Loading...
2.0. SR 02-04-2002MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Planning Commission Michele McPherso~ector of Planning DATE: February 4, 2002 SUBJECT: Discuss Comprehensive Plan Review Process Item 2. The purpose of this memo is to outline discussion topics for the joint meeting of February 4, 2002, and to review a possible committee structure for the process. February 4 Meeting Purpose The purpose of the joint meeting between the P]anning Commission and the City Council is to establish the common issues that are the catalyst for the review of the City's Comprehensive Plan, most recently updated in 1995. The Planning Commission has expressed concerns regarding mixed messages the Council may be sending regarding land use requests, and staff would like to clearly understand the issues precipitating the need to review the Comprehensive Plan. Some questions for the Council and the Commission to consider are: What is going on in the City that you don't like and which you think that the Comprehensive Plan would help change or correct? · What goals in the current plan would you like to change? · What additional issues and/or goals would you like the Comprehensive Plan to include and address? · What concerns do you have regarding the current guidelines within the Comprehensive Plan? · What would the end result of the Comprehensive Plan review be? The Comprehensive Plan can address a number of issues including transportation, parks and open space, pedestrian connections, utility extensions, the level of growth, housing density, housing affordability, redevelopment of downtown, redevelopment of the gravel mining areas, and establishing a future vision of the City. These are all issues that can be discussed during the joint meeting between the Council and the Planning Commission. The more Memo to City Council & Planning Commission February 4, 2002 Page 2 Specific concerns that can be expressed by the two groups will also be helpful for the facilitator as he leads the committee through the review of the plan. Composition of the Committee In 1995 a steering committee was established to review the City's Comprehensive Plan. Sixteen members of the community served on the steering committee. The Planning Commission has suggested that a similar process be used for this review of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition to members of the general public, the Commission suggested two members from each of the following commissions: City Council, Planning Commission, Economic Development Authority, Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Heritage Preservation Commission, and the Park and Recreation Commission. Staff would suggest that in order to keep the size of the committee at a manageable level, that one member of each commission with alternates be identified and included on the committee. This would provide six members from the established commissions. Staff would also suggest members representing the Chamber of Commerce and the River's Edge Downtown Business Association is included. We would further suggest that two to four members of the general public, one representing the development community, be included. This would provide for a committee of 10 to 12 with no one group within the community overly represented. Staff that would support the committee and the work of the facilitator would include the City Administrator, the City Engineer, the Utilities Manager, the Director of Economic Development, the Planning Director, the Senior Planner, the Park Planner, and the Building and Zoning Administrator. Staff looks forward to the joint meeting discussion and receiving clear direction regarding the issues to be reviewed. S:\PLANNING\COMPPLAN\2-4memoJointMtg.doc Comprehensive Land Use Plan revision: We need to revisit our Land Use plan, as it has been about 7 years since the last revision. My initial reaction is that we won't have to do a total rewrite; instead, we should focus on the sections that may need revisions due to the changes in the city over the past few years. Process: · Public Input - I think we should solicit the opinions of our citizens. We should include people from all phases from high school students through senior citizens; long-time residents of the city as well as newcomers. We need to structure the process for this input. Whether we target certain individuals and have them respond with a questionnaire, I don't know. · Input Summary - We need to boil the data down to key objectives in the planning of the city. · Compare - We then need to look at what gaps exist between out land use plan and the feedback we get from our citizens and determine what to do with that information. Scope: We should review the plan at a fairly high level and keep in mind the other plans and needs of the city. For example: Park Plan · Traffic Plan · Pavement Rehab plan · Strategic Industrial Marketing plan Every one of these plans has an affect on land use planning and vice versa. Then we will have to determine which detailed objectives do we want to meet. Such as: · Do we want to make provisions for affordable housing? · What standards do we want to set relative to density? · How are we going to define and enforce tree preservation? Anyway, those are my initial thoughts to the process that we are about to undertake. I regret that I am not able to make the meeting on Monday. Thanks, Dan Tveite