My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 02/23/2006 - Work Session b
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2006
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 02/23/2006 - Work Session b
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 3:51:39 PM
Creation date
4/26/2024 1:24:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Title
Work Session b
Document Date
02/23/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
The Planning Commission discussed their role in the review process. The Commission <br />acknowledged their "advisory" role, but felt that sometimes the City Council seems to think of the <br />Planning Commission as a "necessary evil" and an "impediment" to development. <br />The Planning Commission decided that the City Council should better define the role that they <br />want the Planning Commission to assume. <br />The Planning Commission also asked if the City Council has a clear vision of development. <br />Consensus was that the City Council does not as evidenced by the many Comprehensive Plan <br />Amendments processed in the City. The Planning Commission indicated that they desired the City <br />Council be more firm about their policies. <br />Mr. Bakken asked the Planning Commissioners whether or not the Planning Commission had a <br />clear understanding of what their "mission" was. The group stated that they are in place to make <br />sure land use applications adhere to City Code. <br />Mr. Bakken asked if the City Council has defined the role of the Planning Commission. The <br />Planning Commission generally thought there was not any clear definition from the City Council <br />regarding what the role of the Planning Commission should be. <br />The Planning Commission felt that by working together, the review process will operate better. <br />The Planning Commission agreed that they are not policy makers, but that they have opinions that <br />should be acknowledged. <br />The Planning Commission stated that they wished that City Council policy was better <br />communicated to them. The Planning Commission felt that Staff should communicate Council's <br />directions and policy through more detailed reports to the Commission. <br />Mr. Bakken asked if the current "system" works. <br />The Planning Commission felt that as a group, the Commission works well with one another, but <br />that the information exchange between the City Council and Planning Commission could be <br />improved. The problem is not the people serving on the Planning Commission and City Council <br />but the system set up around the approval process. As an example, the City Council minutes are <br />only formal information that is shared with the Planning Commission and often times it is difficult <br />the gain a full understanding of the rationale that went behind the City Council decision. This <br />puts the Planning Commission in an awkward position of defending a City Council decision to <br />residents and interested parties without fully understanding what factored into the decision. <br />Mr. Bakken asked if the Council thinks that the Planning Commission does not do what the City <br />Council wants them to do. <br />Planning Commission/March 2, 2006 <br />DRAFT <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.