Session 06-17, a Regular Meeting
of the Homer Advisory Planning Commission was called to order at
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS CONNOR, FOSTER, HESS, KRANICH, LEHNER
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER CHESLEY, PFEIL (Both Excused)
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
C. KPB Coastal Management Program Reports
D. Commissioner Excused Absences
The agenda was approved as presented by consensus of the Commission.
Commission
approves minutes with any amendments
A. Memorandum Dated
The Commission discussed the
memorandum regarding a motion that was made during discussion of the
Sutton/Cups replat on
Commissioner Kranich commented
that the original motion is contradictory in itself as the first part of it
says the east half of
The Commission agreed that
reference to
RECONSIDERATION
The
public may speak to the Planning Commission regarding matters not on the
agenda. The Chair may prescribe time
limits. Public comments on an agenda
item 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.
Jerry Anderson,
Mr. Anderson expressed his dismay at seeing Commissioner’s Connor and Lehner leaving. He thinks they did a great job, thought outside the box and didn’t become so choked up over the letter of the ordinance that they were unable to see possible solutions that were both in the best interest of the City and the property owners. If properly viewed, those two interests are generally very close to the same.
Mr. Anderson commented that there
is intrigue going on in the City’s Administration that would make a great James
Bond film. He said the City advisory
Planning Commission is the body that advises the Borough Planning Commission on
platting matters within the City. When
he got up to the Borough and the Sutton/Cups replat was on the agenda, the
Borough Platting Officer had written the Borough Staff Report to reflect all of
the recommendations of the Administration on the dedication of
Lastly, Mr. Anderson commented
that last year he had given a letter to staff and also to the City Manager
regarding the filing fees for subdivisions and his letter was never responded
to in any shape or form. In November he
sent in a plat and staff advised him they had everything except the filing fee,
which he said he would be happy to pay when they provided him a copy of the ordinance
that authorizes charging the fee. He
said the plat he submitted in November and another submitted in March came
before the Commission and they acted on them sans the application fee. In May he submitted two more plats. The City Manager sent a letter stating the
City has the authority to charge for services and with out payment, the City
will return the plats and not review them.
Mr. Anderson said he explained to the City Manager that the City of
Homer Advisory Planning Commission (HAPC) has a dual role function. When it comes to zoning matters of things
that affect only the City, HAPC is advisory to the City Council, when it comes
to platting matters the HAPC is advisory to the Borough Planning
Commission. In the platting authority,
the HAPC authority is no more or less than any of the other cities planning
commissions. The Borough asks for the
Commission’s advice regarding the plat for their area and is a function of the
City and Borough, not the surveyor. Mr.
Anderson said he hand carried a letter to the City Manager and said that if the
City doesn’t want to review the plats, he doesn’t care, it just means it is
another meeting that he doesn’t have to go through. Mr. Anderson said he would like the
Commission to be aware that the administration has returned the two plats and
the Borough subdivision ordinance has a provision that if the City does not
send their recommendations within 49 days, then they are deemed to have no
recommendation. The City of
Commissioner Foster said the discussion he missed was with the Borough Plat Committee and it was not that he chose to miss it. He asked Mr. Anderson for his opinion on an issue with the City and Borough in which the Borough Attorney has made a recommendation that if a member of the City Planning Commission hears a plat at the City level, they should not be able to comment on it at the Borough level. It has caused Commissioner Foster to have to recuse himself at the Borough level.
Mr. Anderson responded that flies in the face of 42 years of tradition. Traditionally the Borough Planning Commission has looked very heavily toward the City representative to comment on, clarify if necessary and be the spokesman for the City Advisory Planning Commission. He thinks the Borough Attorney is dead wrong. Mr. Anderson added that the two plats the City doesn’t get to see are not big deals, one eliminates a lot line and the other cuts a 20 into four fives with no dedications involved, so they aren’t missing anything big.
Commissioner Foster said that there is a Commissioner from another City who chooses not to act at the City level so he can participate at the Borough level. Mr. Anderson suggested calling their bluff and said his personal recommendation is that Commissioner Foster should comment.
Commissioner Kranich asked for the status of the Sutton/Cups Replat. Mr. Anderson said it was postponed because he did not have the contours on it, which aren’t required unless a street is being dedicated and he feels it is another indication of the collusion between the two administrations.
Vice Chair Hess thanked Mr. Anderson for the information he brought to the 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.
City
Planner McKibben read the staff report.
Rick
Wise, Pastor of Glacierview Baptist Church, commented to the reason for the
requested vacation stating there are two principal reasons. First it would give complete access to their
campus. Currently this section of
Pastor
Wise stated that if Kallman were to become an active street, it would change
the character of their campus.
Presently, Kallman is partially constructed at about 18 feet wide and is
virtually a dead end street. The water,
sewer and ditch easements, as they now exist, could remain. He said as the community continues to grow,
there is a corresponding need to increase the size of buildings for public
assembly. He said it is difficult for
churches and other non profits to compete for large tracts of land,
particularly with in the City. Many of
Homer’s churches w
Pastor
Wise noted some have claimed that the church is a drain on the economy because
they are tax exempt. He said he is not
one who feels they have an inalienable right to tax exemption, but it is a nice
benefit. He said it should be noted that
the church offers many benefits to the community free of charge. The church has an annual budget of $250,000
and most of that is put back into the community.
Pastor
Wise pointed out that
Pastor
Wise commented that Public Works commented about multiple access corridors, and
said these are preferable only when certain conditions are met. There is only 357 feet between
Pastor
Wise noted his familiarity in water and sewer lines with work he has done in
the past. He said there are a lot of
options for getting water and sewer to the other subdivisions without
Kallman.
In
closing, Pastor Wise commented that they are not proposing something
dramatic. They are asking, as an entity
that has been part of the community for more than 50 years, to grow in the
historical location they chose. He
provided a copy of signatures of over 150 adults who attend the church in
support of the vacation.
Commissioner
Connor asked Pastor Wise for his input on Public Works recommendation for the
realignment of Kallman. Pastor Wise
responded that he is a cooperative person, but the problem is if the street
were better aligned it would benefit the church but would nullify the
neighboring lots. He doesn’t feel it
would be the best solution. He pointed
it out to the Commission on the aerial map.
Commissioner
Foster questioned, with regard to the Homer Non Motorized Transportation and
Trails Plan, if the church has issue with a trail being added. Pastor Wise said he has talked with Kenton
Bloom and had discussed sharing a trail that would align with Pennock. He said the church is not opposed to trails
and would be w
There
was discussion of the need to eliminate lot lines between lots 1 and 2. City Planner McKibben clarified that Borough
Code states that within one year of vacation, the lots have to be
re-platted. It is two separate steps and
the applicant wasn’t aware of this until after they submitted the vacation.
It
was clarified that the church owns lots 1, 2 and 3.
Nathan
Wise commented that they just got lot 3 this spring and have control of the
property on both sides of the street.
Pastor Wise noted that the City could bring traffic down Ronda, which
could be lined up with Mattox and that is more favorable than having several
streets in close proximity bringing traffic onto
Karen
Newell, property owner on
Gary
Thomas, City resident whose property adjoins
Commissioner
Foster asked whether Mr. Thomas was or was not in favor of the vacation
request. Mr. Thomas said that
personally, he would love to never have Kallman developed next to his house,
because it gives him some green buffer space.
He added that he would not like Kallman developed and sp
City
Planner McKibben commented regarding Mr. Thomas’ clarification on the
recommendation of the Quiet Creek Plat.
She said her recollection is the same as Mr. Thomas, but she copied and
pasted into her staff report directly from the minutes of the November
meeting. She said if it is something the
Commission wants to be clear about then more investigation can be done.
Rich
Fetterhoff, City resident, reiterated Pastor Wise and Mr. Thomas’s
concerns. His concern is primarily
safety. He is a leader in the Pioneer
Club at the church and there are a lot of kids involved and a lot of games
played where they are crossing the right-of-way. If it were to be developed into a
thoroughfare, it would put a lot of kids in a precarious situation.
Pastor
Wise followed up with Mr. Thomas’s comments regarding water and sewer. He pointed out on the aerial photo where the
water and sewer stubs are and water is contingent on which pressure reducing
station and what level it is. From a practical
point of view a lot of the water would have to come from the area near Paul
Banks, but the lower portion could be fed very easily through Kramer, which is
already stubbed in there. He noted the
main at Kallman only has a 6 inch stub across.
He feels the utilities can be brought in a variety of ways.
Deputy
City Clerk Jacobsen commented regarding Mr. Thomas’s concern with the staff
report and City Planner McKibben’s response.
Ms. Jacobsen said the entire section of the minutes was not cut and paste
into the staff report, only the item number three. She stated the minutes do say that they shall
not construct Kallman, as Mr. Thomas had pointed out.[1]
There
were no further comments and Vice Chair Hess closed the Public Hearing.
CONNOR/KRANICH
MOVED TO ADOPT
STAFF
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission recommend the
vacation of the
Commissioner
Connor commented that she understands the concerns of both parties and would
like to see all of Kallman vacated. She
questioned that the way the motion was written and what has been referred to in
the Quiet Creek Subdivision, if Kallman was not fully constructed south of the
Quiet Creek Subdivision, then would it void it as a right-of-way.
City
Planner McKibben responded that the Borough Code requires that rights-of-way be
platted to connect with other platted rights-of-way. The preliminary plat had to show the
connection to the existing right-of-way of
Commissioner
Foster asked if the vacation was granted and Kallman was built, would another
applicant be forced to provide a cul-de-sac or turn around.
City
Planner McKibben responded that she thinks Public Works would have included it
if it were needed.
Commissioner
Kranich responded that he is undecided at this point. He can see positives and negatives on both
sides of the issue.
There
was discussion regarding what has happened regarding the development of Nelson and Ronda.
Commissioner
Lehner commented that she likes the idea of promoting alternative modes of
transportation. It could be done here in
a proactive way for pedestrian and bicycle access.
LEHNER/CONNOR
MOVED TO VACATE THE MOTORIZED RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SUBSTITUTE A NON MOTORIZED RIGHT-OF-WAY
OF THE SAME WIDTH.
Ms.
McKibben commented that the rights-of-way have setbacks so this action will not
take away the 20 foot set back. She
noted that only alleys can have reduced setbacks. She doesn’t believe the City Code or Borough
Code differentiates between motorized and non motorize rights-of-way and
questions if it is something that can be noted in a plat note.
It
was discussed that if the vacation was not granted, the City would still need
the additional thirty feet on the other side of the property line. Keeping the thirty feet will still allow
Public Works to use it for utilities and the public could still use it for non
motorized activity.
VOTE: NO:
CONNOR, KRANICH, HESS, FOSTER, LEHNER
Motion
failed.
Commissioner
Kranich commented that from the community standpoint it would be adequate to be
able to traverse up the west property line of the large lot 12A and across the
top of the north boundary. It is a new
concept so the applicant should have the opportunity to comment on it.
City
Planner McKibben noted the staff report refers to Borough Code 20.28.160 Other
Access Provisions. Commissioner Foster
added that the Borough has a lot of requirements and restrictions regarding
half streets. He said that an easement
may be a possible alternative and suggested only from the north end of the lot
to the south end.
Commissioner
Connor commented that she is in favor of the vacating, but not at the expense
of increased traffic on Kramer. She
asked that the Commission not forget about that issue.
LEHNER/KRANICH
MOVED TO POSTPONE UNTIL IT IS BROUGHT BACK BY STAFF.
VOTE: YES:
CONNOR, HESS, KRANICH, FOSTER, LEHNER
Motion
carried.
Vice
Chair Hess called for a recess at
City
Planner McKibben read the staff report.
Paul
Voeller, project surveyor, advised the Commission he is available for
questions. He stated he agrees with the
staff report for this and the following action.
There
was brief discussion regarding the status of the lot. City Planner McKibben pointed out that the
staff report identifies it as vacant and the aerial photo shows it as vacant.
Commissioner
Connor asked if there were other drainages besides the one shown on the western
lot line. Mr. Voeller responded he needs
to get up there and map it to show them on the plat as all drainages and steeps
slopes must be shown.
There
were no public comments.
LEHNER/KRANICH
MOVED TO ACCEPT
Staff Comments/Recommendations:
Planning Commission recommend approval
of the preliminary plat with the following comments:
1. A plat note indicating that this
subdivision may contain wetlands.
Property owners should contact the Army Corps. of Engineers prior to any
on-site development or construction activity to obtain the most current
wetlands designation (if any).
2. Grades in excess of 20% to be
identified on plat.
3. Drainages to be shown on plat.
There was discussion regarding the need for that
particular piece of land for
Commissioner Foster questioned if the City gets a
notice from the State that they are in agreement with vacating the
right-of-way. City Planner McKibben
responded that the applicant will need to have it when they go to the
Borough.
VOTE:
YES: CONNOR, LEHNER, KRANICH,
HESS, FOSTER
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 public.
City
Planner McKibben reviewed the staff report.
Mr.
Voeller had no comment.
There
were no public comments.
LEHNER/KRANICH
MOVED TO ACCEPT
STAFF
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS:
Planning Commission recommend approval
of the preliminary plat with the following comments:
1. A plat note indicating that this
subdivision may contain wetlands.
Property owners should contact the Army Corp. of Engineers prior to any
on-site development or construction activity to obtain the most current
wetlands designation (if any).
2. Army Corps. of Engineer permits
submitted to Public Works prior to the execution of the Subdivision Development
Agreement.
3. Depict and note the 100 foot drainage
easement centered on the creek dedicated by the parent plat.
Commissioner
Kranich commented that on the section of the new lot next to
Mr.
Voeller responded that an action similar to this was taken previously and they
added the 20 foot easement to follow what was done on that plat to carry it on
out. He said it is a roadway easement.
City
Planner McKibben added that it may be a slope easement as Public Works Director
Meyer has commented in the past about needing those easements and in this case
it is also the building setback.
Mr.
Voeller commented that they had received a letter back from DOT asking for some
additional information and it will be included in the information that goes to
the Borough.
VOTE: YES:
LEHNER, HESS, FOSTER, CONNOR, KRANICH
Motion
carried.
City
Planner McKibben read staff report.
Vice
Chair Hess noted for the record that two letters were provided regarding this
preliminary plat. [2]
Matt
Letzring, applicant and owner, pointed out that he has kept the subdivision at a
minimum density, taking into consideration the topography and noted that there
is drainage on the east side of the plat.
Mr. Letzring said he is not opposed to dedicating the sixty feet through
the subdivision for the road, but the road goes out to where there is a 100
foot drainage setback, so he questions the purpose of building the whole road
to City standards. He said he has talked
with staff and understands the City’s concern that in the future other people
will subdivide which will bring up issues.
Mr. Letzring commented his understanding is that dedicating the
right-of-way will help accomplish the City’s goal of
There
was question whether Mr. Letzring had contacted the Corps. of Engineers (COE)
and Mr. Letzring said he spoke to them briefly.
Their response had been that staying out of the delineated areas, it is
a moot point. When the road gets built
or dealing with septics is when the COE would need to be involved.
Question
was raised regarding a cul-de-sac. Mr.
Letzring said he spoke to Public Works Inspector Gardner who said it is his job
to get what is dedicated constructed to standards. Mr. Letzring spoke to Borough Platting
Officer Toll who wasn’t in favor of a cul-de-sac.
Commissioner
Connor asked for clarification on what Mr. Letzring was in favor of doing
regarding the road. He responded that he
was willing to dedicate the entire road and build it to standards to the point
on the drawing he provided the Commission.
Ms. Connor asked about the trail going through the property. Mr. Letzring responded it is his
understanding that it is a logging road.
It follows closely to where the dedication would be and is the one spot
that would fit through the canyon. He
said he would be open to consideration of pedestrian easement.
Commissioner
Kranich questioned if Public Works would really require that the road be
developed all the way up. Mr. Letzring
responded that Mr. Gardner felt that if it was dedicated all the way through,
it needed to be built to standards, unless the Commission approved an alternate
plan.
Discussion
continued regarding the dedication and the development of
Jonathon
McCubbins, property owner below the subject property, clarified that the road
there now is not a pioneer road, it is a logging road. He suggested that if the City is going to
have the easement all the way through, they should get all of the
Marjolein
Cardon, property owner on
There
was discussion of a 20 foot conservation easement. City Planner McKibben pointed out that staff
recommendations include a 100 foot drainage easement centered on the creek
dedicated by the parent plat.
Dennis
Novak, Councilmember and property owner in the area commented that he sat
through this same issue 10 years ago when it was 62 acres being subdivided into
three lots and Eileen Bechtol was the City Planner, adding that he is not for
or against Mr. Letzring’s proposal. He
said they went ahead and approved the subdivision but said that next time they would
need to be developed to City standards.
He said here we are again subdividing into three lots and not wanting to
bring it up to City standards until the next person subdivides. Councilmember Novak commented that the real
issue is that a lot of this area contains wetlands and recharge areas for the spring
that Ms. Cardon spoke about and the stream that comes down on the east side of
Mr. Letzring’s property. It is a
historic water source and because several property owners in the area own their
water rights they would have legal recourse if something impacts the water
source. Councilmember Novak said this arae would lend itself better to subdividing if City water
and sewer were available. He also noted
that a road could create a dam for the recharge area. Councilmember Novak provided a letter from
City Attorney Tans to Ms. Bechtol regarding the prior subdivision in 1996 and
he specifically noted Mr. Tans’ comment at the end of the importance of
protecting the water sources in and around the proposed subdivision.
Commissioner
Foster questioned who is supporting the connection of
Vice
Chair Hess stated that he resides on
Vice
Chair Hess called for a recess at
Vice
Chair Hess recognized that he did not give Mr. Letzring the opportunity to
rebut and asked if he had any further comments.
Mr.
Letzring commented that because of the amount of trees that were logged off the
property it is clearly not a flowing wet stream area but noted there are
sections that need to be dealt with. He
said his plan makes sense and is the best use.
The wetlands are first and foremost in his mind. If it is left as 20 acres and a cattle farmer
comes in, then there will be issues with feces and contamination of the water
source.
CONNOR/LEHNER
MOVED TO POSTPONE ACTION UNTIL A FURTHER TIME.
Commissioner
Lehner commented that there are a whole lot of issues that are intermingled
here. She noted the hydrological issues
and concerns of connecting
Commissioner
Kranich commented in reference to the letter from City Attorney Tans, it
contains some clear language pertaining to plat approvals. He asked that it be included in their next
packet.
Commissioner
Connor suggested that having the COE pay a visit to the site may be in order
due to the sensitivity of the area and the questions regarding the water
quality and that would be another reason to postpone action. She recognized it is something the applicant
would have to be willing to do.
Vice
Chair Hess commented that it has been brought to their attention that people
with water right have an avenue of recourse if the development of the
subdivision affects their water. He
added that they could possibly identify an issue of affecting health, safety
and welfare in this case.
Commissioner
Foster commented that the only hand the Commission can play is whether the road
is being developed in a manner suitable to City and Borough standards. The water rights are an individual issue that
property owners would have to deal with.
He feels the State would have a better chance stating that the road may
wash out because of flooding from wetlands being taken away. Commissioner Foster commended the City for
their recommendations before the final plat, especially having the COE permits
to Public Works prior to the subdivision agreement. He also commended the property owner for
looking at different options for conserving the area. Commissioner Foster added that based on
information from a roads conference he attended, he is concerned about roads
being built just because they were on a plat before.
Commissioner
Kranich commented that there is a procedure in place in the City which allows a
property owner to build a driveway in the right-of-way which could be an option
in this case.
City
Planner McKibben pointed out that the applicant has requested the Commission
recommend to Public Works that he not be required to develop the entire
right-of-way. She referenced
Commissioner Lehner’s concern that an evaluation of the Transportation Plan
with regard to this proposed right-of-way should be done. Ms. McKibben said that after looking over
City Attorney Tans’ letter it appears to relate primarily to water rights and
how it is affected by a platting action.
In general it indicates that people with water rights have legal rights,
but they are outside the platting authority.
She noted that the developer has already said he would voluntarily take
some steps to limit development on the property.
VOTE: YES:
LEHNER, HESS, CONNOR
NO: KRANICH,
FOSTER,
Motion
failed for lack of a majority.
FOSTER/KRANICH
MOVED TO ACCEPT
STAFF COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning Commission recommend approval
of the preliminary plat with the following comments:
1. A plat note indicating that this subdivision
may contain wetlands. Property owners should
contact the Army Corp. of Engineers prior to any on-site development or
construction activity to obtain the most current wetlands designation (if any).
3. Army Corps of Engineer permits submitted to
Public Works prior to the execution of the Subdivision Agreement.
2. Depict and note the 100 foot drainage
easement centered on the creek dedicated by the parent plat.
Commissioner
Foster commented that the Public Works recommendations that the Subdivision
Agreement focus on
Commissioner
Kranich pointed out that the alternate plat the applicant submitted seems to
make more sense because the only dedication required would be enough to gain
access to the properties and not going another 600 feet as a road to
nowhere.
There
was discussion of appropriate action regarding the dedication of the road.
KRANICH/LEHNER
MOVED TO ADD A RECOMMENDATION THAT
Commissioner
Kranich commented that there is concern about the road being extended all the
way through and this does provide access.
Commissioner
Foster recommended that reference be made to the laydown provided by the
applicant.
FOSTER/KRANICH
TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO THE LAYDOWN PROVIDED BY THE
APPLICANT.
There
was no further discussion on the secondary amendment.
VOTE
(Secondary amendment): YES: CONNOR,
HESS, KRANICH, FOSTER, LEHNER
Motion
carried.
There
was no further discussion on the primary amendment.
VOTE
(Primary amendment): YES: CONNOR, LEHNER, KRANICH, HESS, FOSTER
Motion
carried.
CONNOR/LEHNER
MOVED FOR A RECOMMENDATION THAT A PLAT NOTE BE ADDED THAT NO FURTHER
SUBDIVISION WILL BE ALLOWED.
Commissioner
Connor commented that the applicant seems willing to do that and she thinks it
is what is best for the land and the neighbors surrounding it.
There
was discussion that this is the type of action the developer spoke in support
of.
VOTE:
YES: CONNOR, LEHNER, KRANICH, HESS,
FOSTER
Motion
carried.
LEHNER/CONNOR
MOVED FOR A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT ENSURE THAT THE ROAD
BE ENGINEERED TO ALLOW CROSS FLOW BENEATH THE ROAD PRISM.
Commissioner
Lehner said that it was recommended in her subdivision that they could put
cobble rocks underneath the gravel and allow subsurface flows as opposed to
intercepting the flows and conveying them in a ditch. She feels the subdivision agreement could
address this.
VOTE: YES:
LEHNER, HESS, FOSTER, CONNOR, KRANICH
Motion
carried.
There
was no further discussion on the main motion as amended.
VOTE: YES:
FOSTER, CONNOR, LEHNER, KRANICH, HESS
Motion
carried.
OLD BUSINESS
City Planner McKibben reminded
the Commission there is a worksession scheduled for June 22nd at
LEHNER/KRANICH MOVED TO POSTPONE TO TOMORROWS WORKSESSION.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
B. Commission Work List, Ongoing
There was no discussion regarding the work list.
The
Commission hears a report from staff, testimony from applicants and the
public. Commission business includes
resolutions, ordinances, zoning issues, request fro reconsideration and other
issues as needed. The Commission may ask
questions of staff, applicants and public.
City Planner McKibben clarified that they have the next three regular meetings to discuss this item.
KRANICH/FOSTER MOVED TO POSTPONE ACTION ON THIS ITEM UNTIL AUGUST 2ND.
Commissioner Foster encouraged the Commission review and do their scoring prior to the August 2nd meeting because there is a lot of good stuff in there.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
There was discussion that they would like to have input from the Port and Harbor Commission prior to taking action.
Vice Chair Hess suggested postponing action on this until they hear back from the Port and Harbor Commission.
CONNOR/LEHNER SO MOVED.
There was no further discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
A.
Commissioner
Foster commented that Mr. Anderson gave a good report today and the most
important aspect is whether he should recuse himself when the City’s plats come
before the Borough. Vice Chair Hess
asked if it would be appropriate for staff to take this up with the City
Manager and possibly get a legal opinion from the City Attorney to direct
Commissioner Foster at the Borough level.
Commissioner Foster expressed his understanding that he listen to each
issue with an open mind and quite often new information is presented for
consideration. He requested
clarification if he would be restricted to vote as he did during the City’s
action. He said if the concern is an
unbiased opinion, then he believes he should vote as the facts are laid out in
a manner that seems appropriate. He
added that the City of
B
There was no Kachemak Bay Advisory Planning Commission Report.
There was discussion regarding upcoming meetings. The Fred Meyer CUP will be scheduled for a special meeting July 12th.
Vice Chair Hess asked if she had any input regarding Mr. Anderson’s earlier comments. City Planner McKibben said she had no specific comments but appreciated his apology for offending Public Works Director Meyer.
INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS
Items listened under this agenda item can be HCC
meeting minutes, copies of zoning violation letters, reports and information
from other government units.
A.
Letter dated
B.
Letter dated
C.
Letter dated
D.
Letter dated
E. Letter
dated
F. Letter
dated
G.
Memorandum dated
H.
Letter dated
I. Letter
dated
J. Memorandum 06-92, Appointments of Sharon Minsch and Bryan Zak to the Homer Advisory Planning Commission
Members of the audience may address the Commission
on any subject. The Chair may prescribe
time limits.
There were no
audience comments.
COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION
Commissioners may comment on any subject, including
requests to staff and requests for excused absence.
Vice Chair Hess expressed his appreciation for the input of both Commissioner Lehner and Commissioner Connor. He is sad about the circumstances regarding Ms. Connor no longer being able to participate. He added that he is looking forward to the working with the new Commissioners.
Commissioner Lehner said it has been a pleasure to work with everyone. City Planner McKibben added that Ms. Lehner has a perfect attendance record. Ms. Lehner said this is a challenging job and appreciates the new Commissioner’s willingness to put in the time and effort.
Commissioner Connor thanked Mr. Hess for his sentiments. She said it has been a pleasure and honor to do this and realizes that she is going to miss it. It is very interesting to her and they will see her at the meetings. She welcomed the new Commissioners and wished them good luck.
Commissioner Kranich commented that he would miss Commissioner Connor, even though they usually sat pretty solidly on opposite sides of the fence. He recognized that different view points need to be brought forward. He hopes to be pleasantly surprised and someone else coming on will share her view point. He said he is also looking forward to working with the new Commissioners. Commissioner Kranich commented that it was brought up to him regarding the memorandum on approval of the minutes, that it wasn’t clear by looking at the agenda specifically what the memorandum was pertaining to.
Commissioner Foster called Ms. Connor the Lorax, as she speaks for the trees and he appreciates that. He appreciated knowing that the trails and the trees would be addressed and although he may not agree with all the decisions, he knew they would be addressed. He said on Monday he attended an education program as a representative from the Kachemak Bay Research Reserve. It was a discussion with the City, Phil North from EPA, Dave Casey from COE and Gary Williams from KPB Coastal Management Program for a discussion of the bank stabilization that is going on. Commissioner Foster said he received an email from City Manager Wrede regarding the workshop with Orson Smith regarding best management procedures for property owners on how to deal with the erosion and how best to deal with it. He is looking for guidance from the City on what type of workshop they would like. He said he will keep the Commission updated on the progress.
There was discussion regarding the sign for the Bunk House sign that the Refuge Chapel displays from time to time. City Planner McKibben said staff is meeting with them to discuss what is going on there.
City Planner McKibben reminded the Commission of the special meeting for an executive session for the GCI appeal on June 28th and the special meeting for the Fred Meyer CUP on July 12th.
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
MELISSA JACOBSEN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Approved: