7.0. SR 01-22-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to Mayor and City Council January 22, 2002 Page 2 minds of the Commissioners, can be used as a basis for denial or approval of land use requests. Why Review the Comprehensive Plan? Unlike the consensus that was reached regarding the purpose of a Comprehensive Plan, no one issue clearly stood out in the minds of the Commissioners regarding the need for a Comprehensive Plan evaluation. One Commissioner posed the question, "Is Elk River still the place where the city and country flow together?" (even though this is not a City vision of the City) as the basis for a Comprehensive Plan evaluation. Another questioned if the Comprehensive Plan working? Several Commissioners felt that the current plan has a number of unclear statements and that if we clearly don't understand what we want, we cannot fully evaluate proposals that come before the Commission ("we" being the Commission). Other Commissioners felt that changes in the market trends in regards to demographics, building design, cluster developments, etc. are impacting the plan and wondered if the plan is equipped to handle these changes. The question of how large a developed city do we want was raised. Issues such as the development of the gravel mine area and the changes to the Highway 169 corridor from Rogers to Zimmerman were raised as examples of additional impacts to the plan. There were also concerns expressed by the amount of density allowed under the current land use plan. Process In discussing alternative processes, the Commission clearly felt that a section-by-section evaluation of the plan in-house could be accomplished, as the Plan only needed "fine- tuning". It would be important to establish criteria to evaluate the objectives stated in the current plan and determine if they are being met. If the objectives are not being met, then a more-detailed evaluation would be required. The Commission agreed strongly that the review should be conducted by a steering committee comprised of members of the Planning Commission, City Council, Park and Recreation Commission, Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Heritage Preservation Commission, and Economic Development Authority, as well a few members of the community. They did not feel that a consultant was needed, however, based on the list of projects the Planning Department has identified (downtown redevelopment, GIS implementation, housing, etc) for 2002, an outside facilitator is highly recommended in order to complete this process in a timely manner. The Commission also felt that prior to a full review of the Comprehensive Plan that the Planning Commission and City Council should meet to establish a common foundation and understanding as to what the issues and concerns are. Several Commissioners felt that the Council was sending mixed messages to the Planning Commission in regards to land use issues. One issue that was not resolved regarding the process is the need for a moratorium of some type while the review was occurring. This will need to be an item of discussion at the joint meeting. S:\PLANNING\MICHMC\MEMOS\CompPlanUpdate.doc