My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-24-1993 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
02-24-1993 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/27/2013 11:55:02 AM
Creation date
8/27/2013 11:53:09 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />FEBRUARY 11, 1993 <br />Drabik stated that she supported updating the comp <br />plan. Keis and DeLonais agreed. DeLonais asked if the <br />process would be as involved as it was when the plan <br />was first developed. <br />The Planner felt that the initial input meetings were <br />important in putting a comp plan together. <br />DeLonais pointed out the need for updating the City's <br />zoning map, and felt that this should be one of the <br />first things done. <br />Garske pointed out the high cost of updating the comp <br />plan and suggested that the process be spread out over <br />two budget years. <br />The Planner stated that his firm would assist in making <br />the process affordable, but pointed out that spreading <br />the process out over a few years can make initial <br />phases of the plan obsolete by the time it is <br />completed. <br />DeLonais suggested that perhaps a joint meeting of the <br />Council and Planning Commission should be planned for <br />the near future. <br />Garske asked what the City would end up with once the <br />comp plan is updated. Garske asked if there were many <br />portions of the current plan that would change. Garske <br />pointed out the estimate of $17,000 for updating the <br />plan as well as the City's budget crunch. Garske <br />stated that he would like to review the current plan <br />and highlight areas that may be changed. <br />Keis stated that he did not know which areas of the <br />City were served by sewer and water, what development <br />plans are for the McMenemy area, etc. Keis felt that <br />updating the plan would address questions such as <br />these. <br />The Planner pointed out that the City's engineer would <br />have utility information, but indicated that the comp <br />plan would look generally at infrastructure location. <br />Garske pointed out that the City could address area <br />such as Country Drive redevelopment in the comp plan, <br />but by the time money is available, the comp plan could <br />be outdated. <br />Drabik felt that the City needed a game plan to work <br />with. <br />Keis pointed out that the Planning Commission has been <br />more reactive than proactive. <br />Page 7 <br />Page 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.