DOCSLIB.ORG

Legislalivecommission on Minnesota Resources

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legislalivecommission on Minnesota Resources 9900:21 This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp 1111111~ill~I[~'1111111!1~lli~rII1111Irlllllllllll 3 0307 00018 3056 Legislalivecommission on Minnesota Resources Biennial R ort January 1, 999 : M. S. 116P.09, Subd. 7 LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION ON MINNESOTA RESOURCES 100 CONSTITUTION AVENUEIROOM 65/SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55155-1201 PHONE: 651/296-2406 TDD: 651/296-8896 OR 1-800-657-3550 RELAY: 6511297-5350 OR 1-800-627-3529 • FAX: 651/296-1321 EMAIL: [email protected] John Velin, Director January 15, 1999 Qwmm Jt\N 1 4 1989 I,~" Governor Jesse Ventura Secretary ofthe Senate, Patrick E. Flahaven ChiefClerk ofthe House, Edward A. Burdick Senator Richard Cohen, Chair State Government Finance Senator Bob Lessard, Chair Environment and Natural Resources Senator Steve Morse, Chair Environment and Agriculture Budget Division Representative Dave Bishop, Chair Ways and Means Representative Dennis Ozment, Chair Environment and Natural Resources Representative Mark Holsten, Chair Environment and Natural Resources Finance Legislative Reference Library (6 copies) Dear Colleagues, Transmitted herewith is the biennial report ofthe Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) as required in MS 116P. On December 3, 1998, the members specifically adopted the new 1999 appropriation recommendations as well as the • recommendations for items to be incorporated into the regular agency budgets. We look forward to presenting this information and certainly encourage questions and discussion. Thank you for the opportunity to serve the Legislature in this capacity. S~Q~ Senator Leonard Price, Vice Chair LCMR REPRESENTATIVES: Loren Solberg, CHAIR: Ron Erhardt; Greg Davids; Alice Hausman; Phyllis Kahn; Willard Munger; Tom Osthoff; Dennis Ozment; Doug Peterson; Tom Rukavina. SENATORS: Dennis Frederickson; Jerry Janezich; Janet Johnson; Gary Laidig: Bob Lessard; James • Metzen; Steven Morse; Leonard Price; Martha Robertson; Jim Vickerman. L • Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources Biennial Report • January 15) 1999 • Pursuant to: M.S. 116~09, Subd. 7 Commission Members • REPRESENTATIVES: Loren Solberg, CHAIR; Greg Davids; Ron Erhardt; Alice Hausman; Phyllis Kahn; Willard Munger; Tom Osthoff; Dennis Ozment, Secretary; Doug Peterson, Tom Rukavina. SENATORS: Dennis Frederickson; Jerry Janezich; Janet Johnson; Gary Laidig; Bob Lessard; James Metzen; Steve Morse; Leonard Price, Vice Chair; Martha Robertson; Jim Vickerman. • LCMR Staff John Velin, Director Susan Thornton, Linda Bruemmer, Mary Lou Kendle, Yvonne Fritchie Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources Room 65, State Office Building, 100 Constitution Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: (651)296-2406 TDD: (651)296-9896 or 1-800-657-3550 Relay: (651)297-5353 or 1-800-627-3529 Fax: (651)296-1321 E-Mail: [email protected] Web Address: www.commiss-ions.leg.state.mn.us/lcmr/lcmr.htm • 2 The LCMR 1999 Newsletter .4 I. Strategic Plan " a copy of the current strategic plan..." ...............................................................................5 Table of Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund Constitutional Language amended November 3, 1998 found after Strategic Contents plan • II. and III. Project Description " a description of each project receiving money from the trust fund and Minnesota future resources fund during the preceding biennium; a summary of any research project completed in the preceding biennium..." .................................................................................6 Laws 1997, Chapter 216, Section 15 6 Laws 1995, Chapter 220, Section 19, 20 &21 34 Laws 1995, First Special Session, Chapter 2, Art. 1, Sec. 5, Subd. 2 65 Laws 1996 Chapter 407 Section 8 66 IV. Implementation "recommendations to implement successful projects and programs into a state agency's standard operations... " ...............................................................................70 V. Recommendations "to the extent known by the commission, descriptions of the projects anticipated to be supported by the trust fund and Minnesota future resources account during the next biennium..." ...............................................................................73 VI. Revenues and Distributions "the source and amount of all revenues collected and distributed by the commission, including all administra- • tive and other expenses... " . ...............................................................................79 VII. Assets and Liabilities " a description of the assets and liabilities of the trust fund and the Minnesota future resources fund ... " ...............................................................................81 VIII. Findings "any findings or recommendations that are deemed proper to assist the legislature in formulating legisla­ tion .. " ...............................................................................86 IX. Gifts and Donations "a list of all gifts and donations with a value over $1,000..." ...............................................................................87 X. Environmental Spending Comparisons " a comparison of the amounts spent by the state for environment and natural resources activities through the most recent fiscal year..." ..................................................................................88 XI. Compliance Audit "a copy of the most recent compliance audit." • ...............................................................................90 3 islative Commission on Minnesota In This Issue J999 LCMR Process ~'ecommendto 1999 LCMRPiocess, .. 1 .he legislatIve Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) will . the 1999 Legislature 122 natural reSOUl'ce and enviromnental projects totaling over Recommendations ataGlance.:.2 $42 million,· If passed by the LegislatU1~e and signed by the G(jvei'nCl1; funding for . · these projects\irill begin in July 1999 <lnd run thl'ough]11rie'200L . 1999 J,CMR Recommendations How the Process Began. ' ., ..' , , , lnStrategy Ortle!: ..3-5 Site visits th~'6ilghout the summer and early fall of 1997 began the process with LCMR . Local hiitiatives ,Grants Aid Local members traveling in the Squtheast, the metro area, Northeast, and the Minnesota River' . Governnients; Private Organiza- Valley.' The·trips offered membei's the chance to speak directly with the people 1nthe field " . ti6ns ... 8 .' :.. andlearri the cUl'r:ent environmental needs throughout the state, . Issues addressed in the . ' trips included, butwel'e riot limited tb, trollt preservation, well head profection, land World ofResources on tbeWeb." 7 · acquisition;' GIS applications, fOl:est resources, trail c9nnections, historical site renovations arid sustainablefarming: . .. Trust FundRevenue Cailzs Aizotber Extension ... 8' . ResourceForums . .' · Public Natural Resource Forums on the Environment and Natul'alResources Trust Fund were conducted iii1Wo Hatbol's, St.LouisPal'k arid RedwoQd Falls on September 18, 1997, to seek ideas and strategies fo1'the future spending priorities fr:om organizations and the public, LC,MR Members and Staff, Citizen Advisory Committee Member:sand over ,120 . citizen participants met to explore'the question of what kinds ofefforts should be supported. · py the Environnlent and Natural Resources Trust Flind. Individuals unable to attend were ' encouraged to sende-mails, letters bl'fa.,xes expressing theifoplnibns: Both the CACand the .. LCMR itlembers used 'the advice from the citizens In theirplanl1ii1g processes. .. Strategic Planand Request 'for'~roposal Process September 23 and·~4,·1998, theCitizetl AdVisory Committee finalized theirl'eCOnimenda­ .tions on the prioritiesoftl1e Envil'opni.ent and NaMa! Resources Trust Fund, The: CAC Continued on page 2 "1999lLCMR Recommendations by Affilhltlon .Fedel:al State $250,000, . $8,210,000 1% 20% ! . Local Government Unit $14,908,000 36% University,of lvIN $7,095,000 17% , Private/ Non Profit $10,568,000 '26% Continueqfrom page 1 1999 Recommendations' . '. .,, . ,encouraged the LCMR to "st~p out of the box", and recommended that all projects be, ' , at a Glance ' ,innovative and address two key issues: Land Use and Habitat; a sustainable approach bei. '. " . fundamental to both. " ',' ' ' " , Local Initiatives Grants Program, ' $4,8500,000 ' The CACdraftstrategic plan for the rrustFundhad a significant role inthe'delibetations of the LCMR strategic pbil1l1ing session. The LCMR final criteriaemphasized that all projects Local and Regional Trails must promote a sustainable approach. To be sustainable ~ project shoulCi be compatible , ,'$i,35~,00Q ' with the natural ,system and balance the benefits to the environnient, the community and ,the economy. The Six-Year Strategic Plan for 1998-2004 was adopted on November 18, '1997, State Parks, Recreation Areas and Trails . - ; $2,010,000 ' Response to Requestfor proposal " " , Metro ,Parks, Recreation Areas and Trails The Requestfor Proposal was mailed to over 3,500 individuals and organizations in early $2,300,000 December 1997.Arl on-line ,version was also available at the LCMR web address, Bloomington, Blue Earth, Marshall, Brainerd anqDuluth were sites of the 1999 Request for ' Histor.ic Sites hoposal Workshops held in Janumy 1998; Theworkshops were designed to be user-friendly $950,000 by holding them away from the. traditional ,. ,Water Qu~lity location, the Capitol. Re'aching over 100 participants,' the LCMR staff presented an
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comments on the Southwest LRT
    #1 From: matt muyres < > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 9:38 AM To: swlrt <[email protected]> Subject: LRT Environmental Terrorism I hope you dont mind that we catalog, document and publish all environmental destruction, eminent domain and the widespread loss of open spaces left....? Ill give you the link soon... You guys are stuffing an aprt complex near the cedar lake regional trail...no room for it...UNLESS...you cut down trees....thats always the development mantra. Good luck, Matt Ms. Kelcie Campbell, Environmental Project Manager Metro Transit - Southwest LRT Project Office 6465 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Email: [email protected] #2 From: Richard Adair < > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 3:06 PM To: swlrt <[email protected]>; Ginis, Sophia <[email protected]> Subject: comments on SEA/Amended Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation Comments on the SWLRT Supplemental Environmental Assessment/Amended Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation From: Richard Adair, Note: I am a resident of the Bryn Mawr neighborhood and a long-term observer of the SWLRT project who has attended most of the public meetings over the last 10 years. Most of my comments are directed to the portions of SWLRT near my neighborhood where I feel I have useful information to offer. Section 1.2. Purpose and Need Since the publication of the Final EIS, the following factors have increased the need for this project: a. Increased traffic congestion, especially severe during road construction and after even minor snowfalls. b. A growing residential population in downtown Minneapolis. c. Increasing racial disparities in the Twin Cities in income, home ownership, transit dependence, and incarceration.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Summer Trail Use and User Surveys Conducted in 1996, 1997 and 1998
    STATE TRAIL USE Summary of Summer Trail Use and User Surveys Conducted in 1996, 1997 and 1998 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Trails and Waterways Division & Office of Management and Budget Services An electronic copy of this report can be found on the DNR’s World Wide Web home page: http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/trails_and_waterways/ July 2000 2 State Trail Surveys in 1996, 1997 & 1998 CONTENTS Topic Page Executive Summary . 4 Introduction . 8 Methodology . 10 Trail use Market areas . 13 Intensity of use . 15 Trail activities . 28 Use of paved and unpaved trail segments . 35 Trail user experiences and characteristics How users first heard about the trail . 36 Appeal of the trail . 36 Trail ratings (including ratings of a variety of facilities and services) . 39 Priorities for trail improvements . 47 User conflicts and crowding . 49 Tourist expenditures and local economic impact . 50 Trip characteristics . 52 Demographic characteristics of trail users . 53 References . 55 Appendix A — Survey Use Estimates, Confidence Limits, Trail Descriptions and Maps . 56 Douglas Trail, Summer 1997 . 57 Gateway Trail, Summer 1997 . 59 Glacial Lakes Trail, Summer 1998 . 61 Heartland Trail, Summer 1998 . 63 Luce Line Trail, Summer 1998 . 65 Paul Bunyan Trail, Summer 1996 . 67 Paul Bunyan Trail segment near Lake Bemidji State Park, Summer 1998. 69 Root River Trail, Summer 1997 . 70 Sakatah Singing Hills Trail, Summer 1998 . 72 MN Department of Natural Resources 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION For the purpose of gaining a better understanding of summer state trail use, nine state trail surveys were conducted between 1996 and 1998 (see map). The nine surveys covered the main summer period from Memorial Day to Labor Day.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT 2019-XXX MPOSC Luce Line RT Master Plan MPRB
    Business Item No. 2019-88 Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission Meeting date: May 2, 2019 For the Community Development Committee meeting of May 20, 2019 For the Metropolitan Council meeting of June 12, 2019 Subject: Luce Line Regional Trail Master Plan, Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, Review File No. 50120-1 MPOSC Districts, Members: District C, Margie Andreason and District D, Catherine Fleming Council Districts, Members: District 6, Lynnea Atlas-Ingebretson and District 7, Robert Lilligren Policy/Legal Reference: Minn. Stat. § 473.313; 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan Planning Policy – Strategy 1 Staff Prepared/Presented: Colin Kelly, AICP, Planning Analyst (651-602-1361) Division/Department: Community Development / Regional Planning Proposed Action That the Metropolitan Council: 1. Approve the Luce Line Regional Trail Master Plan. 2. Require that the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, prior to initiating development of the regional trail, send preliminary plans to the Engineering Services Assistant Manager at the Metropolitan Council’s Environmental Services Division, for review in order to assess the potential impacts to the regional interceptor system. Background The Luce Line is an existing regional trail corridor that connects the Cedar Lake Regional Trail in Minneapolis through Theodore Wirth Regional Park and then farther west to other regional parks and trails in the Three Rivers Park District System. The portion described in the Luce Line Regional Trail Master Plan (Master Plan) is operated by Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB). The Master Plan is the result of nearly two years of community engagement as part of MPRB’s North Service Area Master Planning (NSAMP) effort, a project to create new vision plans for all neighborhood parks on the north side of Minneapolis as well as three regional trails.
    [Show full text]
  • References (PDF)
    Ames, Gregory P. 1981, November. Recreational Reuse of Abandoned Railroad RiPhts-of-Way: A Bibliooraphy and Technical Resource Guide for Planners. CPL Bibliography, No. 66. Council of Planning Librarians. Chicago, Illinois. Bentryn, Gerard C., and Edward Hay, 1976, March. "How to Get Trails on the Ground." Parks & Recreation. 11(3):28-29,55. Blomer, Craig. 1988, April 11. Personal Interview, Root River Trail Manager. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Rochester, Minnesota. Brackin, Dennis. 1982, May 6. "Completed Section Converts Trail Foes." Minneapolis Star and Tribune. (Minneapolis, Minnesota). PP. 22. Burwell, David. 1986, Winter, "Viewpoint: Rails-to-Trails ." Wilder- -ness. 50(175):60. Citizens Advisory Committee On Environmental Quality (CACEQ) . 1975. From Rails to Trails. U.S. Government Printing Office.--' Washington, D.C. Citizens League, The Committee on Facility Siting. 1980, October 22. Siting Of Major Controversial Facilities. Citizens League. Minneapolis, Minnesota. Clay, Grady, ed, 1980, September. "1980 ASLA Awards ." Landscape Architecture. 70(5):510-511,518-519. Cleckner, Robert M. 1973, February. "New Switch for Old Railroads." Parks & Recreation. 8(2):20-22,56-58. Collins, Dan. 1988, April 12-15. Personal Interviews, Trail Programs Supervisor. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Trails and Waterways Unit. St. Paul, Minnesota. Cordell, H. Ken, and Lawrence A. Hartmann. 1983. "Assessing Outdoor Recreation in the United States." Trends. 20(3) :42-46. Cranz, Galen. 1982. The Politics of Park Design. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Dillman, Don A. 1978. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. John Wiley & Sons. New York, New York. Drake, Charles R. and Virginia L. 1969. River Valley Echoes.
    [Show full text]
  • 2005-50 Tools for Predicting Usage and Benefits of Urban Bicycle
    2005-50 Final Report Tools for Predicting Usage and Benefits of Urban Bicycle Network Improvements Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. MN/RC-2005-50 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Tools for Predicting Usage and Benefits of Urban Bicycle December 2005 Network Improvements 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Gary Barnes, Kevin Krizek 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs University of Minnesota 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. 301 19th Ave. S. (c) 81655 (wo) 102 Minneapolis, MN 55455 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation Final Report Research Services Section 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 395 John Ireland Boulevard Mail Stop 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 15. Supplementary Notes http://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200550.pdf 16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words) This report gives a brief overview of four related small research projects. The full papers resulting from the projects are included as appendices. The four projects were related by the theme of bicycling preferences and behavior with regard to bicycling facilities. The studies were also connected by the fact that they were all based on information from the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota. The four reports are: • Effect of Trails on Cycling • Value of Bicycle Facilities to Commuters • Effect of Facilities on Commute Mode Share • Cycling Behavior Near Facilities Generally speaking, the results support the notion that people value bicycle facilities, in that they are willing to incur additional time costs in order to use higher quality facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Trails
    REGIONAL TRAILS Three regional trail facilities were included in The following park packets follow the required and submit each to the Metropolitan Council the NSAMP planning process. The Luce Line Metropolitan Council format for regional trail for approval. Council approval is necessary prior Regional Trail, Shingle Creek Regional Trail master plans. The Luce Line is considered a to any expenditure of state or regional funds on (which includes the Creekview and Shingle Creek regional linking trail, while Shingle Creek and these regional trails. Park areas), and the Theodore Wirth Parkway Victory (Wirth) are destination regional trails, section of the Victory (Wirth) Memorial Parkway because they have wide corridors with significant Regional Trail do not have master plans and are natural resources. The Metropolitan Council inextricably intertwined with the neighborhood requires descriptions of community engagement, facilities in the NSAMP project area. The other which is included in this document in Chapter 2. regional parks and trails in the area (Theodore After adoption of the NSAMP document, MPRB Wirth Regional Park, Victory Memorial Parkway staff will separate each of these regional trail Regional Trail, North Mississippi Regional Park— master plan packets from this overall document, including the 49th Avenue Corridor, and Above add back in this document’s introductory the Falls Regional Park) already have adopted sections on process and community engagement, master plans. MINNEAPOLIS PARK AND RECREATION BOARD 239 NORTH SERVICE AREA MASTER PLAN This page was intentionally left blank LOCATION AND HISTORY The trail travels through Bassett’s Creek Park until it reaches the end of Chestnut Avenue. It then LUCE LINE The Luce Line is an existing regional trail corridor moves onto the street again to follow Chestnut that connects the Cedar Lake Regional Trail and Cedar Lake Road to the entrance of Bryn westward through Theodore Wirth Regional Park Mawr Park, another Minneapolis neighborhood REGIONAL TRAIL and then farther west to other regional parks and park.
    [Show full text]
  • Adopt-A-Trail Program Regional Trail Segments Last Updated 7-7-20
    Adopt-a-Trail Program Regional Trail Segments Last updated 7-7-20 CITY LENGTH DESCRIPTION ADOPTED BY Dakota Rail Regional Trail 1) Minnetrista 1.1 miles County line to Hwy 7 Cub Scouts Pack 372 2) Minnetrista 1.0 miles Hwy. 7 to Halstead Dr. Gronquist Family 3) Mound 2.5 miles Halstead Dr. to West Edge Blvd. Cargill Cares Alumni 4) Mound 2.0 miles Westedge Blvd. to Seton Channel Cargill Cares Alumni 5) Spring Park/Orono 1.8 miles Seton Channel Kenwood Way Long Lake Fire Dept. 6) Minnetonka Beach 1.4 miles Kenwood Way to Arcola bridge Tassel Transition 7) Orono 1.8 miles Arcola bridge to Orono Orchard Rd. S Vistage Better Business Leaders 8) Orono/Wayzata 1.5 miles Orono Orchard Rd. S to Wayzata Beach Rêve Consulting Lake Independence Regional Trail 1) Orono 2.0 miles Luce Line Trail to Baker Park @ Co. Rd. 6 Boy Scout Troop 537 2) Medina 2.0 miles Baker Park to Hwy. 55 Lee Hickerson 3) Corcoran 2.0 miles Hwy. 55 to Co. Rd. 50 Dusty Boots Club 4) Corcoran 2.0 miles Co. Rd. 50 to Co. Rd. 10 Rockford Middle School-Ctr Envir Studies 5) Corcoran 2.0 miles Co. Rd. 10 to Co. Rd. 117 The North Face Store #315 Luce Line Regional Trail 1) Plymouth 2.0 miles Vicksburg Ln. to Hwy. 55 Domnisoru Family 2) Plymouth 1.8 miles Hwy. 55 to Hwy. 169 Savre Stiegler Family 3) Golden Valley 2.0 miles Hwy. 169 to Douglas Dr. Connections to Independence 4) Golden Valley 2.0 miles Douglas Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Responses to Supplemental Draft EIS Comments
    Attachment 3: Master Responses to Comments Received on the Supplemental Draft EIS OUTHWEST LRT (METRO GREEN LINE EXTENSION) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Master Responses to Comments Received on the Supplemental Draft EIS MR Topic Master Response Original Comment IDa Number 1 Invalid NEPA/MEPA The Southwest Transitway Scoping Process did not initially include the analysis of freight rail 1, 42, 47, 66, 74, Scoping Process changes (either relocation of freight rail to the MN&S Spur or co-location of freight rail and light rail 83, 112, 131, 133, because original in the Kenilworth Corridor), because at that time potential freight rail modifications were not 205 scoping report did not considered part of the Project. Prior to 2011, freight rail relocation out of the Kenilworth Corridor include freight rail co- was the subject of separate action being undertaken by Hennepin County and MnDOT. location The Project’s Scoping Process began with a notice published on August 23, 2008, and publication of a notice of intent in the EQB Monitor on September 8, 2008, and the Federal Register in September 23, 2008. The Scoping comment period ended on November 7, 2008. The Project conducted three formal public hearings and one agency meeting where written comments were received and where verbal comments were recorded. A Scoping Booklet was published that explained the EIS process (including the Scoping Process, how to comment, which agencies were involved, and how to stay involved after the Scoping Process). Exhibits at the scoping meetings explained the Scoping Process in more detail, the alternatives that were under consideration, and the upcoming EIS process.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Meeker County Trails Plan
    Meeker County Trails Plan A plan to guide future trail and bicycle routes in Meeker County ... Adopted May 21, 2019 Prepared by the Mid-Minnesota Development Commission The Meeker County Trails Plan was initiated by the Meeker County Board and paid for by Meeker County, the Mid-Minnesota Development Commission, Meeker Memorial Hospital and Clinics, and the Meeker, McLeod, Sibley (MMS) Healthy Communities Collaborative. www.co.meeker.mn.us www.mmrdc.org www.mmshealthycommunities.org www.meekermemorial.org Meeker County Trails Plan Table of Contents Chapter One: Introduction Section A: Chapter Highlights ............................................................ 1-1 Section B: Brief Description of Meeker County ................................ 1-2 Section C: Purpose of the Trails Plan ................................................. 1-3 Section D: The Benefits of Trails ......................................................... 1-4 Section E: The Planning Process ......................................................... 1-8 Chapter Two: Meeker County Profile Section A: Chapter Highlights ............................................................ 2-1 Section B: Demographics ..................................................................... 2-1 Section C: Transportation Infrastructure .......................................... 2-7 Chapter Three: Existing Parks & Trails Section A: Chapter Highlights ............................................................ 3-1 Section B: Existing Trails ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Celebrate the Cedar Lake Regional Trail
    UPDATE Spring 2006 Celebration Edition Volume 18, No. 1 Celebrate the On the Horizon Cedar Lake Regional Trail BY KEITH PRUSSING, CLPA PRESIDENT elcome to Volume 18 of the Cedar Lake Park Update. It has Wbeen some time since the last issue. It is a large undertaking for the small group of volunteers who comprise our media crew. They deserve a lot of credit. This issue is a celebration. 2005 was an amazing year for this Association, as you will see as you explore this newsletter. Enjoy! Increasingly, our website is the place where we put things such as current events, appeals, news, photos and archival information The trail to the river will run to the right of the rails and beneath the bridge. (www.cedarlakepark.org). It is very cost- effective, expands our ability to serve the community, and reaches a broader audience, he year 2005 brought the vision of an Langseth (651) 296-3205 and Rep. Dan consistent with our mission. Be sure to look at Dorman (651) 296-8216 who are co-chairs of off-road connection to the Mississippi the website news on page two . the conference committee. River much closer to reality. The U.S We will be planting throughout the park T The $1.8 million state money, added to this year. Sites will likely include the memorial government, in the omnibus transportation $1.5 million city funds, $2.3 million TEA-21 Cedar Grove, Linda’s Spiral, Burnham Uplands, bill, appropriated $3 million for the Cedar Lake and $3 million ISTEA federal monies, will allow W.
    [Show full text]
  • Institutionalizing Bicycle and Pedestrian Monitoring
    The Minnesota Bicycle and Pedestrian Counting Initiative: Institutionalizing Bicycle and Pedestrian Monitoring Greg Lindsey, Principal Investigator Humphrey School of Public Affairs University of Minnesota JANUARY 2017 Research Project Final Report 2017-02 • mndot.gov/research To request this document in an alternative format, such as braille or large print, call 651-366-4718 or 1- 800-657-3774 (Greater Minnesota) or email your request to [email protected]. Please request at least one week in advance. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. MN/RC 2017-02 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date The Minnesota Bicycle and Pedestrian Counting Initiative: January 2017 Institutionalizing Bicycle and Pedestrian Monitoring 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Greg Lindsey, Michael Petesch, Tohr Vorvick, Lisa Austin, Bruce Holdhusen 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. Humphrey School of Public Affairs CTS #2015071 University of Minnesota 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. 301 19th Avenue South (c) 99008 (wo) 177 Minneapolis, MN 55455 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation Final Report Research Services & Library 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1899 15. Supplementary Notes http://mndot.gov/research/reports/2017/201702.pdf 16. Abstract (Limit: 250 words) The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) launched the Minnesota Bicycle and Pedestrian Counting Initiative in 2011, a statewide, collaborative effort to encourage and support non-motorized traffic monitoring. This report summarizes work by MnDOT and the University of Minnesota between 2014 and 2016 to institutionalize bicycle and pedestrian monitoring.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2012 85.015 85.015 STATE TRAILS. Subdivision 1. Acquisition. (A) the Commissioner of Natural Resources Shal
    1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2012 85.015 85.015 STATE TRAILS. Subdivision 1. Acquisition. (a) The commissioner of natural resources shall establish, develop, maintain, and operate the trails designated in this section. Each trail shall have the purposes assigned to it in this section. The commissioner of natural resources may acquire lands by gift or purchase, in fee or easement, for the trail and facilities related to the trail. (b) Notwithstanding the offering to public entities, public sale, and related notice and publication requirements of sections 94.09 to 94.165, the commissioner of natural resources, in the name of the state, may sell surplus lands not needed for trail purposes at private sale to adjoining property owners and leaseholders. The conveyance must be by quitclaim in a form approved by the attorney general for a consideration not less than the appraised value. Subd. 1a. Private subsurface use of trails. Notwithstanding section 272.68, subdivision 3, the commissioner may issue a permit, without a fee, to allow a person who owns land adjacent to a trail established under this section on land owned by the state in fee to continue a subsurface use of the trail right-of-way, if: (1) the person was carrying on the use when the state acquired the land for the trail; and (2) the use does not interfere with the public's use of the trail. Subd. 1b. Easements for ingress and egress. (a) Notwithstanding section 16A.695, except as provided in paragraph (b), when a trail is established under this section, a private property owner who has a preexisting right of ingress and egress over the trail right-of-way is granted, without charge, a permanent easement for ingress and egress purposes only.
    [Show full text]