Laserfiche WebLink
9 <br /> <br />Related Questions: <br />1. Should the Council. seek an answer now to this problem of the future, or <br />must the future take care of itself? <br />2. Is the problem one which could be met by an investment or set-aside program <br />begun now? Is there a useful model of a "public trust" which could be <br />adapted? <br />3. Should the Council and the commission take a proactive role, working with <br />other levels of government to find asolution? <br />ISSUE 9. Is there a need for guidelines for service levels for develo ment and <br />or opera ion an ma n enance ~n reg~ona par s. <br />Metropolitnn Council staff, working with staff ,from implementing agencies, have <br />developed draft gguidelines for service levels (G5L) for both development and <br />for 0 b M. The GSL delineate both the quantity and quality of service which <br />facilities in regional parks will provide (development), and thequantity and <br />quality of service which they can sustain through the maintenance they receive <br />(0 b M). The documents are working drafts, to be tried and adjusted in use. <br />Ultimately, proponents feel that GSL offer a way to measure and predict the <br />quality as well as quantity of service returned from investment in regional <br />recreation open space. Opponents say the measures may be so imprecise at the <br />outset as to be meaningless, therefore, misleading to persons attempting to use <br />ahem. Some view GSL as undue infringement on implementing agency prerogatives, <br />feeling that, as owners and operators, the implementing agencies alone should <br />set service levels in the. regional parks-for which they are responsible. <br />A draft suggests the definition of appropriate level of service as follows: <br />A level of service which meets all health and safety. needs, provides an <br />aesthetically pleasing environment, maintains the quality of both natural <br />and built resources, and permits a satisfactory recreation experience up to <br />the facility"s designed. capacity and lifetime. <br />Both Policy 22 and the 1980 text get to "levels of service" in the areas of <br />development and 0 & M. However, the current plan has no definition nor are any <br />levels set. <br />.Related Questions: <br />1. Is it important that the regional system meet minimum acceptable service <br />levels throughout? Who (and how) decides what they are? Is the suggested <br />definition (above) appropriate? Adequate? <br />2. Is the difficulty 'of developing usable service level guidelines.. such that <br />they are worth pursuing or not? <br />3. If usable GSL can be written, should they become part of the policy plan? <br />(The Council has other separate guidelines which are not part of policy <br />plans.) <br />