Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, August 05, 2009 <br />Page 6 <br />Imagine Roseville 2025 and Comprehensive Plan Update process; however, he wanted <br />to know whether this RFP omission was intentional on staff’s part. <br />Chair Doherty echoed Commissioner Boerigter’s comments related to the public input <br />objective and budget; and noted in Section C, that the way this was phrased, the process <br />seemed inadequate if the City Council was not on board with the proposed code <br />revisions from the initial phase. <br />Commissioner Cook opined that the budget appeared to be very modest, given the <br />gigantic scope of the work to be accomplished. Commissioner Cook recognized staff’s <br />expertise in providing assistance to the consultant, if they were prepared to do so, and <br />the proposed budget was based on that assistance. <br />Commissioner Gottfried concurred with Commissioner Cook; and questioned if that <br />budget was based on staff performing substantial backfill for the consultant, and was <br />prepared for such a time commitment. Commissioner Gottfried concurred as well with the <br />need for public review, hearing and vetting. <br />Mr. Paschke noted that on page 4, Item “C” the scope of services did require the <br />submittal of how the consultant was going to engage the public through the process. Mr. <br />Paschke then summarized Commissioner comments to provide consistency throughout <br />the document, and revise and/or clarify Section 2 (Scope of Work); Section C (Code <br />Development and Revision), while allowing the consultant to provide the City with their <br />proposal for the best process to follow. <br />Further discussion included the proposed process for interaction between staff, the <br />consultant and the Planning Commission, depending on the firm chosen, with staff <br />anticipating that they would make presentations to the Commission, rather than the <br />consultant to reduce costs, and allowing for initial discussion between the Commission <br />and consultant to develop a timeline; and whether those updates would be accomplished <br />during regular meetings, similar to those during the Comprehensive Plan Update <br />process, or if special meetings would be indicated. <br />Commissioners further recommended that staff emphasize the scope of service with <br />respect to public involvement shown on page 4 of the RFP, rather than currently located <br />on the last page <br />MOTION <br />Member Doherty moved, seconded by Member Boerigter to RECOMMEND TO THE <br />CITY COUNCIL to authorize staff to seek proposals from the qualified consultants <br />to assist with preparation of revisions to the City’s Zoning Code; based on details <br />presented in the August 5, 2009 staff report; and amended as per the above- <br />referenced discussion at tonight’s meeting. <br />Ayes: 6 <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried. <br />7. Adjourn <br />Chair Doherty adjourned the meeting at approximately 7:55 p.m. <br />