Session 05-10 a Regular Meeting of the Homer Advisory Planning Commission was called to order by Vice Chair Hess at 7:00 pm on May 18, 2005 at the City Hall Cowles Council Chambers located at 491 E. Pioneer Ave.
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS FOSTER, HESS, LEHNER, CONNOR, KRANICH
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS CHESLEY (Excused), PFEIL
STAFF: CITY PLANNER MCKIBBEN
DEPUTY CITY CLERK JACOBSEN
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
The agenda was approved by consensus of the
Commision.
A. Approval
of May 4, 2005 regular meeting minutes
The amended minutes were approved by consensus of the Commission.
PUBLIC
COMMENT AND PRESENTATION
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 are approved
by the Planning Director, the Chair, or the Planning Commission. A Public Works representative may address
the Planning Commission
There were no Public Comments or Presentations.
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.
City Planner McKibben summarized the Staff Report.
Dave Sheer, owner of property adjacent to the subject property, commented that this project has not been thought out, there is potential for damage to trees on his property. He is an architect and redrew the plans that were submitted to the City in the appropriate scale and in order for it to fit on these lots and not be in the setback, the plans need to be looked at closer. He voiced his concerns about the potential problem with the design of the parking. Mr. Sheer stated that the present drawing is not keeping in maintaining the native vegetation and it does not show any landscaping. Mr. Sheer commented that the area along Lakeshore Drive has a wooded feel and that businesses in that area use that to their advantage. Loss of the trees will impact the area. He cited HCC 21.49.060, which specifies, “Development will not adversely impact other properties causing damaging alteration of, among other things, root damage to neighboring trees”. He further commented that in the drawing that was submitted there are no setbacks provided for RV access. Setbacks are there for sound barrier and safety. If RV’s are allowed to park within the setback, Mr. Sheer’s buildings will have increased danger from an RV fire. Mr. Sheer also questioned the legality of the project. The minimum lot size for an RV Park is 40,000 square foot and while this lot is 41,500 square foot, the area is going to be used for more than an RV Park. Mr. Sheer commented that the stores proposed are not necessary. The code allows for necessary facilities like an office, a bathhouse or outhouse facilities, but the proposed cabins, fish packing area and beauty salon are not necessary facilities. He felt like the applicant was using the PUD to get around the 40,000 square foot size requirement. In closing Mr. Sheer said that being an architect he supports development, but this project should have more thought put into it. He feels the buffers and live trees will suffer.
Jordin Keintz commented that he has lived in Homer for about 3 years and has noticed that Ocean Drive could use strategic development. A lot of the buildings are run down and lack character and good development. He likes the idea of the proposed project. He thinks it will help the character and doesn’t think the intention here is to disturb the town. He believes it is a good thing and hopes the Commission will approve it.
Bart Chow, owner of Star Wash, commented that his property is just down from the subject property. He explained that he had looked at those same lots as a potential location for his car wash. He said the topography of the lots doesn’t allow for much and an RV Park would work well there and would be a good compliment to the area. He would like to see the neighbor’s get along and this project to move forward.
Eldon Adair, applicant, thanked the staff for their effort. They did a great job answering his questions and helping him since he is not familiar with Homer’s policies and rules. He appreciates Public Works Inspector Gardner’s comments and will make adjustments as needed. Mr. Adair expressed his understanding for Mr. Sheers concerns. He has hired a surveyor to put the corners back in so it is clear where the lot lines are and a Civil Engineer to take care of measurements and will work with staff to ensure that there are no problems with the dimensions. He submitted the drawings to get the PUD approved and during the permitting process all the details will be taken care of. He assured everyone that his development will be first class. His previous experience has been building golf courses, subdivisions and developments of that nature and is sensitive to erosion, vegetation and keeping people out of trouble. Mr. Adair commented that he spoke with the owners of the Sourdough Bakery at length and they were pleased with his plan. He feels that everyone around there are good neighbors.
Discussion ensued on the proposed access to the property. Planned access for public parking is off Lakeshore Drive and the RV’s will enter on Douglas and exit on Lakeshore Drive. There is not a planned access of Ocean Drive.
City Planner McKibben pointed out that the staff report recommends that the parking plan be revised and Mr. Adair commented that the Civil Engineer will submit a new drawing.
Mr. Kranich pointed out a discrepancy in the building size, one page of the staff report had it at 600 square feet and a drawing showed it as 30x30. Mr. Adair clarified that 900 square feet is correct.
There was discussion regarding landscaping. City Planner McKibben said she would confirm whether or not a landscaped buffer is required after 12 contiguous spaces. Mr. Adair said he plans to clear out the dead trees on the lot and the alder brush. He pointed out that there are quite a few trees along the property line near the bakery and at the corner of Ocean Drive and Douglas that he plans to leave. He hopes to have some small stands of trees in the RV parking area, but a power line runs across the lot and can’t have trees near it. Between the RV station and the visitor parking there will be a five-foot retaining wall and terracing. The wall will be painted concrete with salmon painted on different panels.
KRANICH/FOSTER MOVED TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT PL 05-54 WITH CONDITIONS AND THE FOLLOWING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Commissioner Connor voiced the following concerns:
ü Parking spaces 1-18 along Ocean Drive need to be redone to eliminate the ability to back out onto Ocean Drive.
ü The buffers are too close and should move back to save the trees from the development activity as stated in HCC 21.49.060
ü The perimeter requirement in the same code section should all for adequate privacy from the neighboring properties.
Ms. Connor pointed out that Mr. Sheer made the effort to keep trees for his PUD and keep the neighborhood green.
Commissioner Kranich commented that he hasn’t looked closely at these lots but other places where the they have cleared out spruce trees, when the perimeter trees are cleared the tree inside have a lot of dead branches and green only at the top. If that is the case here it may be better to clear it out and plant new trees.
The Commissioners voiced their support for the project, but concerns were expressed related to the parking, possible access from Ocean Drive and the buffers and vegetation. They felt reluctant to make final approval until updated drawings could be submitted.
LEHNER/KRANICH MOVED TO POSTPONE ACTION ON CUP 05-09 TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING SO THE APPLICANT CAN PROVIDE A MORE ACCURATE SITE PLAN TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT WERE EXPRESSED.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: CONNOR, LEHNER, KRANICH, HESS, FOSTER
Motion carried.
City Planner McKibben summarized the staff report and suggested and additional staff recommendation for a survey to show how the property sits.
Ellen Simpson, habitat biologist with the Department of Fish and Game, commented that the sign was done about fifteen years ago, but they never came up with a place to put it and that it needs to be put up. She told the Commission that there are similarly made signs at the Palmer hay flats and the Mendenhall Glacier in Juneau and those signs have held up very well. She provided a handout to the Commission that included a photo of the sign and a drawing of how it would look at the proposed site. Ms. Simpson said they have been looking at several locations for the sign, like Bishops Beach and Mariner Park, but feel that Mud Bay would be the best location because it would have the most exposure and from there people will be looking out over a critical habitat area. Ms. Simpson advised the Commission that a surveyor has already been contacted in an effort to ensure the location is City land and not state right of way, in which case they would have to get a permit from DOT.
Commissioner Foster commented that such a nice sign would be good for Bishop’s Beach and asked if that would be possible. Ms. Simpson replied that it is possible to have another sign made.
Vice Chair Hess asked if consideration had been given to whether or not the sign would obstruct sight lines for vehicles on Kachemak Drive and pedestrians crossing from the spit trail area. He also pointed out that same location is being considered as an area to be filled an used for parking.
Ms. Simpson answered that she had tried to pick an area that would not obstruct the view of the traffic or pedestrians. She continued that if the area was filled it would make it easier to put in the sign and it may be prudent to wait and see if that is going to happen.
FOSTER/CONNOR MOVED TO APPROVE STAFF REPORT PL 05-55 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND INCLUDE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT A SURVEY BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO PLACING THE SIGN.
LEHNER/CONNOR MOVED TO ADD A RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SIGN DOES NOT BLOCK THE LINE OF SIGHT FOR VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS ON KACHEMAK DRIVE.
There was no further discussion.
VOTE: YES: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
There was no further discussion on the main motion.
VOTE: YES: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
City Planner McKibben summarized the staff report.
There was no public comment.
LEHNER/KRANICH MOVED TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT PL 05-56 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
FOSTER/KRANICH MOVED THAT COMMISSIONER FOSTER HAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
Commissioner Foster advised the Commission that he owns two lots in the Central Business District that he is in the process of developing.
City Planner McKibben asked Commissioner Foster if he has a zoning permit in place, if the development plans are set and if there are plans to change them in the near future.
Commissioner Foster replied that he does have a zoning permit, his plans are set and he has no plans to change them in the future.
Vice Chair Hess commented that in his opinion Dr. Foster is not singled out to gain or lose any differently if the ordinance passes.
Commissioner Lehner concurred.
VOTE: NO: KRANICH, LEHNER, HESS, CONNOR
Motion failed.
Commissioner Lehner pointed out a typographical error that the word “singe” occurs several times in the ordinance and it should be single. She asked that it be corrected.
Commissioner Foster asked if a property owner of two contiguous lots builds on one and doesn’t add a buffer on the property line, what controls the requirement that it gets landscaped.
Commissioner Kranich pointed out in the ordinance where that is referenced in the ordinance. Mr. Kranich also clarified that it does not have to be the same property owner, it can occur if there is mutual agreement between different property owners.
VOTE: YES: LEHNER, HESS, FOSTER, CONNOR, KRANICH
Motion carried.
Vice Chair Hess called for a recess at 8:15at the request of Commissioner Connor. The meeting resumed at 8:20.
The Commission hears a report from staff, testimony from applicants and the public. The Commission may ask questions of staff, applicants and the public.
LEHNER/CONNOR MOVED TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT PL 05-57 WITH THE FOLLOWING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
City Planner McKibben summarized the staff report. She brought the Commissions attention to following concerns of Public Works:
1. Due to
extreme slopes, this department is requesting preliminary engineering on the
road improvements, particularly within the Redleaf Court R/W and Fireweed
Avenue from Redleaf Court to the northeast corner of the subdivision. It appears that the fill slope of the road
improvements on Redleaf will go well outside of the R/W (as much as 60
feet). Additionally, Homer’s Design
Criteria Manual requires Rights of Ways to intersect at an angle as close to
ninety degrees as feasible, and in no event at an angle less than sixty
degrees. It looks like Redleaf Court
R/W intersects the Fireweed R//W between 35 and 40 degrees.
2. The plat
submitted scales at 1” = 150’, rather than 1” = 100’, as noted.
3. The Low
Court East cul-de-sac should have a full radius dedication rather than the
corner dedication on the north side of the cul-de-sac.
4. The
panhandles of 35, 36, and 37 are called out at 25’ each, but the combined width
of all three is 45’, leaving 15’ panhandles.
We would like to discuss with the owner some other options for
lengthening Low Court East. As
presented, we believe that the Fire Department will require construction of a
substantial driveway (20’ wide?) to be placed in the panhandles. This would require easements within the
panhandles, and likely including construction of the driveway as part of the
Subdivision Agreement.
5. A water
line easement may need to be dedicated between lots 25 & 26 just west of
Low Court West. The need for this will
ultimately be determined during the water system design correspondence. The purpose of the easement would be to loop
the water line into the water main that runs north/south along the west
boundary of this tract for water quality purposes.
6. The radius
return needs to be dedicated at each cul-de-sac. This curvature is shown on Low Court East (line C16), but not on
the others.
7. The angle
created where Fireweed ties into Meadow (Fireweed) Avenue needs to be
re-aligned to come in tangent with the curve of Meadow (Fireweed) Avenue.
8. There is a
conflict of street names with Fireweed tying into (Whispering) Meadow Avenue.
9. The Tulins have been inclined to pave their subdivisions in the area. This department would suggest paving this subdivision, particularly Fireweed, due to the increased traffic flow that this tie-in will certainly generate.
Ms. McKibben stated Public Works has requested that the Planning Commission postpone action on this preliminary plat.
Jerry Anderson, representative of the subdivider handling the design, public administration and dealing with the various commissions, commented that this was a good staff report. Mr. Anderson advised the Commission that there had been a meeting with Public Works since the staff report was prepared and most of their concerns were taken care of at the meeting. Mr. Anderson made comment to each of Public Works comments:
Commissioner Foster commented that Lots 35, 36 and 37 seem to drop off into the canyon. Mr. Anderson replied that they do drop off. He pointed out on the aerial photo provided by the Planning Department that they are long lots and will accommodate on site water and septic and they do meet the length to width ratio. Mr. Anderson advised the Commission that Mr. Tulin is working on a plan for City water in the subdivision.
Mr. Anderson made further comment regarding the recommendations in the staff report:
Discussion ensued regarding slope on the property. Several of the Commissioners reviewed the contour map with Mr. Anderson and he discussed the different areas of the map. He pointed out areas that are 30 percent and will need dirt work for adequate slopes for building homes and septics.
There was further discussion regarding wetlands in the area. Mr. Anderson pointed out potential wet areas on the aerial map and drainages that will be developed. He commented that while they are familiar with where the wet areas are, the COE has to make a determination so for them remain compliant.
Commissioner Conner commented that this subdivision is amenable to pedestrians in that area and while it is not a requirement, suggested the applicant consider a trail through the northwest corner of the property. Mr. Anderson replied that there is room on the ROW and if Mr. Tulin wants to do so.
Mike Anderson, Civil Engineer, spoke to the Commission about the soils in the proposed subdivision and said that what he has found is a lot of sand, which explains why there is not a lot of erosion there. He stated that sandy soil does well with septics and slope stability. This is an area that the COE will have to come out and review to determine where the wetland boundaries are. He commented that Lots 1 through 5 are the highest on the hill with 25 to 30 percent slope and they will have to be contoured to deal with the slope. He pointed out that if a slope holds water, that is when there is a problem but because of the sand, these do not hold the water. He further commented that the area has been verified to be acceptable for wells or septic, but determination will have to be made on the wet lots. Each lot will be tested and approved by the normal process. The roads are on a 60 feet swath and bike or pedestrian trail could easily be accommodated, again, if that is what Mr. Tulin wants to do. His belief is that the wettest lots are 23,24 and 25 on the back of the lots where the runoff goes.
Commissioner Foster voiced concern with the wetlands and drainage and diverting it to one direction or another. The canyon drops right down into town and the community has concern with steep slope. He asked how they could be assured that the added impervious coverage won’t affect properties below and the safety of the community.
Mike Anderson reiterated his comments about the sandy soils and that they drain very well.
Commissioner Lehner asked if there had been any consideration given to setting aside an area of wetlands for a recharge area. Mike Anderson replied that is something to be worked out with the COE. He continued that he is not sure what will be done, but City water runs right through the subdivision so it makes sense to do that.
Commissioner Foster commented that utilizing City water with out City sewer brings water in to the area from another watershed.
Charles Tulin, applicant, stated that he has been working with Public Works Director Meyer and Public Works Inspector Gardner who have suggested bringing in City water. The water line passes along the full length of the property and the wettest part is over the water main and under the electric lines. He commented that the City is equally interested in establishing drainage along the stream on the property. Currently there is no drainage east and south. There is a collector stream that crosses a large culvert and meanders down the canyon. Mr. Tulin’s understanding is that the City is planning to redo the main line through the property, which will require some remediation be done with the standing water over the main at the present time. He will be meeting with the local representative of the COE to see what needs to be done. He believes the recommendation will be for ditching to be established and water to be directed down stream. Mr. Tulin stated that no roads will be built with out the oversight of Public Works and Public Works Director Meyer has made the request that Fireweed Avenue be paved. He pointed out that it is not a requirement but if they want it paved, he will. Mr. Tulin said the roads are very accessible and drivable right now, giving indication to the quality of the soils in the area.
Mr. Tulin commented that a large amount of money has gone into clearing out dead spruce and widening pathways and access ways in an effort to reduce wildfire hazards and clean up the lots. He said there are lots in his West Highlands that they have not sold yet because he is still working on cleaning up the lots. It is being done carefully and money is being spent to do the job right.
Commissioner Connor asked Mr. Tulin if he was aware that the Non Motorized Trails and Transportation Plan (NMTTP) had a proposed trail through this property. Mr. Tulin responded that he had no objection to walking paths. He made comment that he was considering putting in a lake but needs to do further research. He feels it will make the area more attractive.
Terry Yager, Real Estate Broker, made comment to the quality work that the Tulin’s put into developing their subdivisions. They hire very professional people to do the work that is needed. Mr. Yager explained that he had purchased a lot in one of the Tulin’s subdivision many years back and sold it several years ago for a considerable amount more than he paid, pointing out that the quality of work in their subdivisions makes them very desirable to people. Mr. Yager said that when selling the lots, Mr. Tulin always has the engineering data available to provide to buyers so there is no question as to the quality of the subdivision.
Buzz Kyllonen, a developer in Anchor Point, spoke in support of the Tulin’s and their plat request. He stated that their subdivisions are of the highest quality, are very sellable and attractive. Mr. Kyllonen commented that there are a lot of people who want to live in this area, so let’s encourage good growth and since Mr. Tulin has met the code, it should be easy to support this project.
Joe Super commented that he has been building subdivisions and developing property for over 35 years. He has built roads in six of the Tulin’s subdivisions and driving through them it is easy to see that they are well constructed, the ditches are draining the water off and they are holding up very well.
Commissioner Connor commented the Borough Code 21.12.060 requires that the preliminary plat show prominent natural features like streams and she would like to see more detail about streams and canyons. Also required are the names of the adjacent subdivisions, areas subject to flooding, contours for roads that are six to ten percent and approximate location of slopes over 20 percent.
City Planner McKibben pointed out that the topographical map provided does identify the slopes, a copy was provided at the meeting for the Commission to review. The issues Ms. Connor brought up are dealt with at the Borough level; they are not a requirement of the City for their process.
Mr. Anderson commented that he did not list the adjacent subdivisions and will correct that. He said there are really no prominent features, just the canyon, which is shown on the topographical map, there are no significant streams, crops or et cetera. He pointed out the contours for the road, with less than ten feet of slope in 800 feet of road. He is not aware of any flooding issues on the property.
Commissioner Connor commented that she is torn because there was a very compelling presentation given regarding this preliminary plat, but there is still the letter from Public Works Director Meyer requesting that the Commission postpone it for additional review.
Commissioner Foster asked if all drainages were identified. City Planner McKibben replied that with out a site visit, staff is only aware of one drainage.
FOSTER/KRANICH MOVED TO AMEND STAFF RECOMMENDATION FIVE THAT ALL DRAINAGES BE IDENTIFIED ON THE FINAL PLAT.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: YES: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
There was discussion regarding identifying the wetland areas on the plat. City Planner McKibben commented that at a meeting with the COE earlier in the week, the COE recommended that it not be required to be shown on the plat because wetlands do change. The COE suggested it be handled through a plat note. Ms. McKibben said she will be discussing appropriate language for a plat note with the COE.
LEHNER/CONNOR MOVED TO ADD STAFF RECOMMENDATION 7 TO IDENTIFY WETLAND BOUNDARIES ON THE PLAT.
Discussion ensued and the following points were brought up:
ü It could be argued that wetlands are a prominent natural feature.
ü If the wet area is handled with drainage and is no longer an issue, everyone will be aware it was there.
Mr. Anderson stated that there is no confirmation of where the wetlands are until the COE figures out where they are. If there are areas that are unusable or not able to be built on, they will be shown on the plat. He may walk out and find some squishy land, but the COE has to make the determination. He brought up the point that once the final plat is recorded it is henceforth and forever. He recommended taking caution putting things on the plat that are going to change, because they will be there until a replat is done at some unknown time. He made reference to the Bunnell Subdivision plat, which was recorded in 1944 and it is still the official plat, and the negative effects that could have resulted if swampland was noted.
Commissioner Foster reiterated his concerns regarding the steep slopes there and believes reference to the wet areas, if not delineated on the map itself, should at least be added to the plat notes.
Commissioner Lehner pointed out that there are updated NRCS maps and a lot of groundwork has happened. The maps give a reasonable delineation from the fieldwork that has been done over the last three years.
Jerry Anderson disagreed. Yes the maps are better, but the COE has to make the final determination.
Commissioner Kranich expressed his agreement with Mr. Anderson’s previous point regarding the Bunnell Subdivision. There were streams on those lots that are gone now, or not on the same lots.
VOTE: YES: CONNOR, FOSTER, LEHNER
NO: HESS, KRANICH
There was question regarding the number of votes required to pass a motion. Vice Chair Hess called for a recess at 9:42 pm for Deputy City Clerk Jacobsen to confirm. The meeting resumed at 9:47 pm.
Review of the Commission’s bylaw determined that four votes are required to pass a motion.
Motion fails.
LEHNER/FOSTER MOVED THAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION 7 BE ADDED THAT THE ROAD BE LOCATED ON THE 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY TO LEAVE ADDITIONAL SPACE FOR A PEDESTRIAN PATH ALONG FIREWEED AVENUE.
Comment was made that based on the NMTTP, it is good to tie the trails together and improve the quality of life for everyone.
VOTE: YES: CONNOR, LEHNER, HESS, FOSTER
NO: KRANICH
Motion carried.
LEHNER/FOSTER MOVED TO POSTPONE ACTION UNTIL PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR MEYER CAN MEET WITH THE APPLICANTS.
Commissioners Lehner, Connor and Foster voiced their concerns that Public Works Director Meyer had specifically requested this afternoon that action be postponed, even after meeting with the applicants on Friday before this meeting. They aren’t sure of the specific reasoning, but it is unusual that Mr. Meyer makes this specific of a recommendation to postpone.
Commissioners Hess and Kranich argued that they have had very compelling evidence tonight and the subdivision will be further scrutinized through the subdivision agreement.
City Planner McKibben expressed that it is her understanding that Mr. Meyer has concerns with the cut of the road and the effect on the slope, and the DEC required setback for the septic on some lots might make them undevelopable.
Commissioner Lehner cited
Borough Code 20.04.010 “The purpose of this title is to promote an adequate and
efficient street and road system, to provide utility easements, to provide
minimum standards of survey accuracy and proper preparation of plats, and to
protect and improve the health, safety and general welfare of the people”
VOTE: YES: LEHNER, FOSTER, CONNOR
NO: HESS, KRANICH
Motion failed.
Commissioner Foster commented that in the staff report Public Works is requesting that the Commission postpone action, so if he agrees with Public Works request he would have to vote no.
Vice Chair Hess responded that it would serve the same function because it will come back before the Commission again.
VOTE (Main motion): YES: KRANICH, HESS
NO: FOSTER, CONNOR, LEHNER
Motion failed.
B. Staff
Report PL 05-58 Re: South Peninsula Hospital Subdivision 2005
Addition Preliminary Plat and Vacation of a Portion of Bartlett Street
CONNOR/LEHNER
MOVED TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT PL 05-58 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Dedicate additional right-of-way for a
full sixty-foot street as required by Homer City Code for Hohe Street.
2. Dedicate easements over existing water
and sewer lines as required by the Public Works Department.
3. Correct the City Manager to Walt E.
Wrede.
4. Adherence to the Public Works Department
concerns as listed above, #1 and #3.
5. Correct the name of the
Kenai Peninsula Borough Mayor.
6. Show that area that was
subject to landslides on the plat.
City Planner McKibben summarized the staff report.
Wayne Aderhold, Kenai Peninsula Borough Public Works, made comment to the
staff recommendations. He agrees with
staff recommendation 1. and added that there is a driveway that comes down Hohe
Street. When the hospital’s east
addition comes in, they plan to put an intersection in, it all needs to be
cleaned up. Mr. Aderhold said that if a
water and sewer easements are needed, it should wait until the State determines
what needs to be done with regard to the Bartlett/Hohe road project.
Commissioner Kranich commented that there is nothing in the packet that
where state DOT has signed off on vacating the state ROW.
Mr. Aderhold replied that it is not state ROW, it shows on their plans,
research showed it was City ROW.
Vice Chair Hess asked Mr. Aderhold for clarification on what should be
addressed by the Commission.
Mr. Aderhold replied that on staff report 1, in addition to cleaning up
the ROW; look at cleaning up the configuration of roads and driveways
there. He said they could identify
where the landslide took place as requested on item 2. He didn’t have comment on the other staff
recommendations.
VOTE: YES: FOSTER, CONNOR, LEHNER, KRANICH, HESS
Motion carried.
Vice Chair Hess called for a short recess at 10:30 p.m. The meeting resumed at 10:36 p.m.
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 05-59 Re: Transportation
Plan
LEHNER/CONNOR MOVED TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT PL 05-59.
Nancy Hillstrand, city resident, voiced her concern for the one-way couplets in the plans. She suggested temporary speed bumps to slow people down. She feels that is most important to slow down, especially out on the spit from El Pescador down though that congested area, during heavy traffic time. She thinks the one-way couplet is a bad idea.
City Planner McKibben brought the Commissions attention to the email from City Clerk Calhoun regarding the HARP funding and its application to other things than roads. She referenced the revision to page I-15 to add to the end of the paragraph - HARP funds are available to implement the Non-Motorized Transportation and Trails Plan in the staff report. City Clerk Calhoun’s email provided legal opinion from City Attorney Tans stating that HARP funds are not for trails, parks, parking or et cetera.
Commissioner Lehner brought up a recommendation she had that was not addressed in the revisions. In areas zoned CBD, UR and RO aesthetics conducive to pedestrian use shall be promoted by designating an A/B street grid. “A” streets must maintain a high standard of spatial definition and pedestrian interest. “B” streets can be assigned to lower grade uses such as parking lots, fast food drive-throughs, garages and et cetera.
The Commission discussed placing it under objectives on page I-21 of the Transportation Plan and agreed that the wording was ambiguous. City Planner McKibben pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan speaks to being pedestrian friendly in the Central Business District and this proposal takes away from that by designating areas that are pedestrian friendly and areas that are not. It was decided by the Commission not to add this item.
There was discussion regarding Mrs. Hillstrand’s comments regarding speed bumps. Ms. McKibben reminded the group that the Transportation Plan is a long-term 20 year general plan, not a site-specific study. The Commission agreed that it is an issue out at the end of the spit. It was agreed by consensus to add that additional traffic calming methods in pedestrian intensive areas, such as the spit, will be considered for additional traffic calming measures.
Commissioner Foster commented regarding the Poopdeck Trail and adding the separated pedestrian pathway is in their revision twice and that is good. He continued that the vacation of the ROW they approved is going before the Borough on Monday and if approved, it is going to limit the width of that trail.
Commissioner Kranich expressed his disagreement with one-way couplets listed in item I-32. He pointed out that during last year’s construction the trucks carrying loads of gravel were routed up Heath Street, which is a City street and it took a pounding because of it, to keep all the heavy truck traffic off of Pioneer. A one-way couplet will put every truck and motor home on Pioneer Ave.
The Commissioners discussed one-way couplets and the fact that it does not have to be a circle around Pioneer. The drawing from Public Works Director Meyer provided gives the impression that Pioneer Ave is where it has to be. The Commission agreed that rather than eliminate the recommendation, soften it some. City Planner McKibben recommended, “For example, the concept would route traffic into one-way patterns along the following streets”. They also agreed to remove street names from the map and add to it that it is an example.
The Commission discussed roundabouts and different ways that pedestrian traffic is dealt with. They agreed that is better to take the opportunity to look at the concept rather than preclude it all together.
Commissioner Foster recommended adding the language “Four way stops induce politeness in a community and should be encouraged.
VOTE: YES: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
B. Staff Report PL 05-46 Re: Proposed Amendment to HCC 21.45.040 (b) Dimensional Requirements (b) Building Setbacks (1). Postponed
Motion carried.
CONNOR/FOSTER MOVED TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT PL 05-47.
Sally Rediske, owner of Homer Physical Therapy, stated that she purchased the building that currently houses the Seldovia Native Association Health Clinic. She expressed her approval of increasing the size limit for Residential Office, stating that a third of her business comes from people seeing her sign at her current location. She commented that is a growing professional area and businesses need to be easily identified.
Nancy Hillstrand stated that she was not real familiar with this issue but asked that they do not make it like Soldotna.
There was discussion on current sign code allowances.
LEHNER/FOSTER MOVED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS TO 20.60.060
RO-DESIGNATED
ARTERIAL: INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING ROADS: EAST END, BARTLETT, HOHE,
MAIN AND PENNOCK: FIFTY TWO FIFTY SQUARE FEET SHALL BE THE MAXIMUM
TOTAL AREA OF ALL SIGNS, EXCEPT INCIDENTAL, BUILDING MARKER, AND FLAGS(b) PER
ZONED LOT ADJACENT TO AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY WITHIN THIS DISTRICT IN THE
DISTRICT.
VOTE: YES: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
The Commission agreed that further discussion on this topic should be postponed until Chair Chesley returned.
KRANICH/FOSTER MOVED TO POSTPONE ACTION ON THIS ITEM UNTIL THE JUNE 15, 2005 REGULAR MEETING.
VOTE: YES: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
D. Staff Report PL 05-38 Re: Proposed Amendment To Homer City Code Re: More than One Permitted Principle Use on a Lot. Postponed
City Planner McKibben
advised the Commission that City Attorney Tans had some concerns regarding the
amendment and she recommended they postpone.
LEHNER/KRANICH MOVED TO
POSTPONE THE ITEM TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING.
VOTE: YES:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
E. Staff Report PL 04-109 Re: Commission Work List – On-going.
The Commission agreed to change the top three items to the following:
1. Develop Sensitive Areas Ordinance
- steep slope
- possible interim CUP process for certain criteria
- wetlands/shorelines/bluff erosion
2. Subdivision Code
3. Review/amend nonconforming uses code section
REPORTS
A. Borough Report
Commissioner Foster reported
that of the 10 plats before the Borough on Monday, eight of them are from
Homer.
B. Kachemak Bay Advisory Planning Commission Report
PLANNING DIRECTORS’ REPORT
Commissioner Foster asked
Ms. McKibben about the activity on the lots on the Sterling Highway, as you are
coming into town. It has been an on
going problem and said that it is time to start fining them.
Commissioner Hess
concurred adding that it is clear that there are activities going on that are
not allowed without a permit.
Comment was also made
regarding:
ü
The new business in the Trailside Mall.
The windows are covered with signs.
ü
How can Mike Kennedy’s lot on Ocean Drive Loop not be a violation
ü
The status of the family on Forest Glen Road
City Planner McKibben
replied that she will look at the Sterling Highway property. She
said they are working on Ocean Drive Loop. The family on Forest Glen Road has made some progress on clean up
and Planning Technician Eggertsen-Goff has talked with them.
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.
Letter to Tom
Keesecker, Seldovia Village Tribe IRA, dated May 6, 2005 Re: Development on 890 East End Road.
COMMENTS OF THE AUDIENCE
Members
of the audience may address the Commission on any subject. The Chair may prescribe time limits.
Nancy
Hillstrand questioned the Commission on what the boundaries are for the Bridge
Creek Watershed area. City Planner
McKibben clarified the areas and explained that the physical boundary is
larger.
Mrs.
Hillstrand advised the Commission that her well water is full of silt deposits
to the point that she has to change her filter in her well after just a few
uses. There is a subdivision being
developed in an area above her property that she believes is causing the
siltation. Her property is near the
water treatment facility and she expressed her concern as to how the siltation
is affecting the water that goes through the treatment facility. The land that is being developed is outside
the Bridge Creek Water Shed Protection District but that whole area through
there is very sensitive to siltation and wanted to bring it to the Commission’s
attention. She suggested perhaps this
area should be included in the protection district.
City
Planner McKibben advised Mrs. Hillstrand that Planning Technician Engebretsen
and Engineering Technician Hrachiar were going to be in that area on Friday and
suggested she contact Planning Technician Engebretsen to arrange a meeting.
COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION
Commissioners
may comment on any subject, including requests to staff and requests for
excused absence.
The
Commissioners commented that it was a good meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
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
adjourned at 12:03 a.m. The next
Regular Meeting is scheduled for June 1, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall
Cowles Council Chambers. There will be
a worksession at 6:00 p.m. prior to the meeting.
MELISSA JACOBSEN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Approved: