012 – processing test site data for visitor count & origin studies; and debriefing testing phase of mapping and inventory system • 2013 – initial implementation of the plan; more mapping and inventory and visitor counting/origins; will identify 4 park & trail sites (1 in each region) to conduct additional visitor counts & origin surveys; and to do inventory work 5

  6. History of Regional Planning in Greater MN • No history of comprehensive planning! • Legacy Plan recognized this – with many provisions reinforcing the importance of Greater MN taking on greater responsibility for planning • 2004 LCMR Parks Study Group Report “encouraged counties and cities in Greater MN to coordinate the development of regional parks” • Common theme expressed during scoping phase of project 6

  7. GMRPTC – An Emerging Entity • Ready – GMRPTC is poised to take on its responsibility • Understand responsibility – essentially becoming the third leg of a three-legged stool • Capable – many professionals actively involved, well-versed, on the issues, and fully capable of leading the organization 7

  8. GMRPTC Organizational Structure (Working Model) 8

  9. Positioning GMRPTC as Funding Authority • With the responsibility must come the authority! • And, with the authority must come the responsibility! 9

  10. Key Challenge • Limited history of investments in regional parks and trails in Greater MN • Reaching an optimal level of service will take many years to achieve in Greater MN 10

  11. Building a Regional System – Overview • GMRPTC will take a disciplined approach to building a regional system in Greater MN • Main principle: Focusing on quality outcomes that are relevant to Greater MN ‘s regional needs 11

  12. Starting Point for Potential Regional Parks/Trails • 2005 LCMR Report and U of M Inventory Report (2011) • Raw numbers – LCMR suggests around 115 parks have potential; U of M around 130; other opinions vary • Bottom line – have to build the system from the ground up using well-vetted protocol and criteria to determine which parks and trails are truly regionally-significant and of high public value 12

  13. Emergence of a Physical System Plan • Actual physical plan will emerge over time as the protocols and criteria are applied and initiatives formally vetted! 13

  14. Classifications and Evaluation Criteria • Legacy Plan definitions serve as basis for more detailed/ specific classifications and criteria for regional parks and trails in Greater MN! 14

  15. Consistent Approach to Criteria Rating/Weighting • Criteria: Broad enough to cover the predominant factors … yet limited enough to be manageable and keep the focus on what really matters 15

  16. Classification: Regional Trail (Non-Motorized) • Evaluation Criteria (weighted factors): • Provides a High-Quality “Destination” Trail Experience • Well-located (i.e., Convenience of Access/Adequate Length) to Serve Regional Population • Enhances Connectivity to Regional Destinations • Fills a Gap in Recreational Opportunity within a Region 16

  17. Classification: Natural Resource-based Regional Park • Evaluation Criteria (weighted factors): • Provides a High-Quality Outdoor Recreation Experience • Preserves a Regionally-Significant and Diverse Natural or Historic Landscape • Well-located and Connected to Serve a Regional Population • Fills a Gap in Recreational Opportunity within a Region 17

  18. Classification: Special Recreational Feature Regional Park • Evaluation Criteria (weighted factors): • Provides a Special High-Quality Outdoor Recreation Experience • Provides a Natural and Scenic Setting Offering a Compelling Sense of Place • Well-located to Serve a Regional Need • Fills a Gap in Recreational Opportunity within a Region 18

  19. Relationship Between Greater MN, DNR, and Metro Regional Parks Classifications • A seamless relationship between GMRPTC, MN DNR, and Metro Regional Parks is a clear expectation of Minnesotans’… • …. and essential to the efficient and effective use of • Legacy and other public funding sources! 19

  20. Example of Working through Classification Issues 20

  21. Vetted Regional Parks and Trails Become Part of Formal System Plan (and Funding Program) 21

  22. Guidelines for Funding Allocations • Be consistent with merit rankings • Focus on quality outcomes with a real impact (location, size, scale) • Ensure reasonable balance, fairness, and equity across regions • Take into consideration potential for “risk of opportunity lost” 22

  23. Information Management System 23

  24. Research and Measurement • Study requires establishing protocol for visitor counts and origins • This summer pilot tested a modified version of Metro’s approach to counts & origins at 3 test sites • In process of debriefing pilots & modifying as needed • Also want to set the framework for more needed research • Economic value of regional parks and trails • Demand research – what is optimal level of service? • Other ? 24

  25. Contact Information • Al Lieffort, Park Superintendent • Douglas County • 320.762.2966 • Al.lieffort@mail.co.douglas.mn.us • Jeff Schoenbauer, Principal • Schoenbauer Consulting, LLC • 612.578.1975 • jaschoenbauer@gmail.com • Kathy Schoenbauer, Principal • Schoenbauer Consulting, LLC • 612.578.1980 • keschoenbauer@gmail.com 25

More Related