My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.2. SR 03-11-2002
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2002
>
03/11/2002
>
6.2. SR 03-11-2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:32:01 AM
Creation date
12/17/2002 1:17:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
3/11/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
TO: <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br /> MEMORANDUM <br />Mayor and City Cou~c~lj <br />ei~r ~ia~,rl,0~ ily Ad~trato/ r <br /> <br />SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Update <br /> <br />Rusty Fifield of the Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGi) has submitted a proposal for <br />consulting services to assist the city in its update of the Comprehensive Plan. Rusty's role in this <br />project will be to lead the public participation components of the process, work with and attend <br />the Comprehensive Plan (CP) task force meetings, and to develop and present the CP <br />implementation strategies. The planning staff at HKGi will be doing the "nuts and bolts" <br />planning work for updating the city's Comprehensive Plan document. <br /> <br />Staff met with Rusty to discuss and consider changes in the CP proposal for consulting services. <br />By this I mean I was looking for ways to reduce the work plan and fees proposed by HKGi. In <br />the end, only minor adjustments in the work plan and fees came about as a result of our meeting. <br />Everyone agreed that we should not move much of the research work from HKGi to the city <br />staff for two reasons: first, the city staff already has a full work program for 2002 and, second, <br />the HKGi staff would be lacking the background on the city when they analyze the data and <br />make recommendations. Additionally, there did not appear to be many public information <br />meetings that could be removed from the work schedule as we all agreed that the public process <br />in updating this Comprehensive Plan is very important. <br /> <br />It is unlikely that the city would get a significantly lower proposed fee from another <br />planning/consulting firm, unless the work schedule is significantly altered. Quite simply, <br />professional work for planning assistance is not cheap in today's world. As an aside, Council <br />should note that in 1989 the city completed focus area studies as an addendum to the <br />Comprehensive Plan. It was proposed that four areas be evaluated and this turned into three <br />focus area studies. BRW got the project; the fee txvelve years ago for this work was $49,965 and <br />this was without any public participation meetings. <br /> <br />Funding for consulting services for the CP update would mainly come from the <br />Holt/Jackson transaction that generated about $60,000 that the Council put into a <br />contingency reserve. Any fees above this amount would have to be funded from one of the <br />following: the 2002 contingency budget; put into the 2003 planning budget; or by using the <br />2003 contingency budget. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.