Regional Recreation Planning In Kent County N.b. Canada

Introduction - Many authors (Gold, 1980; Coyler, MacGowan & Skinner, 1997; Nogradi, 2000; Soubrier, 2000; Reid, 2001; Reid, Mair & George, 2004; Choy & Prineas, 2006) have looked at different approaches to planning for leisure, recreation, and tourism. Canadian municipalities developed Master plans for the past 50 years and New Brunswick implemented a leadership program financing such studies in the late 80s. Although a great deal of attention has been given to local planning (municipalities), regional planning has yet to obtain that kind of interest. The Province of New Brunswick took a step in that direction in 2014 when it implemented a program to encourage the new Regional Service Commissions to undertake regional recreation planning. The Kent Regional Service Commission decided to engage in such a planning process in collaboration with its 30 communities that account for a population of 33,000 residents. This paper describes the process and presents the results included in this regional master plan. Approach - The recreational needs assessment process involves analyzing the current situation (CS) and desired future state (DFS), and then identifying the need (DFS-CS) and the required actions based on the recommendations. To achieve this, we visited some 120 facilities of all types (sports, tourism and culture) in order to assess their condition (functional, secure, accessible, and esthetic) and we developed an online survey administered to the Kent County population. A questionnaire was also sent via email to a number of the region’s associations to create a profile of their financial and human resources, clientele, funding, and challenges. Several consultation meetings (27) were held in each of the communities located in the Kent RSC’s Greater Areas. Conclusions - We found that the facilities are aging and that some of them are lacking in accessibility. The wish list of new facilities includes an arena, a pool and, a trail. As for usage levels, arenas and community centers are the most popular facilities, followed by trails and regional tourist attractions. The organizations told us about their challenges, which involve funding, volunteer management, and better regional cooperation and collaboration. Concerning communications, the more traditional methods of reaching the public, like newspaper ads and church bulletins, are still used, but contemporary methods like Facebook and websites are increasingly popular. Kent residents’ recreation participation rates are similar to other Canadians in terms of type of activity and frequency. Walking, hiking, gardening, and biking top the list. Participation in “passive” activities, such as tablet and computer use, is very high. In terms of governance, the public wants to professionalize the field by hiring a recreation director. They also want to have volunteers better supported. The public would like to be consulted and guided throughout the facility development process and the concept of a fair funding formula is very important. These needs were rewritten in the form of 19 recommendations on governance, facilities, and programs and services.

Acessar