05/24/2004 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 24, 2004 APPROVED 1 Councilmember Reinert moved to continue the public hearing to the June 28, 2004 regular City • 2 Council meeting. Councilmember Dahl seconded the motion. 3 4 Motion carried unanimously. 5 6 K. Comprehensive Plan Review Process, Michael Grochala 7 8 Community Development Director Grochala stated that comprehensive planning is in part intended to 9 assist in developing lands more wisely to serve citizens more effectively, making the provision of 10 public services less costly, and achieve a more secure tax base. He said since the adoption of the 11 Comprehensive Plan in 2001 and subsequent implementation, staff has noted that there are elements 12 of the existing comprehensive plan that need to be reexamined. He stated that staff is specifically 13 becoming increasingly concerned over conflicts between the plan elements (i.e., land use, sanitary 14 sewer, transportation, etc.), conflicting goal and policy statements, as well as unintended 15 consequences created by the growth management ordinance, and that these conflicts may have an 16 impact on the implementation of the plan as originally intended by the community. 17 18 Community Development Director Grochala stated the issues range from minor mapping errors to 19 lack of sewer capacity to service stage 1 growth areas (2000-2010). To address these issues, staff is 20 recommending a process that involves a review of the existing plan elements to including the 21 following: (1) Transportation Plan; (2) Land Use Plan; (3) Sanitary Sewer Plan; (4) Water Plan; (5) 22 Natural Resources Plan; and (6) Park Plan, as well as the Goals & Policies set forth in the plan and 23 the Growth Management Ordinance. .24 25 Community Development Director Grochala stated it is staff's intent to provide a written summary of 26 the plan purpose, plan elements, policy implications, and identified conflicts for presentation to the 27 City Council and Planning and Zoning Board. He stated this review will provide the basis for 28 discussions on the plan to determine what, if any, revisions to the plan should be examined further. If 29 it is determined that the City should examine possible revisions to the plan, a separate participatory 30 process would be developed. 31 32 Community Development Director Grochala stated that with regard to the Comprehensive Plan, 33 Minnesota Statutes, section 462.355 states the following: "Subdivision 1. Preparation and review. 34 The planning agency shall prepare the comprehensive municipal plan. In discharging this duty the 35 planning agency shall consult with and coordinate with the planning activities of other departments 36 and agencies of the municipality to insure conformity with and to assist in the development of the 37 comprehensive municipal plan. In its planning activities the planning agency shall take due 38 cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government and other affected public 39 agencies. The planning agency shall periodically review the plan and recommend amendments 40 whenever necessary." 41 42 Community Development Director Grochala stated staff is requesting City Council direction on how 43 to proceed, as well as a timeline for completion of the review. Staff is recommending that a joint 44 Planning and Zoning Board and City Council meeting be held to allow the appropriate time for the 45 presentation and discussion. It is likely that multiple meetings may be necessary. He explained the 46 review process charts. .47 48 Councilmember Reinert stated that there is a deep divide on the Council on this issue. 17