Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo-170928-2 MEMORANDUM TO: Bozeman Planning Board FROM: Henry Happel SUBJECT: Growth Policy DATE: September 27, 2017 A large task now before the Planning Board is the development of a new Bozeman community development plan, or “Growth Policy” to use the terminology in the State statute. This memo provide some background information and asks some initial questions concerning this task. It focuses on questions of process rather than the substance of what might end up in a new Growth Policy. The purpose of this memo is to invite discussion on the matters raised. We could as a Board make one or more decisions concerning these matters, or we could postpone any concrete decision-making to a subsequent meeting. A. Background: What Do Growth Policies Address? 1. State Law. State law mandates that cities have a Growth Policy and provides some strong suggestions regard what might be in it. The most important part of the State legislation is found in MCA 76-1-601. It’s here on the web: http://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0760/chapter_0010/part_0060/section_0010/0760 -0010-0060-0010.html 2. Past Policies. A second good source of information concerning what a Growth Policy might look like can be found by examining the two previous growth policies adopted by the City. The 2009 Bozeman Community Plan is here on the web: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/136629/Electronic.aspx The Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, adopted in 2001 is here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/136629/Electronic.aspx. 3. Community Development. Finally, I’ve attached as Exhibit 1 a short explanation from the Community Development Department about long-range planning and growth policy processes. I've highlighted the part describing growth policies. B. What Should Be the Scope of the Growth Policy? If we are to pursue our responsibilities efficiently, I think it makes sense to make some decisions early on about the scope of the Growth Policy we intend to develop. At the top end, we need to decide whether we will focus on issues that clearly relate to growth, or, as with the 2009 Bozeman Community Plan, include a wider range of community interests and concerns. My sense, though I could be wrong, is that the Board would prefer a narrower focus, in part because the City is in the process of developing a Strategic Plan (more on this below), which covers a number of topics that were addressed in the 2009 Bozeman Community Plan, and in part because there is a belief that a tighter and briefer document will be more widely read and understood. At the other end, we need to decide whether the Growth Policy will include, or encourage, or outline, individual neighborhood plans. I believe it is the view of the Community Development Department that the Growth Policy we develop should provide for and encourage, if not actually craft, individual neighborhood plans. The argument here is that Bozeman has become large enough and diverse enough that no single plan can adequately cover growth issues relating to its many diverse neighborhoods. A third issue is whether the Growth Plan should subsume other city plans including, for example, the Transportation Master Plan, the PROST Plan, the Integrated Water Resources Plan, etc. The Community Development Department has indicated to me that they see some merit in that. C. What Should Be the Scope of Our Effort? On another level, I think we should make some decisions early on concerning the extent to which we, as a Planning Board, wish to get into the weeds on this project. At one extreme, a new Growth Policy could be developed, drafted, debated, and finalized all by the Planning Board with no significant outside assistance. At the other extreme, we could turn these tasks entirely over to consultants or the Community Development Department, or some combination of the two, and only be involved in setting very high- level goals and objectives. To a considerable extent, I think our level of involvement needs to reflect a realistic assessment of each member’s enthusiasm for this project and the time commitments that Planning Board members are willing to make to it. One relevant consideration is timing. I think the Community Development Department would like us to have reached agreement on high level goals and objectives for the Growth Policy in sufficient detail to negotiate a contract with a consulting firm to begin drafting the Policy by not later than very early next summer, with a goal of having a final agreed Growth Policy adopted a year later- early summer 2019. D. Where to Begin? I have received suggestions from some of you concerning how we should proceed, at least initially, on developing some of these high-level goals and objectives. One suggestion has been that we undertake a serious effort, with the assistance of consultants, to ascertain the values that the community holds that would inform these goals and objectives. A second, not entirely dissimilar suggestion, is that we should reach out to all the significant constituents in the City—differentiated by economic resources, educational backgrounds, locations in the City, etc., and obtain from each group their concerns and objectives, and use this to inform our deliberations. A third approach, suggested by a couple of Board member and Mr. Matsen, would have us rely on the work the City has already done developing its Strategic Plan to inform the high-level values question. Under this approach we would take the Vision Statement with Strategies in the Strategic Plan, particularly those under the heading of “A Well-Planned City,” and work from there. In connection with this last approach, it's useful to know that the City Commissioners are working not only on the Strategic Plan itself, but also on a set of implementing tasks, most of which have been suggested by city managers. The draft of the Strategic Plan with these implementing tasks (preceded by a brief cover Memorandum from the Interim City Manager) can be found here on the web: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/135571/Electronic.aspx E. Substance. The last time the Planning Board took up Growth Policy issues was in the Spring of this year, prior to our deep dive into the proposed revisions to the UDC. At that time the Board articulated a number of substantive issues that it thought the Growth Policy should address and asked an an informal subcommittee to meet to begin work on developing a Memorandum to the City Commission that would describe the Boards general approach and highlight these substantive issues. If you wish to be reminded of the discussions at that time, you can review the videos of our April 18 and May 2 meetings. The subcommittee (Duggan, Spitler, Thompson and myself) did meet and a draft Memo had been produced. A copy is attached below as Exhibit 2. Because the City Commission has been dealing with, and continues to deal with, other matters, my sense is that they would not be able to put a review of this Memo on their calendar for the next several months. However, once we have a clearer sense of how we wish to proceed, the Board should probably review this Memo and decide whether we wish to forward it, or something like it, to the Commission. EXHIBIT 1 EXHIBIT 2 DRAFT MEMO TO THE CITY COMMISSION This memorandum summarizes the results of Planning Board meetings held April 18, May 2, and _________ to discuss the members’ preliminary thoughts with regard to a new Growth Policy for the City. Links to the videos of these meetings are here: [to be added] The 2009 Community Plan: There is general agreement concerning deficiencies of the 2009 Community Plan. The members find the plan too long, too vague, too broad, too concerned with the present, and insufficiently concerned with future changes and desired outcomes. The Growth Policy’s length and support of all things positive neglects the necessity to make trade-offs between competing interests, and makes it easy to ignore. It covers subject matter widely removed from growth issues. Focus: Flowing out of these criticisms, there was also general agreement that a new growth policy should be more narrowly focused on growth issues, should address the biggest issues facing the City in connection with growth, and should clearly articulate directions that the City seeks to take with regard to these big issues. The Planning Board recognizes it will need some guidance from the Commission regarding the extent to which the Commission is comfortable with the document taking clear positions on big, and sometimes controversial, issues. Measurable Objectives: A new growth policy should, to the extent possible, articulate measurable and specific objectives and outcomes so that one can tell to what extent the City is being successful in implementing desired policies. The policy should also address the incentives utilized to attain these objectives. Economics: We need to recognize the importance of economic issues in affecting future growth. We also need to be realistic about aspirations in light of available resources. Several members pointed to the importance of including economic analyses in the growth policy. The Big Issues: Members expressed some preliminary ideas as to what the major issues are that should be addressed in the growth policy. The ones identified were: 1. land-use designations, both inside the City and in the larger planning area; 2. interplay of density, sprawl, affordability, and neighborhood preservation; 3. parking; 4. infrastructure, including transportation infrastructure and modalities; 5. annexation policy; 6. creation of viable commercial nodes; 7. coordination with MSU, Bozeman Deaconess Hospital, and the School Board; and 8. policy coordination with the county. We would be happy to hear from the Commission if you believe that issues should be added to, or subtracted from, this list. We appreciate your consideration and guidance as we begin undertaking this important project.