Session 04-15, a
Special Meeting of the Homer Advisory Planning Commission was called to order
at
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS CHESLEY, BARTLETT,
PFEIL, FOSTER, HESS, LEHNER
ABSENT: NONE
STAFF: CITY PLANNER MCKIBBEN
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
JOHNSON
A quorum is required
to conduct a meeting.
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.
The agenda was approved by consensus of the Commission.
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. The Planning Director, the Chair, or the Planning Commission approves presentations. A Public Works representative may address the Planning Commission.
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.
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
City Planner McKibben
read the staff report and recommendations.
Harry Rasmussen, city
resident, President of Homer Hockey Association (HHA), said the Rasmuson
Foundation was notified about the change of plans for the facility and HHA has
a green light to continue in the direction they are going without stipulations
or conditions. He said the Planning
Commissioners serve in a voluntary capacity running an organization much like
HHA volunteers do. Their organization
too contains policies that may have to be modified to provide fair and
equitable guidelines. Mr. Rasmussen said
the HHA fully understands the Planning Commission process and appreciates the
extra mile the Commissioners and City Planner have gone. Additionally, Mr. Rasmussen expressed
appreciation for the monetary contribution the Commissioners made to the HHA at
last week’s meeting.
Chair Chesley said a press
report in the Homer Tribune stated HHA had returned to the Planning Commission
for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) rather than an amendment to the CUP. Homer Tribune reporter Steve Kadel was
present and said he would print a correction.
Commissioner Hess asked
how phased development was defined in the Homer City Code (HCC). City Planner McKibben answered that there is no
definition of phases of development and it is not unusual for the CUP to allow
phases. When asked if there were other phase
developments the Commission had approved, City Planner McKibben answered that
Quiet Creek, the new visitor center and college were allowed phases. Islands and
Commissioner Lehner
said the development definitions book defines a temporary structure as one
without a permanent foundation or footing.
City Planner McKibben said she did not find a definition of foundation
or footings, although either is generally a permanent structure like piers,
concrete block, slab or wood.
Commissioner Lehner noted that a distinction between “without any
foundation or footing” was needed as there had to be something holding the
building to the ground. City Planner
said the Community Design Manual (CDM) may need to reflect a longer timeline to
construct a permanent structure, as the codes vary from thirty days to two
years on a temporary structure.
Chair Chesley is not
sure any action is needed for the amendment to the CUP. Most codes do not define temporary
structure. The CDM should address
structure without a separate code section to allow temporary structure
permitted use without a final product.
The applicants have a CUP to build a development. They have a financial problem in the
development with unanticipated costs.
There is an uncertain future if the permitted project can be
completed. It is the developer’s
responsibility to complete the project in compliance with the CUP. The Commission needs a guarantee that the
temporary structure does not end up as a permanent structure. Commissioner Chesley proposes that Homer
Electric Association (HEA), the land owner of the development, or the City of
Commissioner Foster
said he would like to see the Planning Commission have control of the project
along the way and be agreeable to the different phases that may be needed. Additionally Mr. Foster agrees no
modification to the CDM is needed.
City Planner McKibben
said it would be helpful to have a statement in the CDM including permanent and
temporary structures. She said it was unusual
to have a CUP without a permanent structure.
The Commission noted that mobile commercial structures were permitted on
construction sites without time constraints or a limit of units allowed on a
site. City Planner McKibben verified
that temporary structures were a listed permitted use as part of the
construction.
Commissioner Hess
said HHA’s request is for a temporary building to be used with the same use
intended for the permanent structure. He
said the Commission will be setting a precedent setting up a temporary building
for the use intended to have on the final end of the development. He said there is the potential of other
developers requesting the same permit and everyone needs to be treated fairly
and equitable.
Commissioner Lehner
suggested using the term “interim facility” as opposed to temporary
structure. Commissioner Hess said the
Commission should be aware of allowing a temporary building for final use that
may not meet the intent of the zoning district.
City Planner McKibben added that the zoning district allows use of the
structure as a recreational facility, although the structure does not meet the
CDM.
Chair Chelsey said he
is reluctant to define temporary structures.
The applicant is seeking modification to the CUP to erect the air
structure prior to the assembly of the permitted structure. The purpose of the interim structure is to
address fundraising issues and not construction. The structure is not required for
construction developments or the soils engineering process, although the soils
could benefit from being covered. The
Planning Commission is requesting assistance from the City Attorney and staff
to draft language to include in the CUP that requires the City or HEA to be
signatories to conditions of the permit.
The property owner would provide a legal and financial obligation for
removal of the structure at the anniversary date of the CUP. The conditions would then be binding and
enforceable as both the financial position and applicant’s ability to complete
the permitted development is uncertain.
Mr. Chesley believes the added assurance would diffuse future political
implications for the Commission or Council.
Chair Chesley said although the applicant’s engineers may
demonstrate the benefit to covering their site to achieve soil stabilization, it
may be irrelevant as other activities are permitted under the facility. The Commission is not here to debate the soil
condition report prepared by a licensed engineer. Commissioner Bartlett said a building is not
needed for the ground development as the end result would be the same after
three years. He said making the City the
ultimate owner of the facility will set precedence and make it equitable for
everyone. Equality of all applicants is
the Commission’s goal. Commissioner
Pfeil said the surety proposal sounds like a win, win situation. In response to Commissioner Pfeil’s request
of a timeline, City Planner McKibben explained there were time frames for the
paving, parking and landscape. Chair
Chesley said a timeline could be required for the posting of a performance bond
or for the completion of the development.
City Planner cited the zoning permit code that sets a reasonable amount
of time for the applicant to complete the work.
The City Planner may grant one extension for good cause; however the
Planning Commission must approve other extensions.
Commissioner Lehner
said she favored the performance bond but felt somewhat uneasy without waiving
the CDM requirements. She said there
should be a mechanism to waive the design requirements. City Planner McKibben said there is a firm
timeline and aesthetics required for the final stage of the building. The CDM was not adopted when HHA’s CUP
application was submitted.
Chair Chesley said if
the Commission agrees he would like to refer the request to the City Attorney
for advice on the best procedure. He
proposed that the resolution to amend the CDM along with the CUP modification
be addressed at the July 21 regular meeting.
He said it was important to involve the land owner to assure all parties
had an understanding of the need to complete the development plan within three
years. Commissioner Hess said the temporary
building is part of the phase development and could be removed as it will not
meet the outline of the CDM.
Chair Chesley
requested that staff provide the City Attorney with a copy of the meeting
minutes from June 8th and tonight for his review.
City Planner McKibben
stated the proposed use and application are consistent with the code, but not
the CDM. The application of the CDM is
the Commission’s discretion. She said in
three years if there was no money to build the permanent structure the CUP will
go away and there will be an improved commercial lot.
Commissioner Bartlett
said he agreed with the performance bond and felt the City Attorney needs to
become involved to set the guidelines.
He said obtaining a performance bond is complex, time consuming and
expensive. Typically government agencies
or individual organizations do not get them, but rather hire contractors to get
them. He said it would be another step
the HHA would need to go through.
Additionally Mr. Bartlett said when addressing the interim structure it
should pertain to both state and local code.
City Planner McKibben said the definition of temporary structure would
be useful to the CDM as well as definitions chapter.
The Commission agreed
by consensus of the action to take, stating everything remains the same for
HHA, as they have a permitted development to continue their work.
In response to Mr.
Rasmussen’s request for clarity on the financial support from the City, Chair
Chesley made the following explanation:
When a developer appears before the Planning Commission to request a CUP
for building a development and returns expressing concern of their financial
ability to complete the project, asking for modification of the terms of the
CUP, the Planning Commission can add conditions to assure the development is
completed or the CUP goes away and development stops. The Planning Commission is asking for some
other entity to step up as the guarantor to say they will see the project
through in the fashion committed. It may
be creditors, a municipal entity or a cooperative association that steps up to
give a pledge with teeth.
HESS/BARTLETT – MOVED
TO CONTINUE STAFF REPORT PL04-57 TO THE JULY 21, 2004 MEETING.
VOTE: YES.
NO OBJECTION. UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
COMMENTS OF THE
AUDIENCE
Members of the audience may address the Commission on any subject. The Chair may prescribe time limits.
None.
COMMENTS OF THE
COMMISSION
Commissioners may comment on any subject, including requests to staff and requests for excused absence.
Commissioner Lehner said she felt uncomfortable with the
public sitting lower than the Commission, stating it made her nervous when she
used to testify. She said raising the
seats would make her feel more comfortable.
Commissioner Bartlett said they are not easy questions as
they are long-ranged making it worth the time to deliberate them.
Chair Chesley thanked Jo, Beth and the Commissioners for
their work.
ADJOURNMENT
Notice of the next
regular or special meeting or worksession will appear on the agenda following
“adjournment”.
There being no further business
to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at
________________________________
JO JOHNSON, DEPUTY
CITY CLERK
Approved:_____________________