Loading...
6.9. SR 07-19-2004TO: FROF'I: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Michele McPherso~irector of Planning July 19, 2004 Consider Comprehensive Plan Approval Item ~ 6.9. Attachments · July 13, 2004 Memo from Rusty Fifield outlining the necessary Comprehensive Plan revisions · July 15, 2004 Memo from Rusty Fifield regarding scope of services and budget for Comprehensive Plan revisions · Draft revised Land Use Plan The City Council at its July 12th meeting discussed at length the draft Comprehensive Plan recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. Consensus of the Council was to make the following changes to the land use map: No expansion of the Urban Service District. In the furore, expansion of the District maybe considered to the gravel mining area as the end result of a gravel mine focus area study. It may also be extended south and east along the Highway 10 corridor for commercial development. The land use plan will reflect a phasing of the change in land use designation of Agricultural to Rural Residential north of County Road 33 in three time frames: 2005, 2008 and 2010. These phasing areas will occur in one-mile increments starting at the County Road 33 intersection with Highway 169. The City Council should identify if this phasing occurs January of each noted year, or at some point during the year (i.e. first quarter, July 1, or December 31). Commercial land use designation will be identified 1/4 mile east of Highway 169 and north of County Road 21, or to the nearest quarter, quarter section line. Additional commercial land has been designated near 171~'t to 165th Avenues along Highway 10. A "commercial reserve" has been identified south of Cargill Memo to the City Council Comprehensive Plan Amendments July 19, 2044 along Highway 10 - this will preserve commercial development opportunities until such time that utilities can be extended. In addition to the above changes to the land use map, Rusty Fifield has provided a preliminary overview of the text changes that will need to occur to accommodate the work that has occurred in the previous six month. Mr. Fifield has provided a proposed scope of services and budget for this work that is not to exceed $2,000.00. Schedule The action requested of the City Council is to adopt the noted land use changes in concept at the July 19th meeting. The text will then be modified and a £mal draft prepared. This can be accomplished by the August 16th City Council meeting. However, while the Council is not legally obligated to send the draft to the Planning Commission for additional public comment, the Council could choose to do so prior to adoption of the final plan. If the Council desires to send the document to the Planning Commission for additional public comment, the schedule would be as follows: a. Planning Commission review and public comment August 24,2004, and b. City Council consideration September 20, 2004. Council Action The Council is asked to take action on the following three items: 1. Approve the noted land use map and text changes. 2. Approve the additional funds to complete the text changes, in an amount not to exceed $2000.00. This will be funded from Council Contingency. 3. Determine if the document should be re-reviewed by the Planmng Commission. S:\PLANNING\Michele McPherson\MEMOS\07 15 04 Comp Plan Apprvl.doc ~ To: Michele McPherson From: Rusty Fifield Subject: Comprehensive Plan Revisions Date: July 13, 2004 This memo outlines revisions in the draft Comprehensive Plan that should be considered to reflect the changes desired by the City Council. Please note that making the document and graphics modifications is not covered by our contract for this project. We need to discuss the scope of work and budget for bringing the project to conclusion. Authorization for HKGi to undertake additional work should be part of the Council action on Monday. My initial review the draft Plan identified the following changes: The Sanitary Sewer Capacity initiative in Chapter 3 needs to be revised. At a minimum, it should acknowledge the recent work of H.R. Green. Ideally, this section would discuss other steps to continue planning for sewer capacity. 2. Should the land use map show the expanded wastewater treatment plant site as Public/Semi- Public? The Greenways initiative and Chapter 11 (Environmental Resources) should be modified to reflect that an NRI is being undertaken to be completed later in 2004. If other related actions have been taken, they should be noted here. 4. The Land Use Plan map needs to show the areas that will be phased into Rural Residential. 5. The Agricultural land use category must be returned to the Plan to implement this approach. The Plan text must describe the timing and procedures for the transition from Agricultural to Rural Residential. Does the change occur automatically on January 1 of the stated year? Can the change be accelerated? Will cluster development be allowed in the Agricultural area during this transition period? 7. A strip of land along the east side of Highway 169 was targeted for Highway Business. This area needs to be identified on the map and connected to some related parcels boundaries. No changes were made in the land use plan for the gravel mining area. Should the Plan include an initiative that discusses a focus area study to explore the development options and feasibility for this area? 9. Highway Business use was added along Highway 10 east. These areas need to be identified. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659 Ph (612) 338-0800 Fx (612) 338-6838 www.hkgi.com Direct (612) 252-7133 Email rusty(~hkg~.com Comprehensive Plan Revisions July 13, 2004 Page 2 10. Corresponding Plan text changes will be needed for Highway Business and Light Industrial. 11. Cliff Lundberg had requested changes in the text relating to Old Town. I do not recall the specific changes or the position of the Council on making these changes. 12. The analysis of future land use must be updated to account for these changes. 13. The Sanitary Sewer and Sewer Capacity portions of Chapter 8 (Utilities) should be revised to include the information produced by the recent H.R. Green study. 14. The Council did not change the urban service area boundary. Given the discussions at the meeting, it might be prudent to revise the text in Chapter 8 to more clearly describe the process for changing the boundaries. 15. Are changes needed in Chapter 9 (Parks, Trails and Open Space) to more accurately describe the current status of greenway planning or other elements of the park system that have changed in the past 12 months? I will continue to review the draft Plan. I will notify you if I find any other changes that should be considered. I also want to use this memo to present some issues and concerns related to the proposed changes in the Comprehensive Plan. It is not clear to me if the new commercial designations along 169 and 10 can be served with sanitary sewer in the foreseeable future. If not, the proposed land use changes may have unintended consequences. These changes could lead to the unsewered commercial pattern found on the City's eastern boundary. My sense is that the Council is not seeking this type of development, but rather a continuation of pattern along 169 north of School Street. A "commercial reserve" land use would hold development capacity while preventing premature and undesired development. The focus on commercial development heightens the importance of a proactive approach on planning for future highway interchange areas. The location and design of the interchanges will have a profound effect on commercial development potential. The Council's discussion of the Highway 10 corridor mentioned interchanges at both 171~t and 165th. The investigations made during the planning process suggest that this result is not likely. The City may want to consider obtaining market research that explores how future development in Elk River combined with commercial development in adjacent communities influences need for commercial land in Elk River. Comprehensive Plan Revisions July 13, 2004 Page 3 Planning for commercial areas along Highway 10 should include new street corridors to connect these areas with residential development. As we have seen in other locations, it is very difficult to create needed corridors after the development pattern is set. It would be interesting to note the net difference in development potential (housing units) between the Agricultural and Rural Residential land uses. This difference accounts for the impact of the phasing plan. It is important to remember that the economics of future sewer system expansion is a critical issue. The next step in planning should be an exploration of funding options and the implications for land use. Development will not occur if the utility costs are too expensive. The City should make a conscious decision to subsidize these costs to achieve the desired development outcomes. I recommend obtaining a written opinion of the City Attorney related to the ability of the City Council to adopt the Plan without a new hearing or Planning Commission review. While I agree that the statutes do not limit the period for Council action followmg the initial hearing, it is hard to believe that the Legislature intended an unlimited period for Council consideration. Your situation is more complicated because the Council changed the Plan recommended by the Planning Commission. The conservative approach is to assume that this action could be challenged. In this case, Staff and Council should have a written opinion as the basis of Plan approval. To: Michele McPherson From: Rusty Fifield Subject: July 15, 2004 Date: Comprehensive Plan This memo presents a proposed scope of services and budget for completion of the process to update the City's Comprehensive Plan. This proposal covers work outside of the scope of the initial contract for this project. The scope of services is based on work to be performed by HKGi to incorporate changes made by the City Council into the draft Comprehensive Plan approved by the Planning Commission in 2003. This proposal assumes that the Plan modifications will be based on specific changes identified and adopted by the City Council. This proposal does not address any updating of supporting analysis based on the passage of time since the initial drafting of the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the scope of services does not include any meetings for the review and adoption of Plan materials. Given these assumptions, HKGi will: 3. 4. 5. Review the draft Comprehensive Plan to determine modifications needed to support changes adopted by the City Council. Prepare text changes to reflect the adopted Plan revisions. Make final modifications of Land Use Plan Map. Provide text and mapping changes to staff for review. Prepare final version of Comprehensive Plan. The budget for these tasks is an amount not to exceed $2,000. HKGi will bill the City on an hourly basis as work is performed. Please let me know if you have any questions about this proposal. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659 Ph (612) 338-0800 Fx (612) 338-6838 www.hkgi.com Direct (612) 252-7133 Email rustyQ~hkgi.com July 15, 2004 Honorable Mayor and City Council of Elk River c/o Scott Harlcker, CiD' Planner Elk River City Hall 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, Mn 55330 Re: Comprehensive Plan Update Honorable Mayor and City Council of Elk River, The purpose of this letter is to notify you of our intent to request a modification to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update at the Monday, July 19th Council Meeting. Our request centers around a parcel of land located south of 175th Street at Polk Avenue. The parcel, its proposed zoning, and the limits of the proposed urban service district are all shown on Figure 1 which is taken form the current Comprehensive Plan Update document. It is our intent to develop the land in accordance with the zoning proposed in the Comprehensive Plan Update, which is high density residential. Our concept includes 25-40 town homes depending on the fmat site layout and zoning classification. We beheve this use of the site make sense given its prox~ity to the Park and Ride Facility that will also serve as a terminal for the planned North Star Corridor project. We intend to work with the City to ensure that this development maintains Elk River's unique identity and character. However, even though the land is zoned high density residential, it has not been included in the proposed urban service district even though much of the surrounding land has been included. Because of this, we would not be able to connect a development on this parcel to City sewer and water, which will significantly limit our use of the site. Sewer and water are already stubbed into the site so connecting to them is not a complicated or costly issue. We respectfully request that the City of Elk River consider modifying the Comprehensive Plan Update so that this parcel be included in the urban service district. We recognize that this parcel is located within a tract of land that has already been the subject of a change in the urban service district delineation proposed in the Comprehensive Plan Update. To address this we have made contact with land owners in the area and have scheduled meetings with several of them to discuss issues they may have with our request and proposed development. We will discuss the results of those contacts with you at the upcoming council meeting. Thank you for you consideration of this issue. We look forward to presenting to you on Monday. Sincerely, Brian LeMon E:\EIk River\Council letter.doc 1995 Comprehensive Plan (Current) Legend 2003 Comprehensive Plan (Draft) legend Future Lend Use Category Figure 1 Site to be developed Site to be developed