My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-06-01_PC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
2016-06-01_PC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/16/2016 10:17:38 AM
Creation date
9/16/2016 10:17:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, June 1, 2016 <br />Page 9 <br />Regarding the RFP, Member Kimble suggested asking the proposers what was new that <br />401 <br />they were observing or what more did the city need to ask; opining they should be able to <br />402 <br />bring new ideas to the city based on nationwide trends, how to keep and attract millennial <br />403 <br />and a diverse population. As part of her work with Mr. Tom Fisher of the University of MN <br />404 <br />and the Metropolitan Design Center assisting with putting tools together to help cities with <br />405 <br />their comprehensive plan processes; Member Kimble suggested staff look into some free <br />406 <br />tools that may be available. <br />407 <br />Member Bull expressed his interest in hearing about trends around the county, rather <br />408 <br />than just from a local or regional player, and any other things for the city to consider <br />409 <br />based on that broader perspective. <br />410 <br />Member Murphy reviewed the proposed timeframe addressed in the draft RFP, and <br />411 <br />questioned that proposed work window based on staff and consultant time and if one <br />412 <br />year was needed for internal review after that work was completed. <br />413 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that the timeline in the RFP at this time reflected a desire to start <br />414 <br />sooner than later to avoid having all the good firms tied up and allows for time at the end <br />415 <br />of the process to address any contingencies that may make the plan later. Depending on <br />416 <br />the schedule of the consultant, Mr. Lloyd advised that it may not take that entire time, but <br />417 <br />the presumption was the need to allow for sufficient public engagement activity, which <br />418 <br />took up a considerable amount of time in the process and affected the overall final plan. <br />419 <br />Member Murphy stated he was in favor of starting earlier and allowing for a longer winder <br />420 <br />to do the work and receive more input at the beginning of the process. <br />421 <br />Member Gitzen asked if somewhere in the plan, a SWOT analysis or trends were <br />422 <br />included for potential threats on the horizon that could be addressed proactively now <br />423 <br />before becoming an issue in the community. <br />424 <br />Member Daire asked if any comprehensive plans include a community’s emergency <br />425 <br />plans. <br />426 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that he had consulted with the City’s Fire and Police Chiefs and noted <br />427 <br />there was no emergency management section included in the plan; with both chiefs <br />428 <br />informing they didn’t feel there was a need from their perspective, nor were they <br />429 <br />advocating for time and resources for that. Mr. Lloyd advised that they already did a <br />430 <br />considerable amount of that planning through FEMA with a more universal versus <br />431 <br />community-based method for emergency management with and by other departments. <br />432 <br />While having a mindfulness of public safety as part of the overall goals of a city and <br />433 <br />policy creation accordingly, he was confident this was addressed elsewhere and could be <br />434 <br />part of the other documents referenced by the comprehensive plan. <br />435 <br />Member Daire opined this seemed a test of the general government purpose statement <br />436 <br />for the health, safety and welfare of a community, and opined a light be shined on it as <br />437 <br />part of the comprehensive plan. <br />438 <br />Based on his experience with emergency management, Member Murphy noted this was <br />439 <br />an ongoing and continual process, and not on a ten year basis with a comprehensive <br />440 <br />plan review, but much more dynamic for the community and region, including hazardous <br />441 <br />materials, and other emergency management components. <br />442 <br />Member Daire opined that from his perspective the City had a competent fire and police <br />443 <br />department, and he was not thinking in terms of general difficulties and strategy <br />444 <br />developed, but more as an “FYI” of the plan including safety and security developed by <br />445 <br />professionals who had been at it far longer. Member Daire noted this represented a <br />446 <br />significant capital component of the city’s annual budget but wasn’t accounted for in the <br />447 <br />comprehensive plan at al. In order to round out the picture, Member Daire suggested that <br />448 <br />element be included in the plan; whether or not it was included with public input, and left <br />449 <br />to the professionals who know what they’re doing. However, Member Daire suggested <br />450 <br />getting that information out there would provide a sense that those services were <br />451 <br />available to the community. <br />452 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.