01-28-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JANUARY 14, 1991 LMCD SHORELAND REGULATIONS CONTINUED Callahan stated that is wis h'.s b?lief that she would attend. Mr. Nor.Ti Puurus, who had at one ti.T.e served as Chairman for the LMCD, stated that the D\R and LMCD nave triad over the last three years to get the communities to agree to a plan. He said, "The plan was a consensus. The difficulty is t.hat tne DNR, by legislation, must impose their shoreline regulations. If the cities have no other proposals or alternatives, they will end up with the DNR regulations. The Metropolitan Council has given the authority to impose them, if the cities cannot reath another agreement. That is not a threat, that is a practical reality. The LMCD and DNR tried as best they could, but met v/ith the same arguments regarding develop.ment versus conservation. I believe that the Orono Council is going to be compelled to make some tough choices." Callahan stated that he strongly felt that the LMCD should not beco.me involved in regulating the shoreline. He said, "The aspect of becoming involved in sooreland m inagement is an extension of a very bad pnilosophy in tne LMCD Plan. That seems to be the opinion of a majority of governing oodles and residents around the lakeshore." Jabbour added that because of other bodies of water within the City, that Orono must adopt the DNR Shoreland Management regulations anyway. He said, "It makes no sense for us to adopt the DNR's regulations and then duplicate that by adopting the LMCD Plan for Lake Minnetonka. W.? feel that is repetitious and a waste of our time. If the City finds no philosophical differences between our existing regulations and the DNR's, we can adopt them for the entire City and be done with it." Bernhardson stated that Councilmember Jabbour*s earlier question regarding approval from adjacent cities does require further researcn. He said, "There la a questi^ii as to whethei it is a vote of LMCD from the adjacent municipality t.hat constitutes an acceptablt; substitute for sjch approval. Tiiere is also a question, if we were to proceed separately, whether the DNR's interpretation of all 14 communities constitute adjacent municipalities that are impacted by the variance.." Jabbour said, "I would be willing to know the answers as soon as possible. Is there a diversion between our existing code and that of the DNR’s? Are wo going to be asking for exceptions?" Bernhardson stated that he Mabusth and Michael Gaffron regulations. has been working with Jeanne in reviewing t!ie shoreland - 9 -