Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Town Center Master Plan topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planners preview Dunkirk Town Center master plan chapter; commissioners question Census/ACS data

3434214 · May 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Long range planning staff presented the May 2025 draft Chapter 3 of the Dunkirk Town Center master plan and answered commissioners' questions about population and unemployment data sourced from Census and American Community Survey estimates.

Kat Lockwood, Long Range Planner II with the Department of Planning and Zoning, presented the May 2025 draft Chapter 3 of the Dunkirk Town Center master plan and asked the commission for feedback.

Commissioners asked why the plan lists a population of roughly 2,000 for Dunkirk when the town center boundary contains few residences; Lockwood explained the plan uses U.S. Census Bureau data for a Census‑designated place (CDP), which does not exactly match the town center boundary and therefore includes residents outside the town center. Lockwood said, "it doesn't a % match the town center boundary, but it's close," and noted boundaries and data lag can cause apparent discrepancies.

Commissioners also questioned a listed unemployment rate of 32.7% derived from American Community Survey (ACS) five‑year estimates. Lockwood and Tay Harris, Long Range Planning, explained the ACS five‑year estimates are the most recent multi‑year source staff used at the planning commission's direction, and they acknowledged the figure may be skewed by methodology and boundary definitions. Harris said the "Department of Labor and Statistics might have something that we can use" and offered to check alternate state and labor sources while maintaining internal consistency across town center chapters.

Staff asked the planning commission whether, at the June meeting, it should initiate the 60‑day public comment period for the draft chapter; staff said they would seek the commission's guidance at that meeting. No formal action to initiate the comment period was recorded at this meeting.