Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.D.4. Comments on Scott Co. 2030 Comp Plan CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE s: D. ~ Memorandum CASE NO.: Not applicable TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council, Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Comments on Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan MEETING DATE: August 5, 2008 REVIEW PERIOD: INTRODUCTION: Scott County's draft 2030 plan was made available internally for review. Staffhas developed the accompanying comment letter. Council is asked to authorize the appropriate City officials to submit the attached comments on the Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan as presented. RELATIONSHIP TO CITY GOALS: The proposed action relates to goal D, vibrant, resilient and stable. r ALTERNATIVES: 1. Offer and approve a motion authorizing the appropriate City officials to submit the attached comments on the Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan as presented. 2. Offer and approve a motion authorizing the appropriate City officials to submit the attached comments on the Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan with revision. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and approve a motion authorizing the appropriate City officials to submit the attached comments on the Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan as presented. /~ I R. Michael Leek Community Development Director H:\CC\2008\08-06\Scott County cover rpt.doc Draft of Comments on Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan S, 0 . t.[ · R ~ v \.S ce. 0 (DATE) Brad Davis, Planning Manager Community Development Department Scott County Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Davis: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on Scott County's 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update. Should you have any questions regarding the comments feel free to contact me. Chapter I: The City has no comment on the contents of Chapter I. Chapter II - Public Participation: The City of Shakopee appreciates the County's efforts since 2004 to seek broad public input in the planning process, as well as the inclusion of representatives of the cities within the County in several of the key public events. A County response to this comment is not required. Chapter III - Community Background: This chapter does a good job of providing an overview of the County's past and projected growth in population, households and employment. Figure III-34 under B. Employment Forecasts leads readily to two conclusions that are significant. First is that the City of Shakopee currently does, and is expected to be home to by far the largest number and percentage of jobs in the County (43% of all jobs in the County) The second and most significant conclusion is that the projected 2030 employment forecast does not represent a large enough concentration of jobs in the County and south of the Minnesota River to make the County a real jobs destination. With the increasing cost of fuel (and energy generally), land acquisition for road and transit right-of-way, and construction costs, it is important that the County and Scott County cities take a closer look at this issue and determine whether it requires a major policy shift in the County's and the cities' comprehensive plans. C:\Documents and Settings~cox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet I Files\Content.Outlook\869JTF AX\comment letter Scott County Plan 08062008.doc Draft of Comments on Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Chapter IV - County Vision: The City was represented earlier this year at the public hearing at which several residents addressed the County about the desirability of shifting to a land use approach that would take more account of small-scale agricultural activities. It will be interesting to see if this testimony and subsequent activity related to it will have any impact on the County's statements regarding I) "... the diversity of urban and rural lifestyle choices," and 2) the characterization of abundant farmland in the County as an "interim use." The "Strategic Challenges" portion of this chapter does a good job of setting forth a number of these challenges. The City is in particular agreement with statement number 6 regarding county-wide agreement on the "type, intensity, and location of commercial, institutional and industrial development in the county." Chapter V - Land Use & Growth Management: History of County Land Use Planning; A - Historical Sites: . Figure V-I- This figure lists the Roehl- Lenzmeier House as an historic site. Because of a development proposal that was underway the City undertook an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) process regarding this site. The house was documented for the Scott County Historical Society, and subsequently demolished. Existing Land Uses; A - Residential Development Trends: . Figure V -4- The numbers in this figure do not seem consistent with the City's numbers. City staff would be happy to review these with County staff. . Figure V-5- The percentage changes in density for both townships and cities seem to be out of synch with the listed 2000 and 2005 densities (it should be noted that the number of gross acres being used is left blank in the table. For the listed 2000 and 2005 density for Belle Plaine TWP is 92 and 75 respectively. This is note as an increase of 18%, when, in fact, it is a reduction. Similarly, Shakopee's density is shown as 2 and 2 respectively, yet there is an indicated 33% increase from 2000- 2005. E - CommercialllndustriaVExtraction Land Uses; . While the stated goals are positive regarding the guidance of areas for these use, they do not seem to go so far as to tackle the question of how large a concentration of commercial and industrial lands, and thus jobs, the County, cities and townships should target for future development. C:\Documents and Settings~cox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet 2 Files\Content.Outlook\869JTF AX\comment letter Scott County Plan 08062008.doc Draft of Comments on Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Chapter VI - Transportation: General Comment: Recently, as a result of the SCALE Transportation Task Force, a series of education modules on transportation planning for elected and appointed officials has been developed. The first module is currently being presented throughout the County. The plan does not seem to mention the SCALE initiative on creating commercial corridors and to have a goal of 50% of Scott County residents working in the county, and a greater emphasis on that goal is suggested in this chapter. It is fairly common for transportation planning to focus on roadways and the issues of mobility and safety almost exclusively. This approach often results in talking about the impacts ofland development as something to be tolerated or mitigated. Unfortunately, this approach is still evident in the draft Transportation chapter of the Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update. In addition, at page VI-5, the chapter places much emphasis on the need for the County to plan a roadway system that is compatible with the "Metropolitan System." While that may be an important purpose, it should not play the central role that it seems to. This is so because 1) the Metropolitan Council is not effectively planning for the long-term future of the system, and 2) because, on the local and county level, it ignores the most important set of factors underlying transportation planning, i.e. the underlying decisions about economic development and land use choices. The most notable aspect ofthe first module is that it begins to recognize the critical relationship between land use planning and transportation planning. Chapter VII - Parks and Trails General Comments - There is a need to come up with a trail connection plan and for transportation trails that can safely use countv roads, and the City of Shakopee looks forward to continued cooperation with the County on this issue. The City continues to note with some disappointment the lack of commitment on the part of the County to providing County and regional park and trail facilities that are conveniently accessible to the approximately 33,000 residents of Shako pee, who presently constitute about 25% ifthe County's population. In a time of increasing energy costs, and absent effective trail connections to existing County parks, these facilities can only become less convenient for Shakopee's residents. C:\Documents and Settings~cox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet 3 Files\Content.Outlook\869JTF AX\comment letter Scott County Plan 08062008.doc Draft of Comments on Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Past opportunities for partnership (e.g. George and Idella Shutrop Park on CR 16) were rejected by the County, but it is hoped that the County will reevaluate its position as it looks at future opportunities for partnership with the City of Shakopee. Chapter VIII - Water & Natural Resources C. Natural Resource Goals and Policies - The County undertook its natural resource inventory in 2006. It should be noted that the City of Shakopee undertook this process for the resources in the City, as well as Jackson and Louisville Townships, as early as 2001. Based on that, in 2003 the City did its first corridor planning as part of an interim Comprehensive Plan Update. Since then, the City has gone on to develop extensive standards for the preservation and enhancement of its Natural Resource Corridors. The City expects and trusts that as it implements its own plans, the County is respectful of the extensive work that the City has done and its plans and corridor standards. Chapter IX - Safe, Healthy & Livable Communities D. Housing Goals and Policies - The series of goals enunciated seems to set up a de facto plan to focus executive housing in the unincorporated areas, while relegating multi-family and senior housing solely to the cities. As a city that has a substantial concentration of multi-family, affordable, and senior housing already, but far fewer opportunities for executive housing than its neighbors, this is an approach which seems to be at odds with the City of Shako pee's vision and long-term benefit. It is suggested that further clarification, and perhaps revision, would be desirable on this topic Goal #IX-3 - The County should do more than encourage cities to accomplish these goals. It should, in fact, consider where in the unincorporated areas or hamlets there may be opportunities to develop affordable housing, connect housing in these areas to services, and make sure that housing has appropriate pedestrian and transit elements and connections in the unincorporated portions of the County. Page lX-10. Fire Departments - It should be noted that the City of Shakopee now has a full-time fire chief as well. Chapter X - Economic Development At page X-IS, A. Invest in Well-Planned Infrastructure and Services, the opening ofthe TH 169 Bypass in Shakopee is noted as 2007; it was opened in November of2006. Similarly, 2006 is noted as the year the Bloomington Ferry Bridge was opened; it was opened in 2005. Chapter XII - Implementation Goal #XII-2 - Item "a" states that the plan will be reviewed and updated every 10 years. That, of course, is the general period of time for updates under the Metropolitan C:\Documents and Settings~cox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet 4 Files\Content.Outlook\869JTF AX\comment letter Scott County Plan 08062008.doc Draft of Comments on Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Planning Act (MLP A). As has been seen in the last ten years (especially in Scott County), change can come rapidly, and thus updates of the plan may need to occur more frequently than every ten years. It is laudable that in item "c" the County commits to annual reviews, but it would also be desirable under this goal to acknowledge that these reviews, and changed circumstances, may necessitate amendment of the plan more frequently than every ten years. Goal #XII-3 - It would be desirable under this goal statement to reference the County's commitment to local review and input on the CIP, something which the County has demonstrated in the past. Figure XII-4 - Implementation Recommendations . At page XII -16, top of the page, the recommendation regarding" . . .highway commercial corridor studies. . ." should include an acknowledgement that cities through which the corridors run are key responsible parties in any such studies. . At page XII-16, Category 3. Transportation, first recommendation- This recommendation, again, gives primacy to County spacing guidelines rather than acknowledging the balance between access to property for development purposes and access spacing which is concerned with mobility and safety. It is this balance that in the long run is critical to giving effect to the overall visions of the County and its cities. . At page XII-17, top of the page, the recommendation should be revised to make reference to the Scott County Transit Planning Team (TPT) and Transit Review Board (TRB), as well as the cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake. . At page XII-17, middle of the page under Category 4.Parks & Trails - It seems highly unlikely under Minnesota law the local collection of county park dedication is feasible, but the City would be happy to provide input on this issue. . At page XII-18, Category 6. Utilities - When updating ISTS/CSTS ordinances or standards, as well as interim development standards, the City of Shakopee would expect that it (as well as other affected cities) would be a part of the process of developing those standards. . At page XII-18, Category 7. Healthy & Livable Communities - It is unclear what is meant by a "Community Governance model" and how it would relate to the cities within the County. The City of Shakopee looks forward to learning more about what this is and how it would function, and reserves its judgment on the desirability of the desirability of this approach. . At page XII-l 0, Category 8. Economic Development - Under the third recommendation regarding marketing and promotion of economic development, there is no mention of cities, but there should be. R. Michael Leek C:\Documents and Settings~cox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet 5 Files\Content.Outlook\869JTFAX\comment letter Scott County Plan 08062008.doc Draft of Comments on Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Community Development Director CC 2008 Correspondence File C:\Documents and Settings~cox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet 6 Files\Content.Outlook\869JTF AX\comment letter Scott County Plan 08062008.doc