Utah’s Great Outdoors Open Space Project Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Utah State...

Utah’s Great Outdoors Open Space Project

Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism

Utah State University

Utah Division of Parks and RecreationBoard and Public Meeting

Logan, UtahJuly 17, 2000


Tonight’s Presentation

Purpose of the Project

Three Phase Process

Project Results and Findings

Major Themes and Recommendations


Project Purpose

Identify open space needs, priorities, and initiatives for each Planning District in Utah.

Focus on issues related to: •outdoor recreation•amenity values•ecological services


Project Purpose

Seek input from key stakeholders:•land management and planning

professionals•state and local officials•community leaders and residents

Identify action strategies for addressing open space needs.


Three Phase Process

Phase 1:

Phase 2:

Phase 3:

Utah’s Great Outdoors Conference

Statewide Key Informant Mail Survey

Public Meetings--Presentations of Findings and Opportunities for Stakeholder Input


Utah’s Great Outdoors Conference

Participants responded to these two questions:

• What are the most pressing outdoor recreation and open space needs in your region of the state for the next 20 years?

• What are the most pressing outdoor recreation and open space problems or needs for specific towns and communities in your region?


Statewide Key Informant Survey

To further validate and prioritize outdoor recreation and open space needs for each Planning District that were identified at the Conference.

To obtain stakeholder attitudes toward 25 open space protection tools.


Public Meetings

Present prioritized listing of outdoor recreation and open space needs for each Planning District.

Seek out stakeholder comments on these findings.

Ask participants to identify existing and potential projects addressing outdoor recreation and open space needs.


Results of Public Meetings

Over 300 specific outdoor recreation and open space projects identified for the seven Planning Districts in Utah.

A broader picture of the social and political context in which open space planning must occur.


Major Themes & Recommendations

Two broad types of open space needs:

• Specific Purpose Projects• individual trails • water projects• visitor centers • heritage sites• parks

• General Concerns • funding • education • partnerships • planning needs



Addressing these two broad types of open space needs will require different approaches:

• State and federal agencies need to work directly on General Concerns.

• Specific Purpose Projects will require local initiatives and local, state, federal, and private stakeholder collaboration.



There are two different orientations toward open space values.

• Some major differences exist between stakeholders in urban/suburban and rural planning districts regarding the purpose and value of open space.



Stakeholders in rural areas feel the key values of open space are for outdoor recreation and tourism use.• To help meet local economic development

needs• To retain public access for

outdoor recreation• To retain traditions of multiple use of

natural resources on public lands



Urban/Suburban stakeholders emphasize protection of open space for non-use or intrinsic values, along with recreational and access needs. • For community aesthetics and amenities• For controlling growth and development• For providing ecological services -

wildlife habitat -wetlands protection -water quality



Key challenge to successful, long-term statewide planning and funding efforts...

…providing opportunities to enhance both the use and environmental protection roles of open space simultaneously.



Linking these two orientations is possible.

Will require an explicit and balanced effort to bring these together.

Especially important to encourage support and collaboration with rural areas of the state.



Open space linear corridors and water-related resources are critical.•Linear corridors mentioned most often: -trails and paths -bikeways -OHV routes•Corridors implied by projects mentioned for: -parkways -riparian corridors -riverways -wildlife corridors -canyon protection & access -corridors linking communities & towns



• Water-related projects are considered important throughout the state.

• In rural areas, focus in on providing or improving reservoir and river recreation.

• In urban/suburban areas, wildlife habitat, wetlands protection, and water quality are of equal or greater importance.



To enhance long-term benefits from statewide coordination and funding will require Specific Purpose Projects to be designed to simultaneously meet recreational development and use goals along with resource protection goals.



Funding, funding, funding…

• Stakeholders throughout the Planning Districts view funding as a key role for state agencies.

• Not simply providing funds, but also providing technical advice and coordination for identifying and acquiring funds.



Key concerns related to funding:• for maintenance and improvement of

existing but dated facilities• long-term, consistent sources of funds• increasing awareness of

funding opportunities• prioritizing project needs with

funding opportunities• technical assistance with grant proposals



Provide a larger portion of funds to rural Planning Districts.• Distributing funds on per capita basis is

problematic.• Many urban/suburban residents travel to

rural areas of the state for recreation.• Puts a higher level of pressure on rural

resources and infrastructure.



Long-term and consistent sources of funding important for rural areas.

Long-term resource protection and amenity/ecological service values are statewide concerns.

Funding should be used to encourage planning districts to help protect these broader social values.



Local Control--State Coordination

In general, stakeholders see great value in statewide coordination of open space planning and funding efforts, but at the same time want to retain local control.



Focus on projects that meet local needs.

• Large pool of existing and potential open space projects in all planning regions.

• Priorities can be identified by local stakeholders.

• Local needs should be a starting point for statewide planning and funding priorities.



• Funding criteria should recognize both use and non-use values of open space.

• Funding should help meet local needs as well as broader state level needs.

• Open space planning and funding must be a joint effort between local and state agencies and stakeholders.



Provide a logical, consistent, and open process for prioritizing projects.• Clear and explicit criteria, application

guidelines, and technical assistance are needed so local communities and district level planners have an equal opportunity for success.



Planning and funding criteria for a project might include evidence that it:

• Meets both local and state level needs;

• Has local community support;

• Is part of larger scale planning efforts;



Planning and funding criteria for a project might include evidence that it:

• Meets objectives related to amenity and ecological service values... even if the project focuses on use;

• Is part of a collaboration or partnership;

• Has an educational component.



Develop project criteria collaboratively with local officials and stakeholders.• State agencies (DP&R / DWR) could draft

application requirements. • Sent out for review and evaluation by potential

stakeholders (AOGs / IORT).• Develop final criteria and procedures combining

both content and process elements--most fair and acceptable for all.



Implement formal collaborative planning and decision processes.• Designate a statewide recreational lands and

open space committee or task force.

• To make final process and content decisions on project proposals.

• To recommend and approve funding and planning criteria.



Provide state coordination and technical assistance in the more General Concerns of:• planning• collaborative partnerships• public involvement• education• research



Open space protection tools should focus on easements, but also be tailored to local concerns and circumstances.• Generally, local control and private owner

initiatives are preferred.• Need for careful evaluation of these tools.• Controversies may require creativity and

flexibility in identifying acceptable tools.


Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism

Utah State University

In cooperation with Utah Division of Parks and Recreation Department of

Natural Resources

Principle Investigators: Dr. Dale Blahna, Dr. Steve Burr Mr.

Michael Butkus, Ms. Judy Kurtzman


Examples of Identified Needs and Specific Projects

Bear River Planning District Preserve lands we have...

• Cache Valley plan to minimize development along roadways

• Wetlands protection project for Brigham City and Box Elder County

• Develop a plan to protect open space around Bear Lake.



Wasatch Front Planning District Protect and improve riverways...

• Develop riparian parkways along area streams and rivers.

• Weber River Greenway/Parkway• Wildlife viewing/study areas along Jordan

River--Murray, West Jordan, Bluffdale



Mountainland Planning District Preserve good open space in and around

towns for use as parks...• Purchase of 80 acres from state for Adventure

Park in Highland.• Acquisition and development of Zone 1 park in

Lindon.• Develop new community park next to Charleston

town building.



Uintah Basin Planning District Develop an area wide plan for development,

management, and protection...• Strengthen partnerships (cities, counties, state,

federal, tribal).• Develop inventory of resources and plan to protect

the most critical places.• Identify and prioritize recreation needs and wants for

each town.



Central Planning District Develop outdoor recreation opportunities to help

support local economic development... • Expand whitewater use in Marysvale Canyon on Sevier

River with private operator.• Continue to develop and open beaches at Yuba Lake.• Develop an interpretive effort at ghost towns and gold

mining sites on Tushar Mountain.



Southwest Planning District Better cooperation and communication to plan

and execute recreation programs for the future...• Towns and cities adjacent to federally managed areas

need to acquire conservation easements.• Kanab needs grants for funding trail development for

all-terrain vehicle users and hikers.• Recreation and state park potential for Kolob, Sand

Hollow, and Gunlock Reservoirs.



Southeast Planning District Address the need to obtain land and funding for

parks and recreation facilities...• Plan to transfer federally managed land to state

ownership to maximize potential.• Develop a plan for more equitable distribution of

sales and room taxes to rural areas.• Develop incentives for private businesses to help

preserve open space areas.

Utah’s Great Outdoors Open Space Project Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Utah State...

Documents

Transcript of Utah’s Great Outdoors Open Space Project Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Utah State...