3.0. & 4.0. SR 03-23-1994
. ~l~ ~);
~. .it:Y11 ':..
E 1\.,\ River TO:
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND
PLANNING COMMISSION
STEVEN B. ACH, CITY PLANNE~~z;L.
MARCH 23, 1994
DATE:
SUBJECT: JOINT MEETING TO DISCUSS
UPDATE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Dan Tveite, Planning Commission Chairman, will be introducing each of the
discussion items on tonight's agenda. The following is a brief overview of
each agenda item. In addition, there is backup material that will be included
for the discussions Wednesday night.
ITEM 3
e
As previously discussed, the Planning Commission would like to formulate a
Steering Committee to assist in updating the Comprehensive Plan. The
following is a break down of respective groups and the number of members
that would provide representaticn.
Elk River City Council - One Member
Planning Commission - Two Members
Park & Recreation Commission- One Member
Economic Development Authority - One Member
Housing & Redevelopment Authority - One Member
Citizen from each Vii ard selected by the respective City Council Person
- Four Members
School District - One Member
Chamber of Commerce/Retailer - One Member
Chamber of Commerce/Industrial- One :Member
TOTAL MEMBERS: 14
If it is desired, a Steering Committee should be assembled, a few questions
worth addressing include:
e
· Is the composition of the Steering Committee as presented by the
Planning Commission acceptable.
· How will these members be cnosen
P.O. Box 490 · 13065 Orono Parkway · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
e
4.
.
.
5.
.
.
e .
.
e
Comprehensive Plan
March 2, 1994
Page 2
3.
TRANSPORTATION
The majority of transportation issues have been outlined in the
preliminary draft of the transportation plan. The Planning
Commission did identify issues relative to projected east/west
roadways as well as the possibility of re-routing Highway 10 and 169.
I have been informed that there are no plans from MnDot to re-route
Highway 10 or 169 in the future.
ECONOMaCDEVELOPMENT/REDEVELOPMENT
What involvement should the City have encouraging and assisting
industrial/commercial development in the community?
Does the City want to actively pursue redevelopment opportunities?
DOWNTOWN AREA
What is the goal for the downtown commercial area?
Should the downtown area be expanded to improve its development
opportunities?
Should the City adopt development standards for the downtown area
to provide continuity and possibly a "theme?"
What consideration should be given to utilizing the river front within
the downtown area?
6. ENVIRONMENTAL
· Should the City start a wetland banking program?
· Are there any special development standards that can be adopted to
protect the river front and other water ways from development
pressures?
· Should the City continue to expand its recycling opportunities to the
residents as well as adopt standards for commercial and industrial
recycling efforts?
· Are preservation of wooci+andS, open space, and other natural features
important to protect during the development process?
7. l\1AINTENANCE OF STRUCTURES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
.
As the older parts of Elk River continue to age, there is a concern to
maintain the integrity of our housing stock. Is a housing maintenance
code inspection program for all types of residential as well as
commercial industrial a program the City believes is important at this
time?
e
e
e
Comprehensive Plan
March 2, 1994
Page 3
8. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Review the policy statements that are within the 1988 Comprehensive
Plan.
9. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Review the policy statements within the 1988 Comprehensive Plan.
10. INDUSTRI.AL DEVELOPMENT
Review the policies that are within the 1988 Comprehensive Plan.
11. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
Review the policies that are within the 1988 Comprehensive Plan.
12. HIGHWAY 169 AND HIGHWAY 10 CORRIDORS
. Should the City adopt special policies or standards for development
along these two major corridors?
13. IMPLEMENTATION
· Update Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map.
· Proceed with appropriate rezoning to comply with land use plan.
· Amend various sections of the Zoning Ordinance to comply with
policies and goals adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan.
· Initiate various studies to meet goals and policies of the Plan.
In addition to the components and questions mentioned above, there IS
probably a first and foremost question".. .
'"
· Does the City Council want to be involved from the start of this process?
Or,
· Does a committee do the majority of the work upfront and present their
findings/recommendations to the Council?
This question should be asked at the joint meeting between the Planning
CommissiG!l and City Council on :rvlarch 23, 1994.
Comprehensive Plan
March 2, 1994
Page ..
e
The last question relative to the process refers to the Steering Committee. I
am asking the Commission to give some thought to the size of this committee
and how this group will be assembled.
In closing, I would appreciate any thoughts or comments the Commission
may have regarding this memo and/or the process of updating the
Comprehensive Plan in general. As mentioned, the joint meeting with the
City Council will be held on March 23, 1994, at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall. A
packet of information outlining the topics and issues to be discussed should
be sent out prior to that meeting to help facilitate the discussion.
e
",..
pccomp.doc
.
~ity of ~ J
~ 1l{'1
MEMORA.J.'lDUM
River TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: STEVEN B. ACH, CITY PLANNER_~?
e
DATE:
MARCH 2, 1994
SUBJECT: UPDATE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLA.."N"
Since last week's Planning Commission meeting, I have taken some time to
review the Commission's list of issues that were formulated at the
Workshop, along with the City's Growth Management Plan dated August 22,
1988. For your consideration, I would like to present a list of components
that may comprise the Comprehensive Plan. Within each. of these
components could be a series of policy questions for the Planning Commission
and/or City Council to consider as part of this process.
The following is a list of the components along with the accompanymg
questions that may be asked:
e
1. LIMITS OF URBANIZATIONIUTILITY EXTENSION
. What will the urban service limits be for City sewer and water
extensions within the scope of this Plan?
. What is the expansion capability of the current Wastewater Treatment
facility?
. How will the City manage growth?
. What growth management policies/tools will need to be adopted to
prevent "leap frog" development?
2. LAND USE MIX
.
What type of land use mix does the City want to provide housing
opportunities, commercial dev.elopment and industrial within the City?
How much land should be devoted to commercial and industrial use
given the amount of residential development?
What is the proper mi."\: and diversity of housing opportunities for the
community?
What should be the long range land use plan for the gravel mining
area along Highway 169?
-
.
.
.
e
ITEM 4
Attached is a memo addressed to the Planning Commission dated March 2,
1994, regarding the update of the Comprehensive Plan. The memo addressed
several components that could comprise the Comprehensive Plan. Under
each component is a list of questions that may be addressed to develop
general policies regarding each of the components.
As mentioned in Dan Tveite's memo to myself, the Planning Commission
wanted to prioritize these components for discussion purposes at Wednesday
night's meeting. Please refer to the attached memos from Dan Tveite and
myself for further information.
e
e
MR~ 18 -'94 11:57 CUST RELRTIONS G~?
P.l/3
-
InterOffice Memo
To: Steve Ach
--- ----....-
Dept.
PnoM /I
Fax'
d~
Fax _
From:
Dan Tveit.e
Date:
. Subject;
March 18, 1994:
Agenda for meeting with City Council
e
Steve, after polling the Planning Commissioners, I have prepared the following agenda for our meeting
with the City Council on March 23:
1. Determine makeup of Steering Committee for the revision of the Comprehensive Plan. Bob
Minton has prepared a list delineating the composition of the Steering Committee. r have
attached this. and believe that this creates a good basis for discussion.
II. Creating constructs from which to work. I recommend that we use your memo of March 2, to the
Planning Commission as a basis. I realize that this memo covers far more ground than we wlll
be able to review. Therefore, I propose the following prioritization:
1) All of section I . Limits of Urbanization.
2) All of section 2 - Land Use Mix..
3) The first and last points of section 6 . Environmental. The last point is a confinnation of
the importance that the city places on the woodlands, etc. and this will help establish
proposed lot sizes, etc. The fIrst point is far more tactical as far as isolating areas
immediately.
4). The first point of section 5 . Downtown Area. If we resolve the first point, whether we
have a theme for the downtown are 'will shake out in the strategy.
S) Section 11 - Parks & Open Space. I realize that this will largely be addressed by the Park
& Rcc commission, but I want to recognize the importance.
6) Section 3 . Transportation. This too will be addressed by another group, but we want to
ensure that we provide for all modes of transportation; public or private, motorized or non
motorized.
7) All remaining section in order that we have time to review.
1 believe that this will cover the time frame that we have allotted. The memo addressed to the Planning
Commission should be included with this agenda as well as the proposal for the Steering Committee. If
you have any question, please contact me at 667-6726.
e