Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />B. EXCESS FUNDS IN PLANNING AREA ALLOCATIONS <br /> <br />In previous years, the Council has also recommended: <br /> <br />"That in the event any policy planning area has unused funds after all <br />quality projects (over 60 percent) are funded, the excess shall be <br />redistributed to the other planning areas in proportion to the <br />planning area allocation percentages." <br /> <br />Staff received no comments from applicants regarding this policy. It was <br />not used in FY '82 as there was no excess funds in the planning areas. <br />However, this policy is reasonable under appropriate circumstances. Staff <br />recommends that it be retained for FY '83 grants. <br /> <br />C. BOAT LAUNCH PRIORITY <br /> <br />In an attempt to meet the demand for more boat launch sites on lakes in the <br />region, the Council, Minn. Dept. of Energy, Planning and Development <br />(formerly State Planning Agency) and Dept. of Natural Resources implemented <br />a cooperative program in 1979. A top priority for LAWCON/LCMR grants was <br />given to boat launch projects for FY '80, '81 and '82 grant cycles. In FY <br />'80 five projects were programmed to receive a total of $232,725 <br />LAWCON/LCMR funds. In FY '81 only two out of four projects received were <br />funded with $154,875. The two remaining projects, both.on Lake Minnetonka, <br />did not receive grants as one was done with other funds which prevented it <br />from being open to the public on weekends, and the other project did not <br />meet adequate parking space requirements. In FY '82, two applications were <br />submitted and both were withdrawn. The withdrawals were due to: <br /> <br />The owner of the proposed access site on Lake Lucy in Chanhassen <br />changed his. mind and decided not to sell. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />The Roseville City Council refused to approve development by Ramsey <br />County of a boat launch on Lake Josephine, due to lakeshore owner <br />opposition. <br /> <br />Although there is little that the Metropolitan Water Access Task Force can <br />do in regard to an unwilling seller, Task Force members feel that some <br />steps can and should be taken where access projects are stopped due to <br />lakeshore owner opposition. For instance, a citizen's advisory group was <br />formed on the Ramsey County Beach/Access project on White Bear Lake after <br />citizens expressed their concerns about the project. This approach gave <br />affected citizens--both lakeshore owners and the general public--a forum to <br />discuss concerns and come up with solutions to problems. Consequently, the <br />project was approved. This type of balanced decision-making is one way to <br />provide needed public access sites without the usual polarization of public <br />attitudes which often lead to failure. <br /> <br />In some cases, local comunities may decide not to go ahead and develop an <br />access on their own and let the DNR do it instead. The information derived <br />from the decision-making process can be used by the DNR in properly <br />developing the access. <br /> <br />The Task Force feels that local governments should have an opportunity to <br />provide and consequently control some access sites. The reasons for this <br />recommendation are: <br /> <br /> <br />