Session
03-20 Regular Meeting of the Homer Advisory Commission was called to order by
Chair Smith at 7:04 p.m. at Homer City Hall, Council Chambers, 491 East Pioneer
Avenue, Homer, Alaska 99603.
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: CELENTANO, PFEIL, SMITH, HESS, CHESLEY
BARTLETT,
STAFF: BEVERLY GUYTON
BETH
MCKIBBEN
DEENA
BENSON, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
EXCUSED: FOSTER
A quorum is required to
conduct a meeting.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA
All
items on the consent agenda are considered routine and non-controversial by the
Planning Commission and are approved in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless
requested by a Planning Commissioner or someone from the public, in which case
the item will be moved to the regular agenda and considered in normal
sequence.
A. Time
Extension Requests
B. Approval
of City of Homer Projects under HCC 1.76.030 g.
C. KPB
Coastal Management Program Reports
D.
Commissioner Excused Absences
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commission
approves minutes, with any amendments.
A. Approval of December 3, 2003 meeting
minutes.
The minutes were approved by consensus.
PUBLIC COMMENT, PRESENTATIONS
The public may speak to the Planning Commission regarding matters not on the agenda. The Chair may prescribe time limits. Public comment on agenda items will be heard at the time the item is considered by the Commission. Presentations approved by the Planning Director, the Chair, or the Planning Commission. A Public Works representative may address the Planning Commission.
There were none.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Commission conducts Public Hearings by hearing a staff report, hearing public testimony and then acting on the Public Hearing items. The Chair may prescribe time limits. The Commission may question the public.
A. Staff Report PL 03-110 Re: Homer Hockey Association Is Requesting Approval To Place A Public Sign Designating The Location Of The Proposed New Hockey Rink At 3768 Waddell Way, Lot 2, Waddell Park Subdivision.
Planning Administrative Assistant Guyton reviewed the staff report and staff recommendation:
The Homer Advisory Planning Commission should approve the request for a Public Sign for the Homer Hockey Association Facility site.
Tim Stage announced he was representing the Homer Hockey Association and answered questions. He advised that there would be one sign, 4’ by 8’, one-sided It will have vinyl printing on paint. The location will be just to the right of three trees visible while driving down Lake Street. The sign will be located approximately 30 feet off the road. The commission held a handout of an example of what the sign would say.
HESS/PFEIL - MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT PL 03-110 THE HOMER HOCKEY ASSOCIATIONS REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR PLACING A PUBLIC SIGN ON THEIR FUTURE LOCATION LOT.
No discussion.
VOTE: YES: UNANIMOUS CONSENT. NON-OBJECTION.
Motion carried.
PLAT CONSIDERATION
The Commission hears a report
from staff, testimony from applicants and the public. The Commission may ask questions of staff, applicants and the
public.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
The Commission hears a report
from staff, testimony from applicants and the public. Commission business includes resolutions, ordinances, zoning
issues, requests for reconsideration and other issues as needed. The Commission may ask questions of staff,
applicants, and the public.
A. Staff Report PL 03-86 Re: Resolution renaming Forrest Glenn Street to Glenwood Road due to similarity of street names within the Emergency Service Number area in the City of Homer, Alaska. POSTPONED.
Amended Motion on the floor-
CHESLEY/HESS – MOVE TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT PL 03-86 AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION. Staff recommendation was amended to read “…renaming Forrest Glen Street to Glenwood Road.
Planning Administrative Assistant Guyton reviewed the staff report that included history on this resolution. She advised that while running the packet additional suggestions were turned into planning. She listed 5 names to choose from off the list the residents had sent in and stated that none of the 5 names have any complications with duplication. The names are Berry Hill Road, Raindrop Road, Tundra Rose Road, Dogwood Road and Blue Spruce Road.
There was no public testimony.
HESS/CHESLEY - MOVE TO AMEND MAIN MOTION TO CHANGE THE RENAME FROM GLENWOOD ROAD TO TUNDRA ROSE ROAD.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: YES: UNANIMOUS CONSENT. NON OBJECTION.
Motion carried.
A letter to the editor in the current Homer News was commented on by Commissioner Chesley. The letter was from a person who was upset about a letter that Julie Engebretsen, Planning Technician I, had sent out. Commissioner Chesley voiced his support of Ms. Engebretsen on her work. He commented that she does a good job; that hers is a hard job well done. Chair Smith also expressed his support for Ms. Engebretsen saying she is doing her job well. He further commented that the author of the letter was off base in taking a process that was mandated far away from here and personalized on the person who ends up on the front line. He commented that it was completely inappropriate to criticize her over that.
B. Staff Report PL 03-78 Re: Proposed Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Homer Adding Chapter 21. Large Retail And Wholesale Structure Development, Impact Statement And Standards. POSTPONED.
At 7:20 p.m. the commission returned to cleaning up the wording in the latest draft where they left off at the work session prior to the meeting. They began on line 512 of the December 17 draft that included the city attorney’s comments. The following includes subjects the commission discussed:
- talked about addressing acronyms, ie CPV’s, BMP’s etc. line 551
- addressed storm water treatment wording at line 512
- need to assure there is a definition of ‘storm water’ in the code
- looked at CA’s question on line 577 to make sure it was addressed
- staff to check on a current drainage management plan
- addressed and held a brief discussion on heat and glare scenarios
- discussed the wording in Materials and Equipment Storage – concern regarding having a storage section here because it is not allowed in the CBD.
- Discussed lighting standards – noted that the City Attorney did not receive a copy of the definitions
- Acknowledged needing a definition for “up lighting” and looked at wording
- Lengthy discussion regarding exemptions of the lighting section
Chair Smith called for a recess at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:04 p.m.
- went back to line 144 on the subject of traffic
- discussed building aesthetics at length
- looked at fencing requirements and dimensions and discussed various options
At 10:15 the commission discussed their timeline and the need to schedule worksessions. Commissioner Celetano advised that she had to be excused and left the meeting. City Planner McKibben suggested the commission schedule a meeting every Wednesday for the month of January.
Commissioner Chesley noted that the items yet to complete are-
1. the fiscal economic impact analysis,
2. architectural standards (they are working on) and
3. the citizen participation plan
He explained that he had a discussion with a council member regarding the time line of the Planning Commission. During the conversation with the council member Mr. Chesley addressed the request by the Planning Commission for an economic analysis that had been supported by the City Manager and had not been done. Mr. Chesley shared the council members reason it had not been done. It was because the request had been part of the debate about cap size prior to getting into the standards. Now the standards and building size is an issue, but the economic standards at that point wasn’t something that needed to be done. Now the commission still needs to come up with a fiscal economical impact analysis that needs to be done from the development standpoint. Mr. Chesley referred to the letter from Fred Meyer read at the Council meeting by Al Waddell and expressed his disagreement with the statement that there would be no impact on traffic, police, fire etc because it is in the CBD. He gave an analogy imagining that a certain size pipe is the sewer capacity of the city. Every time there is a hookup to the system, it is impacted to whatever degree. He reiterated that every hookup is an impact. He expressed his opinion that the City needs to start assessing those impacts and charging a commensurate fee. Mr. Chesley commented that a company had been suggested to him that does this type of work. He suggested that the $30,000 be used to have someone like this come in and do the fiscal economic impact standards just like the City did with the traffic issue. He thought that would speed the process along. Mr. Chesley thought it would be beneficial for the Council to receive a standard that had a professional entity looking at something as important as the economic and fiscal analysis. He pointed out that the fiscal information the commission looks at is very different from what the council would be concerned with as political decision makers. He reiterated this suggestion that professional help could assist in speeding this along. He pointed out that assistance with the traffic section cost hardly anything. All commissioners voiced support for his suggestion.
City Planner McKibben advised that the draft language was taken from what the task force submitted. Everything she’s seen in her research is close to what’s in the draft.
Chair Smith pointed out that the Planning Commission doesn’t make a decision based on the amount of money that the city will receive as a result of it. A conditional use permit can’t be “bought” by saying they will contribute a certain amount of taxes, however, the commission can consider the public health, safety and welfare. The public welfare could, in some sense, include the creation of a hundred new jobs. He added that there are direct benefits from enhanced economic activities that the commission can consider. By the same token, it could be turned around and the commission could look at the benefit of 100 jobs with a side affect will the cost of 150 jobs. It’s a consideration of the public welfare and the commission cannot be bribed.
Chair Smith referred back to the disagreement with the Fred Meyer letter, and cautioned the commission to make sure the analysis of the impact to the city included what the impact would be to the ISO rating. He added that this could have very serious financial consequences to the city. He explained ISO ratings as told to the commission last year by former Fire Chief Robert Purcell. The city is allowed a maximum of 5 buildings that are either over 35 feet in height or have a fire flow in excess of 350 gallons per minute (he wasn’t sure of the number) - and added that the city already has the 5 maximum buildings. In adding more, the city has to provide a ladder truck or all of the residents of the city’s insurance rates skyrocket. The only mitigation is a ladder truck and a building to house it and a crew to operate it, etc. Other options could be fire sprinklers and fire walls within the building.
Commissioner Chelsey reiterated his concern about getting the economic analysis done in the next four weeks and suggested outsourcing it. He pointed out that there are several professional groups in Alaska that does this type of work. City Planner McKibben advised that if the costs were kept low the city manager could approve the funding.
Again, the commission looked at their workload and a time line. They speculated that the citizen participation plan would probably take two meetings.
Chair Smith went over what the commission was requesting of staff. He stated “looking for a framework for the financial economic analysis report and some way to analyze that” and the commission agreed.
Commissioner Chesley added that he had further talked about proposing that the analyis be managed similar to how the commission does the TIA-- where the city requires a traffic impact analysis in which the city would contract with a firm to provide the analysis so it has more credibility than if it came from an interested party. The costs would be added into the developer’s application fee. City Planner McKibben noted that the citizen participation plan wouldn’t require an expert.
The commission agreed that they want an economist to evaluate the draft fiscal economic analysis and make some recommendations; in addition, they want to know as soon as possible who’s available, how fast they can respond and how much it will cost. The commission agreed that they didn’t feel qualified to accomplish this task in the time they have left for completion and asked that City Planner McKibben research this and get back to them.
The commission discussed a meeting schedule and acknowledged that they might have to look at a Saturday worksession. Commissioner Hess advised that he would be absent the second week in January. City Planner McKibben advised that Commissioner Celentano would not be here for the week of the 19th and Chair Smith advised that he would be gone one week the end of January.
Worksessions were scheduled beginning at 5 p.m. every Wednesday in January in addition to the regular meetings.
REPORTS
A. Borough Report
B. Kachemak Bay Advisory Planning Commission Report
PLANNING DIRECTORS’ REPORT
City Planner McKibben reported that the city would be awarding a contract for the wetlands delineation to Mike Gracz and Karen Noyes. That it should be started quickly and it is anticipated that it would take several years to complete. The evaluation committee will be meeting soon to look at the RFP for the Scenic Byways and the Non-motorized Transportation Plan that the city has obtained grants for.
City Planner McKibben advised that Christy Miller, with the State Flood Hazard Program, would be here, Friday, February 6th all day. Part of the day will be devoted to staff and part to training. The people invited for training are the realtors, insurance agents, finance people and anyone else who is interested. She further advised that the flood hazard mapping is not very accurate and that there is a potential for coordination with some other mapping projects that are going on. This would give much more accurate information to the commission for their consideration of permitting projects.
City Planner McKibben further advised that she has been working with Administrative Assistant Holen who found out the name of the speaker who talks a lot about “walkable communities”. He will be in Anchorage in February and she is searching for funding to have him come to Homer and do a presentation. There was support voiced from the commissioners.
Chair Smith pointed out that if the wetlands delineation project takes more than two years to complete the maps, the Corp of Engineers would have to extend the city’s general permit. City Planner McKibben offered to find out more about that.
INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS
Items listed under this
agenda item can be HCC meeting minutes, copies of zoning violation letters,
reports and information from other government units.
A. Memorandum to Walt Wrede, City Manager,
from Beth McKibben, City Planner, re:
Development Standards for Large Retail and Wholesale Development
Standards.
B. Ordinance 03-70(S) An Ordinance of the City Council extending
Sections 1 through 5 of Ordinance 03-25(S)(A) and Sections 1 through 3 of
Ordinance 03-33(S)(A) to April 30, 2004, Retail and Wholesale Development
Impact Statement and Standards.
COMMENTS OF THE AUDIENCE
Members of the audience may
address the Commission on any subject.
The Chair may prescribe time limits.
There were none.
COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION
Commissioners may comment on
any subject, including requests to staff and requests for excused absence.
Commissioner Hess acknowledged how much work Commissioner Foster has put into the storm water section and how important it is.
Commissioner Pfeil thanked the commission and the staff for all their time and work.
Commissioner Bartlett thought the commission should discuss building codes more because it seemed to him he is missing pieces and parts of what’s being developed. What he wanted to see seemed to be more hidden and not directly available and that bothered him. He expressed his concern regarding the time crunch to complete the work that needs to be done in only four meetings. He hinted that the commission might need more than four meetings. He pointed out that the commission has a deadline on some major issues and he foresees some long discussions on some of them.
Commissioner Chesley specifically thanked City Planner McKibben, Planning Technician Engebretsen, Planning Administrative Assistant Guyton and Deputy City Clerk Benson for their support. He thanked Councilmember Novak for “liberating the refrigerator[1]” for the commissioners and staff and taking care of their comfort needs while they work hard.
Chair Smith asked if Deputy Clerk Benson had any comments. She announced that she was learning a lot, finds the commissioners entertaining and the commission meetings are ones she doesn’t want to miss.
Chair Smith advised that he had talked to some council members who advised how they came up with the time line for completion by the commission. It was decided by establishing a drop-dead date for adopting an ordinance and working backwards, part of which gives the council two months to take testimony and make amendments. The commission discussed what it would take to make their deadline in getting the final product to the council. They discussed the pros and cons of turning in a draft while they were still working on it and decided to wait until they have a complete product to move to public hearing. The commission speculated on what would happen if they didn’t meet the deadline. Chair Smith thanked the commission. Commissioner Bartlett commented that he felt that everyone was willing to work extra, within reason, to get the work done and acknowledged that everyone has a job and other commitments. Chair Smith concluded that he felt all were working above and beyond the call of duty. He wished everyone a Merry Holiday. The commission added that they were willing to work Christmas and New Years Eve but felt the staff needed the time off[2].
Notice of the next regular or
special meeting or work session will appear on the agenda following
“adjournment”.
There being no further business to come before the commission the meeting was adjourned at 11:03 p.m. The next Regular Meeting is scheduled for January 7, 2003 in the City Council Chambers. There will be a worksession at 5 p.m. prior to the Regular Meeting.
______________________________________
DEENA BENSON, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Approved: _____________________________