Memo- Updating the Comprehensive PlanMEMO
To: City Council/Zoning and Planning Commission
From: Nancy Anderson
Date: August 25, 2006
Subject: Updating the Comprehensive Plan
The Metropolitan Council is requiring all cities to update their Comprehensive Plans by
June 2008. Hoisington Koegler prepared the' existing Comprehensive Plan. We are
budgeting money for 2007 to again have Hoisington .Koegler assist the City in updating
the existing plan.
Attached is a memo and schedule prepared by Hoisington Koegler for the updating of
the plan. The Zoning and Planning Commission will be the primary group that will be
responsible for updating and preparing the plan. The proposal from Mr. Koegler details
dividing the residential community meeting into three areas and gathering information
along with a group of commercial representatives. Mr. Koegler also details an Ad Hoc
Committee with representatives from the Community that can work with the
Commission.
Incorporated in the plan will be other documents that have been generated in the past
for planning purposes. These plans include The East End Study, Shady Oak Road
Redevelopment Study, the LRT Station Study Plan, and LRT plans. Also to be included
in the plan will be a section on Economic Development.
The topic for tonight's meeting is the process outlined by the attached memo. If the
Commission and City Council have other suggestions for the updating of the Plan these
will also be discussed.
a~
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. ~®
To: Jim Kerrigan and Nancy Anderson
From: Mark Koegler
Subject: Hopkins Comprehensive Plan
Date: August 23, 2006
Based on our recent discussions, I have assembled the following information outlining a process for
updating the Hopkins Comprehensive Plan. This information is intended to convey the elements of a
planning process that meets the needs of Hopkins while conforming to the schedule requirements of the
Metropolitan Council. Upon concurrence with this general process, I can add appropriate detail and work
with you to create a specific set of tasks and responsibilities for the plan update.
Process
It's my understanding that the City of Hopkins wants to take full advantage of work that has been done in the past
as a basis for the Plan, rather than trying to "reinvent the wheel". At the same time, there is interest in creating a
more meaningful plan, not simply updating a few numbers in the existing plan. Members of the City Council
have also expressed interest in adding community involvement to the update process. Accordingly, the approach
outlined as follows would take advantage of all existing information and define a focused approach for
community involvement. This approach is both practical and cost effective.
The attached process diagram outlines a starting point for discussions on the Comprehensive Plan update. It
outlines a series of general tasks, community involvement steps and a rough timeline. It starts with akick-off
meeting with the Zoning and Planning Commission (Z&P) which is the entity that will be charged with the
primary responsibility for preparing the plan. The initial kick-off meeting would be focused on a review of the
existing plan as well as the scope and schedule for the plan update. It should be held in a workshop meeting
format, void of any other agenda items. That meeting might also feature a brief "Comp Plan 101" for the benefit
of Commissioners who have not participated in past comprehensive plans.
As the work progresses into the early portions of the planning process, future planning directions for specific
areas of the community will be taken from recent redevelopment planning actions including but not limited to the
East End Plan, the Shady Oak Road Redevelopment Study, past LRT planning efforts and the current Station
Area Planning process. These projects represent substantial portions of the community and the Comprehensive
Plan will need to incorporate and coordinate these actions.
The planning process for the Hopkins Comprehensive Plan should feature focused community input. The last
Hopkins plan update was a relatively procedural exercise with open public forums. This time around, the
Comprehensive Plannig process should more proactively take the plan to the community. Focused area
meetings could be used to accomplish this purpose.
As depicted on the attached diagram, the public input process could entail two series of focused area meetings.
The areas could include downtown and commercial interests as well as three sessions focused on Hopkins'
residential neighborhoods. The residential neighborhoods could be split geographically, generally those on the
east side of the community, east of TH 169; those lying west of TH 169 and north of Excelsior Boulevard; and
those lying west of TH 169 and south of Excelsior Boulevard. Meetings focused on each of these areas would
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659
Ph (612) 338-0800 Fx (612) 338-6838 www.hkgi.com
Direct (612) 252-7120 Email mkoegler@hkgi.com
Jim Kerrigan and Nancy Anderson
Comprehensive Plan Memorandum
August 23, 2006
Page 2
allow people to gather information and provide feedback on issues that impact their specific neighborhoods as
well as the community at large. The first series of meetings could be used to inform people about the planning
process and gain a better understanding of the long-term issues that are of interest and concern to them. After
gaining initial input, the draft of the plan could be prepared. Once a draft of most of the plan elements is in place,
the next step in the community input process would be to facilitate a review of planning alternatives. Planning
alternatives would likely include options for housing, transportation, parks and open space, aesthetics,
commercial uses, etc. Smaller scale, community meetings could be effective in examining a range of alternatives.
Bringing planning concepts down to the neighborhood scale creates more local interest. These four sessions
would need to begin with acommunity-wide overview and then quickly focus on more localized discussions.
The communication process used as part of the Comprehensive Plan also needs to use creative means of fostering
input. Translation of pertinent materials into multiple languages maybe appropriate as well as web site postings,
blogs and other options will need to be considered to get the word out and to encourage participation either in
person or electronically at public input events.
The tasks identified on the attached graphic are intended to only be the basic foundation of the Comprehensive
Plan process. Based on past experience, the planning process as generally identified herein is likely to take
between 12 and 14 months. As long as the project gets underway in early January, compliance with the 2008
statutory deadline should not be a problem.
It is also my understanding that the City may want to incorporate an Economic Development chapter into the plan
update which would build on existing information. Such a section in the plan would be a great way to ensure that
economic development initiatives are integrated into the City's long-range planning efforts. An economic
development component of the plan might include community economic goals, an assessment of the current
business climate, forecasts of economic development needs and opportunities, incentives for economic
development and resources used to accomplish economic development objectives.
Additional Public Input
In most cases, the Planning Commission is the body charged with the responsibility for coordinating the
preparation of a comprehensive plan. Events in Hopkins are shaped by a number of players including the City,
residents, private business, and particularly the school district. There may be value in bringing "non-City"
representatives to the table along with the Planning Commission in order to broaden the discussion. Toward that
end, consideration could be given to establishing an Ad Hoc Comprehensive Plan Committee to meet with the
Planning Commission at key times during the planning process. This group would not be part of all Planning
Commission meetings but be involved at specified points in the planning process. Such a group might include
representatives from the:
^ School District #270
^ SuperValu (business emphasis)
^ Hopkins Business and Civic Association
^ Human Rights Commission
^ Hopkins residential community
^ Others
Having these kinds of interests as well as the knowledge base that they represent at the table helping to formulate
the plan could greatly benefit the process and the final result.
Jim Kerrigan and Nancy Anderson
Comprehensive Plan Memorandum
August 23, 2006
Page 3
During the planning. process, other review/input meetings with specific commissions such a.s the Park Board
would be held. The Ad Hoc Committee would not replace the role of this and other commissions. All meetings
throughout the process would be open to the general public.
Nett Step
Take a look at the process identified herein and see if you think it fits with your needs. I would be glad to have a
follow-up meeting to assist in refming the tasks, talking more specifically about the elements of the plan that need
to be updated and an appropriate level of involvement of HKGi in the update process.
•
a
V
t„/'1
"'a
R5
V
0
~~
r~+
.~
ass
~^
#~
V
tl1
0 ~
Z D
_ ~,
~r.
~ r.
ti
~'
-~~
~~.~
~_
L
V: .V'
v, 'J
,~ y ~ ~~
L J v (~
r .=+ '.+ ~% ~.
~ _ Z ~ _,
z_ `~ z - _
_~ _ ~ -
". L J C
N ~
L C V f:
Cr '7 ~ v, ^.
`+ ~~ L
. ~ L,
r ., ~
~ .r
~ N
r,
r.
G
i l
v
G
~-',+t~
_ cam,
~!
.:,
ti a
n N
.~
'J ' ~, C ~ J
~
V r W J ^JJ ~
. ~i
w / 1
f.
I , . • • '
j ~ ~ c.L. / l ~ ;~
-~
= - ~'
.3 _ -
, _
l
J:
~, _
z
"~. .. -
.t N
z~~ ~.
1<
y
J
N
J
L
r
n
N
L
J
n
v
~z
~~
:J
u
[~
O
N
N
T
i-.
r
r.
EX~IIBIT A
MAP OF PRIMARY STUDY AREA SUBJECT TO MORATORIUM
IMPOSED BY INTERIM ORDINANCE