Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br /> Has development proceeded at an appropriate rate, too fast, or too slowly? <br /> Are developments being placed in the right areas? Are the right kinds of <br /> developments being built and are the priorities appropriate? <br /> The system has given priority to acquisition over development. Is that <br /> still a correct point of view, or should development receive higher <br /> priority than it now has? <br /> What measurements should the Council use in addressing questions about <br /> rate of development? What are the important questions to answer? <br /> ISSUE 3. How should priorities be set for the recreation open space capital <br /> improvement program. <br /> As part of its task in establishing a CIP for regional recreation open space, <br /> the Council has established a priority list. Six categories, which correspond <br /> to demands identified in the Council "s recreation resource program, are as <br /> follows: <br /> A - Region-wide functions necessary for continuing the system. <br /> B - Acquisition of parcels critical to completion of the planned system. <br /> C - Development of certain facilities including: <br /> o Deteriorated high use facilities; <br /> o Essential components of'a high priority project; <br /> o Projects in areas with gross service deficiencies; and • <br /> o Public access to high quality resources. <br /> D - Specifically designated (by Metropolitan Council ) regional trails and <br /> special uses. <br /> E - Support facilities which provide no direct service to users. <br /> F - Lower priority acquisitions and developments. <br /> The list is used to assign priority but is not absolute in itself. Experience <br /> has shown that (1) all the high priority projects in the CIP cannot be accom- <br /> plished in a single biennium, and (2) not all projects in any category are <br /> immediately ready. Some can only be accomplished in the more distant future. <br /> Hence, some category "D" projects, ready immediately, may be funded despite the <br /> fact that there are unfinished category "B" projects. Projects receive prior- <br /> ity both by the category to which they are assigned and by the biennium to <br /> which they are allocated. <br /> A separate priority process is used for projects after the Council finds out <br /> what funds are available for a specific biennium. At that time, an implementa- <br /> tion plan shows, as specifically as possible, when each project is to be funded <br /> in the time period according to anticipated revenues. The implementation plan <br /> is adopted by the Council yearly to reflect available capital . <br /> Revisions to both the CIP and implementation plan are made following consulta- <br /> tion by the commission and the Council with implementing agencies and other • <br /> interested persons, preparation of a draft for hearing, a public hearing, <br /> preparation of responses to comments at the hearing, and preparation of a final <br /> draft which is considered and adopted by the Council following commission and <br /> Council recommendations. <br />