07-23-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

C: Metro Council's further review. (The thrust of the City's comments in disc*.submission of this document to Metro Counci' - =erring to the "final review submission" bi* Council not the informational submission back ; » April.) To illustrate the City's point on clarity of authority there was still confusion on this point as to the exact role Metro Council had in its review at the Advisory Committee, June 28th meeting, when it was not clear by the consultant as to what effect Metro Council and its review would have. Thrust of Plan - The basic tenant of the plan is to develop means of increased regulation as the density increases. The plan however, did not address the following: Basis for Determining Density - The plan does not soecifically outline methology used as the basis for determining the density which is central to triggery the reviews. Issues include whether it is; a.) peak density or "average" peak, b.) total acres or "useable" acres, c.) how surveys are done (weekdays, weekends, nights, morning, afternoons, type of weather etc.) Once the consultant is no longer with LMCD does LMCD know how it will be determined. (Page 50 cites the busiest day 2,256 active boats 6.2 density - useable is 5.2. It goes on to state the average peak is 8.0 density but not methodology for determining it.) Active Promotion Versus _Reg u I a tion - In addition on ■the”thrust of the^plan the consultant has indicated the plan is not an active promotion of any powers that currently do not exist for LMCD, but a coordinated effort with LMCD regulating growth. Whenever an agency however, takes on as an objective for action an item, whether they have authority or not, this becomes a goal to which they work to attain. The "promotion by saying they are going to establish such goals for access is a different thrust than stating that there are these issues out there, there are other "actors with authority relating to them and that the LMCD will exercise its authority to appropriately control when they come into play. It should also be stated what activities, as far as access points that they specifically do not control. Review Process - Orono did participate in the process and provided substantial comments from August thru February to the initial separate drafts. In fact, the jresent public review document reflects suggestions made by this city in those reviews. Regardless of whether the city participated or not, the plan still needs to be abundantly clear on points so that those in the future