pm_061004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, October 04, 2006 Page 2 status report of the Comprehensive Plan Update process, dated October 4, 2006; and provided a review of each section of the plan. Discussion included staff’s perspective and input for an aggressive approach for policy and/or technical updates needed and a timeline for accomplishing each respective update; realities of timing issues; relationship of and strategies for the technical updates with the “Imagine Roseville 2025” community visioning process and overall Plan update; and defined participation and expectations of the Planning Commission’s role. Sections discussed, status, and staff and/or Commission responsibilities included 1) Introduction/Background; 2) Demographics Profile; 3) Goals & Policies; 4) Land Use by Planning District; 5) Transportation; 6) Housing & Neighborhood Plans; 7) Economic and Redevelopment Plans; 8) Environmental Protection; 9) Parks; 10) Community Facilities; 11) Implementation Strategies; and 12) Appendices. Mr. Stark recommended consideration of whether including Master Plans into the Comprehensive Plan appendices was legally appropriate, or whether they should be stand- alone documents, allowing the Comprehensive Plan to be a more broad-based and general look into the future, requesting that the Planning Commission and City Council address the specific detail for appendices augmenting the Comprehensive Plan. Further discussion included metropolitan systems statements in conjunction with technical or policy updates; regional strategies of the Metropolitan Council; timing concerns; status of various departments and activities of advisory commissions in pursuing their particular areas of expertise and recommendations; technical updates and timing; staff’s preference for reviewing each section (i.e., technical updates) on a one/month basis as applicable at the Planning Commission level beginning immediately; staff’s intent to make recommendations to the Planning Commission on updates; Metropolitan Council requirements for a mandatory update in 2008; and visioning process completion by end-of-year (2006) and future incorporation of that data into a future amendment to the Comprehensive Plan due to timing concerns. Additional discussion included in-house staff time versus or relative to outside consultants and their respective expertise and resources; 2007 budget funds for the Comprehensive Plan Update; format of the Comprehensive Plan update allowing for structure and terminology consistency; statutory requirements and mandates; and the need for Commissions and the Department Heads to move forward with their portions of the Comprehensive Plan Update in an appropriate fashion. Staff recommended that Sections 4 (Land Use by Planning District) and 7 (Economic and Redevelopment Plans) be considered from scratch, rather than utilizing a “band aid” approach; and opined that staff didn’t have the time or expertise to address those two sections. Mr. Stark opined the need for outside assistance on at least those two sections, depending on City Council support of that recommendation; and encouraged the Planning Commission, individually or as a whole, to remind the City Council of funding requirements for the Update. After further discussion, it was Commission consensus to direct staff to prepare a draft resolution for their consideration at the next Planning Commission, recommending to the City Council the Commission’s encouragement for City Council provision of necessary 2007 funding to implement technical and policy updates for the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update, and to implement the Community Visioning process documents into the update. Commissioner Roe noted that the Council had adopted their preliminary budget and levy; and recommended that the Planning Commission seek allocation of funds for the purpose of the