Loading...
2. PCSR 10-12-2004 /i City of Elk River MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michele McPherson, Director of Planning DATE: October 12, 2004 SUBJECT: Workshop Agenda Discuss Format and Purpose of Workshop Meetings Discuss Motion-Making Related Attachments: • An Introduction to Planning—Citizen Planner Handbook • Findings of Fact—Citizen Planner Handbook • The Planning Universe—Planning Staff Currently, the workshop meetings are utilized as an opportunity for the Planning Commission to provide input and guidance on development proposals, and to review conceptually and in draft form ordinance amendments to the Subdivision and Zoning Codes. The Commission should decide if these activities are appropriate and satisfactory use of the Commission's time. Of particular concern is the review of concept plans. Staff has observed during discussions with Scott Breuer and Orrin Thompson the lack of forthright or even blunt assessments of the concept plans submitted by these developers. Both projects received,by all appearances, positive support from the Commission during the concept reviews, only to receive a recommendation of denial once the item is before the Commission during the public hearing. Staff and the applicants invest time, and on the part of the applicant,money,preparing plans based on feedback from the Commission. It is important that the Commission evaluate the concept plans using the same criteria for a"real" plan and provide critical comment to the applicant. Planning Commission should consider two options in regards to concept plan review: Planning Commission Workshop October 12,2004 Page 2 1. Discontinue reviewing concept proposals on large development tracts and see them only at the public hearing, or 2. Provide a more structured review of such concept plans and provide critical feedback for the applicant. An example of structure would be: A. Allow the Commission to "establish a vision" for the parcel in question prior to reviewing a concept plan; B. Prepare a "cheat sheet" of analytical questions and issues that the Commission can consider when reviewing a concept plan;and C. Discuss the plan openly and,if needed, bluntly with the applicant. Staff is looking for direction from the Commission in regards to how it feels the worksessions function. Information regarding findings of fact and motion making is attached for your reference. Please remember that you are making recommendations, not actually approving projects. Consider Revised River Park Concept Related Attachments: River Park Concept Plan, October 7, 2004 River Park Concept Plan, September 20, 2004 As the Planning Commission is aware, the City Council, at the request of Orrin Thompson— the applicant, has remanded the River Park development plan back to the Planning Commission for further consideration. Attached please find the most recent revision of the proposed development. The revised development contains 497 dwelling units Concept Plan 9/20 Concept Plan 10/7 Units Total Units 608 497 Single family 328 320 Townhouse 280 177 Public Space Total acres 26.7 27.2 Park/School/Fire 22.5 22.5 South park 4.2 4.7 Acres Preserved Woods 0.0 5.6 S:\PLANNING\Michele McPherson\PLREPRTS\10 12 04 PC workshop.doc An Introduction to Manning Chapter 1 0 l 6. 188 This chapter of the manual will address the following topics: r What is Planning? * Why We Plan ^* The Planning Process/Concept r Authority to Plan "• References for more reading on the topic of planning concepts What Is Planning? Webster's Dictionary defines planning as "the act of making or carrying out plans; the establishment of goals,policies and procedures for a social or economic unit" Community planning is often described as an ongoing attempt to guide future development and redevelopment of a neighborhood, city, town, county or region in order to promote the public health, safety, and welfare. Why Po We Plan? Communities plan in an attempt to manage change. Change occurs in all communities, regardless of size and location. Sometimes change means population growth, for others it may be declining or changing demographics. Change could mean growing residential areas, commercial and industrial development, increased traffic, etc. It can also take the form of deteriorating neighborhoods, decline of downtowns, and loss of employment. Sometimes change occurs as a result of internal forces, other times it is driven by external decisions and factors. So, communities make plans to deal with change. Even communities that Minnesota Planning Association Citizen Planner Handbook Introduction Page 1 Introduction want to remain the same as they are today have to plan to deal with change--otherwise, outside forces will dictate the development of their communities. Don't worry, as a planning commissioner you will not be expected to deal with all of the facets of change, at least not right of way. Most planning commissions have three areas of concentration: NOLS 1. Development of the community's comprehensive plan 2. Creating and maintaining land use plans 3. Planning for capital improvements and/or special projects Larger communities may have other boards or commissions that get involved in planning the future of the community. Examples of these include park boards, downtown associations, economic development authorities, housing authorities, etc. Planning Process Figure 1 shows the basic planning process that is used when trying to address a problem or an issue: Define The Issue /4 Evaluate Identify Plan's Available j Effectiveness Options Implement Help ' the Chosen *in Choose Best Solution Solution(s) Figure 1 The Planning Process Problem Identification: In order to be effective at planning, commissioners need to make sure they address the right problems. Sometimes the problem is obvious, such as the need for new land and Minnesota Planning Association Citizen Planner Handbook Introduction Page 2 Introduction utilities to support development. Other times, one problem may be based on another, such as downtown or neighborhood deterioration. Identify Options: There is usually more than one solution to any given problem. Commissioners should seek out a reasonable range of solutions, and give them all due consideration. Even ideas that sound a bit "wacky" at first may have merit, and could prove to be the best option available. , I 0 t Help Choose the Best Option: Because most planning decisions affect the entire community, it is important that the public have a meaningful opportunity to participate in the decision making process. The planning commission plays an important role in the citizen participation process. Implementation: Once the best solution has been chosen, the community needs to implement it. The planning commission would play a role here too--developing policies, ordinances (for example, zoning regulations) and administrative procedures for carrying out the necessary actions. Evaluation: It is important that the commission evaluate the effectiveness of the solutions that were implemented. Did it work, or not? If not, what went wrong or what happened instead of what was anticipated? Will a different option work better, or does the community need to redefine the problem? The cycle continues. Authority to Flan Believe it or not, land use planning is considered to be an exercise of the police powers of the state. Therefore, City, Township and County planning is based on state law (often called enabling legislation). Under enabling legislation, planning is supposed to begin with an analysis of community needs and goals which are then formulated into a Comprehensive Plan. The comprehensive plan then becomes the guiding policy for community development, and the zoning ordinance and other land use regulations must be based on this comprehensive plan. There will be more discussion later in this book about the need for comprehensive plans and the important relationship between it and land use regulations. Minnesota Planning Association Citizen Planner Handbook Introduction Page 3 Introduction In Summary The Planning Commission Is an Appointed Advisory Body Which: ► researches, studies, and generates ideas on planning issues in order to guide community land use planning Notes °�► serves as a feedback mechanism to inform the governing body what citizens want and where the best long-range interests of the community lie + evaluates information from staff, other public agencies, and testimony gathered in public hearings regarding development proposals, ordinance amendments, capital improvements, and other land use issues in order to make recommendations to the governing body + supports its decisions with findings of fact based on the health, safety and welfare of citizens, and guided by the Comprehensive Plan + receives its charge from state enabling legislation REFERENCES FOR MORE READING Some excellent resources to read on the basic concepts of planning include: The Citizen's Guide to Planning, by Herbert H. Smith, Planner's Press, Chicago, IL Journal of the American Planning Association, a monthly publication by the APA. ( _ Minnesota Planning Association Citizen Planner Handbook Introduction Page 4 Findings Of Fact Chapter 11 The Planning Commission's decisions must be based on facts submitted at the public hearing and recorded in the minutes. Facts are also included in staff reports which should be made part of the minutes by reference. Planning Commissioners must always remember that any matter before them could be litigated. They must apply the facts of each agenda item to the applicable law, normally the standards in the ordinance. Based upon this application of facts to the law, the Commission must find reasons or rationale upon which their decision to recommend approval or denial is based. These reasons or rationale are referred to as Findings of Fact. There must be an adequate factual basis in the record to support the legal reasons for the decision. Therefore, these findings must be clearly stated and recorded in the minutes in order to support the decision in the event that the action is legally challenged. Valid bases for findings include: A. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and it will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property. B. The proposed change is consistent with the land use map. C. The proposed zone change is appropriate because an error was made when drawing the original boundaries on the zoning map. D. The proposed use will not endanger, injure or detrimentally affect the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity. E. With the conditions placed upon it, the proposed project will not contaminate groundwater. F. Strict adherence to the zoning ordinance would impose an unnecessary hardship on the property owner. Minnesota Planning Association Citizen Planner Handbook Finding of Fact Page 48 The following reasons are not valid bases for findings: Findings of Fact A. The proposed use is better than what is there now. B. The property is vacant now (weed patch, dust blowing, etc.) and this use will improve it. 110tris C. You can't keep a landowner from using his/her land. D. This proposal will bring in more revenue to the city. E. The owner can't sell or lease it with the present zoning. F. The owner can get more money for the property if it s rezoned. G. The neighbors do not like the proposal. Without adequate findings of fact, the local government can be sued in a court of law, and their decision will likely be overturned or sent back to them for reconsideration. The courts will look at the case in the following light: 1. Is the law clear in its requirements and expectations? 2. Does the record show that the findings of fact represent testimony and information considered by the governing body? 3. Is there a reasonable connection between the findings of fact, the ordinance(s) and the action taken by the governing body? Minnesota Planning Association Citizen Planner Handbook Finding of Fact Page 49 Parliamentary f roced u re Chapter 12 ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER 110teS Planning Commission proceedings are conducted in accordance with Robert's Rules of Order to provide for standard procedures, avoid confusion, ensure a fair hearing for everyone, and to protect citizens rights. ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Call to order: The Chairperson says, "The meeting will please come to order." 2. Establish a quorum: In order to conduct business legally, a certain number of commissioners must be present. The number for a quorum is stated in the city/county/township ordinance. 3. Approval of Agenda: The meeting agenda is approved, either as presented or as amended. 4. Minutes: The minutes of the previous meeting are approved, either as presented, or`as amended. 5. Agenda Items: The Commission works through its agenda of public hearing items, discussion items, training, information, etc. 6. Announcements: Announcements are made. 7. Adjournment: The meeting ends by a vote. HOW TO MAKE A MOTION 1. To obtain the floor, a commissioner says, "Mr./Madam Chairperson". The Chairperson recognizes the speaker by name. 2. To make a motion, say, "I move that we...". 3. To obtain a second, wait for another commissioner to say, "I second the motion". 4. The Chairperson then says, "It is moved and seconded that °'I we...". He/she then says, "Is there any discussion?". e Discussion may now occur. (At this point, your motion has Minnesota Planning Association Citizen Planner Handbook Parliamentary Procedure Page 50 Parliamentary Procecl u re become property of the entire Commission, and you cannot change it without the consent of the Commission. 5. The Chairperson then asks, "Are you ready for the question?". If yes, he/she says, "All in favor of the motion say `aye ". Then, "All opposed, say `no ". motes 6. If a majority of the commissioners vote in favor of the motion, the Chairperson says, "The motion carries". If a majority are opposed, he/she says "The motion is lost (fails)". 7. To withdraw a motion: Before it has been repeated by the Chairperson, the maker of a motion may withdraw it. After it has been repeated by the Chairperson, the maker may withdraw it, if no one objects. 8. To amend a motion before a vote has been taken, a motion may be amended by saying, "I move to amend the motion by " The Commission then votes on the amendment before discussing and voting on the original motion. 9. To end debate and call for a vote on the motion say, "I move the previous question". After the motion is seconded, the Chairperson says, "Shall the main question be now put?". No discussion is allowed on this motion, and it requires a 2/3 vote to carry. If the motion carries, all debate instantly stops and the Chairperson calls for a vote on the previous question/motion. 10. To complain about conditions such as heat, noise,etc., say, "I raise a question of privilege". This is a device that permits a commissioner to bring up an urgent matter for consideration immediately. You may interrupt a speaker with this device; you do not need a second; there is no debate, and no vote is taken. Minnesota Planning Association Citizen Planner Handbook Parliamentary Procedure Page 51 THE PLANNING UNIVERSE PLANNING STAFF Understand What Your oped by you and your predeces- agency should be managed.You Planning Staff Does sors. should have more than enough to do studying the issues and Planning commissioners may Your job is to temper their rec- making policy decisions. ... well be unaware of the amount ommendations with information of time that staff spends in deal- developed during the hearing Control your public behavior. ing with major or controversial which was not available to the Never be guilty of berating, requests.Staff may have met staff. It is not unusual for a staff downgrading or insulting the and talked numerous times with to voluntarily reverse or change staff at a public meeting. Yes,it neighbors and the applicant to the details of its recommenda- can be embarrassing if citizens resolve the issues. In essence, tion during the course of a hear- point out apparent errors in staff staff often "lives and breathes" ing' reports or presentations. The these requests for months at a public meeting,however,is not time. r q From, "The Riggins Rules, #30 the place to find out what hap- ly 31"by Fred Riggins (PCJ pened or why... in most cases, From, `Planning from Different #13) a quiet discussion with staff Perspectives,"by Carolyn L. away from the public can work Braun (PC]#24) A Working Relationship out seeming discrepancies or g P disagreements. Don't forget that the staff is Effective staff/commission rela- Reward good work. A simple there to help you in any way tions are vital to the overall suc- "thank you--you did a great possible. It s composed of very cess of planning in your com- job last night before that group P P ry munity,whether your planning of hostile homeowners" can be capable professional people with agency has one, ten, or one just the right comment to uplift vast experience. Lean on them hundred employees. Good will a harassed lannin staff when heavily. They can pull you out and an understanding of the it a ears the whole town has of many a bad spot if you give pitfalls that impede sound rela- taken up arms against them. sit and let chance.. Othey o do problems tionships can help you solve any Take your planning director to problems that may arise. lunch. Praise a particular piece not give them the respect which P P is their due. Remember that Resist the temptation to "micro- of staff work at a public meet- their usual practice is to remain manage." After you have been ing. ... There are all manner of silent unless they are specifically on the job any time at all,you ways you can--and should -- asked to comment. Most of will become more familiar with reward your often overworked them consider it presumptuous and undervalued planners. p p planning jargon,and the rules and unprofessional to inject any and regulations of your com- There will always be some ten- unsolicited comments into the munity, than most citizens. Still, sion between commissioners hearings.Always ask them to you are not expected to be a and staff; you have different re- comment prior to the final vote. professional planner. Indeed, sponsibilities and, often, differ- you not take staff recommenda- you would be less effective as a ent perspectives. But the sooner [ions It take These recommenda- citizen planning commissioner you can develop a creative part- if you were. nership and the more you can dations are made after much P -- Y study by professional people Even if you are a successful pro- nurture it-- the better it will be with years of experience in their fessional or businessperson, it is for everyone. field and are based on pertinent not appropriate to try to tell the From, "Staff Needs a Little TLC, laws, ordinances,regulations, planning director whom to hire Too!,"by Elaine Cogan (PCJ#3) policies, and practices devel- or fire or how you think the COUNTY ROAD 13 . ________./.. WM „.: . * .figiri_ 40,4,;114/1 SCHOOL la, �i - ,`rrq,l I� 111 1' SITE??? ; ,,;,.�� 1ME /MEI 1 , //C . #;.*** 1111 Inn MN 4)6 44 411 ter► MI NM, '\ ** .''''..teatitt:v:* � ■ 40 , la law 4 m. i1s. ,N,H,.ir.E r..,i, iBi/%R,mI_ .asa..fti.a.4.m•mi..,v.il_, I= aw.w4.i.t roo-_..w__iw a vdii m i„lr,a,gii ,Ml , ..A= ,ow III, '- : - 1 O.v1,t a t o SUNSET RIDGE ©-p 7. CONNECTION �• �. � " aw .......... , 1. 1W♦ 01"1 All! 1 /11 .� ♦ M ► ii*k . c ofr 24iiiiIlhi T c :z3 el//7 NI rip ti., .11 141■ ■ III Lit/To:4>i- ... In A6, <::::3 c:2) . . , # -7 am L ---3 1 a for-N■ 104-Apill iv, .,.. .r. . H C H ,-��. it.;c„) ._, f ral H, MIL 110 { � U ! r 5 r F-+ 1 . --- I . ....., .. ,—, ,...-ix., .. „.. ..-......=,„ --- ........./- „.. — -f. ir r ...... .:„..,..,'"?- " --‘1„- ' ".. zr...-,...-...-.... „, r . .- .. ...- I 7 .,---Nio •,17,:-:::-„,:.--,„--, ."-r.is , ■ 2 1^-^ "(-.7",-(4 C'!(' - \ j4 f, t)N - ri VILLAGE TOWNHOMES(TYP.) L_...:-..._ - . .' r If a ,,,,, ■ { i LODGE TOWNHOMES(TYP.) - .44.41. 000066102M004°' LURID 16 ....; 1 I '' ■....__ 4165.61101411111WIL6 1 1,0:i174111' 14,l„15, 4.44* ..0011:01, 14110114 ViV44/ lk,‘,.,Ai.s... ' 1 ",..,,,_ 1.4■47 :, 141401 le_in4, IF : --- .....:f ; ,I) I --'-. UNIVERSITY SINGLE FAMILY(TYP.) —, iii ,...,,,,f,.., ,„4".111 Illk*4:1t 1" i %.• 1 , II it AV 41:47,121,,,w10111 _'*orAiiiiiiiTidgifibti .11:6414111 ", ■ \ :.'" , ‘ HOMESTEAD SINGLE FAMILY(TYP.) 4---..-,--. -., kit - -- ...- \ t.....ir- 3 41.,N ,oktillyi „y to... _,..,. . „.• - ..4.0.-- „awl'444** \ 1 V ''-'.4.1 4, I ' trie 1 .. ,,FNA.Iriglihn1011111%ilk \ 'Y'-'-----''''''''''.- 41et'',/ il‘• --. '11 1-4 400 4 SITE DATA SITE DATA l''' ,)-- nom' 111111 ,. - a €11. ,,,, 40or„,,,,,,r,"" -....„,,, '"s#5), "ektipio ir / ? 34.7 AC SOUTHWEST WETLAND i 3.9 AC MISCELLANEOUS WETLAND OM 5.6 AC PRESERVATION/CONSERVATION AREA! .1,,.... ...... is . , ..4 )• `, 4.2 AC courry ROAD 4CI DEDICATION i , ,..,, • I- — 1.7 AC COUNTY ROAD 13 R.O.W.DEDICATION j....L.J III I „I , ,:,, :,.. 14* ‹....1,,,„„ \.....:‘,. „ .. .... ,....f.,_: 2.3 AC FIRE STATION/WELL SITE t...."'s N",-•'.--, 20.0 AC SCHOOL RITZ/SOUTH PARK i',. ''''1.f.' ' 1111 dlliart, • ra - ■• 4.2 AC NORTH PARK I '-.., 3,.. vigligiab, 1L ''‘,..,.1 1111, Ap. •••-,,,r tor aik,...:„.. 140.7 AC RESIDENTUIL MW STREET AREAS ' ' 111 224.6 AC TOTAL tf,, 0, ■ 74 ----- ,,,..- ..-., ,. RESIDENTIAL TYPES g no rm ''' tti,.. ;-1-7--- :::::::-- _,LN.1-,(e. N 240 UNITS UNIVERSITY SINGLE FAMILYMEERMI ;‘ 1:" iii Ing 88 UNITS HOMESTEAD SINGLE FAMILY(SNIALL) "- -Z.--... ' EX19113i3 III . *4n „„ a ; 7.... 134 UNITS , VILL1WE ATTACHED ROW `s, ' I . ; / fill lip ;4 146 UNITS LODGE ATTACHED MULTIPLEX Iflii 411411 / \ N ill V "f . 111■ 608 UNITS TOTAL Ar ----' eliallir ill tall ■ 7 l 11 ,..,, .... ‘ _ \,...: vi _.,... .„...,...? . . ... „.. , .,... „.. im.e-• \ _.,.......,,,, . ,. , , _. 11, \ Iffili --■ \ t‘ '.•-- \ . k. 11‘ Lig illir fitili 6111111..._111_ _ 1111 1 11111 '\ E4SEMENT ‘..., 4111 1. ow r )4irilt 0 ..i .......,, ,,..,... . ..„.....„...„,:::,.....„ '.„, , , , ,.„.) ; ,. ...., ..,.,,.,./........,...,,..„.„:„__".. . ,,...,:_,...",„ . , Al, i ..,............._ 0 ...?•,>'/...Sg',..”,"..i,......:a. r.. ' 7.:7,4;.;n4.;/":".-''''''%•, '1'.-.' .'''''.... (• ,..„.. '''''.''';'....:47I"'../ .... '',.,'''"i s•---..",T---------- .110.^- -L,'•4:ii'll/ IEMSTING TREE i ., C ANOPY .,^..,,, (r._ L • ,._ 7 • ,,...i....1..,.„.-.N7,'-..' , . ..,:EW.XEI,TSTL,AING * 11V1III Ffrlloii3O 1401° r,l SOUTHWEST ... / 7\ ' ) 4n _,.. N. ,, 40 •., ,. gi I ..... . . 1 ,' - .• ' 4 1, %41, - Nr-, , b 011...kii Ms, „ma -.-=.---- a n ISO 30C 4, ••••■•... ... .......... i'l, - ., XI IF .....1 Is r/ri , 1 ' 1 r 1 , _ LODGE TOWNHOMES '' `I 8-PLEX(TYP.) „ i sr3 JL`i 1I t . s . .,;r., ii 1' .^i: • :l, a s „ a i f , x •----,• I <SITE DATA SITE DATA lit 33.7 AC SOUTHWEST WETLAND AREA I 7.2 AC MISCELLANEOUS WETLANDII:ONAING f A"; "i " �9�i�j 4.2 AC COUNTY ROAD 40 R.O.W.DEDICATION � ! \e9: ,� m 1.7 AC COUNTY ROAD 13 R.O.W.DEDICATION \ � ♦ i 22.5 AC NORTH PARK/SCHOOL/FIRE STATION 1.--- A' t ' 4.7 AC SOUTH PARK ,Nci 'a Pi.�K' 4t r>,. 4 150.6 AC RESIDENTIAL AND STREET AREAS 444.6 AC TOTAL �� fiTATI kN - r ,` 1 i I ,.-- r .. ,.,,,::::::H,:.,,,,,:•,,..:: ,,,:.,i:,,,,:.,: ,: ::,.,,,,,,„,,,,,,,:,„,,,,,,, ,,,, ,,,. . c ,its ,e4 \\11�� RESIDENTIAL TYPES :/,'„://- . l ,. jj • 320 UNITS UNIVERSITY SINGLE FAMILY(MEDIUM) k13�M{ /� •� � I , 53 UNITS VILLAGE TOWNHOMES ROW (fx3i1 �` . ' `� '-. ,, ;' . I� j sa UNITS LODGE TOWNHOMES 8-PLEX ' �l f 1 36 UNITS LODGE TOWNHOMES 4-PLHX � 497 UNITS TOTAL 3 _ .,. �...,- t ...,,,,. \� 1 I S• 1 - ._.. '..s ,,-.---- . y ' � o i .� F.3f#tSTINfi7 t}j "�- __ I i\ _ __:„.-- ,---, FA ii 4;1 :li ooh t _- ' i r � `'` ' -"\--. \ _ - _. ..., ,„,,,,,i , 1 F A. 1//,046 ill 1 tit 5,' 4 � y __ I,` ., ,r, F r .� LODGE TOWNHOMES '. 1\\\ pow mm,,o,........6.,, ,..: < • ''''44:1A14',:: /C\ / f:/.../\,,. . -��� /�?� a 4-PLEX(TYP.} `` ''),</., \ , ,. _,., g 7 1,...,4 7-, fy„., / ',., 71 1.11 ` r..�`r�`. xt cet�r fzt.� r. r. ar<,c1 )"'-,,,,„,,..-'".k ,/fl / ra € . lf .j �ttt A '*SCI h4k:i f taL '- 7. , :.11M(i ��+ `.���� HcTf.A.KU. Er • Y=-" i�'.'%a �.„., 'ors . - O it -<,,,,, i 501, .5D � . _ ! _ I 1 POTENTIAL 1 V I ILLAGE TOWNHOMES ROW (TYP.} --_ ! ! FUTURE PARK I •UNIVERSITY SINGLE FAMILY (TYP.) I f .,. Orrin Thump. Hon1 it • . River Park Wins.19 Elk River, MN October 7, 2004 A few years ago,I attended an APA Mobile Workshop that visited an award-winning transit-oriented Guest development in a commuter rail suburb of a major Midwestern city.As has been the case with almost every such development I've visited,when 1 asked about the zoning codes governing this Commentary: new development I was told that everything that I was admiring had been developed as"Planned Unit Developments",i.e.,as negotiated exceptions to the prevailing zoning codes.In the midst of all of this excellent"smart growth"development,one vacant lot stood out like a sore thumb.When I What is it asked the Planning Director why that plot had not been developed like the others his response was, with Planners "That guy brought me three plans and I rejected them all!"I had to stifle the urge to respond with: and Planned "Why don't you just tell him what you will approve?" Unit Develop-, More recently,I contacted planners in two cities that are noted for their work on Crime Prevention i�" through Environmental Design and asked if they could point me to the CPTED provisions in their ments? zoning codes. In both cases,the response was the same: "We haven't codified our CPTED policies; we prefer to negotiate with developers to incorporate CPTED elements into their designs." Why can't good design principles be codified into municipal zoning ordinances? It's as if the entire planning profession has adopted the attitude that"I don't know how to define good development, but I know it when I see it!" by Steve Elkins. City Councilmember There are a number of problems with this approach.First,from the perspective of an elected official, and former Planning there are no guarantees that the planner's vision will be consistent with the community's vision. By Commissioner in the time a proposed development reaches the Planning Commission or the City Council,the param- Bloomington, MN eters of the PUD have been painstakingly negotiated between Planning Staff and the developer without ever having been vetted by the community. At that point,community representatives can give the proposal thumbs up or thumbs down,and that's about it. Second,the degree of alignment between the development proposal that's brought forth and the community's goals and values is too dependent on the skills and values of the particular planner negotiating the provisions of the PUD. Most of the good smart growth development that I've seen around the country has been driven by a handful of visionary planners who knew what they were doing. They possessed the communication skills needed to sell their vision to their community and the perseverance needed to see their vision executed through to completion. What happens when that visionary moves on? Unless the visionary's insights are codified,there is no assurance that his successors will remain true to the original vision. Moreover,not every community can have an"all star"planner to guide its vision. Without"role model"zoning ordinances to serve as road maps,most municipal smart growth initiatives will fall far short of their potential. Most importantly,zoning ordinances are a city's primary means of communicating its design and development standards to the development community. When an outmoded zoning ordinance advertises performance standards that are not in keeping with the community's current development vision the ambiguity increases the development community's"Entitlement Risk","the risk associ- ated with securing approvals,zoning and permits critical for the project to be built and occupied". The increased risk discourages the development community from pursuing any type of development CONTINUES ON PAGE 6 Planning • Civil En ineerin Bonestroo •Natural and Water g g L Rosene Resources Management Land Surveying • S S O C I AT E S 0 Planning Anderlik& Landscape Architecture • Associates •Park and Recreation Environmental • Planning and Design Engineers&Architects •Geographic Information 7200 Hemlock Lane 20 E Thompson Ave. St.Paul:651-636-4600 Systems(GIS) Minneapolis,MN 55369 St.Paul,MN 55118 St.Cloud;320-251-4553 •Transportation Planning Tel. 763.424.5505 Tel. 651.457.3645 Rochester:5074$2.2100 . •Comprehensive Willmar:320-214-9557 Infrastructure Planning websita wwwdoucksmd tout alma IwmcC'loucloo.ci com and Design www.bonestrop.aom LL.. r.,'. ,e',L,,y., .:.. • nil iii �� n�,'�� i tisflsOH ',.oia as x1 „ „ ... ��4. p lannm ; .. ,., �.• ,AT minnesota Septem•er 20 What is it with Planners and Planned Unit Developments? CONTINUED FROM PAGE 5 on the land in question,let alone forms of development that are consistent with the community's vision. Developers cannot afford to waste their time or capital on project proposals with a low chance of regulatory approval. If an outmoded municipal zoning code specifies a 50'minimum setback,no developer in his right mind is going to waste time developing a pedestrian- friendly design proposal with building entrances set at the sidewalk. Time and time again,developers tell me:"Tell us what you want,and that's what we'll bring you."The appropriate place for us to tell the development community what we want is in carefully considered comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances that are adopted with the consensus of our communities. We'll never get significant volumes of smart growth development until developers can build it"by right"with little risk of disapproval. If cities are,in fact,becoming more receptive to smart growth development patterns(and I think we are),why aren't more of us publishing smart growth zoning codes as an incentive to the development community to bring us smart growth development proposals? First,there are few good model ordinances—APA ought to be helping with this. There are more and more good examples out there all the time,but finding one that's appropriate for your community is still a hit or miss proposition. Second,I believe that many city staffs like forcing developers through the PUD process,because it provides leverage to negotiate concessions such as additional right of way for street improvements. Finally,we cannot discount the fact that the PUD process creates the ideal form of government for the visionary planner:a benevolent dictatorship—with the planner as benevolent dictator. new D ,ii , : ' Dan Cornejo is starting his own firm,Cornejo Consulting. Dan has 25 years public sector planning 1 0...�r�lar+almenta:: '' ' experience in the United States and Canada. For the past five years, Dan directed the Community Award& i�CibIdljS; ; Planning practice area of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc(SEH). In his new venture, Dan will focus his . s efforts and expertise towards providing highly personal and specialized community planning and b rths PUbk abgl design services in the Twin Cities metro and other large-to medium-sized communities. li Qb pars l' yhrl Amy Denz recently joined 1000 Friends of Minnesota as the new Land Use Planner.She will be coordinating a new program at 1000 Friends called Growing by Design,which will offer planning li Sharathe littjp h$ *h services, including CommunityViz technology,to communities in Minnesota's Growth Corridor. Prior well as the bt Whet I+bnr ;- to her move to 1000 Friends,Amy was a planner principal with the Minnesota Department of it`Bil*WplBntil»Fa66 .I Natural Resources(DNR), coordinating the Wild and Scenic Rivers Program.Amy replaces Molly 4¢ur news ii'1eldox ' McCartney,who has taken a planning position with the City of Minneapolis. g0.01190.0.*!,4. ..511j1MIlliiiiNIDlltiiilliPi Ken P. Doresky joined the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency as a housing development officer in " "BI multifamily on July 9. Before that he was employed as the community development specialist by t rinelaslon:lnthehext � :: the City of New Hope for 31/2 years.Jon Sevald has joined Sherburne County as their County qe pf*n g'1 Planner. Previously, he was employed by the City of Andover as their Planning/Administration Minnesota ii Intern. Garneth Peterson,AICP, has joined SRF Consulting Group, Inc. as an environmental ' planner. Her new e-mail address is>rneterson @srfconsultinecom. • LAND USE PLANS v; Resource Comprehensive Planning . O. • ORDINANCES Development Regulations • Strategies • DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Site Planning&Design Development Review Corporation • STAFF SUPPORT • EAws.AUARs,ELSs ` �' Annexation Ann Perry • ANNEXATIONS Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. Dean Johnson • EXPERT TESTIMONY 5775 Wayzata Blvd., Suite. 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 14001 Ridgedale Drive, Suite 300,Minnetonka,MN 55305 Ph:952.595.9636 Fax:952.595.9837 planners @nacplanning.com (952) 513-9548 • (fax) 513-9549 • rscmn @spacestar.net i 6, :: , + vial D111 9 ":*s,A n .,u • ` III; 7 c .... .: re planning 14. .°d September 2004 minnesota