Session 08-03, a Regular Meeting of the Homer
Advisory Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Kranich at
PRESENT: COMMISSIONER
FOSTER, HESS, KRANICH, MCNARY, ZAK
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER
MINSCH, HOWARD (both excused)
STAFF:
DEPUTY
AGENDA
APPROVAL
FOSTER/ZAK MOVE TO APPROVE.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
PUBLIC
COMMENT
The Public may speak to the Planning Commission
regarding matters not scheduled for public hearing. (3 minute time limit)
Presentations approved by the Planning Director, the Chair or the Planning
Commission. A Public Works representative may address the Planning Commission.
Frank Griswold, City resident, said he would like
to reiterate his request for corrections to the minutes of November 7th,
December 20th, and January 2nd. He noted the in the
January 16 minutes that per se was spelled incorrectly. He commented regarding
the Policy and Procedures and Bylaws. He appreciates the attempt; he thinks it
is evident that they need help writing this code. He sees their intent in some
of the corrections, but in many cases it has made it worse and they may be the
only ones who understand what it means. He thinks they should have input from
an attorney or someone who writes code for a living. Points he noted:
·
P191
of the packet “The Commission shall make findings that the use satisfies the
conditions as established in
·
P197
of the packet “The following conditions must be satisfied” is much better than
“The Commission must make findings that the conditions have been satisfied”.
·
P201
of the packet under Planning Commission Review for Non conforming use, it says
Public Hearing and it is all crossed out. It would be very important for a non
conforming determination to have a public hearing. By not having a public
hearing the surrounding property owners are not notified and therefore would
not be able to participate in the process nor in an appeal.
He said he has about 20 more suggestions, but his
time was up. Mr. Griswold said the Commission is shooting itself in the foot by
curtailing public testimony of this ordinance.
City Planner McKibben noted that this w
RECONSIDERATION
There were no items for reconsideration.
ADOPTION OF THE 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 w
1. Approval of the Minutes of November 7,
2. Time
Extension Requests
a. Oscar Munson Preliminary
Plat
3. Approval
of City of
4. KPB
Coastal Management Program
5. Commissioner
Excused Absences
a.
Sharon Minsch
b.
Barbara Howard
FOSTER/ZAK MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
The December 20th minutes were moved to
New Business Item B.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
PRESENTATIONS
Presentations approved by the Planning Director,
the Chair, or the Planning Commission. A Public Works representative may
address the Planning Commission.
REPORTS
A. Borough
Report
Commissioner Foster reported that there was one
item of the City’s on next Monday’s meeting agenda. It is a vacation of a
utility easement off
B.
No KBAPC report.
C. Planning
Director’s Report
City Planner McKibben reviewed her staff report.
There was brief discussion regarding the status of
the sign code amendments. City Planner McKibben said it did not pass first
reading at the Council meeting, but the Commission can bring it back at a
future date.
Question was raised regarding who at Perkins Coie
is doing the technical rewrite of the zoning code and what the fee schedule is
for that. City Planner McKibben said she could bring the information back to
the Commission.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
The Commission conducts Public Hearings by hearing
a staff report, hearing public testimony and the acting on the Public Hearing
items. (3 minute time limit) The commission may question the public. Once the
public hearing is closed the Commission cannot hear additional comments on the
topic.
Chair Kranich stated he was absent from the last
meeting but he listened to the recording of the January 16 public hearing.
Commissioner Hess stated that he read the minutes regarding the public hearing.
Chair Kranich opened the public hearing for
comments on both the Scenic Gateway Overlay and the Community Design Manual.
Paul Sayer, owner of the f
Chair Kranich advised Dr. Sayer that if the
ordinance is adopted the way it is currently presented, he would need to apply
for non conforming status and include all the activities that are currently
being performed on the property. Chair Kranich recommended Dr. Sayer contact
the Planning office.
Mitchell Hrachiar, Borough resident, thanked the
Commission for the opportunity to speak tonight. He commented regarding Lloyd
Moore’s lot, noting there were a number of bright halogen type lights installed
last fall and he doesn’t believe that lighting should be grandfathered in to
any commercial status. Mr. Hrachiar doesn’t believe there was a CUP issued on a
non conforming structure or continuance of a non conforming structure so there
is a possibility of a zoning violation on the property. He hopes his comments w
Lloyd Moore, City resident, expressed his concern that the Gateway Overlay is unfair to his neighbors. Most of his businesses are not allowed in the Gateway Overlay District. Regarding his lighting, Mr. Moore stated that he is not trying to light up a porch, he is lighting up an acre and a half. The need for lighting is due to safety. He raised the question if any of them have ever been run over by a 52,000 lb. truck? Mr. Moore said he hasn’t and he is going to make sure that no one working for him or who is on his facility is. It is a commercial property that runs 24 hours a day seven days a week, every day of the year. Mr. Moore said that one size does not fit all. He commented that the restriction on the roof peak which is a 6/12 is unacceptable, but works for him because of the snow load up there. He stated that there is no where else in the City for his facility. Other locations where the zoning is appropriate have issues with wetlands and the cost of developing that commercial property is not productive for him. Mr. Moore said it is unfair for the neighbor between him and the other commercial properties to be zoned rural residential and have these conditions placed on their property. He doesn’t think this gateway is right and one size does not fit all. He thanked the Commission for their time.
Frank Griswold said he doesn’t think they need to trash the Gateway to Homer so people can make money in January, February, and March, at the risk of losing business or economic growth in summer months when Homer brings in most of its tax base. He said that since they are affecting a lot of people the City should do a blanket grandfathering and staff should take pictures and document information and not make individuals do it. The City would then have a basis for the decision and wouldn’t have to deal with these on an individual basis for the next ten or fifteen years. It would be easier on the property owners and easier for the City in the long run.
Chair Kranich commented that he was on the City Council at the time annexation went through. Research was done on the part of the City Attorney and City Administration on non-conforming status on everything that was in the annexed area. It ended up that the information didn’t get back in time for a blanket issuing.
There were no further comments and Chair Kranich closed the public hearing.
FOSTER/HESS I MOVE THAT WE CONTINUE THESE ITEMS TO OUR NEXT MEETING.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
This topic was taken up
with Item A.
City Planner McKibben reviewed the staff report.
Chair Kranich opened the public hearing.
Frank Griswold said he thinks this is an
Roger Imhoff said he is not a City resident but
been an area resident since 1977. He agrees with keeping the building heights
at 35 feet maximum. He encouraged the Commission to take some of the latitude
they are apparently giving this project to look at new subdivision within the
City of
There were no further public comments and Chair
Kranich closed the public hearing.
Commissioner McNary noted that the Commission has
recommended to the Council that the 35 foot building height limit remain.
FOSTER/ZAK MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS TO A FUTURE
WORKSESSION TO BE ANNOUNCED.
There was discussion that Council set a time frame
for the Commission to discuss it and make recommendations. They agreed to take
it up later in the meeting.
VOTE: NO: ZAK, KRANICH, HESS, MCNARY, FOSTER
Motion failed.
FOSTER/ZAK MOVED TO TABLE THIS AT THIS TIME
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
PLAT
CONSIDERATION
The Commission hears a staff report, testimony from
applicants and the public, The Commission may ask questions of staff,
applicants and the public, The Commission w
City Planner McKibben reviewed the staff report.
There were no comments from the applicant or the
public.
FOSTER/HESS MOVED TO APPROVE
There was no discussion.
VOTE: YES: KRANICH, FOSTER, MCNARY, ZAK, HESS
Motion carried.
City Planner McKibben reviewed the staff report.
Roger Imhoff, surveyor, had no comment but said he
was available for questions.
There were no public comments.
HESS/FOSTER MOVED TO ADOPT
Comment was made that it is better for a person to
deal with drainage issues on the property rather than trying to address
drainage off site. Trying to channel water off site potentially affects those off
site.
Question was raised whether any of the noticed
property owners provided comment. City Planner McKibben said she is not aware
of any.
VOTE: YES: FOSTER, MCNARY, ZAK, KRANICH, HESS
Motion carried.
City Planner McKibben reviewed the staff report.
There were no comments from the applicant or the
public.
HESS/FOSTER MOVED TO ADOPT
Question was raised regarding the 33 foot section
line easement along the south border and if it would be possible, should
someone want to go to the extreme, of adding a bridge over to Jake’s Little
Fireweed Lane. Mr. Imhoff responded that it would be a possibility.
MCNARY/FOSTER MOVED TO AMEND STAFF REPORT PL08-20
THAT THE STAFF COMMENTS
It was clarified that the motion refers to plat
note three.
VOTE (Primary amendment): NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS
CONSENT
Motion carried.
There was no further discussion on the main motion
as amended.
VOTE (Main motion as amended): NON OBJECTION:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
City Planner McKibben reviewed staff report.
There were no comments from the applicant or the
public.
HESS/FOSTER MOVED TO ADOPT STAFF REPORT PL08-21,
MINSCH SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
It was noted that there was no zoning designation
on the staff report.
Question was raised regarding a creek on the lot.
Mr. Imhoff referenced the aerial photo and noted the location of a low spot on
the west boundary.
Chair Kranich called for a break at
The lot dimensions were clarified. The ones in bold
are the surveyors measurements and the parenthesis are the dimensions of
record.
VOTE: YES: ZAK, KRANICH, HESS, MCNARY, FOSTER
Motion carried.
City Planner McKibben read the staff report. She
noted letters provided from Charles Jay, and Susan and Hal Smith.[1]
Roger Imhoff, surveyor, had no comment but said he
was available for questions.
Mary Hogan asked that the Commission consider the
problem with the drainage as the bluff is not solid and currently there is a
house ready to go into ocean. She noted that the access from the highway is not
a City road, it is a private access.
Commissioner McNary disclosed an ex parte
communication with Charles Jay, who works with Commissioner McNary. He said
that Mr. Jay told him today that the road accessing the area is a private road
and wasn’t maintained by the Borough. Mr. McNary said there was no more
discussion after this. It came up because Mr. Jay had asked if it was too late
to give letters to the Clerk for a laydown.
Commissioner Foster said that since there have been
three members of the public who have commented on this he will recuse
himself from commenting and voting so
that he may participate as a representative of the City on the Kenai Peninsula
Borough Planning Commission.
There was no opposition from the Commission and
Commissioner Foster left the table.
HESS/MCNARY MOVED TO ADOPT
Chair Kranich asked if the applicant had considered
a third lot on the bluff and below, which would eliminate the problem with the
3 to 1 ratio. Mr. Imhoff responded that technically it would work as you could
have beach access to the third lot, but it wasn’t something that was
considered.
Commissioner McNary asked if there is a precedent
for the 3 to 1 exemption. Mr. Imhoff said it is a fairly common request and it
is fairly common that it is granted by the Borough Planning Commission. There
are number of lots on the bluff that extend from upland into the tidelands
area. When these properties are subdivided it is common to request that
exception and it is virtually always granted.
Mr. Imhoff said that a 15 foot utility easement
would be granted fronting the right-of-way and it will be shown on the plat.
There was brief discussion noting that the
Commission has gone both ways approving or disapproving the 3 to 1 exemption
requests on bluff lots.
Commissioner McNary commented that the preliminary
plat notes seem to address the concerns raised by the neighboring property
owners. Ms. Hogan reiterated her concern regarding the instability of the
bluff.
VOTE: YES: ZAK, HESS, MCNARY, KRANICH
Motion carried.
Commissioner Foster returned to the table.
PENDING
BUSINESS
There were no items under pending business.
NEW BUSINESS
The Commission hears a report from staff.
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. Any items brought before the
Commission for discussion are on the floor for discussion following
introduction of the item. The Commission w
A. Staff Report PL 08-24, Policies and Procedures Manual/Bylaws
City Planner McKibben read the staff report.
HESS/FOSTER MOVED TO BRING
There was no discussion regarding the motion to
discuss and was approved by consensus.
The Commission discussed the amendment to the
policy regarding commissioner absences, the amendment being that a commissioner
who misses three consecutive meetings or six meetings in a year would be
removed from the Commission. They expressed their support to the amendment.
HESS/MCNARY MOVED TO POSTPONE ACTION ON THE BYLAWS
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
B.
FOSTER/MCNARY MOVED TO ADOPT THE
The following amendments were addressed:
·
Page
5, middle of the last paragraph that Commissioner Foster was commenting on the
health and safety component of the Code.
·
Page 2 third paragraph Commissioner McNary
reviewed the code and agreed that it did not
specifically allow…
·
Frank
Griswold’s audience comments Staff reports were not objectionable
objective,
The Commission asked that more information be
included in the public comments at the beginning of Commission Business.
There was no objection to the proposed amendments
to the minutes.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
HESS/MCNARY I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE BRING STAFF
REPORT PL08-18 OFF THE TABLE
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
Chair Kranich disclosed that he has a family member
who owns property about 900 feet from the proposed Town Center Zoning area. He
noted that the distance is three times the distance used in notification of
property owners. Chair Kranich stated that he has no financial interest in the
property.
Commissioner Foster disclosed that he owns property
on
There were no motions made regarding conflict of
interest for either disclosure.
HESS/MCNARY MOVED TO BRING
There was no discussion regarding the motion to
discuss and was approved by consensus.
The Commission agreed to discuss the proposed
ordinance by sections and took the following action for amendments:
There was discussion regarding removing item l on
line 83, retail sale of building supplies and materials. Concern was expressed
regarding the loading and unloading building supplies and handling deliveries
in the town center. The opinion was stated that the Commission is walking on
thin ice restricting what people can sell in a retail building that is in an
enclosed space.
HESS/ZAK MOVED TO MOVE ITEM L (LINE 83) IN
PERMITTED USES
There was brief discussion.
VOTE: YES: ZAK, KRANICH, HESS, FOSTER
NO:
MCNARY
Motion carried.
FOSTER/HESS I MOVE THAT ON ITEM A LINE 57 WE STRIKE
HARDWARE, APPLIANCE
a. Any retail
business where the principal activity is the sale of merchandise and services
in an enclosed building, including but not limited to food establishments,
drug, variety, and dry goods hardware,
appliance, and furniture stores;
Commissioner Foster said the idea is not that he is
eliminating them; it is just not putting it in and waiving a flag saying they
want it here. There was discussion that
appliances and furniture are large items and again raise the issue of loading,
unloading and deliveries as the previous motion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
HESS/FOSTER MOVED THAT WE MOVE HARDWARE, FURNITURE
Commissioner McNary commented that North Wind
Gallery sells chairs, so, the owner cannot have her store in
They discussed issues with parking and having room
for loading and unloading.
FOSTER/HESS MOVED TO MOVE LETTER U LINE 109 TO
CONDITIONAL USE.
Commissioner Foster commented his reasoning are the
same as listed above.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
Commissioner Hess commented regarding line 133 and
134, that PUDs are okay, but there are problems with it right now and it should
be fixed before adding it to the Town Center District. It will be easy to add
back in later.
HESS/FOSTER MOVED TO ELIMINATE LINE 133
There was discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
There was discussion about removing shelter for the
homeless from conditional uses. The Commission recognized the need for such a
facility and discussed that the
ZAK/HESS MOVED TO ELIMINATE ITEM E “SHELTER FOR THE
HOMELESS” FROM CONDITIONAL USES.
There was brief discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
Discussion
ensued regarding indoor and outdoor recreation facilities and the importance of
keeping those items as conditional uses so there is some oversight on their
development.
MCNARY/FOSTER MOVED THAT WE END DISCUSSION AT
21.56.040 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS EVENING
The Commission agreed to meet on
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS
A. Letter
dated
B. Letter
dated
C. Memorandum dated
D. Letter dated
E. Letter dated
F. Letter dated
G. Email dated
H. Report from Mayor Jim Hornaday regarding
I. “Great Streets” article from American Planning Association,
January edition
COMMENTS OF THE AUDIENCE
Members of the Audience may
address the Commission on any subject.
Frank Griswold commented regarding the Bylaws and
Policy and Procedures Manual. He said these underwent a major rewrite a year
ago. This body is wasting a lot of time undertaking a task in which it has no
expertise. Instead of clarifying the rules they are just making them more
confusing. They should use the $50,000 grant from the Borough to hire someone
who knows how to write code or adopt the bylaws and procedures of some
community that has had them prepared professionally. Regarding the Town Center
Rezone the Commission should ask themselves at least five questions. One, why
is a rezone necessary to accomplish any of the purported goals? Two, if these
goals are good for
COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION
Commissioners may comments
on any subject, including requests to staff and requests for excused absence.
Commissioner Zak had no
comment.
Commissioner Hess thanked
the Commission and said they got a lot done tonight.
Commissioner Foster commented that his decision to
recuse himself wasn’t arbitrary it was based on the decision of the Borough
Attorney. Clearly when there are three people who have expressed opposition to
something, they deserve the right to have someone representing the City be able
to hear and vote on that at the Borough level.
Commissioner McNary commented that he likely won’t be here next week. His short time here was educational. He underestimated the amount of work that is done here and he appreciates what the Commission does.
Chair Kranich commented that they got through a lot
tonight and there are still some weighty things to finish. It was a good
meeting.
ADJOURN
Notice of the next regular
or special meeting or work session w
There being no further business to come before the
Commission, the meeting adjourned at
MELISSA JACOBSEN, DEPUTY
Approved: