PRECM 01-07-1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• ~""~"~ ~ C +(~, h t .t~ L Q ~1 ~Gi. .5 While parks and open space represent leisure and tun to most citizens, adop- tion of a new regional recreation open space policy plan represented a major Council work effort in 1980. The plan estimates the outdoor recrea- tion needs of the Metropolitan Area to the year 2000 and selects park facilities to meet those needs. When it is trans- . formed from paper to reality, citizens will find 11 more parks and six more park reserves than the system now con- tains. The plan also calls for extensive development of the regional park sites. The plan contains several major ele- ments that distinguish it from the 1974 park plan, which it replaced: The capital improvement program (C1P) included in the new plan calls for expenditures of some $31 million for acyuisition and development in 1981- 82. However, the Council is now work- ing with the implementing agencies to cut the CIP total down to the range suggested by the state llepartment of Finance, $22.5 to $27.5 million. Good parks benefit virtually everyone and are a major factor in the high "yuality of life" of this Region. The increasing cost and scarcity of gasoline make it even more urgent that a "near- in" regional park system be completed and readily accessible to the half of the state's people who live in the Seven- County Area. [t sets forth policies on providing levels of regional recreational facil- ities and levels of costs to taxpayers that are equitable throughout the Metropolitan Area. Policy 22 says the parks should have consistent basic operating policies and a stable and equitable method of financing their operation and maintenance. 2. [t limits the number of implementing agencies, which own and operate the regional parks, to 10: the seven counties and the cities of St. Paul, Minneapolis and Bloomington. 3. It changes the status of several park sites from the earlier plan: -Hampton Woods, St. Francis Hills and Mississippi Islands are dropped. - The regional parks of Lake Minnetonka, Anoka County Riverfront, and the Mississippi Gorge, plus aspecial-use facility to provide public access to Lake Minnetonka, are added. - Six regional sites are. reclassified: Big Marine Lake, Miesville Ravine and Upper Grey Cloud Island from parks to park reserves; Grass-Vadnais, South Washington County and Lebanon Hills from park reserves to parks. About t 3,500 acres remain to be ac- quired to complete the system. Most of the newly acquired lands remain to be developed. Besides acquisition and development funding, which the Council provides, funding operations and maintenance of the regional park system has become a significant problem. While the Council does not plan to recommend a shift from local financing of these costs in 1981, it expects to recommend doing so in the 1982 session. Concern on the part of implementing agencies about this increasing tax burden has become a major impediment to implementation of the regional park system. Enmeshed in this issue is a key Council goal for the system: to achieve an equitable distribution of regional parks around the Metropolitan Area. The western portion of the Area is much further along and moving at a more rapid pace than the eastern section. Local funding overlooks the fact that as a regional facility, the park may be needed primarily for residents of other counties. Also at issue is equity. The amount of tax money paid by each citizen annually in the Metropolitan Area for regional park operations varies widely, from 99 cents to $15.50. The Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission helped the Council develop the new plan and advises the Council in carrying out the regional system through review of implementing agency plans and grant requests.- The Council has granted $82 million since 1974 to buy and develop regional parklands under the 1974 Metropolitan Parks Act. Minn. Slat., secs. 473.301-473.341 (1978). Nuu~y t„u.....y,..,,,,, uy t Metropolitan Solid Wast Slat., secs. 473.801- 47 That plan recognized the diminishing landfill capa priorities that emphasize lion, waste recycling, an recovery. In support of the Counc' Legislature passed the 1 Management Act, a toug provide the rpachinery t done. It contains enforc and deals with both soli waste as well as sewage s Minn. haws 1980, cl:. S The law authorizes spen million for waste manag ning, site selection and a for demonstration prole The law requires selectiu lion of: at least one site waste in the state by J u for chemical processing, and temporarily storing wastes; sites for landfills politan Area to handle t and other solid wastes h and sites for the Area's s ment residues -one. for and one for screenings, erator ash. In addition, plans to reduce and reus fewer land disposal facil In the months since flee the Council has stayed ca meeting its assigned rest In 1980, the ('uunril - Completed a repast t the needed landfill ds in the Metropolitan now and the. yeas :O( Developed a grant ati the seven metruprlil, fund county-level pi tify four potential ,a sites and one drmuli lion debris landfill si county. - Held well-attended p to review sludge. and siting issues with the law requires the Cou three candidate sites three candidate sites 1981. - Completed a disposa report that estimate lion, recycling, proc source recovery, the