Session 07-14, a Regular Meeting of the Homer
Advisory Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Kranich at
PRESENT: COMMISSIONER
CHESLEY, FOSTER, HESS, HOWARD, KRANICH, MINSCH, ZAK
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER
HOWARD
STAFF:
DEPUTY
AGENDA
APPROVAL
The agenda was approved by consensus of Commission.
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 commented that the minutes of
·
Page
2 second bullet point is awkward and confusing and needs to be restated.
·
Page
3 “Chair Kranich recommended Mr. Griswold
provide proof of the statements he claims Mr. Kranich made if he wants them
weighed as evidence” Mr. Griswold believes this
is a fabrication and left out a really good point of appeal for Mr. Griswold.
·
Page
4, Include discussion between Chair Kranich and Mr. Griswold regarding the
events at the
·
Pages
8, Mr. Griswold’s comments that the City does not have planning authority were
left out and he wants it included.
Mr. Griswold said he would like to know what the
Commission’s policy is on revising minutes. He was told by the Clerk that
someone had requested he receive an advance copy of the minutes. He would like
to know who it was and why. Mr. Griswold said he would also like to know if
these minutes were already pre-corrected before they appeared in the packet and
what pre-corrections were made.
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 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.
1. Approval
of the Minutes of
2. Time
Extension Requests
3. Approval
of City of
4. KPB
Coastal Management Program
CHESLEY/MINSCH I REQUEST THAT WE REMOVE THE AUGUST
14
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
It was clarified that they would be items F and G
under new business.
The Consent Agenda was approved as amended by
consensus of the Commission.
PRESENTATIONS
Presentations approved by the Planning Director,
the Chair, or the Planning Commission. A Public Works representative may
address the Planning Commission.
A. Alan
Parks, Chairman, Global Warming Task Force
Alan Parks, Chair of the Global Warming Task Force,
invited Bill Smith to join him at the table for his presentation. Mr. Parks
commented that the group has been meeting on an average of twice a month since
January 2007. They requested that City join ICLEI, the International Council
for Local Environmental Initiatives, which is an international group with 700
members, five from within
Mr. Parks said the Task Force members have resolved
that debate on the causes of climate change is over for them. They are moving
forward with the assumption and agreement that it is predominantly caused by
human means. Mr. Parks said a summer intern with the Alaska Marine Conservation
Council and
Bill Smith, who received input regarding land use
and planning, commented that he attended the ICLEI community training session
in
Commissioner Foster commended the Task Force for
their work on the forum. He commented that the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) has made it clear with science that there is a
discernable human influence on climate, but human induced climate change has
not been quoted. He suggested the Task Force stay with the terminology used by the
IPCC.
REPORTS
A. Borough
Report
Commissioner Foster commented that the Borough
Ordinance 2007-33 regarding streets, sidewalks, roads and trails was brought up
at the Borough Planning Commission Meeting with a Public Hearing and there were
no public comments. Commissioner Foster read an excerpt from the Borough
Planning Commission minutes regarding his comments on the legal access
definition. He said he would speak more when the Ordinance comes up during
pending business and provided a copy of the unapproved Borough Planning
Commission minutes for the record.
B.
There was no KBAPC report.
C. Planning
Director’s Report
City Planner McKibben reminded the Commission of
their joint worksession with Council next week. She advised them of a meeting
with Gary Yuedelsen regarding
Commissioner Chesley commented that the City
Hall/Town Plaza Review Committee is being reinstated to take on new tasks. He
had suggested to the City Manager that that he should consider whether to have
Planning Commissioner’s on the Committee since the City will be coming to the
Commission in the future for a CUP.
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.
There were no public hearings.
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 will accept testimony or a
presentation on agenda items that involve an applicant.
A. Staff Report PL07-86, Homer Public
Library No. 2 Preliminary Plat
City Planner
McKibben reviewed the staff report. She noted there was a laydown item provided
by Jamie Sutton and that staff conducted a field visit. She suggested the staff
recommendations be amended to add the requirement for a ten foot drainage
easement along the entire west line of lots one and two of the proposed plat.
It would create the easement over the culvert not just beginning where the
culvert ends.
There were no
comments from the public.
MINSCH/HESS I
MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT PL07-86 WITH STAFF 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.
Dedicate a 15 ft utility easement along
3.
Verify the legal
description in the title block.
4.
Depict the approximate
location of the drainage and create a drainage easement. Dedicate a 30 ft
drainage easement, beginning and centered on the culvert outfall south of the
paved portion of the parking lot, and continuing south along the
creek/drainage.
5.
Verify whether or not there
is an area of 20% or greater slope on the lot, and depict the area on the plat.
There was
discussion regarding City Planner McKibben’s recommendation.
Commissioner
Hess suggested including a pedestrian easement, citing comments from the letter
from Mr. Sutton.
City Planner
McKibben suggested that recommendation four end at the word drainage in the
first sentence and the Commission add a recommendation six that would address
the drainage and a pedestrian easement if the Commission chooses to add it.
There was
discussion regarding drainage easements. Commissioner Chesley questioned
requirements for drainage easements. City Planner McKibben cited a section of
code in the
Commissioner
Chesley questioned if it would be appropriate to continue this so staff can
provide a depiction of what it would look like and the impact on the property.
The Council is counting on the property to have a certain value on it for the
library debt reduction. He wonders if they might be able to get input from
Council at the worksession.
Chair Kranich
noted there are several areas where the plat does not meet the requirements
regarding Preliminary Approval per KPB code 20.12.0060 Form and Contents
Required.
CHESLEY/ZAK I
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CONTINUE
Commissioner
Hess suggested that the access easement be addressed by City.
LANE/HESS I
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CONTINUE, THAT STAFF
ANALYSIS INCLUDE THE RECOMMENDATION BY JAMIE SUTTON IN THE LAYDOWN TO THE HOMER
ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
There was brief
discussion.
VOTE (Primary
amendment): NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
There was no
further discussion on the amended motion to postpone.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
CHESLEY/HESS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO
SUSPEND THE RULES
Commissioner Chesley explained that there could be
a fair amount of time spent on pending business item A and B and the applicant
is in the audience for new business item A.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
Motion carried.
City Planner McKibben reviewed the staff report.
Larry Dallas, applicant, commented that he was
available to answer questions. Mr. Dallas clarified that he has maintained
access to the beach which is currently being used by the public and the boat
launch. He has applied through his attorney for a vacation of the right-of-way
as the neighbor on the other side has vacated their half. 30 feet doesn’t
provide enough room for right-of-way. Mr. Dallas explained that his dogs jump
the fence quite easily and moving the fence back 20 feet takes away most of his
yard. The property is lower than the
road by about two feet. He is requesting a permit to leave his fence where it
is.
There were no public comments.
MINSCH/HESS I MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT
Staff Comments/Recommendations:
Staff recommends denial of a six (6) foot high fence within the
front yard per
Commissioner Minsch expressed the need to follow
the code regarding fences.
Commissioner Chesley commented that after
discussion during the worksession the Commission could consider the location as
well as the height.
Commissioner Foster commented that a right-of-way
would have a 20 foot setback and questioned if this would fall into the group
of non buildable rights-of-way that access
There was discussion regarding the applicant’s
assertion that the fence doesn’t create a visual barrier over the four feet
from the edge of the surface of the road. City Planner McKibben said she has
not visited the site and from the photograph she can see Mr. Dallas’ point, but
she said they need to be consistent in the way they look at the height of the
fences.
Commissioner Zak noted in the photo the fence next
door looks higher. Using mounding and
measuring four feet from the base of the fence is something that could be
considered in dealing with the issue of dogs.
Commissioner Foster commented that the fence in next door in the photo
was there prior to annexation.
CHESLEY MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS FOR MORE STAFF
ANALYSIS OF THIS POINT OF THE FENCE HEIGHT
Motion died for lack of a second.
Commissioner Hess recommended looking at the sign
code regarding heights for use in the future on working with fence heights.
City Planner McKibben cited
There was discussion that the Commission would have
to establish findings to support a six foot fence. Commissioner Zak felt that
justification could be found for it.
HESS I CALL FOR THE QUESTION.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: YES: FOSTER, MINSCH, CHESLEY, ZAK, KRANICH,
HESS
Motion carried.
City Planner McKibben reminded the Commission the
recommendation on the floor is to deny the permit.
VOTE (Main motion): YES: KRANICH, FOSTER, CHESLEY,
HESS, MINSCH
NO:
ZAK
Motion carried.
Chair Kranich called for a short recess at
PENDING
BUSINESS
A. Staff
Report PL07-81, Scenic Gateway Overlay Zone and Community Design Manual
City Planner McKibben commented that this draft
includes the amendments she understood the Commission wanted and spent some
time going over them.
Commissioner Foster noted that while the Commission
was working on this they were also working on the Development Activity Plan
that was going to be added in, but the
MINSCH/HESS I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE NOT DO ANOTHER
THING ON THIS ORDINANCE UNTIL AFTER WE MEET WITH THE COUNCIL ON MONDAY.
Commissioner Minsch expressed her concern that any changes
made in this discussion would not have time for adequate review from Council.
She would like to know if Council thinks the Commission is on the right track
before they spend anymore time on the ordinance.
Commissioner Foster noted that he will be absent on
Monday and hopes that his concern will be brought forward.
VOTE: YES: CHESLEY, MINSCH, KRANICH, HESS, FOSTER
NO:
ZAK
Motion carried.
B. Staff Report PL07-88,
It was noted that the
Commission is interested in Section 6, KPB 20.08.065, Legal Access.
Commissioner Foster commented that the way it is
written in the draft, Legal Access means a constructible continuous section
line easement, and platted public right-of-way, or public access granted by
recorded document. He had recommended at the Borough level that if the intent is
contiguous right-of-way and constructible it should be clearer.
There was discussion as to whether the definition w
MINSCH/HESS I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO THE FLOOR A
MOTION TO DISCUSS
There was no discussion and
the Commission agreed by consensus to bring this to the floor.
Discussion continued
regarding the Borough Ordinance.
CHESLEY/HESS I
Commissioner Chesley commented that as long as the
Commission is expecting that each of those categories to be constructible and
contiguous. The Borough Attorney can work it into the best legal definition.
VOTE: YES: MINSCH, ZAK,
KRANICH, HESS, CHESLEY, FOSTER.
Motion carried.
CHESLEY/FOSTER I
There was no discussion.
VOTE: YES: ZAK, HESS, FOSTER, CHESLEY, MINSCH,
KRANICH
Motion carried.
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 will accept testimony or a
presentation on agenda items that involve an applicant (such as acceptance of a
non conformity).
New Business item A was taken up earlier in the
meeting.
City Planner McKibben reviewed the updated work
list.
MINSCH/HESS I MAKE A MOTION TO DISCUSS THE UPDATED
SEPTEMBER 2007
There was no discussion and
the Commission agreed by consensus to bring this to the floor.
The Commission asked for the following changes:
·
Updating
·
·
Expedited
permit process for higher density development, incentives and other ideas.
·
New
boundaries for Bridge Creek moved to a higher priority.
There was discussion of a work session regarding
Global Warming Task Force Draft Action Plan.
CHESLEY/MINSCH I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE STAFF REPORT
PL07-91 FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION
Commissioner Chesley commented that his memo is an
expression of the direction the Commission wanted to go to make the CIP process
more meaningful. Inviting the City Manager and Mayor to a meeting to discuss
action would be beneficial to the Commission in making their recommendations.
City Planner McKibben suggested inviting Special
Projects Coordinator Holen to make a presentation each year to discuss the
updates.
There was discussion regarding the CIP process.
CHESLEY/HESS I
There was no discussion.
VOTE: YES: CHESLEY, MINSCH, KRANICH, HESS, FOSTER
NO:
ZAK
Motion carried.
There was discussion of postponing this item to let
the let the Bylaw Committee make a recommendation to bring back to the
Commission.
CHESLEY/MINSCH I
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
CHESLEY I
There was no discussion and
the Commission agreed by consensus to bring this to the floor.
CHESLEY/HESS I
Discussion ensued whether the Committee should be
made up of Commissioners who have served longer and have a better understanding
of how the Commission does business.
Frank Griswold asked to address the Commission
regarding the agenda item. There was discussion regarding allowing the public
to speak under new business. It was noted that the agenda states the Commission
may ask questions of the public. Commissioner Chesley asked if there was a member
of the public that would like to address the Commission.
Frank Griswold commented that a three member
subcommittee may be more efficient but valuable input from Commissioners and
the public would likely be lost. He mentioned that
ZAK I CALL FOR THE QUESTION.
VOTE: (Question): YES: KRANICH, FOSTER, CHESLEY,
ZAK, HESS, MINSCH
Motion carried.
VOTE (Main Motion): YES: ZAK, HESS, FOSTER,
CHESLEY, MINSCH, KRANICH
Motion carried.
Commissioner Zak volunteered to participate on the
Committee. Commissioner Minsch seconded
that.
VOTE: YES: FOSTER, MINSCH, CHESLEY, ZAK, KRANICH,
HESS
Motion carried.
There was discussion that the meeting time for the
Committee would be established after the Committee members were established. It
was also explained that all Committee meetings would be noticed to the public
and any changes w
MINSCH/FOSTER I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT
MR. HESS VOLUNTEERED TO BE THE THIRD PERSON ON THE COMMITTEE.
Mr. Hess agreed to
participate.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
CHESLEY/MINSCH I WOULD LIKE TO
Deputy City Clerk requested that Mr. Griswold
provide his comments in writing. Commissioner Chesley said he was not making it
a part of his motion. He said that he appreciates the points that Mr. Griswold
is trying to make. It is easy for the Commission to review things like typo’s
or word omissions but when there are ideas advanced that certain things may not
be characterized correctly it is difficult for the Commission to make those
decisions on the fly and the Clerk needs the chance to go back and review the
tapes to see what was said and if any correction needs to be made.
Deputy City Clerk Jacobsen noted that Mr. Griswold
did try to email some revisions and she asked him to put it in writing and
submit it before packet dead line so the Commission could review them and make
any revisions that were necessary, so we wouldn’t have to sit here and go
through all this.
There Commission discussed whether it is procedure
to give the Clerk amendments in writing. Deputy City Clerk Jacobsen commented
that the discussion was not germane to the motion on the floor.
VOTE: YES: MINSCH, HESS, KRANICH, FOSTER, CHESLEY,
ZAK
Motion carried.
G.
CHESLEY/MINSCH I MAKE A
MOTION THAT WE BRING THESE BACK AT THE
There was no discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION: UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS
A. Decision on Appeal of the City of
B. Letter Dated
COMMENTS OF THE AUDIENCE
Members of the Audience may
address the Commission on any subject.
Frank Griswold commented that he did make one
suggestion to the Deputy Clerk and it was rejected. The suggestion he emailed
to the Deputy City Clerk was rejected and he had no reason to believe that any
further suggestions would meet a different fate.
Mr. Griswold had some comments regarding the
procedure amendments. Enforcing zoning violations should not be optional. It is
too arbitrary; some may justifiably claim that friends of City Officials are
exempt from zoning enforcement. There are many blatant zoning violations that
have been on going for decades in prominent locations in town. The City should
treat zoning as serious as it treats parking violations and zoning violations
should be a b
A. Does the City of
B. Does the City of
C. Does the City have legal authority to appoint a
Comprehensive Plan Revision Committee and/or hire consultants to amend its Comprehensive
Plan?
D. Is the City of
E. Should the Kenai Peninsula Borough have updated
the Homer Comprehensive Plan when it hired consultants and revised the Borough
Comprehensive Plan in 2005?
F. Is Max Best the Planning Director for the City
of
Another legal opinion could be sought on whether
the Council or Commission can legally suspend the rules to break the rules.
COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION
Commissioners may comments
on any subject, including requests to staff and requests for excused absence.
Commissioner’s Zak and Minsch
and Chair Kranich had no comment.
Commissioner Chesley said he thinks it is a fair
recommendation to amend their worksession agenda to make the last item comment.
It would be something for the Committee to think about. He said the City Hall/Town Plaza Committee is
being reconstituted. He said if Planning Commissioners are asked to stay on the
Committee he would stand down to let another Commissioner participate. He
believes it would be helpful for the Commission to do a better job of
clarifying when the public can and can’t speak.
Commissioner Hess recognized the wonderful job the
clerk’s office does for the Commission. He said he is curious on the status of
the situation on Baycrest. City Planner McKibben said she had some notes
regarding it but didn’t have them at this meeting. She suggested Commissioner
Hess call her and they could talk about it. During the meeting they were
briefly discussing the rights-of-way that go to the beach and what was expected
to be allowed in the rights-of-way. He brought up a situation off Crittenden
regarding what appears to be a driveway going in. City Planner McKibben said
the property owner has a permit to construct a driveway on a right-of-way. She
is not aware of a mechanism in the Code that allows staff to restrict it to pedestrian
access at this point. The property owner had requested vacation of the
right-of-way and it was not approved.
Commissioner Chesley commented that it is
disturbing that a public right-of-way is for the public right-of-way, not for
the benefit of an individual land owner to construct a driveway in. It seems to
him that the correct interpretation would be that a land owner could construct
a driveway from a public right-of-way.
City Planner McKibben said that the property owner can not restrict use
and the public can st
Commissioner Foster expressed his concern regarding
Mr. Griswold’s comments. When he looks at Borough 21.01.025 it says that the
City has the delegated authority to provide zoning regulations and it says it
has the delegated authority to make changes to the Comprehensive Plan. He
doesn’t understand what Mr. Griswold is talking about. Perhaps some other time
that can be explained. Commissioner Foster said he was overwhelmed by the rape
of that creek and a road going down to the beach, it blew him away when he saw
it and it is against what they had intended. It is a disregard to the City’s
rules and regulations. Planning is supposed to be in charge of driveway
permits, not Public Works. [1]
ADJOURN
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
Approved:
[1]
Commissioner Foster noted during minutes approval on