City of Homer

Planning & Zoning           Telephone        (907) 235-3106

491 East Pioneer Avenue                      Fax                  (907) 235-3118

Homer, Alaska 99603-7645                E-mail             Planning@ci.homer.ak.us

                                                            Web Site          www.ci.homer.ak.us

MEMORANDUM 50-70

 

DATE:                        April 6, 2005

 

TO:                  Homer Mayor and City Council

 

THRU: Walt Wrede, City Manager

FROM:            Beth McKibben, City Planner

SUBJECT:     Mr. Griswold’s comments on the Homer Advisory Planning Commission (HAPC) Policies and Procedures Manual (PPM).

 

 

Homer City Code 1.76.050(b) require the HAPC adopt “additional procedural rules approved by the City Council.”  The PPM meets this requirement.  It should be noted that the vast majority of amendments proposed in the current update to the PPM are to make the PPM consistent with HCC Title 21, which under went substantial changes with the adoption of Ordinance 04-11(A).  Also proposed is an amendment to the HAPC agenda that adds items reconsideration, old business and new business.  These additions will assist the HAPC and staff in better serving the public and in conducting business.  Additionally, the schedule of deadlines for items to be included on the agenda has been changed to allow for additional time needed for review by Public Works and the Fire Chief (not done previously). 

 

The City Council should be aware that the PPM of the HAPC is a work in progress.  These amendments are necessary in order for us to be able to continue doing business.  However, the document as a whole is in need of serious attention.  The Commission and staff has this item on their work list, and more extensive revisions are planned.

 

Addressing Mr. Griswold’s comments:

 

·        Section G – conflict of interest - while this may be a reasonable suggestion staff suggests that it wait for a more extensive rewrite of the PMM.

·        Section H – quorum – staff has no objection to Mr. Griswold’s suggestion

·        Section I – Findings – PUDs are a type of CUP and findings are made and adopted. As for appeals, HCC 21.68.060(e) requires written findings – the code always takes precedent over the PPM, and the goal of staff for the PPM in the long term is to remove redundancy in the PPM.

·        Section J. – consensus - staff has no objection to Mr. Griswold’s suggestion

·        Section K – Absentations- AS 29.160(d) states: “Actions of a governing body are adopted by a majority of the total membership of the body.  Each member present shall vote on every question, unless required to abstain from voting on a question of law.  The final vote of each member on each ordinance, resolution, or substantive motion shall be recorded “yes” or “no”, except that if the vote is unanimous it may be recorded “unanimous”.    The language in the PPM is consistent with AS 29. 

·        Section N – Bylaws amended –while this may be a reasonable suggestion staff suggests that it wait for a more extensive rewrite of the PMM.

·        Time to prepare the record of appeals - this language directly quotes HCC.  It is one of the goals of staff to remove anything in the PPM that is found in code, and simply reference HCC.  Such changes will be included in further amendments to the PPM.

·        Page 11 of PPM – controlled standards – controlling standards –staff has no objection to Mr. Griswold’s suggestion

·        Board of Adjustment - this language directly quotes HCC.  It is one of the goals of staff to remove anything in the PPM that is found in code, and simply reference HCC.  Such changes will be included in further amendments to the PPM.

·        Purpose of CUP – staff considers this statement to be an accurate description of the purpose of a conditional use.  Additionally, staff does not believe the state purpose conflicts in anyway with the quote from Mr. Sharp, which was provided by Mr. Griswold.

·        Determination – again a direct quote from HCC.   Title 21 includes specific conditions for certain types of conditional uses.  For example the recently adopted Ordinance 04-11(A) adopted standards for large retail and wholesale development.  There are specific “conditions” for this type of development.  However, the HAPC, through 21.61.202(f), hast the ability to require additional conditions as may be necessary, if appropriate findings are made to support such conditions. 

 

Recommendation:

 

Recommend that Council amend resolution 04-102 by adding the following:

 

Section H - Quorum; Voting:

 

Four Commission members shall constitute a quorum. Four affirmative votes are required for the passage of an ordinance, resolution or motion. Conditional use permits and zoning variances require a majority plus one vote. Voting will be by verbal vote, the order to be rotated. The final vote on each resolution or motion is a recorded roll call vote or by consensus.  For purposes of notification to parties of interest in a matter brought before the Commission, the Chairman may enter for the record the vote and basis for determination.

 

The City Manager, or his/her designee and Public Works Director shall serve as consulting members of the Commission but shall have no vote.

 

Review Standards

 

In reviewing an appeal request, the Planning Commission will consider:

 

         1.         Documentation of evidence

         2.         The record (Minutes)

         3.         Controlleding sections of Chapter 21.28 through 21.70 Homer City Code.

4.                  The Commission may accept new testimony and other evidence, including public testimony, and hear oral arguments as necessary to develop a full record upon which to decide an appeal from an act or determination of the Administrative Official or Planning Director.  Any person may file a written brief or testimony in an appeal before the Commission.