The meeting was called to order by Chairman Zastrow at 6:00 p.m. in the Conference Room of the Municipal Building.

Item #1:     Approve Minutes of April 30, 2007 Meeting.

A motion to approve the Minutes was made by Sheldon Mielke, seconded by John Wilmet and passed by a 7-0 voice vote.

Item #2:     Review Progress of Planning Process.

Mark Roffers, of Vandewalle & Associates, handed out and reviewed a revised meeting schedule. This will keep everyone up to date on where we are in the progress. We are at the June Consultant meeting, at which we share with the Committee the information we have gathered and are assembling regarding trends and existing conditions. The next step is to present this information to the Planning Commission, to bring them up to date on the progress and inform them of the schedule and their involvement in the process. That meeting will take place in July, and the Steering Committee's attendance is optional. John Wilmet said the Council has adopted the Resolution for the Public Participation Plan for the process.

Item #3:     Review Results of Community Vision Workshop.

Megan MacGlashan, of Vandewalle & Associates, reviewed the handout that compiled the results of the Workshop on May 31, 2007. The process that was done at the Workshop started with individual ideas, then went to small group ideas, and then on to large group ideas. This allows the group to see what ideas are common among the group and where there are differences. Megan MacGlashan then reviewed the key items of the different chapters of the Comprehensive Plan.

• Natural Resources: The idea of Fort Atkinson as a model for community-wide sustainability, relating to efficient use of energy and reduction in use of fossil fuels, incorporation of green technologies, and initiatives to maintain water and air quality and the Rock River.
• Cultural Resources: Heard about maintaining and embracing the diverse population and promoting services, housing, transportation and community facilities that cater to the needs of the population.
• Land Use: Focus on infill development and redevelopment, promoting compact and well-planned new development on the outskirts of the City that compliments natural features.
• Transportation: Emphasis on evolving the infrastructure of the City to accommodate alternative forms of transportation, especially those which reduce dependency on fossil fuel; bike lanes and interconnected trail systems.
• Utilities & Community Facilities: The need to expand and enhance the existing community facilities, especially the Library and Parks system. Provide for a diversity of recreational activities. Also heard about the value of schools in this community and investing in their facilities and programming.
• Housing & Neighborhood Development: The idea of well-designed, well-planned, compact neighborhoods that offer a diversity of housing options and a mix of compatible land uses.
• Economic Development: Promoting the expansion of small, local businesses and specialty shops that cater to the daily needs of the residents and invite tourists into the community. Restoration of the existing businesses, elimination of vacant store fronts in the downtown and providing for a variety of business and employment options.
• General Community Character: Retain the small town character, preserve the historic buildings, greenspace and tree-lined streets in the City, and promoting high quality development in a safe and clean community, and to encourage growth that contributes to maintaining the City's character.

On Page 9-11 are listed the common themes of the small groups. A lot of the individual ideas that were just summarized are reflected in those of the small group. On Pages 12 and 13 is the tabulation of the voting exercise. The top ten vote getters are a good representation of the themes that were identified in the first exercise. The map needs to be analyzed more to evaluate the comments that were written on the map at the Workshop. Now the map only shows the placement of the stars by the various groups. The initial look at the stars on the map, tends to reflect the goals that were identified in the earlier portion of the Workshop. Mark Roffers said once the work on the map is completed, it will be presented to the Committee and shared with the citizens at the next visioning Workshop. Mark Roffers then asked for any comments on the Workshop.

Sheldon Mielke indicated that it was a lot to do in a short time frame, it would have been nice to have more time. He also handed out a written list of all the individual comments that were made on the sticky notes. His concern was that some of them had either been missed or the comments were editorialized during the presentation and the writing down and the content may have gotten missed.

Sandy Mayer thought it would have been helpful to have a Committee member at each table to help the group through the process. It was hard to keep the group focused on the future, they only wanted to look at existing issues.

Jill Kessenich said the map exercise was frustrating, and it might have been the time constraint. Our group spent more time discussing items than putting stars on the map.

Jim Fitzpatrick said it would have been nice to have some additional time for the map exercise. Some people in the group spent most of the time trying to locate places on the map.

John Wilmet said that it would have been helpful to put some landmarks on the map to help people locate where places were.

Item #4:    Discussion on Draft Plan Vision and Overall Goals.

Mark Roffers handed out and reviewed the draft Vision Statement for the City. The Vision Statement will be presented in the Plan with pictures from Fort Atkinson that will illustrate the Statement. The Statement will be in the first chapter of the Plan. The text needs to be reviewed and commented on. The first paragraph is meant to capture a full-service community for the future. The second paragraph is focused on economic development and community character activities to be achieved through economic growth. The third paragraph talks about the notion of sustainability and tries to define this concept. The final paragraph is intended as a wrap-up. Mark Roffers then asked for comments from the Committee.

Jim Fitzpatrick said there needed to be more statements on the school system. Mark Zastrow said it needs to mention the importance of health care in the community. Sandy Mayer said that it needs to be revised to make it more personal to Fort Atkinson. The Committee agreed that the statement is too long and will need to be shortened up. The Committee members indicated the following ideas to personalize the statement: Family owned businesses, business diversity, historic aspect, entertainment options and arts/culture.

John Wilmet said that he will email the draft Statement to the Committee members and if they can get their comments to him by June 25th, he will forward them to Mark Roffers.

Item #6:    Discussion on Questions Related to Background Sections of Comprehensive Plan.

Mark Roffers gave a report on the progress they have made. Based on State requirements, there is a 26-page checklist that deals with trends, demographics, existing land use patterns, economic development, etc., that has to be completed. Our approach is to complete the checklist as soon as possible, and then to meet with City staff to get it reviewed and commented on.

Mark Roffers then reviewed a draft of the Natural Features Map that will be in the Plan, which represents parks, open spaces, steep slopes, etc. He asked the Committee what natural features they thought defined Fort Atkinson. Jill Kessenich said the Bark River Trail. Jim Fitzpatrick indicated Rock River Park and Riverside Drive. Mark Zastrow said the Rock River, along with Lake Koshkonong. Jim Simdon said the river scenery and the river bottom areas, once you get outside of the City.

The other area that Mark Roffers said they are working on is an existing Land Use Map that shows how the land is being used. The City will be field checking the next few weeks to check the draft map with what is out there. One of the items they will be checking on is areas of land use conflicts. The Committee came up with the following areas:

• Redi-Serve Plant on Wilson Avenue
• Lorman's on Jefferson Street
• Hospital and Clinics
• Old Thomas Industries building on Oak Street
• Library on Merchants Avenue
• Middle School
• Ambulance service on Arndt Street

Mark Roffers said the next question is economic development. What needs to be determined is what the community perceives as the strengths and weaknesses of economic development. A handout was given to the Committee to review. Jim Fitzpatrick said a strength should be the school system. Sheldon Mielke said the "served by rail" is a stretch and should be removed. John Wilmet questioned the weakness of "disagreement on future growth direction and focus", this is a single issue and should be removed. John Wilmet added the City doesn't have access to a large workforce from Madison, so that one could be removed. Sheldon Mielke said the Highway 12 corridor should be included as a strength.

Item #6:     Discussion on Procedures for Public Comment at Committee Meetings.

Mark Zastrow said there needs to be 10-15 minutes set aside at the beginning of each meeting to allow the public to make short comments about the process or items on the agenda. There needs to be this time, but the Committee also has to remain focused. His opinion is that there would not be a problem to set aside the first 10-15 minutes for this, but to keep track of this so the meetings remain as a work session for the Committee. The Committee agreed to allow public comment at the beginning of the meeting. Jim Simdon asked if there could be a comment period at the end of the meeting also. Mark Zastrow said that could be an option, but it could extend the meeting out. The citizens have the option of talking to any Committee member after the meeting to discuss issues or express concerns.

Item #7:     Discuss Next Steps in Planning Process.

Mark Roffers said the next step would be to make a presentation to the Planning Commission in July, to keep them up to date with the process. John Wilmet said that could be at the July 24, 2007 meeting. Mark Roffers also said there is an intergovernmental meeting scheduled for July and asked Jeff Woods to look at dates for the meeting and a list of people to invite.

Item #8:     Set Next Meeting Date

Mark Zastrow said the next meeting has been set for 6:00 p.m. on August 20, 2007 at the second floor training room of the Police Department. John Wilmet said the remainder of the Committee meetings would be held there to eliminate conflicts with Municipal Court in the Council Chambers.

Item #9:     Adjournment

A motion to adjourn was made by Sheldon Mielke, seconded by John Wilmet, and passed by a 7-0 voice vote. The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
 
 
Jeffrey L. Woods, P.E.    
Secretary