Browsing by Author "Arrowhead Regional Development Commission"

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Chisholm Comprehensive Plan 2012
    (2012) Arrowhead Regional Development Commission
    This 34-page plan is much more detailed than the comprehensive plan from 2003. There is a major focus on the re-routing of Highway 169, with various options for development and re-development. There is little specific mention of water resources except to note that Longyear Lake will remain Chisholm’s focal point and that trails and other amenities including a boat launch will be added. It notes that The Causeway will become a significant focal point: “This plan envisions the removal of the causeway dividing Longyear Lake. In one form or another the causeway has been a part of Chisholm for a hundred years but it prevents the essential restoration of Longyear Lake into the naturally functioning body of water that can be the community’s keystone attraction. Its removal makes the lake’s revitalization into a regionally significant recreation area possible and provides the opportunity for such vital projects as the Festival Park. The ‘Bridge of Peace’ and associated flags will become part of one of the new lakeshore developments.” A stormwater project will be installed near the fishing pier. Actions related to Longyear Lake restoration include: “1. Develop Case Statement to describe how the combined proposed actions are intended to restore the water body to a naturally functioning system for recreational, aesthetic, civic, economic and environmental benefits. 2. Seek peer review of the Case Statement by MnDNR, environmental groups, recreational groups, and the like for purposes of building support. 3. Develop restoration plan with sequence of activities to implement and research funding sources.”
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Lake County Comprehensive Trail Plan
    (2013) Arrowhead Regional Development Commission
    Executive Summary: “In 2011 Lake County representatives approached the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission regarding the development of a comprehensive trails plan to help the County identify needs, prioritize projects, improve connectivity with other trail systems, increase awareness, and generally improve management of the County’s trail system. In July, 2012, work began on the plan. The plan envisions a trail system that is beneficial to the health, economy, environment, education and quality of life of the County, its residents, and its visitors. Though the plan focuses on trails within the County, it does take into consideration connections to federal, state and local trails and destinations. The plan identified partnership opportunities for Lake County with other governmental organizations, users, and non-profits with interests in the County. The visioning process laid a foundation for future trails, projects, and funding. A marketing plan outline would become beneficial in encouraging residents and visitors to enjoy Lake County’s beauty, recreational offerings, and destinations. Trails are important to the health of County residents, to the economy of the County, and to the overall quality of life for those living in and visiting Lake County. Health and active living studies have shown that active living, including having trails accessible to the local population, results in benefits to physical and mental health. A citizenry that uses trails and outdoor recreation facilities has less obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and a longer life expectancy. The number of trails and trail users have an impact on the economy of Lake County. This impact is especially significant because studies have shown that the northeast region of the state led all regions in trail-related spending in six of ten trail uses. Studies done on the quality of life in other locations indicate that trails have an overall positive influence on quality of life. People enjoy having ready access to the outdoors and maintained, connected trails provide that access. While recreational use figures are not specifically available for Lake County trails, recent studies have categorized use in the 9-county northeast region of the state. Typically, visitor day trail use for snowmobiling, ATV riding, and RVing were higher in the northeast region than any other region in Minnesota, even though the metro area has a much larger population. The northeast area ranked second to the Metro area in cross-country skiing and off-highway motorcycle riding. An important aspect of any trails program is the key recreational attractions that bring visitors from outside the County, as well as being favorite recreational sites of local residents. Vision and goals: Lake County has a long history of trail use tapping its natural resources. Trails have provided access to nearly all areas within the county. Today, these trails are used by residents and visitors year round to view natural attractions, used to access hunting areas, or are part of a destination package. With this in mind, Lake County desired to develop their trails and improve connectivity to enhance the users experience and to promote economic development). The goals are: form a well-connected, integrated trail system; have a system that is manageable and sustainable; a system that is safe; and a system available (or multi-use). Future goals and strategies were developed to address continued growth in the number and different types of users. As the report progressed, four key elements became apparent about the trail needs in the county. They were: • better access to the extensive ATV travel routes system • better connectivity between the City o( Two Harbors and the County’s Trail System • more opportunities for road biking and mountain biking • marketing Lake County’s trails. These elements became the overall recommendations and when looking at the trail maps, it becomes apparent that these concepts apply throughout the county. The plan also contains specific recommendations as well as strategies for implementation. With over 2,000 opportunity miles of trails available, Lake County abounds with opportunities.”
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Northeast Minnesota Economic Development District Midpoint Progress Report
    (2014) Arrowhead Regional Development Commission
    This is essentially a brief summary and status report of Northeast Minnesota Economic Development District projects. The projects include the Minnesota Woody Biomass Thermal Energy Team; Hazard Mitigation Planning; Go Cook County; Koochiching County- International Falls Economic Adjustment Assistance; Northern Aero Alliance; Two Harbors Planning; Hermantown Planning; Tourism Cluster and Scenic Byways; and Minnesota Association of Development Organizations and Greater Minnesota Development Strategy. While these individual projects undoubtedly have impacts on coastal waters and people, there is not enough detail in this report to draw any conclusions about their nature.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Northeast Minnesota Flash Flood Disaster - Economic Development Impact Study
    (2013) Arrowhead Regional Development Commission
    ARDC conducted a study to determine economic development impacts of the 2012 flood. ARDC collected information from all levels of government and held small group interviews to analyze gaps in data and identify lessons learned. Recommendations are paraphrased and summarized below. “A. Develop and Mobilize Micro Loans and Micro Grants for Disaster Response and Recovery. Micro loans and micro grants have been identified as a best practice for providing quick assistance to small businesses. The Northland Foundation’s Business Flood Recovery Fund has been cited as one of the most successful local response efforts following the 2012 floods. The program should be evaluated to learn how the region can keep the basic infrastructure of this program in place and how other groups can duplicate it or enhance it so that it can be remobilized even quicker in the aftermath of a future disaster. Micro loans should be explored as a source of assistance immediately following a disaster. Regional economic development funds, revolving loan funds and additional commercial lenders should examine their capacity and adopt disaster recovery lending programs that could be enacted immediately after future disasters. B. Maximize Planning and Zoning for Disaster Mitigation, Response, Recovery and Resiliency. 1. Land Use Planning: Decisions made before and after a disaster affect the resiliency and recovery of a community in the event of a disaster. Communities that integrate disaster resiliency into land use planning and development decisions can mitigate potential disaster impacts by: a. Integrating a hazard element into Comprehensive Plans, either as a stand-alone section or in discussion of other plan sections such as housing, infrastructure, and economic development. b. Assessing disaster vulnerability of sites in development plans. c. Encouraging development in less hazardous areas. d. Minimizing or mitigating vulnerable types of development in hazardous areas. e. Reducing disaster vulnerability through land use and zoning regulations. 2. Economic Development Planning. Recovery dictates long term success. The return of jobs, tourism, and capital investments are dependent on housing recovery, infrastructure restoration, environmental restoration, and social service provision. Communities should integrate disaster resiliency into economic development planning by: a. Assessing the unique needs and challenges for small businesses, large employers, economic diversification, and workforce/residents in the face of a disaster. b. Prioritizing economic development projects that are disaster resilient and fill a need in the post disaster community. c. Encouraging all physical projects to address disaster resiliency in the planning stage. 3. Infrastructure and Public Facilities: Restoration of infrastructure and public facilities is a prerequisite for recovery. Communities should prioritize long term infrastructure needs to take advantage of opportunity to upgrade, mitigate, or relocate infrastructure following a disaster. In the rush to rebuild, communities should be prepared to avoid repeating mistakes or missing opportunities to develop systems that will serve their residents and businesses better in the future. A disaster resiliency factor should be added to routine capital project planning. 4. Planning and Recovery Facilitation: To support community planning for and recovery from disasters, ARDC is available to work with communities on a project basis to: a. Offer a forum to convene diverse stakeholders and facilitate discussion and planning initiatives around the issues of economic resiliency and preparedness. b. Provide communities and businesses with regional demographic and economic data, hazard vulnerability and mitigation data, and disaster impact data. c. Establish familiarity with economic and community recovery funding sources and programs. d. Explore how ARDC’s revolving loan fund can be used to assist disaster impacted businesses. C. Improve information cataloging for long - term recovery and resiliency ARDC found that a lack of a one - stop portal for information on the evolving economic impact of the disaster is a challenge to long term planning and recovery efforts. A one - stop data repository may be best set up at the county and state levels. An up – to - date data repository can be useful for: • Developing and securing funding for recovery and resiliency programs and assessing the effectiveness of mitigation programs. (TIF districts, redevelopment programs, business continuity planning) • Establishing baseline to assess the long -term issues presented by future disasters in the region or elsewhere in the state. • Developing new local, regional, and state policies and programs. • Developing disaster profiles for use in community planning. • Developing tools and metrics for evaluating progress against set goals, objectives and milestones.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Population, Economy, Land Use: Lake Superior Basin Water Quality Management Plan Non-Metro Minnesota Portion
    (1974-06) Arrowhead Regional Development Commission
    This report examines the population, economy, and land use in the Minnesota non-metropolitan part of the Lake Superior Basin. Its objective is to evaluate existing land use problems and proposed development plans and socio-economic forecasts in terms of their relationships to water quality and water resources so that these plans and forecasts can be modified, if necessary, to correlate with water quality related considerations. The report also incorporates information on the area's hydrology and water quality and the status of wastewater treatment facilities. This is intended to provide a frame of reference for estimating future wastewater treatment needs, their costs, staging and priorities. Other objectives of the report are to identify the trends and parameters of growth; to identify the water quality implications of existing development patterns and trends; to identify development issues and conflicts; all to provide a basis for the continuing water quality plan and strategy for the Region.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Arrowhead Regional Report (1971-06)
    (1971-06) University-Community Program for Planning and Development in the Arrowhead Region; Arrowhead Regional Development Commission
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Arrowhead Regional Report (1971-07)
    (1971-07) University-Community Program for Planning and Development in the Arrowhead Region; Arrowhead Regional Development Commission