HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/29/2008
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes
a. January 15, 2008
5. Public Hearings
None
6. New Business
AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING
MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
1830 County Road BEast
Comprehensive Plan Update - Process and Responsibilities
7. Unfinished Business
None
8. Visitor Presentations
9. Commission Presentations
January 28 Council Meeting: Mr. Walton
February 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson
February 25 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler
10. Staff Presentations
Note: The February 5 PC meeting will be on Monday, February 4 because of precinct caucus night
11. Adjournment
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 2008
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai
Chairperson Lorraine Fischer
Commissioner Harland Hess
Cornrnissioner Gary Pearson
Commissioner Dale Trippler
Commissioner Joe Walton
Cornrnissioner Jeremy Yarwood
Cornmissioner Robert Martin
Commissioner Joseph Boeser
Absent
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Absent
Present
Absent
I
Staff Present:
Ken Roberts, Planner
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the arnended agenda adding under Staff Presentations - 10. a.
Rescheduling of February 5 rneeting and 10. b. Special meeting on January 29.
Commissioner Hess seconded Ayes - all
The motion passed.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. January 2, 2008
Commissioner Trippler moved approval of the minutes of January 2, 2008 as submitted.
Cornmissioner Martin seconded Ayes - Trippler, Walton, Martin
Abstentions - Fischer, Hess, Pearson
The rnotion passed.
V. PUBLIC HEARING
7;00 p.rn. Conditional Use Permit - Hydrologic (1261 Highway 61 East)
Planner Ken Roberts presented the staff report for the request by Hydrologic to add a fenced-in
outdoor storage area in the parking lot of the building at 1261 Highway 61.
Commissioner Trippler said he observed that the trailers trucks when parked seem to go over the
property line and he suggested that posts be installed to ensure that trucks cannot back into that area.
Mr. Trippler also suggested that consideration be given to adding CUP conditional language requiring
that projects must be completed within one year of their start date.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-15-08
-2-
Commissioner Martin asked what constitutes "substantially started" for a CUP project. Staff responded
that because of the diverse circumstances for each project, it is determined on a case-by-case basis.
Cornmissioner Hess suggested that the 8-foot proposed height of the fenced-in storage facility be
included in the conditional use permit recommendation. Mr. Hess agreed with Mr. Trippler's
suggestion to require pipe protectors to keep trucks from backing into the new fenced-in area. Mr.
Hess asked whether any changes would be required to the grading. Staff responded that no grading
change has been proposed.
Commissioner Walton asked whether stored materials could exceed the eight-foot fence height. Staff
responded that the storage proposal does not exceed the eight-foot fence.
Jeff latterel, representing Hydrologic, explained that the stored materials would not exceed the eight-
foot fence height. Mr. latterel said there would be no changes to the grading or drainage. Mr. latterel
said he does not object to a requirement of the protective posts, but he explained that there is a
protective island in that area to stop the trucks and trailers from hitting the fence.
There were no comments from the public during the public hearing.
Commissioner Pearson moved to adopt the resolution approving a conditional use permit for
Hydrologic to add a 25-foot by 40-foot by 8-foot-high fenced-in outdoor storage facility to the property
at 1261 Highway 61. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the code. Approval of
this CUP is subject to the following six conditions:
1. All construction and activities on the site shall follow the site and project plans as approved by the
city. City staff may approve minor changes to these plans and the city council must approve major
changes to the approved plans.
2. The fence design and the slats in the fence shall provide 100 percent screening of the materials
inside the enclosure.
3. Any fence over six feet tall requires a building perrnit issued by the city. The city building official will
require the submittal of a structural plan for the proposed fence approved by a registered engineer
with the building permit materials.
4. Hydrologic shall store all of their materials and supplies in the fenced storage area or within the
building. Stored materials shall not exceed the height of the fence.
5. The proposed outdoor storage area and site work must be substantially started within one year of
council approval or the permit shall becorne null and void. The council may extend this deadline for
one year.
6. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
Commissioner Trippler seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
VI. NEW BUSINESS
None
Planning Commission
Minutes of 01-15-08
-3-
VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None
IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
a. January 14 Council meeting: Commissioner Martin reported on this rneeting.
b. January 28 Council meeting: Cornmissioner Walton will attend.
c. February 11 Council meeting: Comrnissioner Pearson will attend.
X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
a. Reschedule February 5 meeting
The February 5 meeting was rescheduled to Monday, February 4 because of the caucuses.
b. Special meeting on January 29 - Cornprehensive Plan Update
A special rneeting was scheduled for Tuesday, January 29 to discuss the Comprehensive Plan
Update.
X. ADJOURNMENT
The rneeting was adjourned at 7:51 p.m.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Acting City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
Ken Roberts, Planner
Comprehensive Plan Update - Process and Responsibilities
January 24, 2008
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
The city is starting the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan as required by the
Metropolitan Council. To help start the update, city planning and engineering staff have met and
worked with several of the city's consultants to prepare a process and program to begin the
preparation of the final phases of the plan update. This work plan and process, when the city
finishes it, should give Maplewood a completed and updated Comprehensive Plan to guide the
city for the next 10-20 years. This memo is to help explain the plan update process and the
responsibilities of many of the various groups that we expect to be involved with the plan
update.
BACKGROUND
On September 10,2007, the city council approved a recommendation to begin the Parks, Trails
and Open Space portion of the Comprehensive Plan with the firm of Schoell Madson, along with
beginning an update of the nine components of the overall Comprehensive Plan. Schoell
Madson was the firm selected through a competitive process to prepare the Comprehensive
Land Use Study as part of the South Maplewood Moratorium process.
On January 28, 2007, the city council was to consider proposals from city consultants for their
preparation of updates to several parts of the comprehensive plan. This work would include
updates to the land use plan, the transportation plan, the sanitary sewer plan, the completion of
a natural area and greenway plan and a surface water management plan. (Please see the
attached agenda report starting on page four from the Acting City Manager for more information
about these proposed contracts.)
DISCUSSION
Proposal Review
The process for preparation of a Comprehensive Plan needs to begin with the growth and
development assumptions before the city makes the final determinations for the other
components. For example, it is not appropriate to complete the work of the Parks, Trails and
Open Space or Transportation component without the knowledge from the growth component of
the Land Use study. Each of these components must work in unison. A cooperative effort with
city staff, MFRA, SEH and KHA, along with extensive input from the city's boards and
commissions, will provide for the best Comprehensive Plan. Staff is proposing that the work be
done in phases to allow checkpoints and updates as necessary and to meet the June 2008
completion date required by the Metropolitan Council.
Approval Process
On September 10,2007, the City Council established a multi-commission-community task force
to help study parks, trails and open spaces (PTOS) in Maplewood. This task force includes
members of the Park Commission, Environment and Natural Resources Commission, Historic
Preservation Commission, the planning commission and several Maplewood residents. The
task force now has 28 members. The PTOS Advisory Panel [formerly the Task Force] would
"advise" and make recommendations mainly to the Environmental and Natural Resources
Commission, the Parks Commission and the Planning Commission. State statute requires that
the Planning Commission hold a Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Plan update, and by city
ordinance, the Planning Commission's mission should be to implement the goals and findings of
the Comprehensive Plan.
We have prepared a flow chart that shows the members of the consultant team and staff team
working on this process. (Please see the chart on page nine.) This chart is to help establish the
lines of communication and to identify the responsible liaison. Thus, staff recommends that the
city adopt the flow chart that establishes the various liaisons and process for approval, along
with expectations for management of the plan update process.
Staff prepared the attached chart with the following assumptions/expectations:
1. The PTOS Advisory Panel will review and make recommendations to the various
Commissions with respect to Parks, Trails and Open Space in the city while considering
broader topics. We have attached on page ten a summary and proposed schedule of
the topic areas for the PTOS.
2. Each of the Commissions will make their own findings and recommendations on their
specific area of responsibility. For example, the ENR (Environment and Natural
Resources) will be working mainly on the Natural Resources Plan and Storm Water
Management Plans, but coordination will be through the PTOS and Planning
Commission liaisons.
3. Recommendations from the PTOS Advisory Panel and the various Commissions will be
forwarded to the Planning Commission for their consideration. The planning commission
will hold at least one Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Plan update. The Planning
Commission will then forward their recommendation, along with the recommendations of
the PTOS Advisory Panel and the other Commissions, to the City Council for final
consideration and approval.
4. Staff will provide the City Council, the Commissions and other interested parties a
monthly summary of progress on the plan update and about issues related to the
Comprehensive Plan update process.
5. City staff expects members from the PTOS Advisory Panel and the various
Commissions to attend or provide representatives to the Public Open Houses. In
addition, they may be asked to make presentations to other Commissions on their
overall perspective to help guide each Commission in their final recommendations to the
Planning Commission and City Council.
2
6. It is possible that there will be divergent opinions and recommendations from the
differing perspectives and Commissions. City staff is encouraging the consideration of
all views and perspectives during this process. City staff and consultants will assemble
all the information for the plan update for the City Council's consideration and will make
a professional recommendation for the Council to consider. The staff also will provide
the council the recommendations of the Commissions and Advisory Panel.
7. It is the goal of staff to complete this process by the end of June 2008. This would allow
for a six- month neighboring f-ommunity review to be completed before the city makes
the final submittal of the plan update to the Metropolitan Council. The finished plan
update is due to the Metropolitan Council by the end of 2008. The six-month review
process is a suggestion by the Metropolitan Council, but may be shortened if the
neighboring jurisdictions agree to take less time with the city's plan. This is an
aggressive schedule, but for now staff is proposing that the city follow it. The
Metropolitan Council has not yet provided staff with any methods for requesting an
extension on their due date.
It is important to note that this is an aggressive schedule with high expectations for everyone
involved - city staff, the consultants, the boards and commissions (especially the planning
commission) and the city council. City staff is expecting that this update will require the
planning commission to dedicate much to time (and possibly extra meetings) to the
process. However, staff anticipates that this process will provide the city the best planning
document for Maplewood to meet the needs of the city for the next 10-20 years.
RECOMMENDATION
Please review all the attached materials and be prepared to discuss the process for and the
responsibilities for updating the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan.
Attachments:
1. January 23, 2008 staff report from Chuck Ahl
2. Flow Chart of Communications and Responsibililies for Comprehensive Planning Process
3. Draft PTOS Topic Areas and Schedule
3
Attachment 1
AGENDA REPORT
DATE:
City Council
Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
DuWayne Konekwo, Deputy Director of Public Works
Comprehensive Plan Updates, Consider Contract Amendments with
McCombs Frank, Roos and Assoc., Kimley-Horn Associates, SEH, Inc.
and Applied Ecological Services, Inc. for Updates to all Chapters of
Comprehensive Plan
January 23, 2008
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION
At the September 10, 2007 meeting, the City Council approved retaining consultant services for
preparation of the first phase of the Comprehensive Plan. Planning and engineering staff have
worked with a number of the consultants and have prepared a program to begin the preparation of the
final phases of the overall work. This work plan should result in a completed and updated
Comprehensive Plan that guides the City for the next 10-20 years. Authorization of the Professional
Services for these consultants is recommended.
Background
On September 10th, the Council approved a recommendation to begin the Parks, Trails and Open
Space portion of the Comprehensive Plan with the firm of Schoell Madson, along with beginning an
update of the nine components of the overall Comprehensive Plan. Schoell Madson was the firm
selected through a competitive process to prepare the Comprehensive Land Use Study as part of the
South Maplewood Moratorium process. The firm of Schoell Madson no longer exists. The firm was
purchased and merged with McCombs Frank Roos (MFRA) in November 2007 [see attached notice
memo from November 2007]. A majority of the employees who worked with Schoell Madson
transferred to MFRA. The Council authorized $21,830 of work with Schoell Madson that transferred
to MFRA as part of the merger. The Council also authorized $9,800 of work with Kimley Horn
Associates (KHA) for the Transportation Component of the Comprehensive Plan. There are no
changes proposed to the Transportation work by KHA.
City planning and engineering staff met with MFRA representatives, KHA representatives, and with a
representative from SEH, the firm that prepares the Non-Degradation Study of our storm drainage
system, to coordinate the overall project scope and to avoid duplication of services. Planning and
Engineering staff did not consider returning to a full competitive solicitation process for these services
due to work that is on-going. The reasons include the background information that Schoell Madson
has with the South Maplewood Study that will be a large component of the Comprehensive Planning
and the major background information that KHA has from the 2003 study work that they have
completed. Additionally, KHA is currently an active member of the City's consultant pool and assisted
staff in the preparation of the Sewer Study Component of the Comprehensive Plan in 2003 in
consultation with SEH. Each of these pro~llses looked at a competitive solicitation of firms for the
studies. Because this is a professional seryice, the competitive selection is not governed by the low
bid requirements but nevertheless involves selection of the most effective professionals involved in
the overall process and the competitive nature of the pool provides for the lowest cost overall plan.
Given each of the firms current involvement in on-going work, it does not appear appropriate, nor is it
recommended by the staff, that the process be stopped and opened for a competitive selection
process.
4
Comprehensive Plan
Page Two
Proposal Review
The process for preparation of a Comprehensive Plan needs to begin with the growth and
development assumptions prior to the final determinations within the other components. For example,
it is not appropriate to complete the work of the Parks, Trails and Open Space or Transportation
component without the knowledge from the growth component of the Land Use study. Each of these
components must work in unison. A cooperative effort with MFRA, SEH and KHA will provide for the
best Comprehensive Plan. Work is proposed in phases to allow check points and updates as
necessary and to still meet the June 2008 completion date required by the Metropolitan Council.
Attached are proposals for completing the work:
1. MFRA: MFRA, with Rose Lorsung as the lead individual, is proposed to be the lead firm on
completion of our Comprehensive Plan. Services are estimated to be $83,699, of which
$21,830 have already been authorized. The work scope includes 8 meetings of the Parks,
Trails and Open Space (PTOS) Advisory Panel during the next 5 months, along with regular
meetings of the staff - consultant Technical Committee. We are proposing that MFRA assist
staff in preparing a monthly progress update as well as conducting 2 City-wide Open House
forums for additional input. The divisions of the work are as follows:
a. Phase I, authorized in 2007, Land-Use: $ 8,020
b. Phase I, authorized in 2007, PTOS $13,810
c. Phase II, newwork, Land-Use: $51,099
d. Phase II, new work, PTOS $10.770
e. TOTAL MFRA Contract $83,699
2. KHA: Kimley Horn Associates, with Jon Horn as the lead individual, is proposed to complete
the Transportation and Sanitary Sewer Components of our Plan along with providing
significant assistance in the guidance of our Trails updated work plan that coordinates with our
Transportation and PTOS Plan. The new work by KHA will involve coordinating the 2003
Sewer Comp Plan with this version of the plan and to prepare the Capital Improvement
Summary. KHA's work is:
a. Phase I, authorized in 2007, Transportation Section
b. Comp Sewer Plan, new work
c. TOTAL KHA Contract
$ 9,800
$10.600
$20,400
3. AES: Applied Ecological Services, Inc. is proposed to assist with completion of our natural
areas and greenway plan. This is a part of previous Comprehensive Plans that was never
completed. With the Community desire to be an environmentally-friendly/green community, an
inventory of the natural areas and greenway systems is needed in order to prepare protection
plans along with planning for restoration and management of these resources. This is a
necessary section to be added to the overall Comprehensive Plan. The work for AES is:
a. Greenway Plan, new work $20,300
4. SEH: SEH is our lead consultant for our storm water program, including last year's Non-
degradation Plan, with Ron Leaf as the lead individual. The Non-Degradation Plan provided
specific guidance for the City in meeting our NPDES Storm Water Permit requirements along
with achieving a Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SEH work required
by our Non-Degradation Plan and SWPPP to be included in our Comprehensive Plan is:
a. Surface Water Management Plan, new work $65,000
5
Comprehensive Plan
Page Three
5. Total Consultant Work to complete Comprehensive Plan:
a. MFRA:
b. KHA:
c. AES:
d. SEH:
e. TOTAL Consultant Contracts
f. Previously Authorized in Phase I
g. New work for 2008:
Budget Impact
The funding for this work was included as line items in the 2008 budget.
Funding for Phase I was approved as follows:
$83,699
$20,400
$20,300
$65.000
$189,399
$ 31.630
$157,769
. $8,020 to be funded from City Planning budget [101-701-000-4490]
. $13,810 to be funded from Park Dedication fees [PAC fund 403]
. $9,800 to be funded from Public Works Administration [101-501-000-4490]
The new work is proposed as follows:
. $51,099 [MFRA Land Use]; Planning Budget [101-702-4490] ; ($89,190 budgeted)
. $10,770 [MFRA PTOS]; Park Availability Fund [403]; (Balance +$1.1 million)
. $10,600 [KHA Sewer Plan]; San Sewer Fund [601-508-4490; ($85,000 budgeted)
. $20,300 [AES Natural Res. Plan]; PAC Fund [403]; (Balance +$1.1 million)
. $65,000 [SEH Surf Water Plan]; EUF Fund [604-512-4490]; ($65,000 budgeted)'
, - Includes a $45,000 carryover from 2007 consultant costs
- EUF fund balance is awaiting $150,000 monthly payment from Utility Fee
- Expenditures will occur such that a positive balance should exist each month
- Finance Manager is working on establishing fund balance information
Approval Process
On September 10, 2007, the City Council established a multi-commission-community task force,
including members appointed by the Park Commission, Environment and Natural Resources
Commission, Historic Preservation Commission and a number of Maplewood residents. The
membership of the Task Force is currently at 28 members. Staff is suggesting that the Council define
the expectations and authority of the Task Force and that this Task Force should be considered the
Parks Trails and Open Space Advisory Panel. We have prepared a flow chart that the members of
the Consultant Team and staff team working on this process are recommending to the City Council to
help establish the lines of communication and responsible liaison members. The PTOS Advisory
Panel [formerly the Task Force] would "advise" and make recommendations mainly to the
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission, the Parks Commission and the Planning
Commission. State statute requires that the Planning Commission hold a Public Hearing on the
Comprehensive Plan update, and by city ordinance, the Planning Commission's mission should be to
implement the goals and findings of the Comprehensive Plan. Thus, staff recommends that the city
adopt this flow chart and establishes the various liaisons and process for approval, along with
expectations for management of the approval process.
6
Comprehensive Plan
Page Four
Approval Process (cont.)
The attached chart then brings along the following assumptions/expectations:
1. The PTOS Advisory Panel will review and make recommendations to the various
Commissions with respect to Parks, Trails and Open Space in the city while considering
broader topics. Attached is a summary and proposed schedule of the Topic Areas.
2. Each of the Commissions will make their own findings and recommendations on their specific
area of responsibility. For example, the ENR will be working mainly on the Natural Resources
Plan and Storm Water Management Plans, but coordination will be through the PTOS and
Planning Commission liaisons.
3. Recommendations from the PTOS Advisory Panel and the various Commissions will be
forwarded to the Planning Commission for their consideration. The planning commission will
hold at least one Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Plan update. The Planning
Commission will then forward their recommendation, along with the recommendations of the
PTOS Advisory Panel and the other Commissions, to the City Council for final consideration
and approval.
4. Staff will provide the City Council, the Commissions and other interested parties a monthly
summary of progress on the plan update and about issues related to the Comprehensive Plan
process.
5. City staff expects members from the PTOS Advisory Panel and the various Commissions to
attend or provide representatives to the Public Open Houses. In addition, they may be asked
to make presentations to other Commissions on their overall perspective to help guide each
Commission in their final recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council.
6. It is possible that there will be divergent opinions and recommendations from the differing
perspectives and Commissions. City staff is encouraging the consideration of all views and
perspectives during this process. City staff and consultants will assemble all the information
for the plan update for the City Council's consideration and will make a professional
recommendation for the Council to consider. The staff also will provide the council the
recommendations of the Commissions and Advisory Panel.
7. It is the goal of staff to complete this process by the end of June 2008. This would allow for a
six- month neighboring Community review to be completed before the city makes the final
submittal of the plan update to the Metropolitan Council. The finished plan update is due to the
Metropolitan Council by the end of 2008. The six-month review process is a suggestion by the
Metropolitan Council, but may be shortened if the neighboring jurisdictions agree to take less
time with the city's plan. This is an aggressive schedule, but for now staff is proposing that the
city follow it. The Metropolitan Council has not yet provided staff with any methods for
requesting an extension on their due date.
We anticipate this process will provide the city the best planning document for Maplewood to meet
the needs of the city for the next 10-20 years. .
7
Comprehensive Plan
Page Five
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Acting City Manager to retain the following
consulting firms for completion of the Comprehensive Plan as noted:
1. Retain McCombs Frank Roos Associates (MFRA) at a cost of $83,699 to prepare the Parks,
Trails and Open Space and Land Use Component of the Comprehensive Plan. An amount of
$21,830 has been previously authorized to Schoell Madson, who has merged with MFRA.
Funding shall be from the 2008 Planning Budget in the amount of $51,099 and $10,770 from
the Park Availability Fund (Fund 403).
2. Retain Kimley-Hom (KHA) in the amount of $10,600 to complete the Sewer Component of the
Comprehensive Plan. Funding shall be from the Sewer Fund [601-508-000-4490]. An amount
of $9,800 has previously been authorized to KHA.
3. Retain Applied Ecological Services, Inc. (AES) in the amount of $20,300 from the Park
Availability Fund (fund 403) for preparation of the Natural Resources Greenway Plan.
4. Retain SEH, Inc. in the amount of $65,000 from the Environmental Utility Fund (Fund 604) for
preparation of the Storm Water Management Plan.
5. Adopt the proposed Flow of Communications and Responsibilities for Comprehensive
Planning Process chart as proposed by City staff establishing the process and expectations of
the Parks Trail and Open Space Advisory Panel and of the Commissions in the
Comprehensive Planning Process.
Attachments:
1. Flow Chart of Communications and Responsibilities for Comprehensive Planning Process
2. PTOS Topic Areas and Schedule
8
Attachment 2
Row of
Conn1.Inication and
Responsibilities
for Corrp-ehensive
Planring Process
cm'~OF ~'L4PLElVOOD
2030
COMPREHENSIVE PL4.lV
Staff Uaisons: Chuck
Ahl, Tom Ekstrand,
and Ken Roberts
i-
t
Staff Uaisons:
Tom Ekstrand
and Chuck AhI
Staff Uaison:
Tom Ekstrand
..-~
Staff Uaison:
Shann Rnwall
Staff Uaisons:
DeA.ey l<of18\A.ko
and Gnny Gaynor
J
/
Staff Uaisons:
Shann Rnwall and
Gnny Gaynor
\
Staff Uaisons:
DeA.ey 1<oneIM<0
and Gnny Gaynor
HA
9
Attachment 3
;.-
:.:;
PIDS
Topic Areas & Schedule (DRAFT)
The following topic areas win be covered in upcoming meetings. Each meeting will build on
information in previous meetings. This is DRAFT list of topic areas, and each may be modified
based on information provided at the direction of the commissions.
,',
The objective is for the group is to work in advisory capacity to review and make recommendations
to the commissions with respect 10 Parks, Trails and Open Space in the community while
considering broader topics. Guest speakers will be asked to attend meetings for specific topic
areas (I.e. natural resources and transportation). Open Houses will also be held to gather public
input, and it will be important for members to attend those meetings.
}i
.. Please Note we will be changing meetings to Thursdays for the remainder of the project.
Jan 16th Goals, Process Summary and Update Work
.'.J
J
Feb'28th Natural Resources and Conservation Principles
Mar 13th Natural Resources, Water Resources and Conservation Principles
Mar 28th South Maplewood and Natural Resources
\
Apr 10th Land Use and the Parks System
Apr 24th Transportation and Trails System
May 8th Wrap-up: Chapter Review and Summary
May 22nd Wrap-up: Additional Wrap Up (as needed)
:t
:1
10