My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-22-1990 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1990
>
10-22-1990 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/10/2025 11:17:13 AM
Creation date
2/10/2025 11:15:22 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
448
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
RESPONSE TO ORONO'S <br />SEPTEMBER 19, 1990 LETTER <br />The first main points in their letter of September 19, 1990 is: <br />ft OCT I 9B90 <br />1 The plan concentrates LMCD's focus away from environmental protection and <br />preservation. <br />Sub-points; <br />a. It is not a plan for LMCD, but for some other agency to implement <br />b. Some plan goals are contrary to environmental and aesthetic <br />interests, e.g., it accentuates land use development on the lake <br />for recreation without considering its effect on the lake. <br />RESPONSE: <br />Throughout its more than 20-year history, the LMCD has not been first and <br />foremost an agency concerned with environmental protection and preservation. <br />These goals are among the most important, but the LMCD has spent as much or more <br />of its efforts on Recreation use of the lake (Chapter II of the plan; User <br />experience, satisfaction, and public safety (Chapter III of the plan; and <br />overall management issues (Chapter VI of the plan). Environmental protection <br />and preservation are the subject of Chapters IV and V of the plan. <br />We should not forget that the fundamental environmental protections for <br />Lake Minnetonka in the future are contained especially in the Shoreland <br />Management Chapter (IV). Without those protections, the quality of Lake <br />Minnetonka cannot be maintained at anything close to what it is today. <br />Orono states that this is not a plan for <br />implement. That simply is not true. Examine <br />plan proposes <br />1 . <br />the LMCD, but someone else to <br />the alternatives against what <br />2. <br />In order to fully implement the plan, the following organ i zations must <br />work together: <br />14 lakeshore convnunities <br />LMCD <br />Watershed District <br />Suburban Hennepin Regional Parks <br />H<»*^nepin County <br />Meiropvttian Council <br />Metropolitan Access Conunittee <br />Pollution Control Agency <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />Department of Trade and Economic Development <br />If only one agency were to implement this plan alone, whether the LMCD <br />or any other agency, it would have to usurp at least i:*ine of the powers <br />of each of these same organ i zations. That is not desirable, practical <br />or reasonable. Not or the LMCD or anyone else. <br />Orono further states that the plan accentuates land use chatiqes for <br />recreation use without considering the consequences. The plan maintains that <br />the future threats to the lake are from development ami redevelopment of the <br />lake for residential and commercial purposes. The plan supports additional <br />parks on the lake and more access ramps. And it is impoi taut to note that parks <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.