Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Willow Park council directs staff to begin update of comprehensive plan and capital improvement plan
Summary
Council voted to direct staff to start updates to the city's comprehensive plan and capital improvement plan, backing a consultant's recommendation to refresh an 11-year-old comp plan and to scope a CIP update; council asked staff for a proposed scope, timeline and not-to-exceed costs to return in a future meeting.
Willow Park's city council on Oct. 28 voted to direct city staff to begin work on both a revised comprehensive plan and an updated capital improvement plan (CIP), following a presentation from Derek Turner of Jacob & Martin.
Turner told the council that Willow Park's current comprehensive plan was adopted in 2014 and is now 11 years old, and that state guidance and professional practice generally call for plan updates every five to 10 years. He described the comp plan as a community's long-range blueprint for land use, transportation and public facilities and said it would inform future zoning and development standards. "A comprehensive plan is a planning document; it has no teeth beyond guiding your future zoning and development standards," Turner said.
On cost and timing, Turner said a full, from-scratch comprehensive plan or a major wholesale update could run into the low hundreds of thousands of dollars, while a more targeted update would cost less; he estimated that updating the CIP (rather than building one from scratch) would likely fall in the $25,000—$30,000 range. The consultant also described a typical six- to nine-month process for a substantial comp-plan update with substantial public engagement.
Council members pressed whether the comp plan or the CIP should come first. Several councilors said the future land-use map in the comp plan should be resolved before finalizing infrastructure priorities in the CIP; others noted the two efforts are interrelated and recommended coordinating both efforts. Council asked staff to return a proposed contract or scope of work that includes timetable, benchmarks and a not-to-exceed cost for council review.
A motion directing staff to start both processes carried by voice vote; the council did not record a roll-call tally in the minutes. Next steps recorded in the meeting packet: staff will prepare a proposed scope and a draft contract and bring financing and schedule options back to the council for formal approval.
