Laserfiche WebLink
9 <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 pro-active role, working with <br />other levels of government to find a solution? <br />ISSUE. 9. Is there a need for guidelines for service levels for development and <br />or opera ion an ma n enance in regions par s. <br />Metropolitan Council staff, working with staff from implementing agencies, have <br />developed draft guidelines for service levels (GSL) for both development and <br />fcr 0 & M. The GSL delineate both the quantity and quality of service which <br />facilities in regional parks will provide (development), and the quantity and <br />quality of service which they can sustain through the maintenance they receive <br />(0 & M). The documents are working drafts, to be tried and ad3usted 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 />them. 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 />evel s 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 ar 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 />