Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-12-12 Packet 1205 CD CD CD 0 C_ sv sv IS m o �. 0 CD O � CEzt C/) < D C) �' o 77 C CD O Q Cn 5. CD (o h CD Cpn Q C) CQ O C CD ill 0 c C2 CD Cn C� D � W N=N W C3i-PW N�N� O Om ND ¢� sv C'' =TM TmTm�=--Tm W �NO cn cc 0 Q OE c o -ocncn_0.� cnmp.0 CD (Q ao (CD 00 oo CDCCC CD CCE CD o — �� C) C: = m CD -o� o m mp w --i � CD :D `� (D5.CD CD r O n D — CD < < w p CD -7 C Cn CD + CD C SD Qo m N -n r C) ccn X p C � CA w rr (Q Cn o Q° p CQ C-1 O% CD p CCDD 0 < CD 64 W p CD CD CD CD U� CCD CD -`' l< CD C:) T � C rCe o m 3 cn x -a C) h CDO CD o< o CD � CD CD :3 l< CD m CD (Q O o o 0 o 3 _ 3 O o -o m D sv CD Cn h O N _0 w a O O = 3 COD Al Cn 0 Q CD o CD < (D Cn < T. C C O C aD Q O cn C Q Q cn n �< T. O O 1 Cn N�iv1C O Cn _0 4�,-<�::m0 x O O = E3 --+, _ ::5 CD-0 O CD r* -0�- 0 0 '_c �- CD a Z, Z' ZY CQ CD :3CD w Q O C O O CD :N O C Cn CD CC] < O W CD A) CCU x sv CD a O F r Z3 Q 73 Q CD r CD cc C Q CD CD a 0 ZY CD a F'-- O N� Ch. / 0 � 0 > R e R t m R ::a $ \ \ \ f \ / / > \ z m » > # 2 2 z E a m/ c a 2 5 > > \ c - k m o E e m CL m \ \ \ o}/ 0$ m z n\ m & D. \ f 2 > © m 2 z Xƒ} \ _ E g g $ _ / 2 q / z / 2 E E > ƒ % / } / \ } � ° e CD/ IDf § Ln / \ CL ® g m - A ° 9 e E = 7 / � \�cu 0 lb § $�\ k8� \ 22 /§ E 2 \ / \ x / \ 0 f - \ \ § / 2 OQ �� §// )\\ & \\/ Ln k < / ƒ 6) Do\ / / U o / } g e e e z \ \ < §§ g§=/ / m R \ % / W ƒ % 0 } a = \ / / LM \ ƒ ƒ § ] 2 2 0 0 / \ m a) 0- \ ` �fR&) 0 » CD 2 : 0 < 0 r § 5 0 2 / w r / o oPj ( 2 m 2 j ] cr) ( ( I (A -0 \ 0 / ) _ CD § _�� ` • t"� l -_-•.':_. spa t�� a -"�.. - -.-. _ �^:' �„' 4 Washington County Land and Water Legacy Program Lumberjack Park (Aiple), Stillwater Washing ..ton County POSC November 2022 Overview • In 2006 Washington County voters approved a $20 million land and water protection referendum • 2021 marked the 15t" anniversary of the Co u nty's "Land and Water Legacy Program" implementation • More than $16 million in county and nearly $24 million in partnership funds have been invested in 11,200 acres to date • Program nearing end of $20 million in available bond funds F Carpenter Nature enter;'DenmarkTownship; :� Eligibility The program funds are used for: • Improving water quality of rivers, lakes, and streams • Protecting drinking water sources • Purchasing parkland, including trail corridors • Preserving wetlands and woodlands • Protecting land along water bodies from development Washington County also gives priority to projects: • Located in the county's Top 10 High Priority Areas or along the Mississippi and St. Croix rivers • Adjacent to already protected lands • Are requested by a city or township • Serve multiple public purposes and allow public access • Leverage additional dollars from other sources J•1 \ Prioritization: Data and Mapping The county partnered with the Washington Conservation District to develop the Land and Water Legacy Program's "Top 10 High Priorities Map" The county uses the map to: • Identify high priority areas for land protection that create a functioning interconnected system of natural areas • Determine areas for landowner outreach • Evaluate projects for funding ect Process iorities and data analysis of a parcel's natural !s facilitate the project selection process: Villing seller contacts the county 'arcel maps are created, and research conducted to letermine prioritization kssessments, site visits and ranking occur ;ounty staff seek partnerships for funding and/or levelop funding proposals kppraisals, surveys, and Phase I and II environmental assessments are completed Nashington County Board of Commissioners approves he projects and levels of investment Land and Water Legacy Program Accomplishments 2006-Present IVA* 1,200 Acres Protected 39 Projects County $16.4M + Partnerships $23.9M Total $40.3 M invested ' LWLP Projects Completed ( LWLP Projects Underway LWLP Expenditure Summary All Project Costs by Funding LWLP Funding, $16,400,000 Partnership Funding, $23,900,000 LWLP, 41% Funding by Percentage State, 17% 15% Met Council, 27 Was ognon uty METROPOLITAN C O U N C I L 2021 Visitor Study: Exploring Washington County Data Darcie Vandegrift, PhD, Principal Researcher Parks and Open Spaces Comission November 10, 2022 l 4 Ir + f may' � 2Y• - � ' `�. Visitor Study Background Nil fox Surveys administered in the field by Wilder Research Over 5,400 surveys, over 50% response rate. Survey quotas proportionate to visitation At least 393 surveys per implementing agency. One unit in each implementing agency was "oversampled" to have data at the unit level 9 • Data were reviewed and analyzed by Council staffCD 0 • Report to be published late 2022 °. 0 2021 Visitor Study Process Data collection & preparation Summer/Fall 2021 Funding inputs calculated, preliminary data analysis Winter/Spring 2022 Data workshops with Imp. Agencies & M POSC Summer & Fall 2022 Publication of findings, including workshop insights Late 2022 • 406 surveys • 352 parks • 53 trails • 209 surveys, park level data • Park data • Popular activities • Information seeking • High WashCo MOE for trail data • No longitudinal data (yet) • (Consider region -wide patterns) Visitor Satisfaction Implementing agencies Dakota & Washington Counties Anoka, Carver, Ramsey, and Scott Counties, City of Bloomington MPRB and City of St. Paul % of visitors rating facilities `Excellent' or `Very Good' Visitors suggest trail condition improvement, basic amenities, relief from heat. Many had no suggestions. Implementing Most mentioned Agency Anoka County Better trail maintenance Bloomington Nothing/all good Carver County Nothing/all good Dakota County Nothing/all good MPRB Ramsey County Saint Paul Better trail maintenance Better trail maintenance Nothing/all good Scott County.-1 Nothing/all good TRPD Washington County Nothing/all good Nothing/all good 2.d my& Nothing/all good/all good Less garbage/litter, better trash service More shade/more trees More/better signage Bathroom access Nothing/all good Better trail maintenance More trash cans Better trail maintenance More bathrooms 3rd More bathroom facilities Better water quality Better trail maintenance Water/drinking fountain access Water/drinking fountain access Litter/trash/animal waste Litter/trash Better trail maintenance Water/drinking fountain access More/better signage 4P More water/drinking fountain access Water/drinking fountain access More trashcans More trails; longer/extended trails Water fountains turned off More trails; longer/extended trails More shade/more trees Better water quality More/better signage Better trail maintenance ME More trashcans/litter issues More trails; longer/extended trails Enforce rules for pets in parks (leash, pick up) Construction Nothing/all good More/better signage Bathrooms cleaner Separate paths for bikes and pedestrians More shade/more trees Water/drinking fountain access Table 2: Visitor suggestions for improvement the day of visit. Source: Metropolitan Council 2021 Visitor Study E- n Communities of color are underrepresented among park, trail visitors relative to the population. Disparities are greater on trails. 4.1 % Asian American 8.2% 2.3% Regional population Black 3.8% 10.3% Park visitation 1.7% Trail visitation 3.6% Latino 7.2% 2.4% 68.8% 84.3% White 90.7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40". 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Figure 1: Comparing survey demographics with the regional population for race%thnicity. Source. Metropolitan Council 2021 Parks & Trails Visitor Study. Washington County: 11 % people of color (compared with 22% of county population) Demographics were similar for parks, trails Washington County similar to demographics in Anoka County Bloomington, Dakota County. 9 c° Young people are underrepresented among park, trail visitors. Disparities are greater on trails. 12-24 1 o°i° 19% 7% 25-44 34% 25% 34% 45-64 32°�° 65+ 0% 10% 24% Regional population Park Visitation Trail Visitation 40' 29% 20% 30% 40% 50% Figure 2: Comparing survey demographics with the regional population for age. Source. - Metropolitan Council 2021 Parks & Trails Visitor Study N Disparities in youth visitation exist across the regional park and trail system. Saint Paul MPRB Scott County Carver County Washington County • 11 . 19.8% 12-24 - Population Dakota County ■ 12-24 - Park & Trail Visitation Anoka County Ramsey County TRPD Bloomington 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% Figure 3: Percent of visitors aged 12-24 by implementing agency. Source: Metropolitan Council 2021 Parks & Trails Visitor Study. 9 CD Percent of visits from groups with youth under 18, parks. Carver County park -------------------- --- Washington County park --�--------- — - - 46% TRPD park - --- Anoka County park ------- ------ Dakota County park ----`--_ Scott County park _ - --- ----- Ramsey County park MPRB park --- Bloomington park 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Figure 4: Groups with youth visiting implementing agency, parks. Source: Metropolitan Council 2021 Parks & Trails Visitor Study. 9 0 Hike/walk & Dog walk/dog park Biking (TIE) & Camping (TIE) Hike/walk Dog walk/dog Biking Running park Biking Dog walk/dog Hike/walk & Swim park (TIE) Hike/walk Biking Mountain biking Dog walk/dog park Hike/walk Biking Dog walk/dog park & Running (TIE) Hike/walk & Dog walk/dog park Playground Biking (TIE) Hike/walk Biking Running Dog walk/dog park Hike/walk Dog walk/dog Biking Running park Hike/walk Biking Dog walk/dog park Playground Hike/walk Biking Swim Running Running, Swim, Fishing Swim Family/friend meetup, Relax, Camping Running Family/friend meetup, observe nature Running Family/friend meetup, Swim Paddling Running, Family/friend meetup Camping, Playground, Family/friend meetup, Dog walk/dog park First time visitors more likely at parks than at trails across the system. Carver County Saint Paul Dakota County Three Rivers Park District Washington County ~ Anoka County �- MPRB Ramsey County Scott County Carver County Washington County Saint Paul Three Rivers Park District Dakota County a MPRB Scott County Anoka County Ramsey County Bloomington 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Figure 5. Comparing first time/infrequent visitors by parks vs trails. Source. Metropolitan Council 2021 Parks & Trails Visitor Study. 9 CD 0 v 0 0 0 New/infrequent visitors are more racially/ethnically diverse than return visitors. Saint Paul MPRB Ramsey County Anoka County Scott County Three Rivers Park District Carver County Bloomington Washington County Dakota County 0% 13% 10% ■ BIPOC proportion return visitors 20% 30% BIPOC proportion new visitors Figure 6: BIPOC proportion of new, return visitors by implementing agency. 40% 9 CD 0 0 v n 0 • 5eq MA IMMMro Discussion guides, full report have much more • Tailored presentations for your staff, other stakeholders • - • Technical advising on key takeaways available �• Discussion guides available now; Report published AO online in late 2022 CD � r �i 0 j Al _ O . C Capital Imprjvernent Plan (CIP) Parks And Open Space Commission: 11/10/22 What is the Capital Improvement Plan? • Plan for long-term infrastructure investments • Big -picture view of projects the County will lead in next 5-years • Approved by County Board How is the CIP Developed? Review direction existing policies: • Comprehensive Plan • Past CI Ps • Master Plans • Maintenance Needs Study Departments provide recommendation based on: • Capital needs • Funding sources • Local partner collaboration • Project timelines Review — 2022 Projects St Croix Bluffs Regional Park Boat Launch Area Washington County Lake Elmo Park Reserve and Lake Elmo Park Reserve Central Greenway Regional Trail Swim Pond Filtration Improvements Review — 2022 Projects Big Marine Park Reserve Facility Safety Improvements Washington County Historic Courthouse Truss Repair, Roof & Exterior St Croix Bluffs Regional Park Conference Cottage Washington County 2023 CIP Funding • Transmission Line Tax (formerly County Program Aide) • State/Met Council Bonding • Parks and Trail Legacy Fund (State Sales Tax) • *Planned Use of Fund Balance -> $5 million ■ Legacy Fund, $1, 2023 Funding ■ Transmission ine Tax, 850,000 �/M c .,,,ding, $500,000 LEPR Single Track Trail • Final Design and Construction • Guided by Design Study • Additional grant funding Washington County 8 LEPR Swim Pond Play Area • Current structure has exceeded design life . • Reduce maintenance needs • Better serve ADA accessibility Washington -ty oun LEPR Park Maintenance & STS Storage Facility - Design • Storage and staff areas are over capacity • Meet existing and future needs • Collaboration with Sentence to Serve Program needs Washington County 10 Historic Courthouse — Roof & Exterior _ - Washington County 12 Washington County 1 U c r _-7,77r 13 Closing Thoughts • Subject to changes in funding and priorities • POSC updates on a regular basis • Full Draft available: https://www.co.washington.mn.us/ 1257/Ca Pita 1-1 m provement-Pla ns YOUR GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS LIVING HERE COUNTYBVSINESS HOW001. Udlal I Co,dad VS Ca..o,.n..,,New. Capital Improvement Plans .w.w/.wrLi Aw.ryet b.n laOe.a W.lc Ly Washington County Capital lmprovemem Plan (CIP) pmpwn *Iraeamvnm¢snnpvE.a,m+.. wMY�{1a�lmeyCawr—,nl ww.d arw.mPlemMe ..d.mi�un.alew.mMam.e veav,..,.u.amwne.m,...a.aa.�w,....�awm. u^"^ s.sexeaw...d.,u. or.r_cadswml�mnentelm.l�� ^�,->leoe vnform.reeMowone0t wmn�,Hn ss� RCIOeneSmey H o- nORvwx sun ..Ooyn Su.leLk Pl.n rtmpglpikre.i. .w.-.IQpp EMmYP—ft submits Comment Comment and Feedback on the Draft 2023-2027 Capital Improvement Plan I