The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07212020 Planning & Zoning Special Meeting PacketCity of Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Rescheduled Special Meeting July 21, 2020 PUBLIC NOTICE TEMPORARY PROCESS FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS & PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY AT JULY 21, 2020 SEWARD PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING The Seward Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a Virtual Regular Meeting on Monday, July 21, 2020. Because the City of Seward is currently experiencing a declared public health emergency due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 ( COVID- 19), alternate methods for providing Citizen Comments and Public Hearing Testimony has been created. How To Submit Your CITIZEN COMMENTS or PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY 1. Email your WRITTEN comments to planner@cityofseward.net no later than 2: 00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 21, 2020. Identify whether you want your comments READ ALOUD at the meeting or EMAILED to commission upon receipt. In response to your email, you should expect to receive a verification email from the Planner confirming the method of delivery — if you do not receive this email, please call the Planner at 224- 4020. Comments requested to be read aloud will be delivered verbally to council by the Planner at the appropriate time during the meeting. 2. If you wish to be called on the telephone during the meeting to provide your comments TELEPHONICALLY, send an email request to the Planner along with your contact information to planner@cityofseward.net, including your full name and the telephone number you wish to have called. The clerk must receive your request no later than 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 21, 2020. Identify whether you wish to be called during the FIRST or SECOND citizen comment period, or both; or, the PUBLIC HEARING item. If you wish to be contacted for the first Citizen Comment period, please be prepared to answer your phone starting at 7: 00 p.m. If you wish to be contacted for the second Citizen Comment period or a public hearing item, there is no estimate of time to expect the call. In response to your email, you should expect to receive a verification email from the Planner— if you do not receive this email, please call the Planner at 224- 4020. All Citizen Comments will be timed and limited to three minutes ( first period) or five minutes ( public hearing or second citizen comment period). The telephone number will be called ONE time; if there is no answer, the Planner will move on to the next citizen. THERE WILL BE NO IN PERSON COMMENTS FOR THIS MEETING. How To Virtually ATTEND The Meeting 1. The meeting will be Live Streamed on the City' s YouTube page. Log onto YouTube and type City of Seward Alaska" into the search bar. 2. Listen on the radio. Tune to KIBH- FM 91 3. Watch on television. Tune into GCI Cable Channel 9. Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Rescheduled Special Meeting July 21, 2020 7: 00 p.m. City Council Chambers Cindy Ecklund Chair Term Expires 02123 Gary Seese Commissioner Term Expires 02122 Tom Swann Commissioner Term Expires 02122 Craig Ambrosiani Commissioner Term Expires 02122 Nathaniel Charbonneau Commissioner Term Expires 02121 Kelli Hatfield Commissioner Term Expires 02121 Liz DeMoss Commissioner Term Expires 02123 Scott Meszaros City Manager Jackie C. Wilde Community Development Director Eric Kozielski Planner Andy Bacon Planning Assistant 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call 4. Citizens' Comments on any subject except those items scheduled for public hearing. [Those who have signed in will be given the first opportunity to speak. Time is limited to 3 minutes per speaker and 36 minutes total time for this agenda item] 5. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda. [Approval of Consent Agenda passes all routine items indicated by asterisk (*). Consent Agenda items are not considered separately unless a Commissioner so requests. In the event of such a request, the item is returned to the Regular Agenda.] 6. Special Reports & Presentations A. City Administration Report B. Other Reports, Announcements & Presentations None Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda July 21, 2020 7. Public Hearings [Limit comments to S minutes. Those who have signed in will be given the first opportunity to speak] A. Unfinished Business Items requiring a Public Hearing 1. Resolution 2020-05 Recommending Kenai Peninsula Borough Approval Of The Point Subdivision; Creating Two (2) Tracts, Each Located Inside And Outside Seward Municipal Boundaries; Vacating Lot Lines, Dedicating Rights -Of -Way And Utility Easements; Located On Nash Road Within The Industrial (I) Zoning District .....................................................Page 3 2. Resolution 2020-06 Recommending City Council Approval Of The Rezoning Of Lots 2, 3, 4-5 And N'/2 Of Lot 6 Block 16 Original Townsite of Seward From Multi -Family Residential (R3) To Central Business District (CB) .........................................................................................Page 15 B. New Business Items requiring a Public Hearing 1. Resolution 2020-08 of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Seward, Alaska, granting a conditional use permit to John Wisel II to construct and operate two or more apartment units within a commercial building located at 213 Fifth Avenue in the Central Business district (CB)..................................................................................Page 28 8. Unfinished Business — None 9. New Business A. Resolution 2020-09 Recommending City Council Enact A Six (6) Month Moratorium on the Placement of Communications Towers or Until Such Time As Design And Development Standards Can Be Adopted Into Code................Page 46 B. Discussion of proposed changes to KPB Subdivision Code ...........................Page 51 C. Approval of March 3, 2020 Regular Meeting Minute.................................Page 103 D. Approval of June 2, 2020 Regular Meeting Minutes .................................. Page 110 10. Informational Items and Reports (No action required) - A. Article: "Planning Practice" 5G Towers.............................................Page 118 B. FEMA Region X Newsletter............................................................................... Page 124 C. 2020 Planning & Zoning Meeting Schedule...................................................... Page 127 D. City Calendars................................................................................................. Page 128 11. Commission Comments 12. Citizens' Comments [Limit to S minutes per individual Each individual has one opportunity to speak] 13. Commissions and Administration Response to Citizens' Comments 14. Adjournment Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda July 21, 2020 Sponsored by: Applicant CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2020-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RECOMMENDING KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH APPROVAL OF THE POINT SUBDIVISION; CREATING TWO (2) TRACTS, EACH LOCATED INSIDE AND OUTSIDE SEWARD MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES; VACATING LOT LINES, DEDICATING RIGHTS -OF -WAY AND UTILITY EASEMENTS; LOCATED ON NASH ROAD WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL (I) ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, McLane Consulting Inc. has submitted a preliminary replat, to be known as The Point Subdivision, to the City of Seward for review and recommendation to the Kenai Peninsula Borough; and WHEREAS, this platting action will vacate interior lot lines creating two (2) Tracts totaling 45.89 acres and dedicate right-of-way; and WHEREAS, City staff have reviewed, commented and support the proposed The Point Subdivision Replat; and WHEREAS, the portion of property within this replat is zoned Industrial (I); and WHEREAS, this subdivision is located in municipal service area zone two and therefore no subdivision installation agreement is required; and WHEREAS, it is the Planning and Zoning Commission's responsibility to act in an advisory capacity to the Kenai Peninsula Borough regarding subdivision plat proposals; and WHEREAS, as required by Seward City Code § 16.01.015, Conditions to plat approval, property owners within 300 feet of the requested replat were notified of the proposed subdivision, and the property was posted with public notice signage. 3/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 2020-05 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission that: Section I. The Commission recommends Kenai Peninsula Borough approval of The Point Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. All structures located within dedicated rights of way shall be removed, as recommended by staff Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission this 215` day of July, 2020. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VACANT: ATTEST: Brenda Ballou, MMC, City Clerk THE CITY OF SEWARD Cindy L. Ecklund, Chair (City Seal) 4/130 P&Z Agenda Statement Meeting Date: June 2, 2020 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Through: Jackie C. Wilde, Community Development Director Eric Kozielski, Planner From: Andy Bacon, Planning Assistant Agenda. Item: Recommending Kenai Peninsula Borough Approval Of The Point Subdivision; Creating Two (2) Tracts, Each Located Inside And Outside Seward Municipal Boundaries; Vacating Lot Lines. Dedicating Rights - Of --Way And Utility Easements; Located On Nash Road Within The Industrial (1) Zoning District BA .K yRULND & JIiSTIFICATION: Attached for the Commission's review and recommendation to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission is a preliminary plat submitted by McLane Consulting Inc. on behalf of property owner Timothy McDonald. This replat will vacate interior lot lines and dedicate right of way, combining eight (8) parcels into two (2) tracts, to be known as Tract A and Tract B, totaling approximately 45.8 acres. The parcels are comprised of a triangular shaped deed lot and six (b) lots in the Clyde King Subdivision, outside City limits, and all of TIS R1 W Sec 1 Seward Meridian, Gov Lot 1, located within City limits. In accordance with Borough requirements, the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission must review and comment on a plat before submittal to the Borough for final approval. SUBDIVISION REVIEW; Zoning The portion of this replat located within City limits is within the Industrial (1) zoning district. The Industrial (I) zoning district is established as a district in which the principal use of land is for business, manufacturing, processing, fabricating, repair, assemble, storage, wholesaling and distributing operations, which may create some nuisance and which are not properly associated nor compatible with residential land uses. It is intended to provide en\ ironmental safeguards for people employed in or visiting the district. Some visual amenith is expected in this district to rnake it compatible with adjoining residential or business districts. 5/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Statement — Resolution 2020-05 Page 2 of 3 Utilities: Electrical service is available on the proposed tracts. This property is located in municipal service area zone two, as specified in SCC 5.25. No subdivision installation agreement is required for this replat. Size: If approved, The Point Subdivision will create two Tracts totaling 45.897 acres. Tract A will be approximately 21.04 acres and Tract B will be approximately 23.32 acres. Existing Uses: That portion to be known as Tract A includes a mix of uses including camping and storage. The proposed Tract B is undeveloped. Flood Zone: A portion of the proposed subdivision is located within FEMA zone AE, as indicated on the preliminary replat. A floodplain development permit with the City will be required for development activities taking place within that portion of the subdivision located both within City limits and inside FEMA flood zones. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Yes No NIA Comprehensive Plan (2030, approved by Council May 30, 2017) X 1 3.2 Land Use: Promote residential and commercial development (page 1- 13) Strategic Plan (Approved by Council resolution 99-043): Growth Management and Land Use X2. . Promote Residential and Commercial development inside the City. (page 9) Staff Comments Staff has reviewed the preliminary plat and no objections were reported. Department Comments No Comment NIA Building Department X Fire Department X Public Works Department Public works stated that the proposed right of way is currently obstructed, and that no structures may be located within a platted right of way. Harbor Department X Police Department X Electric Department City of Seward Electric department requests a 20-foot utility easement centered on existing overhead owerline Telecommunications I X 6/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Statement — Resolution 2020-05 Page 3 of 3 Public Comment Property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the parcel were notified of this proposed replat. Public notice signs were posted on the property, and all other public hearing requirements of Seward City Code § 15.01.040 Public Hearings were complied with. At the time of the publication of this report, staff received no inquiries on this preliminary plat application. Any comments received after this publication will be presented as a lay down to the Commission and the public at the June 2, 2020 meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Planning and Zoning Resolution 2020-05 recommending Kenai Peninsula Borough approval of The Point Subdivision, subject to the condition that all structures located within dedicated rights of way shall be removed prior to final plat approval. 7/130 'kRilfl(AI C: A('EPiANZE 1F •.v o .Ywllph..We�wnFnxwrt+.¢EP Rr ecceG MnHFaFn sp��' j �': �� w.a� px n,wF [m or wAl e.leeMM 0.Dlelno rM .SMR-[6mrr r�.YoeHn vY1uE.Mus Mwfir�lNwlln�6 q` NlM SwNN Cq AreuE naRKEOIXSNoidll.'.fI+,F I � �f eo�Ltrl lra nl�4fh�e'rrtuMU w [L. S[an nF.4wa5 VAINITYMAP Tr s i HIu� pHpinY rr r- gyp[/ �snw j/ w I sw 414 wvlr��nFaeF1uF.uImY � xFnal�l�En3.lwv �p arc mn — rt — ' � Fn uF _ savors on,t. cul[a al rsroFr•..... I..snuecrmwss waeFwFs� �. �, �`- srnse � ' \W f '•� �3R vJAgEWATER M90SAL 4 !➢0.iTa �nwLggwllrt4lp0� .+w� 3 ]t.pi3 At j Nv YCIMIrpFFm.alw,wnx�p ¢�rFwrwa w� fl 44ll - I€CkN�Dworwxw woxuarlEnvnoxm wu Wmw - i ar.sca...ars..,.ssssrnF • urFsaaz,.s ,. � ruworMr..w.lre.san `r. I C.EiTinc/ATE df OwNkNIP RNp PEV1UnpN 1 iS.a�TH bio��niwaino j '3a5 AG n,waswnFrmme w�iox�wa EoiuerrµDae�.rz�"w,u°�•e[a. Hrs�pnswv M[P PJe[rave.SYp.,ral: we..PpMsn'MI WFwlwsp r,K ufk Fwaw.[ NOiR�I"S.KMN04V L€MEMEMT ee•.r..rru nw� r� � .n Fpswl�o.ewaaa; J .0 & +, sjn,�eUuas. 4 . ✓� w.wH ssSFM..wN, n wN.msP arr n �.'1 cw.c.cu.cFm�.enunFaYsofauc,xucvwcaa. a .f=!: 1. wW,.wpy,Vrw'FelFUF'e1�F[•Itt �Nryn Jettm'—T'IptI5e1M 1 ��AU.WFKirHwR wNiY WeS H�Fi*>.16dMo nplu aE[aw�[,f uFM Y.ngqusEywpw Mi s[wFr �auulSbf — 1 sFerefGgM1i1MriwLL56nuA1litpYWg6 1e1..nYP nn!wLurlrr.v „rc.u�eovwns+rlrvwwc Fawwnlpx SPII)sa � e. nrvcox eFcuunu,..cx.rt[�.. [w .m,�wnv + Plat R ` ,m uwY wn+.f nFrnymw xa+s..awuuFF'r`wruumn � 7 uv r. E4c5.tIWN.rlw..WN N. erai 5l safu[sw.oepp. Fpnuw � .w— F.SBLww rlFu.e e.v+rtFn [FH�S.Fp px i �vuway.i[.p![�o�.[nemwcnm wwHFsy Gvt wnittSMloculrpEl � ` [wm xAfNp wf![F:lGxt w w[pG E� e.pepYr sxv.w off na wnY wu' I�u�N � tla�pJo fuLw N�f4 obm1Fr A5�nR54�plMMH, HSaiDFONPw,wEem.2i ee[almspfw[F. uaetuwrle,Owepwnlmi - ,Ft stw�up FUN14wpp! WF�.wH 4RMfww f4LwO20MEAFeeF f WA 'srwrwcFc T-E YJIM'illK1INY. JI: uuw>b°�'ianw16'ervFr<n!n. o'n'�uwrwi,� w�FFnn waver,Fwawp>sf.unwalcFowvwawnx[w+n I[aoorcw.a..�in.�,ui�vwnWeewn4.�"i�. u.Fawr�01wirn"xullo. 1psnw.xml.ewlw�w Yrcww+,asd or nits.ea 15 ru«nHrr, roeeL wu 1 wen.v.u.�pm.lnrlt awwrw,IY r.un pp.n. wm[ nwn.xcPSCE.I• .armweeem..xalmur moF: �iw"i°af°GOss �'R1°`it a e`�'ni im�meMu�u ieii«. .uanuK.wurSwnalssVp.��TSIE vm rKmawA x womw.Y nor,cr:ronorsor Flasu.pwunH rnF xmw rxF fepu.rxv xs o.w. .wutxnu.ro wurl. scot pFw,cs.sFm f>'InuunG f.0 In vex R�riiewpnpla A+�wwsi .iw�j FHoau[+nv�fSiiNWF �[ruvanl ip�wgwanwv w�rN�.0.e.+Wn. w wmouvFls ol.,awa *.raewe.�r a nu ewl wpap .c wn snu.ffn w ran s<•s u sw7 acmaw x �.,... rw. owoc�`w,.stF�E65 i, rw[nlns.lws .wlw..alw,m� i `mrpiwwu+�rrow a.wn.wuu.aln�cnw,rc.Eww .sra�[rsv ,..,. :lAf:.INRC 'AL ant ,vne a 1 ws [ Nm qa.+mp xxr ..--- I oo.uuGw.uw.w rawer. wne, rt xLF Wcs is . h- al wr_.� r_ .a ifiY�nB []SS iluEs 'f Smrel ie.x ma. m:[ as.-T u• 0AUrlaFortBu9HLLL pn+w.ti rwx www.orcr *?E Geographic Information Systen,s 4 North Hinkley Street, Soldotna, Alaska 99669 The Point Subdivision Legend • Mileposts Cj City Limits Highways Major Roads Roads Town Medium Volume Town t_owlSeasonal, Other Proposo Parcels I i,,s map is a user generated stark outs U[ Ir -,ernet mapping site and is for reference only Data layers that appear on th-s map -n,y -? r•, ± vcurate, current, or otherwise reliable i ; ^ct to i;e >e: far - vi:33 - Notes Lots 76-81 Clyde King Sub. and 0 0.09 0.18 Miles Triangular Tract in SEI/4 of SW 1/4 Sec. 36 T 1 S R1 W Seward Meridian, located Coordinate System: NAd_1983 StatePlane_Alaska 4_FIPS_50O4_Feet outside City Limits AND all of Gov. Lot 1. located inside Citv Limits DATE PRINTED: 5/19/2020 9/130 10/130 b N . t — ,th"54L AI.I i.00A0S n- ha h h k' v I {�' SG7 OQ 75� 8Q9.66' SWDO'25 L' n � k b q � k LLJQah LQ — a 4 it a Ic 71 !n p6QXt ry� mnl t/i aU, � OC 9yiti�, 4 ,�� 7rN 2 qI ? a 2a n v� e^3tt O � "7 � n Z°[4 -�aawry��a A ° Vf a v C ° b � � o.Pa Lea qEv. {sa.°im 11/130 b.i RIP 4v Ap Konal Paninsuia Qarnugh Planning [koparlmorrt 144 North 8hfkloy Straet Salrlotna, AK 99669 Plat SubmItIgI form .- Abbroviated Plat • Use the Abbravlalod Plnt Srrbfnitlnl Form ',;covey hum Nmmn & Addraiin A 1-ane Cri-oilting Phone. 907-.283-42.18 ifV.40 Ktrn,'fr (;lair I Iw,i . iild(Ana AK'1<JFyf'19 l mail ihall@mclanaeg.com lid Preliminafy Mai Revised Preliminary Plot ClMirror Rovi6#ons r-1 Major Rovlsionn t Preliminary Design OSubdivision Plat Phase (ira phamddavelupatoril, rmt POOH✓ MYdeSIP mm tides ) [ Preliminary Design Name: zSubmitial of 1 full alze plat and 7 • 1 I xI1 eizo Platt Plat Submittal Fee In the Amount of —Q ❑ Final Plat _ Preliminary Approval Granted (date) Elf tat Recording Fee in the Amount of Plat Naare: The 'Point Subdivision General Location Nash Road, Seward AK USE, D�"" esidenliai F Recreational oammercial. agricultural LJ—mr QCity minutes attached (Plat Iocatipn is in city lirrrits or 8rrdga Creek WatArsslhed Distract) rl"P zFf,rr MNING WHERE APPLICABLE: SEV EXC I. 2. 3, 4, Cemmen%- (Attach an addrfionel sheet it need. rt i t7ri final Si at rs s vg [�w e s f orit of and w thin th Subdivision Tim MCDnnaid Signature" Prier Name Signature Prfnr Name Signature Print Warne 13/130 Signature CITY OF SEWARD RECEIPT # 33361 410 ADAMS STREET 4/o6/2020 PO BOX 167 - SEWARD AK 99664 Received phone: (907) 224-4050 From Lookup Name Payment Type Check # Amounts 11122 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Check 0036853 Due 75.00 Tendered 75.00 Change Due Description: Plat Review -Mc Clure Consulting, Inc. Taxes Payable - Sales 4.90 Zoning Fees 70.10 14/130 Sponsored by: Applicant CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2020-06 RESOLUTION 2020-06 OF THE SEWARD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE REZONING OF LOTS 2, 3, 4-5 AND N'Jz OF LOT 6 BLOCK 16 FROM MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R3) TO CENTRAL BUSINESS ❑ISTRICT (CB) WHEREAS, Applicant Big Mama Love LLC via owner Ristine Cassagranda has submitted an application and the filing fee, with and adjacent lot owners Charles Buswell, and Peter Cannava requesting Lots 2, 3, 4, 5 & N1/2 6 Block 16, Original Townsite of Seward, be rezoned from Multi -Family Residential (R3) to Central Business District (CB); and WHEREAS, the current 'Zoning Designation of the parcels is Multi -family Residential (R3) and the Future Land Use map recornmends the property be zoned Central Business District (CBD); and WHEREAS, the Seward City Code SCC § 15.01.035, Amendments, (b) (1 c) allows the initiation of the zoning change by a petition a majority of the property owners in the area to be amended WHEREAS, the Seward City Code SCC § 15.01.035, Amendments, (b) (3) allows the consideration of this rezone because the parcels are contiguous to the requested zoning district and would bring the parcels into conformance with the Land Use Plan; and WHEREAS, goal 3.2.2.1 of the Seward Comprehensive Plan is to, "Maintain community vision through the rigorous implementation and update of the Comprehensive and Land Use Plans"; and WHEREAS, an objective of the Seward Strategic Plan is to, "Work towards bringing the Zoning Map into conformance with the Land Use Plan"; and WHEREAS, the public notification process was complied with and the appropriate public hearing as required by Seward City Code § 15.01,040 was conducted by the Commission on June 2, 2020. 15/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Resolution 2020-06 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission that: Section 1. The Seward Planning and Zoning Commission supports the proposed Zoning change of Lots 2, 3, 4, 5 & N1/2 6 Block 16, Original Townsite of Seward, be rezoned from Multi -Family Residential (R3) to Central Business District (CB); and recommends that Ordinance 2020 be forwarded to City Council for approval. Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission this 2nd day of June 2020. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VACANT: None ATTEST: Brenda Ballou, MMC City Clerk (City Seal) THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Cindy L. Ecklund Chair 16/130 P&Z Agenda Statement Meeting Date: July 21, 2020 Through: Jackie C. Wilde, Community Development Director From: Eric A. Kozielski, Planner Agenda Item: Resolution 2020-06 of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Seward, Alaska, Recommending City Council Approval of the Rezoning of Lots 2, 3, 4-5 And N'/a 0f Lot 6 Block 16 Original Townsite Seward from Multi -Family Residential (R3) to Central Business District (CB) This resolution was brought forward on fume 2, 2020 for a public hearing and was postponed; it is corning back tonight for a second public hearing. BACKGROUND & JtTSTIFICATION: Attached for the Commission's review and recommendation to the Seward City Council is Resolution 2020-06, amending the zoning designation of Lots 2, 3, 4-5 & N1/2 Lot 6 Block 16, Original Townsite of Seward, from Multi -Family Residential (R3) to Central Business District (CB). (see attached map) The applicant submitted for a Land Use Plan Amendment - Rezoning and paid the requisite filing fee on May 8, 2020. The proposed area to be amended included three (3) parcels consisting of approximately .31 acres. The applicant is requesting this rezone in order to bring the lots into compliance with the Future Land Use Plan approved in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and to provide for future commercial uses allowed within the Central Business District, possibly for a communications tower. The Central Business District (CB) is intended to provide for an area of convenient, attractive, concentrated commercial development primarily intended for retail, financial, entertainment and professional services occurring within enclosed structures. Regulations applying to this zone are designed to encourage a compact group of businesses of the type which are mutually beneficial and located close enough together to encourage walk-in trade. The Future Land Use Map approved in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, delineates Lots 2, 3, 4-5 & N 1 /2 Lot 6 Block 16, Original Townsite of Seward, as Central Business District (CB). These lots are currently zoned Multifamily District (lt3 ). The area is less than I acre; however, the requested rezone meets the requirement for public hearing per Seward City Code SCC § 15.01.035, Amendments, (b) (3) which allows the consideration of this 17/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Statement— Resolution 2020-06 Page 2 of 5 rezone because the parcels are contiguous to the requested zoning district or would bring the parcels into conformance with the Land Use Plan. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North of the requested rezone is Lot 1 Block 16. It is zoned Central Business District (CB) and contains a General Commercial business. To the south is one parcel. Sl/2 Lot 6 & Lots 7-8 Block 16. This parcel is zoned Multifamily Residential (R3) there is one Residential Dwelling existing. The lots east across 5`" Ave. are zoned Central Business (CB) and Multifamily Residential (R3). There are 3 Residential Dwellings on 30' lots and 5 Residential Vacant lots making up 3 parcels. Three of the vacant lots are used as aft -street parking sites for hotels. The lots directly west across the ally are zoned Central Business (CB). There are currently Commercial Businesses and Residential Vacant lots across the alley from the rezone area. FLOODPLAIN STATUS All of the lots are located in FEMA designated, Zone X. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Yes No N/A Comprehensive Plan (2030, approved by Council Mqv 30, 2017): 3.2.2.1 Maintain community vision through the rigorous implementation and update of the Comprehensive and Land Use Plans (page 1-14) I . * Update the zoning code in order to implement the Comprehensive Plan X and bring the zoning map into conformance with the Land Use Plan (page 1-14, bullet 3) Strategic Plan (.4pproved by Council Resolution 99-043): Pursue the community's vision through rigorous implementation of the 2. Comprehensive and Land Use Plans. (Pages 10-11, Large Ballet 2) X Update the Zoning Code in order to implement the Comprehensive Plan (Pages 10-11, Small Buller ,l Seward City Code SCC § 15.01.035, Amendments (b): (1) Changes in this title may be initiated by the following means: (c.) By petition of a majority of the property owners in the area to be amended; 3. (3) Except for an ordinance altering the boundaries of existing, contiguous X zoning districts or an ordinance which brings a parcel into conformance with the land use plan, no ordinance altering zoning within the City shall be considered if the area encompassed by the proposed ordinance contains less than one acre, not including street or alley rights -of -way. 18/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Statement — Resolution 2020-06 Page 3 of 5 STAFF COMMENTS: Staff has reviewed the Rezoning application and no objections were reported. Department Comments No Comment NIA Building Department x Public Works Department x Harbor Department x Police Department x Electric Department x PUBLIC COMMENT: Property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the proposed land use action were notified of the requested rezone. Public notice signs were posted on the property, and all other public hearing requirements of Seward City Code § 15. 01.040 were complied with. At the time of publication, staff has received one request for more information from an adjacent land owner but no comments. The first 300ft mailing missed the co-owner of Lot 2, 337 Fifth Avenue. Staff was made aware of this and that the co-owner objects to their property being rezoned. Staff had followed the normal procedure for this mailing and for receiving an application. Since this occurrence staff has added additional steps for verification of all owners and will send mailings to any second address listed with the KPB Tax Assessing Department as well. Public comment at the first meeting included objection to the rezone from the co-owner of Lot 2 Block 16, Ms. Coppock. Ms. Coppock stated she was against any additional commercial uses on this portion of Fifth Avenue, that the character of the immediate area. was historical and residential. She also brought up the concern that the procedure used for public noticing could be missing property owners with differing addresses from the first listed in the assessor's information. The applicant Ms. Casagranda spoke on behalf of the rezoning for the purpose of allowing for commercial uses on the property and bringing the parcels into conformance with the Future Land Use map within the Comprehensive Plan. Any public comment received after this publication will be presented as a laydown to the Commission and the public at the July 21, 2020 meeting. RECOMMENDATION: At the June 2nd public hearing staff recommended postponing to the July 7, 2020 meeting for the opportunity to contact the additional owners of parcels zoned Multi -family (R3) between Jefferson and Adams Streets on Fifth Avenue. The purpose was to assess if there was support to change the zoning for all these lots to Central Business (CB). 19/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Statement — Resolution 2020-06 Page 4 of 5 Staff mailed letters to the eight (8) land owners, summarizing the proposed change and how it could change the land uses possible on their land. We also explained that given the current development requirements rebuilding would require greater setbacks from property lines than the homes currently have, if no change were affiected. The result of this inquiry is summarized as: The two (2) property owners bookending the proposed rezoning (including Lot 2 which is listed in the proposal) disagree with being included in the staff proposed rezone, and oppose the original rezone application. Two (2) of the parcel owners continue to support the rezoning either as staff proposed or just their lots. On the east side of Fifth Avenue, one (1) did not want to be included but had no further comment. Two (2) owners could not affirm they wanted to be part of the proposed rezone and had no comment on the individual lots being rezoned_ And one (1) offered no communication at all. Of those in objection, Ms. Cange has sent a letter to the commission which is included in the agenda packet. Ms. Cange did not speak but was in attendance for the first meeting. Ms. Coppock in a telephone conversation with staff, stated that there were several historical residences in this portion of Fifth Avenue and putting a commercial structure or communications tower here would change the character of the area. She was also critical of staff For promoting the rezone of all the multi -family lots on the block, she felt staff was working too hard to accommodate a rezoning. Mr. Hearn stated he did not want to be involved in a rezone but had no comment otherwise. Of those in support, Mr. Cannava was interested in the ability to develop a commercial use on his lots but had no plans to at this time. Ms. Casagranda has commercial plans for her lot and desires this rezone so that she may move forward on them. Based on the communication with owners, Community Development staff cannot recommend moving forward with rezoning all Multi -family parcels on Fifth Avenue between Jefferson and Adams Streets. Based on the opposition from the owner with greater land tenure for Lot 2, staff recommends amending the rezoning application to remove Lot 2 from the original application prior to discussion on this rezoning. In removing Lot 2 from the proposed application, there is no longer contiguous Zoning with Central Business (CB) and the proposed area is still less than one acre. With this recommendation it is necessary to examine whether this would constitute spot zoning or contract zoning. Does public necessity, convenience or general welfare require the rezone? Per the land use plan the public vision is to develop the Central Business district and increase the commercial density in this area. There is interest in this location for a possible communications tower which would increase the convenience for the City's residents, businesses, and visitors, regarding their connectivity to this technology during peak usage times (Tourism Season). This area is also part ql' the Historic District of Seward so any development 20/ 130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Statement Resolution 2020-06 Page 5 of 5 should be sensitive to the historic nature of the area. Does the rezone include at least one acre, excluding streets and rights -of -ways? The lots included in the original staff recommendation was approximately an acre but that included all the remaining Multifamily (R3) zoned lots in the area between Jefferson and Adams on Fifth Ave. The proposed rezone was approximately .31 acres, by removing Lot 2 that would be .24 acres approximately. Does this small -parcel coning constitute spot zoning? Does the proposed amendment comply with the comprehensive plan? The proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as indicated in the Agenda Statement. However, in changing the zoning of only 2 of the 8 parcels it takes an area with inconsistent zoning and increases the inconsistencies between adjacent parcels, rather than decreasing those inconsistencies as is desirable. Would the Commission be willing to accept any of the permissible outright land uses in Central Business (CB) to locate between the 2 residential dwellings? A good example to consider is a communications tower as it is one possible use listed in the application. f not then, there could be a claim of'spot zoning. What is the effect of the zoning amendment on the owners and on the community at large? The current zoning of Multifamily (R3) limits the development potential to a single dwelling unit residence on any of ' the 30 ' frontage lots due to the size of the lots. Any multifamily development would require a Conditional Use Permit. By rezoning it benefits the applicants' ability to develop their lots, for a commercial purpose. The adjacent land owners would potentially have a residential dwelling between 2 commercial businesses, or communication tower and businesses. The community benefits would include the potential for a new commercial enterprise or better cellular coverage. These lots are within the Historic District identified in the City of Seward Zoning Map, the historical ' ,Swetman House " is adjacent to the lots proposed for rezoning. The benefit to the two lots becoming commercial may be a detriment to the character of'the area and the adjacent property owners. Does the size of the zoning amendment suggest that "spot zoning" is occurring? This is a small parcel zoning,- Is the proposed area the appropriate boundaries of the proposed amendment based upon the alleged benefits of the rezone on the community'' The minimum appropriate boundary for this to maintain the benefit to the community and safeguard the public would include a contiguous group of'parcels on the west side of'Fifth Avenue. The owners oj'the parcels in objection to this rezone are the ones that would be necessary to rezone with the applicants to avoid increasing any inconsistency to the Comprehensive playa. 21/130 n .iAll 44, all "W 4' ImY YM • ML may„ .•, 12 F � q .a IMI vas. .Mw �_ r va r ,yp r M ry ems■ } _ �, � .� y �, ,,, �=•ilk, ,►-�s'E■ � , • �' may, - � ri 1 tl � . , .: r � . � , ,� �� - r fU z- E�w r �., 4. r' !r ��' ''�R ,9_ DWI &� kl� � -1,y '� � '. ■ � 4�. ��, FFF i�' AN rM t• away ir* a. 17, IV- i Legend = Rural Residential = Single Family Residential Two Family Residential Multi Family Residential Urban Residential ® office Residential Harbor Commercial Auto Commercial Central Business District Industrial Institutional ® Park Resource Management 9i�I�ID.k Rezone of Lots 2, 3, 4-5 & N112 Zoning Map Lot 6 Block 16 Original Townsite N Drawn BY: EAK 5/19/2020 Seward from R-3 to CBD D 150 Sao 600Feet Due to different data sources property lines and aerial imagery do not Mapping Assistance by Alaska Map Company, LLC overlay correctly- Map is to be used for orientation and reference purposes 23/130 1 I TT OIN �E y t fir` it Yam` su"1 , t fL iel : I Email. t t - y.Ma_�-•- � �, __€..� °tom - a-s�� ,, _'-,.;;_� _.z� ...�,_,,;.•.-_-,_-� F:..-mow`- ' �! �`..- �y, b jNu�rtbor of parcels 1Y€5ft}5 r .uact a acc t 4 I t C : Ima t Compiy with the Compreho tsiVe a� ap � r a per y ff@r'a €� CP th �rl lrr�.uri A anni other ;r!# ,r at5or? sub i :t1 , rt:d accus e E tie erts �F. that,t3tt b b-o"rt� s ments t bast of my kno�0It.IV'Ir'I-I- t�a�i# � �i ;c �:dulea for actD7 ci-�y if all api , c�ir 1 t�rnni are �: 4 1l Y•"S'<'►4:i6 :u a rt + a r� Cess t man We ks in advance O the n��t re�u�ariy �I�� month, i�6d �h� fit Tv.f�2y • ' 'Y aka F AF ...:;int ° .t area a r . -:or'1pany rFi��'� ".1_ �'``S?coot uq owt>*T4'� C %Ci l;',f r,�,rrel45� tni:iS1 15�. .. _,�•a a a�spllcd�a's name. ific arcmust h� , _ _�c . �vt`h 9 SEE .. -4sy S C _c The Commu r, ity De'vei . o a ewar'�i �t 0r°ic c�vvn6rs insr3d it tine T82std aces 7 {;..PC6y - 4 i ��., � a.Ir�:la A$ t'- .:F .:I, 1• •. it ( ��yT rW J r t e " 25/130 CITY OF SEWARD 410 ADAMS STREET p0 BOX 167 SEWARD AK 99664 phone: (907) 224-4050 Lookup Name 11122 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R,sCEIPT # 33685 5/o6/2020 Received From pnMq t Tvne C ec # pests Check 0001209 Due 300.00 Tendered 300.00 Change Due Des intl°n' Re -Zone Application-Ristine Casagranda-335 5th Ave. Taxes Payable -Sales 19.63280.37 Zoning Fees 230/430 July 1, 2020 Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Regarding: Resolution 2020-06 Commissioner's I attended the planning and zoning meeting on June 2 2020. 1 felt that the majority of the homeowners that live on fifth avenue between Adams and Jefferson were not sufficiently represented. Or did they really have an idea how the change would impact the area. This area is in the original townsite of Seward and has considerable historic value. Seward is considered a small community with a significant historical background. To destroy the value you have to make more of an offer to tourists who visit the community would be a shame. The Seward historical society has worked hard to bring forward a plan to give the visitor another option while discovering more on their visit. I heard that one of the other options was a cell tower placed on one of the properties. If you look to the side of my property you will see that the city has several towers and satellite dishes in place. I do not object to them being there because it is a safety issue for the citizens of Seward. But i do object to having another tower placed on the other side of my home, It was brought up that rental property is needed in Seward. At this tirne there are several multi units being build in and around the city. Look at the empty units that are standing today. Yes I know that tourism is down because of the Virus, but do we really need more empty units within our city ? And what about those units that are empty ? will they be foreclosed on in the near future ? I hope you give serious consideration to keeping the area in question a residential area, for the good of our community. Sincerely, Leona Cange 327 5th Ave, F,Ecu\1ED jUL 0 2 2020 �P Per ............ 27/130 Sponsored by: Applicant CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2020-08 RESOLUTION 2020-08 OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO JOHN WISEL II TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE TWO OR MORE APARTMENT UNITS WITHIN A COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 213 FIFTH AVENUE IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CB) WHEREAS, John Wise] II has applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) from the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission to construct and operate a Mixed -use Commercial Building with two or more Apartment Units within the Central Business (CB) Zoning District; and WHEREAS, the property is located at 213 Fifth Avenue; and WHEREAS, according to the Seward City Code (SCQ, Land Uses Allowed Table 15.10.226, Two or more Apartments in a Commercial Building are allowed in the Central Business Zoning District by CUP; and WHEREAS, having complied with the public notification process, on July 7, 2020 the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission held the required public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission that: Section 1. According to SCC 15.10.320.D., the Commission shall establish a finding that the use satisfies the following conditions prior to granting a conditional use permit: A. The use is consistent with the purpose of this chapter (the Seward Zoning Code) and the purposes of the zoning district. Finding: This condition has been met or shall be by required conditions. The property is located within the Central Business (CB) Zoning District. Apartments in a Commercial Building in Central Business is allowed by Conditional Use Permit. B. The value of adjoining property will not be significantly impaired Finding: This condition has been met or shall be by required conditions. The neighboring properties are zoned Central Business (CB). The area to the north includes the Hotel Seward, and to the south is the Cookery Restaurant. The properties to the west across the alley are Commercial Retail businesses, across Fifth Avenue to the 28/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 2020-08 Page 2 of 4 east is Hotel Edgewater and a residential dwelling. The property is demolished except the basement, and sits vacant. There is no indication the development will negatively impact the value of any adjoining properties. C. The proposed use is in harmony with the Seward Comprehensive Plan. Finding: This condition has been met. The proposal is in harmony with the Seward 2030 Comprehensive Plan (2017) and Strategic Plan (1999) in that both plans encourage infill development on vacant sites in established areas of the city. Comprehensive Plan (2030 approvPrl by Council 2017) The Comprehensive Plan promotes commercial development within the City of Seward in accordance with community values. Section 2.2.11 Economic Base Promote infill development by encouraging and promoting construction on vacant sites in areas of the city which are already established (page I-10). Strategi_ '�(1999) Pursue the community's vision through rigorous implementation of the Comprehensive and Land Use Plans - Promote in -fill development by encouraging and promoting construction on vacant sites in already established areas of the city (Page 10) Continue to Support and Encourage the Re -vitalization of Downtown Focus downtown revitalization efforts on vacant and dilapidated buildings (Page 14) D. Public Services and facilities are adequate to serve the proposed use. Finding: This condition has been met or shall be by required conditions. Water and electrical service are available on site. E. The proposed use will not be harmful to the public safety, health or welfare. Finding: This condition has been met or shall be by required conditions. The construction shall meet all current International Building and Fire Code requirements and be reviewed through the building permit process. F. Any and all specific conditions deemed necessary by the commission to fulfill the above -mentioned conditions shall be met by the applicant These may include but are not limited to measures relative to access, screening, site development, building design, operation of the use and other similar aspects related to the proposed use. 1) The applicant shall be required to replat the property in accordance with SCC section 12.10.030. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall furnish certified copies of the final plat. A preliminary plat shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit. 29/ 130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 2020-08 Page 3 of 4 2) The existing entry stair is a remnant of the nonconforming structure and must be reconstructed out of the Right -of -Way with the new construction. SCC Section 15.10.315(f)(2). 3) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a dimensioned site plan which identifies four (4) on -site parking spaces for the residential units, and the vehicle ingress and egress route. The applicant shall also identify delivery access and egress for service vehicles. 4) All construction shall meet the current International Building Code and International Fire Code. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Structural and Architectural Stamped Engineered drawings shall be approved by the Building Official 5) The applicant shall work with the Fire Department on ensuring that adequate life safety systems are integrated into the proposed structure. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, Sprinkler/ Alarm Plans if required for the use must be approved by the Building official. 6) The applicant shall coordinate with Public Works and obtain a a right-of-way permit prior to any work in the right -of-way. The applicant shall continue to work with staff through the building permit process to address and accomplish any required upgrades to public utilities if needed. 7) The applicant shall start a job order with the electric department and work with their staff on connecting to services 8) Per Seward City Code §15.10.325.F. an approved CUP shall lapse six months from the date of approval rf the use for which the permit was issued has not been implemented or a building permit obtained The Commission may grant a six-month extension upon finding that circumstances have not changed sufficiently since the date of initial permit approval. 9) Modification of final approval pf a conditional use permit may, upon application by the permitee, be modified by the Planning and Zoning Commission: When changed conditions cause the conditional use to no longer conform to the standards fir its approval. To implement a different development plan conforming to the standards for its approval. The modification plan shall be subject to a public hearing and a filing fee .set by City Council Resolution. 30/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 2020-08 Page 4 of 4 Section 2. The Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the proposed use, subject to the above conditions satisfies the criteria for granting a conditional use permit provided the conditions listed on Section 1, Subsection F are met by the applicant and/or the agent, and authorizes the administration to issue a conditional use permit to John Wisel II to construct and operate two or more apartment units within a commercial building located at 213 Fifth Avenue in the Central Business District (CB), subject to the above conditions. Section 3. The Planning and Zoning Commission finds that adherence to the conditions of this permit is paramount in maintaining the intent of Seward City Code Section 15.10.320, Conditional Use Permits, and authorizes the administration to issue a conditional use permit. Additionally, the administration shall periodically confirm the use conforms to the standards of its approval. Section 4. This resolution shall take effect 10 days following its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission this 21st day of July, 2020. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VACANT: ATTEST: Brenda Ballou, MMC, City Clerk (City Sea]) THE CITY OF SEWARD Cindy L. Ecklund, Chair 31/130 P&Z Agenda Statement 01 4006 Meeting Date: July 21, 2020 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Through: Jackie C. Wilde, Community Development Director From: Eric Kozielski, Planner Agenda Item: Resolution 2020-08 of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Seward, Alaska, granting a conditional use permit to John Wisel 11 to construct and operate two or more apartment units within a commercial building located at 213 Fifth Avenue in the Central Business district (CB) BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION: John Wisel II has applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) from the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission to construct and operate two or more apartments within the Central Business (CB) Zoning District. According to the Seward City Code, Land Uses Allowed Table 15.10.226, "Dwelling, Apartment in a commercial building (two or more units)" are allowed in the Central Business (CB) Zoning District by Conditional Use Permit. The proposed Mixed -use commercial building is to be located at 213 Fifth Avenue. The Legal description of the property is S 10' of Lot 13 & the N 25' of Lot 14 Block 9 of the Original Townsite Seward. This parcel is .08 acres in size. The proposed new construction will be done in the footprint of the original building 30' x 65' and is located approximately at the south and east property line. The parcel is currently vacant except the foundation from the demolished building which is closed off from entry. The proposed Mixed -use commercial building will have a first -floor retail or office component and the second and third floors are currently planned to be dwelling or lodging units. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: The neighboring properties are all zoned Central Business (CB) district. Floodnlain status: According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, adopted by the City of Seward, the property lies entirely within Zone X. Utilities: City water, sewer, and electrical service are available on site. Communications utilities are available. Parkin: Seward City Code 15.10.215B. requires a ratio of two parking spaces per multifamily dwelling unit or 1 space per lodging guest room. However, Section 15.10.215A provides an exception for off street parking in the CB and HC zones. The applicant has provided for a total of four parking places on the site plan. An updated parking plan has been requested. 32/130 Planning and Zoning Agenda Statement Resolution 2020-08 Page 2 of 4 CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Yes No N/A Comprehensive Plan (2030, approved by Council 2017): The Comprehensive Plan promotes commercial development within the City of Seward in accordance with community values. X 1 Section 2.2.11 Economic Base Promote infill development by encouraging and promoting construction on vacant sites in areas of the city which are already established (page I-10 . Strategic Plan (1999): Pursue the community's vision through rigorous implementation of the Comprehensive and Land Use Plans • Promote in -fill development by encouraging and promoting construction on vacant sites in already X 2 established areas of the city (Page 10) Continue to Support and Encourage the Re -vitalization of Downtown • Focus downtown revitalization efforts on vacant and dilapidated buildings (Page 14 Seward City Code Table 15.10.226 Requires 3. Dwelling, apartment in a commercial building (two or more CUP units) in Central Business CB Staff Comments Staff has reviewed the Rezoning application and no objections were reported. Department Comments No Comment N/A Building Department 1) All building Permit Applications for new construction will be reviewed under currently adopted building and fire codes. 2) At minimum Structural and Architectural engineered drawings are assumed to be provided as part of the building permit application process Fire Department Prior to construction architectural, structural, and if required sprinkler/ alarm plans must be submitted and follow current locally adopted codes. Including the International Building Code and International Fire Code Public Works Prior to any work in the Right -of -Way Department coordinate with public works for permitting Harbor Department X Police Department X Electric Department Provide necessary electrical easements for electrical service and as required during lattin Telecommunications X 33/130 Planning and Zoning Agenda Statement Resolution 2020-08 Page 3 of 4 Public Comment Property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the parcel were notified of this proposed Conditional Use Permit. Public notice signs were posted on the property, and all other public hearing requirements of Seward City Code § 15.01.040 Public Hearings were complied with. Any comments received after this publication will be presented as a lay down to the Commission and the public at the July 21, 2020 meeting. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS: 1) The applicant shall be required to replat the property in accordance with SCC section 12.10.030. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall furnish certified copies of the final plat. A preliminary plat shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) The existing entry stair is a remnant of the nonconforming structure and must be reconstructed out of the Right -of -Way with the new construction. SCC Section 15.10.315(f)(2). 3) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a dimensioned site plan which identifies four (4) on -site parking spaces for the residential units, and the vehicle ingress and egress route. The applicant shall also identify delivery access and egress for service vehicles. 4) All construction shall meet the current International Building Code and International Fire Code. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Structural and Architectural Stamped Engineered drawings shall be approved by the Building Official 5) The applicant shall work with the Fire Department on ensuring that adequate life safety systems are integrated into the proposed structure. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, Sprinkler/ Alarm Plans if required for the use must be approved by the Building official. 6) The applicant shall coordinate with Public Works and obtain a a right-of-way permit prior to any work in the right -of-way. The applicant shall continue to work with staff through the building permit process to address and accomplish any required upgrades to public utilities if needed. 7) The applicant shall start a job order with the electric department and work with their staff on connecting to services 8) Per Seward City Code §1 5.10.325.F. an approved CUP shall lapse six months from the date of approval if the use for which the permit was issued has not been implemented or a building permit obtained. The Commission may grant a six-month extension upon finding that circumstances have not changed sufficiently since the date of initial permit approval. 34/130 Planning and Zoning Agenda Statement Resolution 2020-08 Page 4 of 4 9) Modification of final approval of a conditional use permit may, upon application by the permitee, be modified by the Planning and Zoning Commission: a. When changed conditions cause the conditional use to no longer conform to the standards for its approval. b. To implement a different development plan conforming to the standards for its approval. c. The modification plan shall be subject to a public hearing and a filing fee set by City Council Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings provided in Resolution 2020-08, staff recommends granting a Conditional Use Permit to John Wisel II to construct and operate two or more apartment units within a commercial building located at 213 Fifth Avenue in the Central Business district (CB) with recommended conditions. 35/130 i 7 4 � �I s Ate_, y nr� W 0 ` 01 ® 213 FIFTH AVE Parcels RES 2020-08 CONDITIONAL USE FOR (TWO a 105 210 424Feet OR MORE APTS IN A COMMERCIAL BLDG) N S 10' LOT 13 N 25' Lot 14 Block 9 Location Map Original Tawnsite Seward Due to different data sources property fines and aerial imagery do not overlay correctly. Map is to be used for orientation and reference purposes only. 17rawn eq EAK 06/09/2020 36/130 I s 1 7 ft rw. 41 RES 2020-08 CONDITIONAL USE FOR (TWO OR MORE APTS IN A COMMERCIAL BLDG) Zoning map Clue to different data sources property lines and aerial imagery do not overlay correctly. Map is to be used for orientation and reference purposes only. 4 213 FIFTH AVE Parcels Rural Residential I Single Family Residential Two Family Residential Multi Family Residential I t; ® Urban Residential e Office Residential Harbor Commercial Auto Commercial Central Business District Industrial Institutional Park Resource Management D 105 210 420Feet N S 10' LOT 13 N 25' Lot 14 Block 9 Original Townsite Seward D,. �n By: EAK 06/0912020 37/130 cn Y I'. { ►. l� 3 o A o(�'Z419 Seuarcl. � City of Seward t community DevelopmentEI VED las hi( C W ldc- Plamscr JUN 0 1 202 907.22 I. to 18 A '10.1 l awll• Pl,amitrrg r airt ommun►ty Developmu" CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATA ©t) 6/1/2,,, This completed application is to be submitted to the Community Development Depart ) 60 ... three (3) weeks in advance of the next regularly scheduled Planning and Zoning Cor rem Regular meetings are held the first Tuesday of each month. The application must be Ad �c �� the $250 filing fee. In addition, please provide an as -built survey if the property has been deveill'fA - Iawl% scaled site plan with elevations if the property is undeveloped. 1NCOMPT,FT1_,: APPLICATIONS WILL NOT RF ACCiE!,PI-M Applicant. /n; \ Address: GJ � Avc Telephone Number: ' _4`1 � "1� —Email: V 1taM ' i If b6l( Property owner (if other than applicant): Address: h Ale — Telephone Number: _�� 0 1 _sAi �[ {j __.,. Email: 400,Me__ Property Description Address: \ � AVM Lot Size: _6 t V-A---,' idIDL� t �+ k Lat:tBlock: ,) A Subdivision: Kenai Peninsula Borough Tax Parcel ID Number: �(l Development Information What structures are on the property? How is the property being used? What is the proposed use of the property? S`uC1u S e- J f ' What Is the development timeline? M ''t / ' Please note that prior to the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission granting a Conditional Use Permit, it shall be established that the proposed use satisfies the following conditions of Se City Code 15.10.320 (See the attached pages for specific City Code requlrAmopwr- n Conditional Use Permit Application 3.2018 Z:\Commnnity_Development_Folder\Templates\CUP 38/130 A) The proposed use Is consistent with the requirements of the Seward Zoning Code and the -designated zoning district. Please describe thte use. lay d OOiP%t\'n.�V <t 1, tIt Ina— psu.n B) Describe any Impacts to the adjoining properties and how property values may be affected. C) How is the proposed use consistent with the Seward Comprehensive Plan? Explain. You can view the plan at: httL „_.r.uityor. award.u,. ` V tSeM�f1� D) Describe 1 list the public services and facilities that will serve the proposed use. (i.e., roads, utilities.) E) The proposed project or use must not be harmful to the public health, safety and welfare. Describe any mitigation measures that may be needed to protect the public health, safety and welfare. F) Include building elevation plans and a site plan, drawn to scale. The site plan should include: 1) Property dimensions 2) Location and dimensions of existing and planned buildings 3) Parking configuration 4) Driveways and access 5) Natural features B Other pertinent information 39/130 I hereby certify that the above statements and other information submitted are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and that I have the following legal interest In the property: (/) Owner of record ( )Lessee (,,-) Contract purchaser (,`Authorized to act for a person who has the following legal Interest: I understand that this Item will be scheduled for action only If all application materials are submitted not less than three weeks in advance of the next regularly scheduled Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, Regular meetings are held the first Tuesday of every month. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL BE RETURNED 15.01.045. -- Fees, established by city council resolution, will defray a significant portion of the administration costs associated with processing applications for action covered by this title. ether an anglication is grpntod or dens the_DG0qW or awlicant shall not be gajjWtc return of the fee raid. (Ord. 26, § 3, 1989) Applicant Signature: I Property Owner Signature: Enclosed: $ i 07ayment Dimensioned plot plan I drawings Me Use Only Below This Line ee 3u2,Q [].Site Plan El Location Map ❑Fes As -Built Survey 40/130 A) I y 301-, ^5 FOq v)A;oo lr , V 3 Ac 3 " ate_ L "s _ . :77—" `n SL�3III3�2N w'satmossyv '".= xxxaeNandi + Q �, ; e ; auiaiina =NN�� r ti m a e U. 8 1 i �i a' G 42/ 1 30 xv� mICT29G09 -1V0YU�B smv'��N-WWFtr=od �ukr�cscu p�ywawer �r `s ! SI�rZ1I[��2iV� P ti .aN[ `Mvroossv vAI re 4 �x exaxu►va • • sac►-N d► � _• 6uiPllnB a+0•INnNi ti - --lull. . ww { mlBralrm� mma9e aan'Kwxav Louxtce na amYe �WIYM 4f1 ^•�•� rwai w nras "tea VS cl mum qy k-9B F I •■ f �`re g li AH2RSN�x7gvd ;' , �; _ sulPllsB-14nll MU 1 It c e� g IL N ;r f616RiBE5 5911[I9(E "'dlaryW E➢GfT�+Od W9B9 Y'! paYS nrY�s, EI BUIPIIAG son-IRMW IL Sponsored by: Staff CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2020-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ENACT A SIX (6) MONTH MORATORIUM ON THE PLACEMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS OR UNTIL SUCH TIME AS DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CAN BE ADOPTED INTO CODE WHEREAS, discussion of communication towers has been a Planning and Zoning Commission priority since 2015; and WHEREAS, City staff have been contacted multiple times in 2020 by persons representing the telecommunication industry about placement of communication towers in the downtown area; and WHEREAS, members of the public have requested a review and code amendments setting communication tower development standards; and WHEREAS, June 16, 2020.the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public work session to discuss code provisions addressing the permitting of communications towers; and. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has requested that a temporary moratorium be placed on the construction of new communication towers in City limits until such time as they can consider adopting design and development standards similar to that of the City of Kenai. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission that: Section 1. The Commission recommends City Council enact a non -code ordinance placing up to a six-month moratorium on the placement of any new communication tower within city limit Section 2. The moratorium shall not apply to the coloration or equipment upgrades of wireless communication equipment on existing infrastructure. Section 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. 46/130 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 2020-08 Page 2 of 2 PASSED AND APPROVED by the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission this 7cn day of July, 2020. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VACANT: One ATTEST: Brenda Ballou, MMC City Clerk (City Seal) THE CITY OF SEWARD Cindy L. Ecklund, Chair 47/ 130 P&Z Agenda Statement Meeting Date: July 21, 2020 Through: Jackie C. Wilde, Community Development Director From: Eric Kozielski, Planner Andy Bacon, Planning Assistant Agenda Item: Resolution 2020-09 Recommending City Council Enact A Six (6) Month Moratorium on the Placement of Communications Towers or Until Such Time As Design And Development Standards Can Be Adopted Into Code BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION: Since 2015 the Planning and Zoning Commission annual priorities have included the community need for discussion and education on the design and placement of communication towers within City Limits. In late 2019 and early 2020 the Community Development Department began hearing from multiple parties regarding the placement of new communication towers in the Original Townsite on both privately owned properties and lands owned by the City. In response to these proposals, members of the public have requested code changes to regulate the development of communications towers. On June 16, 2020 the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public work session to discuss the need for creating more comprehensive design and development standards. At the Work Session, Commission discussed existing telecommunication structures and reviewed an example ordinance from a neighboring. City on the Kenai Peninsula. The Commission then directed staff to bring forward a resolution recommending Council enact a six (6) month moratorium on the placement of any new communication towers, or until such time as Staff can bring forward an ordinance for consideration and recommendation to Council for enactment. This moratorium would not apply to the colocation of communication equipment on existing infrastructure, nor would it prevent maintenance or upgrades to existing towers. Communication Tower placement is regulated by Title 15 of Seward Municipal Code Planning and Land Use Regulations. There is currently no specified definition for communication tower in Seward City Code. The placement of communication towers is specified in Table 15.10.226 Land Uses Allowed. Communication towers 75 feet and under are currently allowed outright in the AC, HC, CB, 1, RM, and INS Zoning Districts. Communication towers greater than 75 feet in height are allowed by conditional use permit in the 1, RM, and INS zoning districts. Persons or entities seeking to erect new communication towers must comply with all City building codes and development regulations 48/130 Planning and Zoning Resolution 2020-09 Agenda Statement Page 2 of 3 Table !S. 70.226 Land Uses Allowed Excerm: _ Zmft DMras rn�apaRylresta„m1 Ri4rtlpNlyCaamncfY F> 1NMM& Uses RR RI R2 xi.. UR. OR AC HE CS I RM HS F [a�+unaeicrvs. was o ❑ a o a o s.�is.mw�n, rw..s. mac. arvtl anunnes less Tun 18feet a 75 fW.n Lwmuvca _ canRs.�ti E L [ sew [e dl -_ t— 9KK arcE — 18hat iamCM -gr e tl .75 r-mWS. ....... The consensus at the June 16, 2020 Planning and Zoning Work Session was to require a conditional use permit for all new communication tower installations so that the Commission can review individual site characteristics. The intent of the site review would be in alignment with the purpose of Title 15, as specified in 15.01.010(c), in providing orderly development of the community, promote safety and public order, protect the public health and general welfare of the citizens of the community. Further, the Commission recommended reviewing and adopting an ordinance like that which is in effect in the City of Kenai. In order to research and bring forward such an ordinance, as well as to hold work sessions and hearings on the enactment of the ordinance, the Commission recommended bringing forward a resolution recommending Council enact a six-month moratorium on the placement of any new towers. The six-month time period was deemed reasonable time to craft code language and allow for the public process, while not placing undue burden and delay to the development of new communications infrastructure in the City, which is deemed desirable and important for the community. This resolution was to be heard at the July 7, 2020 Planning and Zoning meeting, which had to be cancelled due to Covid-19. In the meantime, City staff continued working on a draft ordinance and gathering information from communication industry representatives. The Planning and Zoning Commission also conducted a second work session on July 21, 2020.to discuss communication towers and review a draft ordinance. It has come to the conclusion of staff that a new communication tower ordinance can likely be passed within a reasonable timeframe so as not to necessitate a Council enacted moratorium. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Yes No N/A Comprehensive Plan (2030): 3.2.1 Promote residential and commercial development within the city of Seward and its vicinity in accordance with community values I. 3.2.1.1 Manage land use to facilitate economic development while X maintaining the historic, small town character of Seward. 3.1.1.2 (bullet 5) Support development of modem communications infrastructure. Strategic Plan (1999): Coals and Objectives 2. * Adjust local development regulations, where appropriate, to X encourage development that is consistent with our economic base vision 49/ 130 Planning and Zoning Resolution 2020-09 Agenda Statement Page 3 of 3 Other (list): Planning and Zoning Priorities April 2020-April 2021 Short and Medium term #6: Communication tower education / work session 3' with an industry expert and recommend draft ordinance to Council X (Approved by Council Resolution 2020-048 RECOMMENDATION: The Commission deny Resolution 2020-09 recommending the City Council enact a six (6) month moratorium on the placement of communications towers, or until such time as design and development standards can be adopted into code. 50/130 Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department MEMORANDUM TO: City Planners KPB Advisory Planning Commissions FROM: Scott Huff — Platting Manager Gk )p DATE: June 30, 2020 RE: Ordinance 2020 ; An Ordinance Amending Kenai Peninsula Borough Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2.40 — Planning Commission, Tile 20 — Subdivisions, and Chapter 21.20 — Hearing and Appeals, to correct grammatical errors, clarify, and improve certain administrative procedure. The Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department has proposed an ordinance to correct grammatical errors, clarify, and improve certain administrative procedures. The sections that are proposed to be amended are Chapter 2.40 — Planning Commission, multiple sections within Title 20 — Subdivisions, and Chapter 21.20 — Nearing and Appeals. KPB Planning Department has implemented the current subdivision standards since the last major rewrite in 2014. Since then, KPB staff has kept notes with any issues or ambiguity in the code. The main objective of this ordinance is to clarify the review process and correct issues that have been identified within Title 20 — Subdivisions. This amendment will also make edits to chapter 2.40 — Planning Commission and 21.20 Hearings and Appeals. These edits will identify who can request a review of a plat committee decision and clarify staff's position during an appeal hearing process. At your convenience please schedule a review of the attached proposed ordinance by your commission. After review please submit all comments to Scott Huff — Platting Manager shuff@kpb.us. Comments are needed by August 3, 2020. All comments will be forwarded to the KPB Planning Commission. Our goal is to have this ordinance open for public comment on the August 24, 2020 Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission will review the ordinance and provide a recommendation, along with any amendments, to the KPB Assembly. If you have any questions please contact Scott Huff- Platting Manager at 907-714-2212 or by e-mail at shuff@kpb.us. KPB staff is also available to meet with your commission during a work session or public meeting to answer any questions and provide guidance. 51/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 2.40.080. - Plat committee - Powers and duties - Hearing and review procedures SUGGESTED CHANGE: Clarify who is allowed to request a review of a plat committee decision by the full Planning Commission. fY1LeLel��l;1�]�,:1►Le11Liei�i B. Review of a decision of the plat committee may be heard by the planning commission acting as platting board by filing written notice thereof with the borough planning director on a form provided by the borough planning department. The request for review shall be filed within ten days after notification of the decision of the plat committee by person al service or service by mail. A request for review may be filed by any person or agency receiving a notice of decision. [participated at the plat committee hearing either by written or oral presentation.] The request must have an original signature; filing electronically or by facsimile is prohibited. The request for review must briefly state the reason for the review request and applicable provisions of borough code or other law upon which the request for review is based. Notice of the review hearing will be issued by staff to the original recipients of the plat committee public hearing notice. JUSTIFICATION: The charge will clarify who is allowed to submit o request for review by specifying that any person or agency that receives a notice of decision is able to request a review by the full planning commission. 20.10.040. _ Abbreviated plat procedure. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Clarify this section such that abbreviated plats are platting actions that eliminate lot lines or create new parcels as long as no more than four lots or tracts are created and the proposed plat complies with the remainder of 20.10.040. If the proposed subdivision is within a local option zone, Number 5 ensures continued compliance with KPB Code, SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. The abbreviated plat procedure may be used where the subdivision or replat [resubdivision] is of a simple nature and meets all of the requirements of this section as follows: 1. The subdivision divides a single lot into not more than four lots or the subdivision moves or eliminates, lot lines to create not more than four lots or tracts. JUSTIFICATION: As it reads now, a replat of four lots into one lot would not qualify as an abbreviated plat. The new proposed language clarifies that vacating interior lot lines as long as no more than four lots are being created is acceptable under 20.1.0.040. 20.10.040. - Abbreviated plat procedure. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Include compliance with 20.40. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Submission Requirements. All of the submission requirements of KPB Chapters 20.25, 20.30, 20.40 shall be met. Page 1 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 52/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 JUSTIFICATION: All lots being created must comply with wastewater• review per 20.40 to ensure public safety and adherence to State Statutes, 20.10.080. — Right -of -Way Vacation Plat and Section Line Easement Vacation Plat. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Include Section Line Easement Vacation Plats under the Right of Way vacation plat section of code. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. When the sole purpose of a plat is to depict right-of-way, or a section line easement vacation, approved for vacation under KPB Chapter 20.70 as attaching to adjoining parcels in compliance with KPB 20.70.150 and AS 29.40,150, the following procedure shall apply: JUSTIFICATION: Often a plat is required to vacate a section fine easement. When only the section lime easement is being vacated, and the boundary is not changing, the plat does not need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission has already reviewed, and approved, the vacation application. It is unnecessary for the Planning Commission to also review the plat. The State of Alaska LDNR has a review process for section line easement vacation plats and is the final authority on approval of the section line easement vacation including the final plat. 20.10.100. — Building Setback Encroachment Permit. SUGGESTED CHANGE: By providing an encroachment permit it allows the land owner to have relief from a structure that is located within a building setback. The issuing of the permit would be granted by the Planning Director and would have to meet specific standards. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: 20.10.100. — Building Setback Encroachment Permit. A. Anv person desiring to construct, or cause, an encroachment within a building setback shall apply for a building setback encroachment permit to the Planning ❑epartment. Failure to obtain an encroachment permit is subject to remedies set forth in KPB 20.10.030, B. A permit fee shall be charged for Building Setback Encroachment Permits as provided in the current approved Kenai Peninsula Borough Schedule of Rates, Charges and Fees. A person who fails to apply for, and obtain, a building setback encroachment permit prior to an enforcement notice being issued pursuant to KPB 21,50.100 is subject to enforcement. C. All building setback encroachments, including those that pre -date the effective date of this ordinance, must apply for a building setback encroachment permit. Permits for building setback encroachments that existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance Page 2 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 53/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 shall pay the same permit fee as applies to permits received prior to placement or construction of the encroachment. D. When the building setback encroachment permit application is complete, it will be scheduled for the next available planning commission meeting. E. The following standards shall be considered for all building setback encroachment permit applications. a. The building setback encroachment may not interfere with road maintenance. b. The building setback encroachment may not interfere with sight lines or rlistanras c. The building setback encroachment may not create a safety hazard. F. The granting of a building setback encroachment permit will only be for the portion of the improvement, or building, that is located within the building setback and the permit will be valid for the life of the structure. The cirantinci of a building setback permit will not remove a Dy portion of the 20 foot bu i Id inq setback from the parce1. G. Upon approval of a building setback encroachment permit, a resolution will be adopted by the planning commission and recorded by the planning department within the time frame set out in the resolution to complete the permit. The resolution will require an exhibit drawing showing, and dimensioning, the building setback encroachment permit area. The exhibit drawing shall be prepared, signed and sealed by a licensed land surveyor. H. Adecision of the planning commission may be appealed to the hearing officer by a party of record, as defined by KPB 20.90, within 15 days of the date of notice of decision in accordance with KPB 21.20.250. JUSTIFICATION: Building setback requirements are within Chapter2O.30 Subdivision Design Requirements. Exceptions to Design Requirements can only be requested at time of preliminary plat approval. If building setbacks were a function of zoning (Chapter 2I.04) than a variance would be required. By allowing a building setback encroachment permit to be obtained, it allows the land owner relief when a structure or improvement is located within the building setback, while also giving the borough an opportunity to review the encroachment if the encroachment does not meet the standards then the encroachment permit will be denied and if applicable, the structure may be required to be removed from the setback. 20.25.020. - Compliance with certain provisions required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add language to clarify that submission of a preliminary plat is the responsibility of a licensed land surveyor. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A [subdivider] licensed surveyor shall prepare a preliminary plat of the proposed subdivision which shall comply with the requirements of KPB 20.25.070 and 20.25.080, and other applicable provisions of this chapter except as provided in KPB 20.10.050. Page 3 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 54/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 JUSTIFICATION: As written, 20.25.020 allows a member of the public to prepare and submit a subdivision plot. Per KPB 20.25,010 the general public is provided an opportunity to meet with the Platting Manager/Plonning Director for a preliminary application conference. During the preliminary application conference, the plan of subdivision and subdivision requirements will be discussed with the land owner. The land owner will then have a licensed surveyor prepare and submit the preliminary plat submittal package. Land surveyors are more familiar with the KPB subdivision requirements and will be able to submit a preliminary plat that complies with KPB 20.25. This will allow the preliminary plat review be completed more efficiently for all involved. 20.25.030. — Prints — Types and number to be submitted. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Clarify that the number of copies and format of submissions is determined by the Planning Director. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: The format and number of [prints] copies of the preliminary plat to be submitted shall be as determined by the planning director and noted on the Borough Plat Submittal Form. Preliminary plat prints shall be folded to 81/2 x 13 inches or smaller in a manner such that the subdivision name and legal description show. JUSTIFICATION: Surveyors still try to submit plats in pdf form by email in a last minute effort to meet the cut-off deadline for preliminary plats or to hasten the submission of final plats. The Planning Department's existing equipment may not allow staff to print plats to scale from pd f documents. If Planning accepts electronic submissions from one surveyor, electronic submissions from all surveyors need to be accepted. And, if Planning accepts electronic submissions of preliminary plats, electronic submissions of final plats also need to be accepted. The cumulative costs of printing preliminary (9 copies each) and final plats (1 each) will create a continual, ever- increasing negative impact on the Planning Department's budget. At some point in the future, technology and equipment may evolve such that electronic submissions are practical and would not negatively impact the budget. Allowing the Planning Director to determine the format of the submission and number of copies to submit creates flexibility that accommodates ever -changing technology. By noting the number of prints on the Plat Submittal Form, the surveyor will know how many copies are required to be submitted. 20.25.050. — Subdivision or replat in first class or home rule city submittal procedure. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Revise so that the cities may be delegated total platting powers as opposed to partial powers. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. Pursuant to AS 29.40.010, first class and home rule cities within the borough [are] may be delegated [limited authority] platting powers to adopt by ordinance subdivision standards different from those set forth in this chapter, Page 4 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 55/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 2.0 June 29, 2020 F. [To the extent a city has been delegated limited platting authority, a]A final plat may not deviate from the preliminary plat unless the proposed revision has first been submitted to the city by the subdivider and has been approved by the city council or its designee. JUSTIFICATION: The borough does not enforce city standards or regulations that are different than borough requirements. The recommendations of the City are passed on to the Planning Commission for review. It is up to the owner to work out any platting issues with the City. Any appeal of a city required subdivision standard will be heard by the City, not the borough. Per KPB 21.01, Cities can be delegated full platting authority as long as they request the authority and comply by having proper notice and an appeal process. 20.25.060. — Subdivision or replat in second class city submittal procedure. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Revise so that the cities may be delegated total platting powers as opposed to partial powers. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: B. [To the extent limited platting authority has been delegated to a second class city, a]A preliminary plat shall not be submitted to the borough planning department for review unless the aspects of the subdivision subject to the city authority have been first approved by the city. F, [To the extent a city has been delegated limited platting authority, a] A final plat may not deviate from the preliminary plat unless the proposed revision has first been submitted to the city by the subdivider and has been approved by the city council or its designee. JUSTIFICATION.' The borough does not enforce city standards or regulations that are different than borough requirements. The recommendations of the City are passed on to the Planning Commission for review. It is up to the owner to work out any platting issues with the City. Any appeal of a city required subdivision standard will be heard by the City, not the borough. Per KPB 21.01, Cities can be delegated full platting authority as long as they request the authority and comply by having proper notice and on appeal process. 20.25.070. — Form and Contents required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Carry the parent plat name forward on the preliminary replat. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. Within the Title Block 1. Name of the subdivision which shall not be the same as an existing city, town, tract, or subdivision of land in the borough, of which a plat has been previously recorded, or so nearly the same as to mislead the public or cause confusion. The parent plays name shall be the prima!)� name of the preliminary ,plat. Page 5 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 56/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO T17LE 20 June 29, 2020 JUSTIFICATION: Carrying the parent plat name forward facilitates future land title searches and allows the plat to be sequentially listed, or at least grouped with, the parent plats in the State Recorder's database. If the owner wants a brand new name for the proposed plat, an exception can be requested. 20.25.070. — Form and contents required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Include travel ways on preliminary plat submittal SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: F. The [names and widths of public streets, and alleys, and] location, width and name of existing or platted streets and public ways, railroad rights-of-way,_easements, and travel ways existing and proposed, within the subdivision; JUSTIFICATION: The existing travel ways often provides the most practical, physical access within, and to, the property. The existing travel way maybe the best location for a fee right-of-way. If right-of-way is not dedicated over the travel way by the plat staff may request or recommend an easement be placed atop the existing travel way in order to try to prevent problems with road blockage, trespass, and/or conflicts about usage rights when new owners acquire the property. It may also be pertinent to obtain dedications or easement within the adjacent lands to provide legal access on the traveled way to the boundary of the subdivision. If the owner(s) disagree, an exception can be requested and justified. 20.25.070. -- Form and contents required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add a dimension requirement for showing the adjacent parcel information in relation to the proposed subdivision. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: G. Show the status of adjacent lands within 100 feet of the proposed subdivision boundary or show the land status across from any dedicated right of ways that adjoin the proposed subdivision baundary, including names of subdivisions, lot lines, block number, lot numbers, rights -of -way; or in indication that the adjacent land is not subdivided. JUSTIFICATION, By providing the adjoining information within at least 100 feet of the subdivision it will provide the information for the neighboring parcels and right of ways. A distance of 100 feet will encompass nearly all right-of-way widths that may adjoin the subdivision. It is important to show neighboring status information to plan for street intersections and lot layout configuration. The adjoining information is valuable for land owners and subsequent surveyors to use when gathering information on neighboring parcels. 20.25.070. — Form and contents required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Clarification for showing non -tidal water features on the preliminary plat SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Page 6 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed). 57/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 H. Approximate locations of low wet areas, areas subject to inundation, areas subject to flooding [,] or storm water overflow, and the line of ordinary high water [wetlands when adjacent to lakes or non -tidal streams and the appropriate study which identifies a floodplain, if applicable]. This information may be provided on an additional sheet if showing these areas causes the preliminaryplat to appear cluttered and/or difficult to read; JUSTIFICATION; The intent is to show the approximate locations) tow wet or marshy/swampy areas on the plat. Knowledge of the locations of low wet areas helps the owners plan for prudent placement of structures, wells, septic systems, and rights -of -way, A wetland is a designation based on specific testing by qualified personnel. Remove mention of floodplains because 20.30.280 addresses these areas. Depiction of the low wet areas can easily clutter a plat such that other information, like basis of bearings and dimensions, can be difficult to discern. 20.25.090. — Notice. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Clarify and update the required items to be included in the notice published in the newspaper and the notice sent to affected property owners. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Notice of public hearing shall appear at least once in a newspaper of general circulation stating: name of subdivision[a general description of the subdivision or replat]; b. KPB File no.[who filed the subdivision petition]; c. general location[when the subdivision petition was filed]; d. general description of the subdivision[the time and place of the hearing on the subdivision;. and e. the time and dace of the hearing; and[the process and deadline for submittal of comments,] f. process and deadline for submitted comments. C. The notice in subsection B, including the name of the surveyor and applicant, shall be sent by regular mail to the affected property owners at least 14 days prior to the public hearing. A certificate of mailing listing the names, addresses and parcel information for each notified owner shall be maintained in the subdivision file. JUSTIFICATION: The edits to this section will reduce the size of the newspaper ad and clarify what items are included with the notice. The reduction in the newspaper ad will be a cost savings measure for the Planning Department, Page 7 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 58/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 20.25.110. — Approval — Commission Authority — Notification required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Clarify the approval time frame of preliminary plats and the expiration of approved plats. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. Approval of the preliminary plat shall not constitute approval of the final plat, but means only that the basic lot and street design is acceptable. The subdivider is on notice that it is the subdivider's responsibility to provide all the information required in this ordinance and to submit a correct final plat within two years of the date of the planning commission's conditional approval of the preliminary plat. Upon application by the subdivider prior to the two-year deadline for final plat submittal, a time extension for two years beyond the initial two-year period for submittal of the final plat may be granted by the planning director. A second [third] and final two-year extension may be granted by the planning director when requested by the subdivider prior to expiration of the previous approval. [, allowing for a total approval time of six years]. When the preliminary plat is located within city limits, submittal of documentation from the city advisory planning commission indicating concurrence with the time extension request must accompany a time extension request. When a preliminary plat that has been granted a time extension is finalized, the final plat must comply with the current code. Expiration of the original plat approval or time extensionswill require the submission of, and action on, a new preliminary plat. JUSTIFICATION: The edits made to this section will clarify when are approved plat expires and clarify how marry time extensions can be granted. The removal of the six -year limit is removed so that a combination of phase extensions and time extension requests can be used in combination for a development. 20.25.110. -- Approval — Commission Authority — Notification required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: revise the language in 20.25.110.8 so thatthe time extensions for phased subdivisions is clear. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Preliminary plats that will be finalized in phases must comply with current code at the time each phase is finalized. All dedications for streets that are required pursuant to KPB 20.30.030 must be provided in the first phase. The approval of a final plat for a portion of the phased preliminary shall [extend] reset the [preliminary] approval date for two years from the date the subdivision phase final plat is recorded. [for t] The remaining land within the phased subdivision [, except that the commission] may require a new preliminary plat approval if the abutting road system changes. Phases must be filed in sequential order. Page 8 of 31 New text is underlined: deleted text is [bracketed]. 59/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 JUSTIFICATION: By rewording this section it is clear that the approval date is reset to allow two years to complete the next phase from the date that the final plat for a phase is recorded. This will allow the subdivider the most time to complete their project. 20.25.110. — Approval — Commission Authority — Notification required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Include a requirement that subdivision plats approved under 20.12, 20.14, 20.16, and 20.20 with approvals 10 years or more convert to the requirements of 20.25, 2030, 20.40, and 20.60. ► F.M9l1*1114 11T,WO 4_[ers E. Subdivision plats aooroved under KPB 20.12. 20.14. 20.16. and 20.20 with aoorovals that are greater than 10 years in length, and with approvals that will expire, will be considered expired on the expiration date. Continuation of an expired subdivision will require the submission of, and -action -on, a new preliminary plat that complies with current subdivision requirements. JUSTIFICATION: To maintain consistency, plats approved per KPB 20.12, 20.14, 20.16, and 20.20 have been allowed to continue review under these codes as long as it was evident the project would be concluded within a reasonable amount of time. Allowing plats to continue review under 20.12, 20.14, 20.16, and 20.20 indefinitely is inconsistent with the intent and application of the current Title 20. 20.25.120. Review and appeal. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Revise the review and appeal statement to remove 'parties of record' so that chapter 20 is consistent with KPB 2.40,080. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: [A party of record] In accord with KPB 2.40.080, any person or agency that participated at the plat committee hearing, either by written or oral presentation, may request that a decision of the plat committee can be reviewed by the planning commission by filing a written request within 10 days of date of distribution [notification] of the decision [in accordance with KPB 2.40.080], A decision of the planning commission may be appealed to the board of adjustment by a party of record within 15 days of the date of distribution[notice] of decision in accordance with KPB 21.20.250, JUSTIFICATION: This change will keep the code consistent between chapter 2 and chapter 20. It will allow any person or agency who participated at the plat committee hearing, either by written or oral testimony, to request a review by the full Planning Commission. An appeal to the hearing officer will require a party of record to meet the Party of record requirements per KPB 20.20.210. 20.30.060. — Easements — Requirements. Page 9 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 60/ 130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 SUGGESTED CHANGE: Remove the default 10-foot utility easement if the plat is within a city, and the city planning commission and affected utilities do not request new utility easements. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: D. Unless a utility company requests additional easements, the front ten feet [of the building setback] adjoining rights -of -wax shall be designated as a utility easement, graphically or by note. Within boundaries of a city, the width and location of utility easements will be determined by the City and affected utility providers. IUSTIFICATION.• If the affected utility companies and the city, which is a utility provider, do not request easements, adding new easements is an unnecessary burden on the property within city limits. Some zoning districts do not have building setbacks so in order to consistently grant utility easements along rights -of way, the language should clarify the front footage adjoining rights -of - way is subject to a utility easement unless otherwise requested by the city and utility providers. 20.30.110 - Half Streets 20.30.120. - Streets - Width requirements. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Move the requirements of 20,30.110 - Half Streets to be incorporated within 20.30,120 Streets - Width requirements. Also, revise the half street notification statement to remove 'parties of record' so that chapter 20 is consistent with KpB 2.40.080, SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: [20.30.110 - Half Streets.] [A.1 [Half streets shall generally not be allowed except where one of the following circumstances applies:] R. The street is identified on the borough road plan as an arterial;] [2. The street is a logical extension of an existing street; or] [3. The remaining half street can reasonably be expected to be dedicated.] [13.1 [When a design change required as a condition of preliminary approval results in a half right-of-way that was not shown on the original preliminary plat, adjoiners to the new half right-of-way are parties of record and will be sent a copy of the plat committee minutes and a sketch showing the new half right-of-way. Pursuant to KPB 2.40.080 review of the plat committee decision by the planning commission may be requested by parties of record.] 20.30.120. Streets —Width requirements. A. The minimum right-of-way width of streets shall be 60 feet. 1. Half streets shall aenerallv not be allowed except to provide the logical extension of a ria_ht of way where the remaining half street can reasonably be expected to be dedicated in the future. 2. When a design change required as a condition of preliminary approval results in a half right-of-way that was not shown on the original preliminary_ plat, adloiners to the new half right-of-way will be sent a copy of the plat committee minutes Page 10 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 61/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 and a sketch showing the new half right-of-way and per KPB 2.40.080 can request a review of the preliminary plat by the full Planning Commission. Additional right-of-way or easement width may be required to provide for the construction of side slopes or to otherwise accommodate right-of-way construction standards set forth in KPB Title 14. JUSTIFICATION: It will simplify the code to move the half street width requirements to fall with the street width requirements section of the code, instead of having the holf width be a separate section. The change to the notice of adjoiners will keep the code consistent between chapter 2 and chapter 20. It will allow any person or agency who participated at the plot committee hearing; either by written or oral testimony,to request a review by the full Planning Commission. An appeal to the hearing officer will require a party of record to meet the Party of record requirements per KPB 20.20.210- 20.30.150. — Streets — Intersection requirements. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Provide a distance requirement for offset intersections. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: B. Offset intersections are not allowed. The distance between intersection centerlines shall be no less than 150 feet. JUSTIFICATION: By adding a specific distance it clarifies the distance required between offset intersections. This distance complies with 20.30.090 Streets — Maximum grade allowed, where the grade at an intersection shall not exceed 4 percent within 130 feet of any centerline intersections. Muni of Anchorage requires 150 feet. Matsu Borough requires 150 feet centerline to centerline for residential sub -collectors or below or 330 feet on residential collector or higher class of road. 20.30.240. — Building Setbacks. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Revise the wording of this section of code to reference 'dedicated' right of way instead of'fee simple'. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. The commission shall require a building setback of at least 70 feet from the centerline of all dedicated [fee simple] arterial rights -of -way in a subdivision. A minimum 20-foot building setback shall be required for dedicated [fee simple] non -arterial rights -of -way in subdivisions located outside incorporated cities. C. The setback shall be noted on the plat in the following format: Page 11 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 62/ 130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 Building setback — A setback of feet is required from all dedicated street right-of-ways unless a lesser standard is approved by resolution of the appropriate planning commission. JUSTIFICATION: By changing the required plat note to add 'dedicated' it will match the building setback requirement of 20.30.240.A. This will be beneficial to avoid confusion when public access easements, temporary turnaround easements, and section line easement affect a subdivision plat. Changing the plat note would clarify that only fee simple right of way dedications will require a 20 foot building setback. 20.30.250. — Building setbacks — Within cities. SUGGESTED CHANGE: clarify that a building setback of record does not need to be carried forward on a new subdivision plat when located within the subdivision is affected by City zoning. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: The building setback requirements for subdivisions located within cities shall be governed by the provisions of municipal zoning districts. Building setbacks as depicted or noted, on record plats shall not be carried forward on a new subdivision plat located within a municipal zoning district Provide a plat note stating "Per KPB 20 30 250 the building setback of record has been removed All development must comply with the municipal zoning requirements.". JUSTIFICATION: This will allow new plats to be complete without requiring an exception to 20.30.240 when the record plat shows a building setback. 20.30.270. - Different standards in cities. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Clarify that the planning commission may follow different standards when requested by the cities. The borough is not required to follow the different standards within a city. Any appeal of a city design standard shall be conducted by the city. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Where cities have [been delegated partial platting powers by the borough and have] enacted by ordinance different subdivision design standards than those set forth in this chapter, the planning commission [shall] agy apply the city standards in lieu of those set forth in this chapter. [The application of the city design standard is subject to the city having an ordinance in place that satisfies the notice requirements of KPB 20.25.090(A) through (D) and a process to appeal decisions made by the city regarding application of its subdivision design standards.] Any appeal of a city desicin standard is subject to KPB 21.01.020. JUSTIFICATION: Some cities have enacted different subdivision standards then KPB standards. The KPB Planning Commission can agree to follow those different standards, but any appeal of those standards Page 12 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 63/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 will be at the city level. Any appeal of a planning commission decision, that is based on KPB code will be handled by the borough. 20.30.280. - Floodplain requirements. SUGGESTED CHANGE: clarify which portion of floodplain management code is required to be followed for subdivision plats. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: C. All subdivisions which are wholly or partially located within flood hazard areas as defined by KPB 21.06.030 must comply [areas where the floodplain has not been mapped and base flood elevation data is not available shall provide the information in compliance] with KPB 21.06.050.A.4. JUSTIFICATION: Adding the specific code clarifies what floodplain requirements affect proposed subdivision plats. 20.30.290. - Anadromous habitat protection district. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Revise anadromous habitat protection district to anadromous waters habitat protection and clarify the width of the Anadromous habitat protection district. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: 20.30.290 - Anadromous waters habitat protection district If any portion of a subdivision or replat is located within an anadromous waters habitat protection district, the plat shall contain the following note: ANADRGMGUS WATERS HABITAT PROTECTION DISTRICT NOTE: Portions of this subdivision are within the Kenai Peninsula Borough Anadromous Waters Habitat Protection District. See KPB Chapter 21.18, as may be amended, for restrictions that affect development in this subdivision. Width of the habitat protection district shall be in accordance with KPB 21.18.040 or as amended. JUSTIFICATION: Revise the language to be consistent with Chapter21.18. Cite 21,18.040 instead of a specific with, such as 50 feet, to allow flexibility for future changes.. 20.40.030. - Abbreviated submittal. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Define the wastewater review submittal requirements for parcels that are 200,000 sq. ft. or larger. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Lots within the proposed subdivision that will be at least 200,000 square feet [or nominal five acres] in size [do not require a soils analysis and report prepared by a qualified engineer] must Page 13 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 64/ 13 0 PROPOSER CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 comply with 20.40.100.F. Before a final plat is recorded or filed for subdivision, the following note must be placed on the plat: WASTEWATER DISPOSAL: Lots which are at least 200,000 square feet [or nominal five acres] in size may not be suitable for onsite wastewater treatment and disposal. Any wastewater treatment or disposal system must meet the regulatory requirements of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. JUSTIFICATION: Currently a wastewater sons analysis report is not being submitted for lots that are larger than 200,000 square feet. This change will require the subdivision plat to comply with KPB 20.40.100.F. The options to comply would be a report from a licensed engineer based on, 1. Existing information, such as an approved DEC septic system currently on the parcel. 2, Visual analysis, or local knowledge. Test pits will not be required for an abbreviated wastewater analysis report. 20.40.100.F is in the code but because of the wording of 20.40.030 it is not being followed. The change within 20,40.030 will require large parcels to comply with 20.40.100.F 20.40.030. - Abbreviated submittal. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Remove the nominal five acres description from the abbreviated submittal for the wastewater review, SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Lots within the proposed subdivision that will be at least 200,000 square feet [or nominal five acres] in size do not require a soils analysis and report prepared by a qualified engineer. Before a final plat is recorded or filed for subdivision, the following note must be placed on the plat: WASTEWATER DISPOSAL: Lots which are at least 200,000 square feet [or nominal five acres] in size may not be suitable for onsite wastewater treatment and disposal. Any wastewater treatment or disposal system must meet the regulatory requirements of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, JUSTIFICATION: Although 'nominal` and `aliquot` are defined in KPB code, there has been some confusion in regards to nominal five acres and how it can be determined by aliquot subdivision. Some thoughts are that nominal means you can include the adjoining right of way when determining parcel size. By removing the nominal five acres, and sticking with a set square footage, there will be less confusion, This will also allow for subdivision designs that better fit the site instead of a strict midpoint method of subdividing the property. 200,000 square feet will still allow for an aliquot 20 acre parcel, that may be as small as 18,365 feet, to be split into four aliquot parcels. 20.40.040. - Conventional onsite soil absorption systems. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Edit the slope requirement to match State of Alaska DEC regulations. Page 14 of 31 New text is underlined: deleted text is [bracketed]. 65/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A.3.a Ground slopes greater than 25[20] percent, or 5 percent where a bed system is proposed, and other topographic features as needed by a qualified engineer to meet the design requirements for wastewater disposal as defined in this chapter; JUSTIFICATION: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation regulates wastewater disposal via State Statutes, and required a setback from slopes greater than 25 percent. This item was noted in the last code re -write to be changed to 25 percent but was missed. 20.40.040. — Conventional onsite soil absorption systems. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Remove regulatory requirements of the Kenai Peninsula Borough from the wastewater disposal note. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: B. Before a final plat is recorded or filed for subdivision under this section, the borough will require the engineer to sign the following note on the final plat: WASTEWATER DISPOSAL: Soil conditions, water table levels, and so! I slopes in this subdivision have been found suitable for conventional onsite wastewater treatment and disposal systems serving single-family or duplex residences. [and meeting the regulatory requirements of the Kenai Peninsula Borough.] An Engineer's Subdivision and Soils Report is available from the Kenai Peninsula Borough_Any other type of onsite wastewater treatment and disposal system must be designed by a qualified engineer, registered to practice in Alaska, and the design must be approved by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. JUSTIFICATION: KPB does not regulate wastewater disposal. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation regulates wastewater disposal via State Statutes. By noting the soils analysis and report it gives notification to the land owners that there is a report on file with the borough. 20.40.070. — Connection to an existing system. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add a new section to clarify that a licensed engineer or surveyor does not have to sign a wastewater disposal note for subdivisions served by city septic systems. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: C. If the subdivision is served by a home rule or general law city, wastewater treatment and disposal system, then signature by an..enclineer or surveyor is not required. Justification: Oversight and authority for septic systems within a city are within the purview of the city and/or the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. An engineer or surveyor in private practice should not be required to sign a statement that the city's septic system complies with the requirements of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Page 15 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 66/130 PROPOSE❑ CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 20.40.100. - Sails analysis and report. SUGGESTED CHANGE: remove the nominal five acres description form the abbreviated submittal for the wastewater review. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE:. F. Soil testing requirements for subdivision lots equal or greater than 200,000 square feet [nominal five acres] consist of general soils and water table description with sufficient detail to support the applicability of the proposed means of wastewater disposal; the description must be based on: Existing information; or Visual analysis by, or local knowledge of, a qualified engineer. Justification: This will keep the code consistent by removing the references to nominal five acres and replacing with 200,000 square feet. 20.60.025. — Fee required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add a new section to the final plat code to cover the fee for final plat submittals, SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: 20.60.025. — Fee required. The fee established by current Kenai Peninsula Borough Schedule of Rates, Charges and Fees shall accompany the submission of the final plat. Justification: Fees for final plat submittal were established in August of 2019. Before this date there was no fee for the final plat submittal. By adding this section of code it will notify all subdividers that there is a fee for the final plat submittal. 20.60.070. — Plat specifications. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Specify minimum font size, define acceptable drawing scales, and remove the legal size for a final plat. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: The final subdivision plat shall be clearly and legibly drawn to a scale of 1 inch equal to 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 150 feet or a multiple of 100. The drawing shall be plotted on good quality polyester film at least 3 mm in thickness. All lines, letters, figures, certifications, acknowledgements and signatures shall be clear, legible and in black ink. The minimum text size should be 10-12oint font (0 1") or the equivalent. Where necessary. 8-point (0.08") capitalized font or the equivalent can be used to label features, The plat shall be so made, and shall be in such condition when filed, that legible prints and negatives can be made therefrom. Colors grayscale or shading is not acceptable as it does not show when the drawing is reproduced. Sheets shall be one of these sizes: [W2" x 14"]; 11" x 17"; 18" x 24"; and 24" or 30" x 36". When more than one sheet is required, an index map shall be provided on the first sheet showing the Page 16 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 67/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 entire subdivision and indicating the portion contained on each sheet. Each sheet shall show the total number (e.g. sheet 1 of 3). When more than one sheet is submitted, all sheets shall be the same size. Indelible ink or sealant shall be used to insure permanency. JUSTIFICATION: These guidelines follow with DNR Platting recommendations. Drawings should be plotted at a standard scale (1" = multiples of 10 feet or of 100) to allow a user to make measurements with a standard engineer's scale. 10-point font sue is acceptable for labels, plat notes, certificates and information within the title block. An 8 point capitalized font, will be legible when the full size drawing is reduced to an 11 x 17 drawing. An 8 point will allow the surveyor to have discretion on the size of the fonts used to label features where space is limited. A font smaller than 8 point is very difficult to read when printed on a reduced size piece of paper (1I x 17). No plats have been submitted on legal size. It would be difficult to prepare a subdivision plat with all the required information, on a legal size paper and keep the information clear and legible. 20.60.110. — Dimensional Data required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add clarification for dimensioning the subdivision boundary. Remove the last sentence in Section A. Label non -radial lot lines and/or include in the legend. Note computed distances. Label computed data and source if applicable. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. The bearing and length of every lot line, block line, and boundary line shall be shown. The bearing and lencith of the subdivision boundary are to be generally shown on the outside of the subdivision boundar. Dimensions of lots shall be given as net dimensions to the boundaries of adjoining streets and shall be shown in feet. No ditto marks shall be used. Information shall be shown for all curves, including radius, central angle, arc length, chord length and chord bearing. The initial point of survey shall be shown and labeled. Label all non -radial lines If monumented lines were not surveyed during this platting action show the computed data per the record plat information. JUSTIFICATION. The labeling of the subdivision boundary on the outside of the boundary clarifies the parent parcel and identifies the parent parcel boundary dimensions. 20,30.220 recommends radiaVright angle lines. By labeling the non -radial lines it will provide useful information to the land owner and especially the subsequent surveyors. By labeling the computed data it will alert subsequent surveyors and owners that the surveyed line(s) were not measured during this platting action. 20.60.110. Dimensional Data Required SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add a requirement for clarification when a discrepancy is found between survey markers and/or clarify how new survey marker locations were established. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: C. Any discrepancy between the survey and the record description, and the source of all information used in makinci the survey shall be indicated. When an inconsistency is Page 17 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 68/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 found including a gap or overlap excess or deficiency, erroneously located boundary lines or monuments or when any doubt as to the location on the ground of the true boundary or property rights exists the nature of the inconsistency shall be clearly shown on the drawing. JUSTIFICATION: This language is consistent with item F of the ASPLS Minimum Standards for the Practice of Land Surveying Manual. This requirement will provide useful information by showing how property boundaries were established and why certain survey markers were used, or not used, to establish boundaries. Any following surveyor will find this information useful as they perform a survey to re-establish a boundary or subdivide property. 20.60.130. — Boundary of Subdivision SUGGESTED CHANGE: Define how the boundary of the subdivision shall be established and shown on the drawing. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: The boundary of the subdivision shall be designated by a wider border and shall not interfere with the legibility of figures or other data. The boundary of the subdivided area shall clearly show what survey markers or other evidence was found or established on the ground to determine the boundary of the subdivision Bearing and distance ties to all survey markers used to locate the subdivision boundary shall be shown. JUSTIFICATION: This requirement will provide that the boundary of the subdivision, and the method used to determine the boundary, will be shown on all subdivision plats. 20.60.170. — Other data required by law. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Include a statement clarifying that KPB does not enforce private restrictive covenants. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: B. Private covenants and restrictions of record in effect at the time the final plat is approved shall be referenced on the plat. The borough will not enforce private covenants, easements or deed restrictions. JUSTIFICATION: Since 20.60.170 requires private covenants to be noted on plats, it could be interpreted that KPB has control or oversight over private covenants. The suggested language is consistent with KPB 21.44.080, which prohibits KPB from enforcing private covenants. 20.60.170. — Other data required by law. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add a requirement that subdivision plats shall conform to applicable Local Option Zoning. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Page 18 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 69/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 C. The plat shall adhere to the requirements of the local option zone where applicable. JUSTIFICATION: This item will require a subdivision plat to comply with local option zoning, if the subdivision is located within an existing local option zone. Currently there is no mention of subdivision plats needing to comply with Local Option Zoning. This requirement will help to keep a local option zone intact which is one of the reasons, and benefits, to applying a local option zone. 20.60.180. Plat notes. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add new section for plat note revision or removal. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. Plat notes shall not be placed on a final plat unless required by borough code or by the planning commission in order to promote or protect the public health, safety, and welfare consistent with borough and state law. B. Revision of, or not carrying forward an existing plat note from the parent plat will adhere to 20 50 010 Separate advertising of the plat note removal is not required. Notification of the requested change will be sent by regular mail to all owners within the subdivision (parent plat and subsequent replats) as shown on the Borough tax rolls. Upon approval by the Planning Commission the revision or removal of the record plat note shall be finalized by recording a Planning Commission resolution or subdivision plat. JUSTIFICATION: Title 20 is silent on procedures to modify or remove a plat note on a recorded plat. Occasionally, owners wish to change or remove notes from a recorded plat due to changes in development, alternative solutions to requirements per plat note, new technology, removal of existing overhead electric power lines, and/or new regulations. All owners within the subdivision are also subject to the plat note and should be notified of proposed changes. Following the exception process allows for orderly presentation and support for the requested action. 20.60.210. — Approval — Authority — Certificate issued when. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add new section to require notification to the owner(s) of the affected lot and/or owners in the subdivision when a request to amend a recorded plat is received. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: E. When an application to amend a recorded plat as defined by 11 AAC 53.900, is received notice by regular mail of the requested amendment to the plat shall be sent to owner(s) of the affected lot or tract and/or the owners in the subdivision per Borough tax rolls. Separate advertising of the proposed plat amendment is not required. 1. The surveyor shall submit a cop, off the plat showing the proposed new wording and/or a sketch of the proposed amendment with the application. 2. The plat amendment may be scheduled as a consent agenda item unless otherwise requested by the owners) Planning Director or Planning Commission. Page 19 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 70/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 JUSTIFICATION: Title 20 is silent on procedures to amend recorded plats. Per 13 ARC 53.260 amending a plat consists of correcting a technical error that will not adversely affect any valid existing right. The owner(s) accepted the information on the recorded plat when the Certificate of Ownership and Dedication was acknowledged. Owner(s) should be notified of any changes to the recorded plat. If the proposed change affects other lots/tracts, all owners in the subdivision should be notified. Notice can be sent by regular mail to owners of record per Borough tax rolls allowing a reasonable amount of time to respond. Separate advertising is not necessary. 20.70.035. - Approval of Vacations. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add standards that must be met for approval of right of way vacations. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: The platting authority shall consider the merits of each reguest to vacate a city street public right-of-way, public area or public easement and in all cases the platting authority shall deem the area being vacated to be of value to the Borough unless proven otherwise. The burden of proof shall lie entirely with the petitioner. In considering any vacation of city street. public right-of-way, public area or public easement the Borough shall consider the following: 1. The current and future needs of the right of way, public access easement, or public areas. 2. The vacation of the right of way, public access easement, or public areas will not limit access to surrounding property. 3. The vacation of the right of way or public access easement will not be detrimental to the public welfare. 4. The borough will consider realignment of right of way by vacation and rededication where it can clearly be shown the right of way realignment will enhance access and the realigned right of way is located to provide reasonable means of ingress and egress. JUSTIFICATION: By specifying standards of approval of right of way vacations, it allows both the applicant and Borough to review the petition for completeness and verify that all standards are met. 20.70.040. Application —Petition required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Revise who is allowed to submit a petition to vacate a utility easement. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. A platted right-of-way or platted public area may not be vacated, except upon petition by resolution of the governing body from a municipality in which the property is located or by the owners of the majority of land fronting or abutting the right-of-way or public area to be vacated. The petition shall be filed with the planning commission. A petition to vacate a utility easement [only must] may be submitted by the state, the borough, a public utility, or the owners of the land subject to the easement. Page 20 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 71/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 JUSTIFICATION., By incorporating these changes, the State, Borough, or utility company, can petition to vacate a utility easement 20.70.050 — Petition Information required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Allow the number of copies required to be determined by staff. 41111r090MMOM,,rMMIUM Persons listed on the borough assessor's tax roll shall be deemed the legal owners for purposes of the vacation petition. The petition shall include a statement containing the reasons in support of the vacation and be accompanied by [a minimum of three copies of] a sketch clearly indicating the proposed vacation, submitted to the planning department at least 30 calendar days in advance of the meeting at which it will be considered. [Additional copies may be required as needed.] The format and number of copies shall be determined by the planning director. In cases where encroachments on public rights -of -way are in question, an as -built survey, sealed by a surveyor, is required showing the improvements, existing travel ways, amount of encroachment, and any other submittal as requested by the planning commission. The burden of proof shall lie with the petitioner to support the vacation. JUSTIFICATION: The number of copies required for petitions has changed over the years primarily based on evolving technology and wide use of electronic media. To the extent possible, staff distributes public hearing notices electronically, which saves time, money, and paperwork. Allowing the number of copies required to be determined by staff creates flexibility of the submittal requirements, reduces paperwork, and saves money. 20.70.080. — Utility easement vacations. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Include language to address situations in which the utility easement is in a city or adjoining a State Department of Transportation or KPB right-of-way. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. Where a vacation petition is for a utility easement only, the petitioner has the responsibility to obtain comments from [the KPB Road Service Area and] all appropriate utility providers and the jurisdictional authority of the adios ining right-of-way, if applicable, and submit those comments with the petition. The petition must be signed by the owners of the land subject to the easement as shown on the Kenai Peninsula Borough tax rolls. A sketch showing the location of the requested vacation must accompany the petition. A public hearing is not required in the case of vacation of a utility easement that is not associated with the vacation of a right-of-way. JUSTIFICATION: Unless a KPB right-of-way adjoins or could be impacted by a proposed utility easement vocation, review and comments by the KPB Roads Department are unnecessary. DOT should be notified and offered the opportunity to comment when the proposed utility easement Page 21 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 72/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 vacation adjoins their right-of-way. if jurisdictional authority is uncertain, comments from ail possible jurisdictional authorities can be obtained. 20.70.080. — Utility easement vacations. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Revise language within A to reflect how the utility easement vacation petition is currently handled, which is for the petition to go to the planning commission. Revise language in C to clarify the amount of time allowed for those within the 300-foot notification buffer to respond to the notice of the proposed vacation. Include the option to finalize the vacation by a plat. Approximately half of the utility easement vacations are finalized by recording a subdivision plat. Add to D and create E to clarify the procedures for finalizing a utility easement by plat. Add item F to provide clarification for how an appeal of a Planning Commission decision of a utility easement is handled. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. Where a vacation petition is for a utility easement only, the petitioner has the responsibility to obtain comments from the KPB Road Service Area and all appropriate utility providers and submit those comments with the petition. The petition must be signed by the owners of the land subject to the easement. A sketch showing the location of the requested vacation must accompany the petition. A public hearing is [not] required [in the case of vacation of a utility easement that is not associated with the vacation of a right-of-way]. B. Publication of a notice in the newspaper is not required for utility easement vacations. C. A notice shall be sent by regular mail to each property owner as shown on the Kenai Peninsula Borough tax rolls within a 300-foot radius from the utility easement proposed for vacation at least 14 days prior to the scheduled public hearing. D. When the application is complete, the planning director will schedule the petition to be head by the Planning Commission[take action on the requested vacation] within ten working days, [, either approving or denying the requested vacation. If the director approves the vacation, t] The vacation may be finalized by a vacation resolution that will be prepared and taken to the planning commission for adoption, in accordance with KPB 20,70.140, or the owner may finalize the vacation in conjunction with a relimina lat detecting the requested vacation that shall be submitted in accordance KPB Title 20. [If the director denies the vacation, a letter containing the reasons supporting the denial will be sent to the petitioner. The director may choose to forward any utility easement vacation request to the planning commission for action. If the reasons for denial are Page 22 of 31. New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 73/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 resolved, the petitioner may submit a new petition for vacation with documentation that the issues have been resolved, accompanied by a new fee.] E. If the utility easement vacation will be finalized in conjunction with the recording of a subdivision plat in accordance with KPB Title 20 the final plat must be recorded within one year of the planning commission's approval or the municipal vacation consent in KPB 20.70.050(F). F. When a utility easement vacation is located within a municipality, a Notice of Decision will be sent to the municipality in which the easement vacation is located. F. A party of record can appeal the planning commission decision of a petition to vacate a utility easement, in accordance with KPB 21.20. JUSTIFICATION: The changes will require the planning commission to review and approve all utility easement vacations. If the utility easement vacation request is simple in nature, non- controversial and no comments were received, then the utility easement vacations may be placed on the Planning Commission's consent agenda. Adequate time needs to be provided to allow for those within the 300-foot notification buffer to respond to the notice of vacation. Fourteen days is consistent with KPB 20.25.090. If the owner wants to vacate the utility easement by plat, a Planning Commission resolution is not required. Length of vacation approval is consistent with 20.70.130. Clarification is needed for how a party of record can appeal a decision to vacate a utility easement. By referencing Chapter 21.20 it provides a clear process to appeal the planning commission decision. The hearing officer will hear and decide all appeals of a planning commission decision when related to the vacation of utility easements. 20.70.090. — Notice required. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Remove 'by regular mail' from the method required to notice utility providers and municipalities. Remove the sentence that requires KPB to publish the notice in a newspaper. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Notice of public hearings shall be posted in a public area such as a post office, community center, or library. Public hearings will be advertised twice once on the agenda in a local newspaper and either on the KPB website or social media. The notice shall include; a. name of applicant and surveyor b. general location Page 23 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 74/130 PROP0SED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 c. legal description d. summarized purpose e. time and location of public hea_rinq f. KPB File number. [The planning director shall publish a notice stating when and by whom the petition was filed, its purpose, and the time and place of the public hearing. The notice shall describe, through both legal and general description, the location, nature, and extent of the vacation. The notice shall be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the area of the vacation.] -Certified mail notice shall [also] be mailed to each property owner as shown on borough tax rolls within a 300-foot radius and regular mail notice sent to owners within the next 300-foot radius to equal a 600-foot total notice radius from the boundaries of the area proposed to be vacated. If the 600-foot radius does not include owners other than the petitioners), notice must be sent to owners of parcels adjoining the boundaries of the parcel(s) that contain the area of the proposed vacation. Notice [by regular mail] shall be sent to all public utilities operating within the general area of the vacation and to the municipality in which the property is located. JUSTIFICATION; Outlining the specific items required in the notice will make it clear as to which items must be included. Currently the notice is e-mailed to all utility providers as well as municipalities. This method has been acceptable to the reviewers and provided for a quick and uniform method of notice. AS 29.40.130 requires the platting authority to publish a notice of the public hearing. KPB sends out notice to all property within the specified radius, publishes the agenda in the newspaper, posts a notice on the KPB website, and posts a notice on the KPB face book page. By removing the sentence that states newspaper it will save the borough $100 - $200 per right of way vacation add. KPB notice will comply with AS 29.40.130. 20.70.110 -- Vacation [consent] decision City council or assembly. SUGGESTED CHANGE: clarify section 20.70.110 to specify approval or denial and also to include utility easements. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A vacation approval or denial by the Planning Commission, of a [city] street, public right-of-way, public area, utilityeasement, or public easement located within an incorporated city [may not be approved without the consent of the city council] must be sent to the City for consent or veto of the vacation decision. A vacation of a street, right--of-way, public area, utility easement, or public easement within the borough outside of the boundaries [limits]of a city[ies may not be made without the consent of the borough assembly] must be sent to the assembly for consent or veto of the vacation decision. The assembly or council shall have 30 days from the date of [approval]the planning commission decision in which to consent or veto the planning commission decision. If no consent or veto decision is made [is received by the planning director] within [the specified period]30 days of the date of the planning commission decision, Page 24 of 31 New text is underlined deleted text is [bracketed]. 75/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 the city or borough shall be considered to have given consent to the vacation. An appeal of a city council or borough assembly action under this provision must be filed in the superior court In accordance with the Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure. F16111l11L11EMISlJ, a9► The clarification in this section will make it clear how the vacation process works and that utility easements are included in the vacations that are reviewed by the planning commission. If the vacation is located within the city, then the city will be given a 30 day window in which it can be vetoed by city council. The KPB assembly will have the opportunity to veto the planning commission decision if it is within 30 days. 20.70.130. - Vacation plat - Preparation, approval and recording. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Revise this section of the code so that a right of way vacation can be completed by a Right of Way Vacation Plat as well as the typical subdivision plat. Revise the language so that the time frame is consistent with either method of platting. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE:. Upon approval of the vacation request by the planning commission and consent [no veto] by the city council or assembly, the applicant shall have a surveyor prepare and submit a plat including the entire area approved for vacation in conformance with KPB 20.10.080, or KPB 20.25. Only the area approved for vacation by the assembly or council may be included on the plat. The final plat must be recorded within one year of the vacation consent in KPB 20.70.110. No extensions of time may be cl ranted for the rici ht of way vacation. To allow time for State of Alaska DNR review and approval section line easement vacation plats must be recorded within four years of the vacation consent in KPB 20.70.110. JUSTIFICATION: Many right of way vacations are completed on plats that do not fall under KPB 20.10.080, but instead the vacations are included on a typical subdivision plat. By identifying KPB 20.25 as a way to complete the vacation it gives the applicant the ability to vacate at the some time as subdividing or changing property boundaries. Adding the language of 'no time extensions' keeps the code consistent between 20,10.080 and 20.70.130. Right of way vacations should be completed in a timely manner so as not to interfere with legal access to surrounding properties. Section line easement vacations require State DNR review and approval. This process can be lengthy. By allowing four years for section line easement vacation plats it allows the applicant time to complete the process without the vacation becoming void. 20.70.140. - Vacation resolution - Easement. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Add a requirement for the petitioner to provide a legal description, a written description and/or drawing, prepared by a land surveyor. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Page 25 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 76/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 Upon approval of an easement vacation not associated with the vacation of a right-of-way or not requiring transfer of title or platting action, a vacation resolution may be adopted by the planning commission and recorded by the planning department within the time frame set out in the resolution to finalize the vacation. The petitioner is responsible for the recording fee as well as a le al description of the area to be vacated. The legal description shall be a written description and/or a drawing prepared, stamped, and signed by a land surveyor.. JUSTIFICA TION: By requiring a legal description of the area to be vacated it will be clear to the exact area that is being vacated. It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide this information to the Planning Commission, Per AS 08.48.221 Seals — all final drawings, specifications, surveys, plats, plates, reports, or similar documents includes, but is not limited to, parcel exhibits, parcel plats, legal descriptions, and similar professional works that may or may not be part of other documents are required to be sealed and signed. 20.70.220. — Section line easement vacations. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Update and correct the section for section line easement vacations. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Section line easement vacation petitions must comply with the requirement of KPB 20.70.040, 20.70.OSO and 20.70.060. [a fee is required in compliance with KPB 20,70.060.] Public hearing and notice must comply with the requirements or KPB 20,70.070, [20.70.080]20.70.090, 20,70.100, 20.70.110, [and] 20.70,120, and 20.70.130. [The mail notice required in KPB 20.70.090 may be by regular mail. Publication on the planning commission agenda, advertised once in local papers, posted in public areas, and on the borough website prior to the meeting will satisfy the publishing requirement.] The petitioner is responsible for all submittals required by the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources, {DNR} in compliance with their procedures. The petition must be reviewed and approved by the planning commission but final authority for approval and platting of the vacation rests with DNR. The petitioner is responsible for coordination with DNR and submittals to DNR. JUSTIFICA TION: A section line easement is statutorily the same as a dedicated right of way and must follow the some review and approval process. The only difference is that a section lure easement vacation must also obtain State of Alaska DNR review and approval. This additional review can lengthen the process. A redundant reference to KPB 20.70.060 is being removed. The notice requirements are being removed from this section as it specifies in section 20.70.090 what requirements are required. 20.90.010. — Definitions generally. SUGGESTED CHANGE. Add definition for architect. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Page 26 pf 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed], 77/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 "Architect" or "qualified architect" means a licensed architect registered to practice in Alaska under AS 08,48 and 12 AAC 36 in the branch of architecture defined b 12 AAC 36.068 applicable to the project. JUSTIFICA TION: KPB .20.30.280,F. requires a certification by an engineer or architect- however, architect is not included in the definitions, 20.90.010. — Definitions generally. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Remove 'parties of record' from the definition for 'Date of distribution" or'distribution' so that Chapter 20 is consistent with KPB 2.40.080.B. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: "Date of distribution" or "distribution" means the date a notice, decision or other document is provided, manually or electronically, or is postmarked [, to a party of record]. JUSTIFICATION: This change will keep the code consistent between chapter 2 and chapter 20. 20.90.010. — Definitions generally. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Remove Nominal five acres. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: [Nominal five acres" means of, like, or relating to an aliquot five —acre part.] JUSTIFICATION: Nominal five acres is being removed from the KPB due to confusion on how to apply the use with septic system reviews. Issues came up with adjoining right of way acreage and the method to subdivide an aliquot parcel. The defined area will be replaced with 200,000 square feet throughout the KPB code. 20.90.010. — Definitions generally. SUGGESTED CHANGE: Remove 'Parties of Record' SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: ["Parties of record" unless specified otherwise means those persons who have commented in a written and signed document or in person on an agenda item before the planning commission or plat committee who own property within the notification radii established in this chapter.] JUSTIFICATION: Remove parties of record' from chapter 20, but leave it defined within chapter 21. All references in chapter 20 will be to KPB 2.40.080. B. This will allow a broader group to request a review to the Planning Commission, If an application is appealed to the Hearing Officer, then the stricter definition of parties of record', as defined in Chapter 21, will be used to determine standing. Page 27 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 78/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 20.90.010. — Definitions generally SUGGESTED CHANGE: Change the definition of right of way to be consistent with Title 14 — Roads. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: "Right-of-way dedication" or "right-of-way" means a right-of-way dedicated on a plat for road street or utility purposes in accordance with the platting requirements of the Kenai Peninsula Borough or such rights -of -war as have been specifically granted by easement or dedicated by statute [means transfer of fee simple underlying ownership of a right-of-way to the state borough, or a municipalityl. JUSTIFICATION: To be consistent with Chapter 14 — Roads 20.90.010. — Definitions generally SUGGESTED CHANGE: Include additional wording in the definition of subdivision SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: "Subdivision" means the division of a tract or parcel of land into two or more lots, or other divisions for the purpose of sale or building development, and includes resubdivision and relates to the process of subdividing or to the land or areas subdivided. As used in this Chapter, it also includes the elimination of lot lines and/or any change to an existing property line. JUSTIFICATION: To be consistent with AS 29.40.120. 21.20.210 - Definitions SUGGESTED CHANGE: Update the definition of 'Party of record' to specify property owners within the notification radii. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: 21.20.210.A.5.b Any party or person aggrieved by the decision where the decision has or could have an adverse effect on the value, use or enjoyment of real property owned by them who appeared before the planning commission with either an oral or written presentation, and who owns lands within the notification radii; (1) A signature on a petition does not qualify the signatory as a party of record. [without a separate oral or written presentation to the planning commission] JUSTIFICATION: This will define that only individuals who own land within the notification radii and who submitted testimony at the Planning Commission hearing have standing to appeal the Planning Commission decision to a Hearing Officer. Page 28 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 79/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 21.20.230 - Jurisdiction SUGGESTED CHANGE: Update the jurisdiction so that it complies with 20.70 requirements. SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: 21.20.230 — Jurisdiction B. [The assembly shall consider vacation petitions approved by the planning commission in accordance with the procedures in KPB Chapter 20.70.] JUSTIFICATION: All vacation decisions now fall under 20.70.110 so this section is no longer needed. 21.20.250 - SUGGESTED CHANGE: SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: E Entry of appearance. The borough clerk shall mail or otherwise deliver copies of the notice of appeal to all parties of record in the proceeding appealed within 15 days of the date of filing the notice of appeal. Proof of service upon each party shall accompany the notice of appeal. Any party desiring to participate in the appeal process must file an entry of appearance containing that party's name and address and signature, or the name and address of the party and the name and address and signature of the party's representative, within 15 days of the date of mailing of the notice of appeal by the borough clerk. If borough staff is not participating in the appeal beyond providing the required staff overview, a notice of non -participation should be filed with the borough clerk. Proof of service of the entry of appearance upon each party shall be made in the manner prescribed in KPB 21.20.280(D). Any party filing an entry of appearance may file additional designations of error or other alternative requests for modification or reversal of the decision. JUSTIFICATION: 21.20.270 — Record on appeal SUGGESTED CHANGE: SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: C. Appeal on the record,- new evidence Appeals to the hearing officer shall be on the record. No new evidence or illustrative documents or attachments to written statements, may be filed without prior approval of the hearing officer after a showing by the moving party that there exists cause for supplementing the record and that even with due diligence Page 29 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 80/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 the new evidence could not have been provided at the hearing before the planning commission. JUSTIFICATION: This will help to clarify that appeals to the hearing officer are on the record. 21.20.280 — Written Statements. SUGGESTED CHANGE: SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: A. Opening statement. A pares of record who entered an appearance in the appeal[appellant, staff and the applicant if the applicant is not the appellant] shall submit a written statement which shall be filed with the borough clerk within 20 days of the clerk issuing notice that a completed record and transcript have been filed. The written statement may include a statement of facts as derived from the record on appeal, a statement of the party's perception of the correctness of the planning commission decision, a list of asserted errors, and any citations to applicable statutes, ordinances, regulations or other legal authority for the position taken by the party to the appeal. Failure to timely submit the opening written statement will result in dismissal of that party from the appeal. Multiple parties may preserve their party status by filing a single written statement; however, the written statement must clearly identify all parties filing the single statement. The hearing officer may waive irregularities in the content of the notice of appeal or written statements. In appeals where staff does not enter an appearance, the staff overview may be provided in writing when opening statements are due. JUSTIFICATION: Clarify that staff is not necessarily a participant. 21.20.280 — Written Statements SUGGESTED CHANGE: SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: E. Additional written statements Unless the hearing officer requests supplemental written statements from the parties of record or staff, no additional written statements shall be accepted. JUSTIFICATION: Clarify that only the opening and reply statements should be provided unless otherwise requested by hearing officer. 21.20.300 — Motions SUGGESTED CHANGE: SUGGESTED LANGUAGE: Page 30 of 31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 81/130 PROPOSED CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES TO TITLE 20 June 29, 2020 A. Parties. Motions for continuances, shortened time, or other matters may be filed by the following parties and served in the manner prescribed by KPB 21.20.280(D): 1. The appellant; 2. The applicant if that party is not the appellant; 3. A borough official if borough staff enters an appearance in the matter. JUSTIFICATION: Page 31of31 New text is underlined; deleted text is [bracketed]. 82/130 Introduced by: Mayor Date: Hearing: Action: Vote: KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH ORDINANCE 2020- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH CODE OF ORDINANCES INCLUDING CHAPTER 2.40 — PLANNING COMMISSION, TITLE 20 SUBDIVISIONS, CHAPTER 21.20 — HEARING AND APPEALS TO CORRECT GRAMMATICAL ERRORS, CLARIFY AND IMPROVE CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES WHEREAS, the borough's subdivision code experienced a significant rewrite in 2014; and WHEREAS, since that time platting staff have found a number of provisions that would benefit from clarifying language; and WHEREAS, amendments will make Title 20 consistent with current law and statutes; and WHEREAS, edits will clarify portions of Title 20; and WHEREAS, beginning in 2018 the planning and legal department staff held numerous meetings to review the existing code for recommended changes; and WHEREAS, invitations were extended to review the amendments to Title 20 with KPB staff to the communities of Anchor Point, Coope r Landing, Hope, Niki ski, Moose Pass, and City of Hom er, Kachemak City, City of Kenai, City of Seldovia, City of Seward, and City of Soldotna; and WHEREAS, work sessions were held regard ing amendments to Title 2 0 with the surveyin g community and public on and ; and WHEREAS, city meetings regarding amendments to Title 20 were conducted in the cities of :and WHEREAS, the and recommended WHEREAS, the and recommended advisory planning commission held a meeting on advisory planning commission held a meeting on Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined, [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2020- 83/130 Page 1 of 20 WHEREAS, the and recommended WHEREAS, the and recommended WHEREAS, the and recommended WHEREAS, the and recommended advisory planning commission held a meeting on advisory planning commission held a meeting on advisory planning commission held a meeting on advisory planning commission held a meeting on WHEREAS, the planning commission held a work session on ; and WHEREAS, the planning comet ission held a public hearing on the am ended Title 20 on WHEREAS, at its meeting of , the Planning Comm ission reviewed this ordinance and recommended approval by unanimous consent; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT O RDAINED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF T HE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH: SECTION 1. That CHAPTER 2.40 PLANNING COMMISSION is hereby amended as follows: 2.40.080. — Plat committee — Powers and duties — Hearing and review procedures B. Review of a decision of the plat comm ittee may be heard by the planning comm ission acting as platting board by filing written notice thereof with the borough planning director on a form provided by the borough planning department. The request for review shall be filed within ten days after notification of the decision of the plat comm ittee by personal service or service by mail. A reque st for review may be filed by any person or agency receiving a notice of decision. P ARTICIPATED AT THE PLAT COMMITTEE HEARING EITHER B Y WRITTEN OR ORAL PRESENTATION.] The request m ust have an original signature; filing electronically or by facsim ile is prohibited. The request for review must briefly state the reason for the review request and applicable provisions of borough code or other law upon which the request fm review is based. Notice of the review hearing will be issued by staff to the originak'ecipients of the plat committee public hearing notice. SECTION 2. That TITLE 20 — SUBDIVISIONS is hereby amended as fellows: CHAPTER 20.10 —GENERAL PROVISIONS Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined; IDELFTE•D TEXT BRACKJFDI Ordinance 2020- 84/130 Page 2 of 20 20.10.040. - Abbreviated plat procedure. A. The abbreviated plat procedure m ay be used w here the subdivision or re l�at[SUBDIVISIQN] is of simple nature and meets all of the requirem ents of this section as follows: 1. The subdivision divides a single lot into not more than four lots or the subdivision moves or eliminates lot lines to create not more than four lots or tracts. 2. The subdivision provides legal and physical access to a public highway or street for each lot created by the subdivision; 3. The subdivision does not contain or require a dedication of a stre et, right-of-way or other area; and 4. The subdivision does not require a vacation ofa public dedication of land ora variance from a subdivision regulation. B. Submission Requirements. All of the s ubmission requirements of KPB Chapters 20.25, 20.30 and 20.40 shall be met. 20.10.080, — Right -of -Way Vacation Plat and Section Line Easement Vacation Plat A. When the sole purpose of a plat is to depict right-of-way, or a section line easem ent vacation, approved for vacation under KPB Chapter 20.70 as attaching to adjoining parcels in compliance with KPB 20.70.150 and AS 29.40.150, the following procedure shall apply: 20.10.100. — Building setback encroachment permits. A. Any person des iring to construct or cause anencroachment within a buiIdin s setbackshalI amply for a building_ setback encroachm ent permit to the planning deRartm ent. Failure to obtain an encroachment permit is subject to remedies set forth in KPB 20.10.030. B. A permit fee shall be charged for building setback encroachment permit as provided in the current approved Kenai Peninsula Borough Schedule of Rates, Charges and Fees. A_person who fails to apply for and obtain a building setback encro achment permit prior to an enforcement notice being issued pursuant to KPB 21.50.100 is subject to enforcement. C. All building setback encroachments including those that pre -date the effective date of this ordinance must apply for a building; setback encroachment permit. Permits for building setback encroachments that existed prior to the effective date of th_ is ordinance shall pay the same permit fee as applies to permits received prior to placement or construction of the encroachment. Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New'rext tlnderlineel; [DI:[T IED TEXT BRACKF=TEd] ordinance 2020- 85/130 Page 3 of 20 D. When the building setback encroachment permit application is complete, it will be scheduled for the next available planning commission meeting. E. The following standards shall be considered for all building setback encroachment permit annlications. 1. The building setback encroachment may not interfere with road maintenance. 2. The building setback encroachment may not interfere with sight lines or distances. The building setback encroachment may not create a safety hazard. F. The granting of a building setback encroachment permit will only be for the Rortion of the improvement, or buildin , that is located within the building setback and the permit will be valid for the life of the structure The granting of a building setback permit will not remove anv portion of the 20 foot building setback from the parcel. G. Upon approval of a building setback encroachment permit, a resolution will be adopted by the planning commission and recorded by the planning department within the time frame set out in th e resolution to complete the permit. The resolution will re quire an exhibit drawing showier and dimensioning, the building setback encroachment permit area. The exhibit drawing shall be prepared signed and sealed, by a licensed land surveyor. H. A decision of the planning comet ission may be appealed to the hearing officer by a rarty of record, as defined by KPB 20 90 within 15 days of the date of notice of decision in accordance with KPB 21.20.250. CHAPTER 20.25 -- PRELIMINARY PLATS 20.25.020. - Compliance with certain provisions required. A [SUBDIVIDER] licensed surveyor shall prepare a preliminary plat of the proposed subdivision which shall comply with the requirements of KPB 20.25.070 and 20.25.080, and other applicable provisions of this chapter except as provided in KPB 20.10.050. 20.25.030. - Prints --Type and number to be submitted. The format and number of [PRINTS] copies of th a preliminary plat to be subm itted shall be as determined by the planning director and noted on the Borough Plat Subm ittal form. Preliminary plat prints shall be folded to 8'/a X 13 inches or smaller in a manner such that the subdivision name and legal description show. 20.25.050. - Subdivision or replat in a first class or home rule city submittal procedure. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined: IUELETF) TENT BRACMK TEDI Ordinance 2020- 86/130 Page 4 of 20 A. Pursuant to AS 29.40.010, first class and ho me rule cities within the borough [ARE] may be delegated [LIMITED AUTHORITY] platting powers to adopt by ordinance subdivision standards different from those set forth in this chapter. F. [TO THE EXTENT A CITY HAS BE EN DELEGATED LIMITED PLATTING AUTHORITY, A]A final plat m ay not deviate from the prelim inary plat unless the proposed revision has first been su bmitted to the city by the subdivid er and has been approved by the city council or its designee. 20.25.060 B. [TO THE EXTENT LIMITED PLATTING AUTHORITY HAS BEEN DELEGATED TO A SECOND CLASS CITY, A]A prelim inary plat shall not be subm itted to the borough planning department for review unless the aspe cts of the subdivision subject to the city authority have been first approved by the city. F. [TO THE EXTENT A CITY HAS BE EN DELEGATED LIMITED PLATTING AUTHORITY, A] A fi nal plat m ay not deviat e from the prelim inary plat unles s the proposed revision has first been su bmitted to the city by the subdivid er and has been approved by the city council or its designee. 20.25.070. - Form and contents required. The preliminary plat shall be drawn to scale of sufficient size to be clearly legible and shall clearly show the following: A. Within the Title Block. 1. Name of the subdivision which shall not bethe same as an existing city, town, tract, or subdivision of land in theborough, of which a plat hasbeen previously recorded, or so nearly the same as to mislead the public or cause confusion. The parent plat's name shall be the primary name of the preliminary plat; 2. Legal description, location, date, and totalarea in acres of the proposed subdivision; [AND] 3. Name and address of owner(s), as shown on the KPB records and the certificate to plat, and registered land surveyor.LJ F. The [NAMES AND WIDTHS OF PUBL IC STREETS AND ALLEYS AND] location, width and nam e of existingZ or Matted streets and public w ays railroad rights-of-w av, easements, and travelways existing and proposed, within the subdivision; G. Show the [S]status of adjacent lands within 100 feet of the proposed subdivision boundary or show the land status across from any dedicat ed right of ways that adjoin the proposed Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2020- 37/ 130 Page 5 of 20 subdivision boundary, including nam es of subd ivisions, lot lines, block num bens, lot numbers, rights -of -way; or an indication that the adjacent land is not subdivided; H. Approximate locations of low wet areas, areas subject to inundation, areas subject to flooding[,] or storm water overflow, and the line of ordinary high water[, W ETLANDS WHEN ADJACENT TO LAKES OR NON -TIDAL STREAMS, AND THE APPROPRIATE STUDY WHICH IDENTIFIES A FLOODPLAIN, IF APPLICABLE;]. This information may be provided on an additional sheet if showing these areas causes the preliminary plat to appear cluttered and/or difficult to rem 20.25.090. — Notice. B. Notice of public hearing shall appear at least once in a newspaper of general circulation stating: a. name ofsubdivision[A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBDIVISION OR REPLAT]; b. KPB File no.[WHO FILED THE SUBDIVISION PETITION];. C. general location[WHEN THE SUBDIVISION PETITION WAS FILED]; d. general description of the subdi vision[THE TIME AND PL ACE OF THE HEARING ON THE SUBDIVISION]; and e. the time and place of the hearing: and[THE PROCESS AND DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS.] f process and deadline for submitted comments. C. The notice in subsection 6� including the name of the surveyor and applicant_ shall be sent by regular mail to the affected property owners at least 14 days prior to the public hearing. A certificate of mailing listing the names, addresses and parcel information for each notified owner shall be maintained in the subdivision file. 20.25.110. - Approval —Scope —Expiration restriction.. A. Approval of the preliminary plat shall not constitute approval of the final plat, but means only that the basic lot and street design is acceptable. The subdivider is on notice that it is the subdivider's responsibility to provide all the information required in this ordinance and to submit a correct final plat within two years of the date of the plann ing commission's conditional approval of the prelim inary plat. Upon application by the subdivider prior to the two-year deadline for final plat s ubmittal, a time extension for two years beyond the initial two-year period for submittal of the final plat may be granted by the plan ning director. A second [THIRD] and final two-year extension may be granted by the planning director when requested by the subdivider prio r to expiration of the previous approval[, ALLOWING FOR A TOTAL APPROVAL TIME OF SIX YEARS ]. When the Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New'-rext Underlined: [DELI:rED TFkr BaACKFTeDI Ordinance 2020- 8 8/ 13 0 Page 6 of 20 preliminary plat is located within city limits, submittal of documentation from the city advisory planning commission indicating concurrence with the time extension request must accompany a time extension request. When a preliminary plat that has been granted a time extension is finalized, the final plat must comply with the current code. Expiration of the original plat approval or time extensions will require the submission of, and action on, a new preliminary plat. B. Preliminary plats that will be finalized in phases must comply with current code at the time each phase is finalized. All ded ications for streets that are requ ired pursuant to KPB 20.30.030 must be provided in the first phase. The approval of a final plat for a portion of the phased preliminary shall [EXTEND] reset the [PRELIMINARY] approval date for two years from the date the subdivision phase fina I plat is recorded. [FOR T]The remaining land within the phased subdivision[, except that the comm ission] may require a new preliminary plat a removal if th e abutting road sy stem changes. Phases must be filed in sequential order. E. Subdivision plats approved prior to February 14 2014 under form er KPB 20.12, 20.14, 20 16, and 20.20 with approvals thatare greater than 10 years in length, and with approvals that will expire, will be considered expired on the ex ira tion date. Continuation of an expired subdivision will require the submission of and action on a new prelim inary plat cornl2lies with subdivision requirements. 20.25.120. - Review and appeal. [A PARTY OF RECORD] In accordance with KPB 2.40.080 any person or Agency that participated at the plat committee hearing; either by written or oral presentation, may request that a decision of the plat c ommittee be reviewed by the planning comm ission by filing a written request within 10 days of date of distri bution [NOTIFICATION] of the decision. 11N ACCORDANCE WITH KPB 2.40.080.1 A decision of the planning commission may be appealed to the hearing officer by a party of record within 15 days of the date of distribution[NOTICE] of decision in accordance with KPB 21.20.250. CHAPTER 20.30. - SUBDIVISION DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 20.30.060. - Easements —Requirements. D. Unless a utility corn parry requests additi onal easements, the front ten feet [OF THE BUILDING SETBACK]adioining rights -of -way shall be designated as a utility easement, graphically or by note. W ithin the boundaries of an incorporated city, the width and location of utility easements will be determined by the city and affected utility providers. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined: [t7FLETE❑ TEXT BPACKFTF.n1 Ordinance 2020- 89/ 130 Pagc 7 of 20 120.30.110. - HALF STREETS.] [A. HALF STREETS SHALL GENERALLY NOT BE ALLOWED EXCEPT WHERE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CIRCUMSTANCES APPLIES:] [1. THE STREET IS IDENTIFIED ON THE B OROUGH ROAD PLAN AS AN ARTERIAL;] [2. THE STREET IS A LOGICAL EXTENSION OF AN EXISTING STREET; OR] [3. THE REMAINING HALF STREET CAN REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO BE DEDICATED.] [B. WHEN A DESIGN C HANGE REQUIRED AS A CONDITION OF PRELIMINAR Y APPROVAL RESULTS IN A HALF RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT WAS NOT SHOWN ON THE ORIGINAL PRELIMINARY PLAT, AD]OINERS TO THE NEW HALF RIGHT- OF-WAY ARE PARTIES OF RECORD AND WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE PLAT COMMITTEE MINUTES AND A SKETCH SHOWING THE NEW HALF RIGHT-OF- WAY. PURSUANT TO KPB 2.40.080 REVIEW OF THE PLAT COMMITTEE DECISION BY THE PLANNING CO MMISSION MAY BE R EQUESTED BY PARTIES OF RECORD.] 20.30.120. Streets — Width requirements. A. The minimum right-of-way width of streets shall be SO feet. I . Half streets shall generally not be allowed except to provide the logical extension of a right of way where the remaining half street can reasonably be expected to be dedicated in the future. 2. When a design change required as a condition of preliminary approval results in a half right-of-way that was not shown on the original preliminaa plat,ad'oiners to the new half right-of-way will be sent a copy of the plat committee minutes and a sketch showing the new half right-of-way and per KPB 2.40.080 can request a review of the plat committee decision by the full Planning Commission. 20.30.1a0. -- Streets — Intersection requirements. B. Offset intersections are not allowed. The distance between intersection centerlines shall be no less than 150 feet. 20.30.240. - Building setbacks. A. The commission shall require a building setback of at least 70 feet from the centerline of all dedicated [fee sim ple] arterial rights -of -way in a subd ivision. A minim um 20-foot building setback shall be required for dedicated [fee simple] non -arterial rights -of -way in subdivisions located outside incorporated cities. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined; It?FLFTFrn TrxT BRAcrrTFol Ordinance 202.0- 90/ 130 Page 8 of 20 C. The setback shall be noted on the plat in the following format: Building setback - A setback of feet is required from all dedicated street right-of-ways unless a lesser standard is approved by resolution of the appropriate planning commission. 20.30.250. - Building setbacks —Within cities. The building setback requirements for subdivisions located within cities shall be governed by the provisions of municipal zoning districts. Building setbacks as depicted or noted on record plats shall not be carried forward on a new subd ivision plat located within a m unicipal zoning district Provide a plat note stating, "Per KPB 20 30 250 the building setback of record has been removed All development must comply with the municipal zoning requirements." 20.30.270. — Different standards in cities. Where cities have [been delegated partialplatting powers by the borough and have] enacted by ordinance different s ubdivision design standards than those set forth in this chapter, the planning commission [SHALL] mUappl y the city standards in lieu of those set forth in this chapter. [THE APPLICATION OF THE Cl TY DESIGN STANDARD IS SUBJECT TO THE CITY HAVING AN ORDINANCE IN PLAC E THAT SATISFIES THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS OF KPB 20.25.090(A) THROUGH (D) AND A PROCE SS TO APPEAL DECISIONS MADE B Y THE CITY REGAR DING APPLICATION OF ITS SUBDIVISION DESIGN STANDARDS.] Any appeal of a city design standard is subject to KPB 21.01.020. 20.30.280. - Floodplain requirements. C. All subdivisions which are wholly or partially located within flood hazard areas as defined by KPB 21.06.030 m ust comply [AREAS WH ERE THE FLOODPLAIN HAS NOT BEEN MAPPED AND BASE FLOOD ELEVATION DATA IS NOT AVAILABLE SHALL PROVIDE THE INFORMATION IN COMPLIANCE] with KPB 21.06.050. 20.30.290. — Anadromous waters habitat protection district. If any portion of a subdivision or replat is located within an anadromous habitat waters protection district, the plat shall contain the following note: ANADROMOUS WATERS HABITAT PROTECTION DISTRICT NOTE: Portions of this subdivision are within the Kenai Peninsula Borough Anadromous Habitat Waters Protection District. See KPB Ch apter 21.18, as m ay be am ended, for restrictions that affect development in this subdivision. W idth of the ha bitat protection district shall be in accordance with KPB 21.18.040. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2020- 91 / 13 0 Page 9 of 20 CHAPTER 20.40. — WASTEWATER DISPOSAL 20.40.030. - Abbreviated submittal. Lots within the proposed subdivision that will be at le ast 200,000 square feet [OR NOMINAL FIVE ACRES] in size [DO NOT REQUIRE A SOILS ANALYSIS AND REPORT PREPARED BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER]0.40.100(F). Before a final plat is recorded or filed for subdivision, the following note must be placed on the plat: WASTEWATER DISPOSAL: Lots which great least 200,000 square feet PR NOMINAL FIVE ACRES] in size m ay not be suitable for onsite wastewater treatment and disposal. Any wastewater treatment or disposal system must meet the regulatory requirements of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. 20.40.040. - Conventional onsite sail absorption systems. A. If any lots within a subdivision will Ltilize conventional onsite soil absorption systems and are less than 200,000 square feet, the following requirements must be met and submitted to the planning director: 3. A working map depicting: a. Ground slopes greater than [20] 25 percent, or 5 per cent where a bed system is proposed, and other topographic features as needed by a qualified engineer to meet the design requirements for wastewater disposal as defined in this chapter; B. Before a final plat is recorded or filed for subdivision under this section, the borough will require the engineer to sign the following note on the final plat: WASTEWATER DISPOSAL: Soil conditions, water table levels, and soil slopes in this subdivision have been found suitable for c onventional onsite wastewater treatment and disposal systems serving single-fam ily or duplex resident es_ [AND MEETING THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS OF TH E KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH.] An Engineer's Subdivision and Soils Resort is available from the Kenai Peninsula Borough. Any other type of onsite wastewater treatment and disposal system must be designed by a qualified engineer. registered to practice in Alaska, and the design m ust be approved by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. (Signature of) Engineer License # Date 20.40.070. - Connection to an existing system. Kenai Peninsula borough. Alaska NeW TeXt Underlined: IDE1,FTED rExT bRACKFTEDI ordinance 2020- 92/ 13 0 Page 10 of 20 C. If the subdivision is served by a wastewater treatment and disposal system within a home rule or general law city, then signature by a licensed engineer or surveyor is not required. 20.40.100. - Soils analysis and report. F. Soil testing requirements for subdivision to is equal or greater th an 200,000 square feet [NOMINAL FIVE ACRES] consist of general soils and water table descri ption with sufficient detail to support the applicability of the proposed means of wastewater disposal; the description must be based on: Existing information; or Visual analysis by, or local knowledge of, a qualified engineer. CHAPTER 20.60. — FINAL PLAT 20.60.025 — Fee required The fee established by the current K enai Peninsula Borough Schedule of Rates, Charges and Fees shall accompany the submission of the final plat. 20.60.070. - Plat specifications. The final subdivision plat shall be clearly and legibly drawn to a scale of 1 inch equal to 10 20 30 40 50 60 150 feet of a m ultiple of 100 feet. The drawin R shall be p lotted on good quality polyester film at lea st 3 m it in thickn ess. All lin es, letters, figures, certifications, acknowledgements and signatures shall be clear, [AND] legible and in black ink. The minimum text size sh ould be 10 point (0.1 ") font or th e equivalent. Where necessary, 8 p oint (0.08") capitalized font or the equivalent can be used to label features. Theplat shall be so made, and shall be in such condition when filed, that legible prints and negatives can be made therefrom. Colors, grayscale or shading is not acceptable as it does not show when the drawing is reproduced. Sheets shall be one of these sizes: [8'/2" X 14"]; 11" X 17"; 18" X 24"; and 24" or 30" X 36". When m ore than one sheet is required, an index map shall be provided on the first sheet showing the entire subdivision and indicating the porti on contained on each sheet. Each sheet shall show the total number (e.g. sheet 1 of 3). W hen more than one sheet is subm itted, all sheets shall be the sam e size. Indelible ink or sealant shall be used to insure permanency. 20.60.110. - Dimensional data required. A. The bearing and length of every Iot line, block Iine, and boundary line shall be shown. Dimensions of lots shall be given as net dimensions to the boundaries of adjoining streets and shall be shown in feet. No ditto marks shall be used. Information shall be shown for all curves, including radius, central angle, arc length, chord length and chord bearing. The initial point of survey shall be shown and labe led. All non -radial lines shall be labeled. If Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2020- 93/130 Page ► 1 of 20 monumented lines were not surveyed during th is l2latting action show the computed data per the record plat information. B. The natural meanders of ordinary high water (or mean high water line as applicable) is for area computations only, the true corners being on the extension of the sidelines and the intersection with the natural meanders. C. Any discrepancy between the survey and th e record description,_ and the source of all information used in making the survey shall be indicated. When an inconsistency is found including a-jzap or overlap excess or defici ency, erroneously located boundary lines or monuments or when any doubt as to the to cation on the ground of the true bounda or property rights exists the nature of the inconistency shall be clearl shown on the drawing. 20.60.130. - Boundary of subdivision. The boundary of the subdivision shall be de signated by a wider border and shall not interfere with the legibility of figures or othe r data. The bound4ty of the subdivided area shall clearl show what survey markers or other evidence was found or established on the Rround to determine the bounda of the subdivision. Bearing and distance ties to all survey.markers used to locate the subdivision boundary shall be shown. 20.60.170. - Other data required by law. A. The plat shall show all other data that are or may be required on the plat by statute or ordinance. B. Private covenants and restrictions of record in effect at the time the final plat is approved SHALL] will be referenced on the plat. The borough will n of enforce private covenants easements, or deed restrictions. C. The 12lat must adhere to the requirements of the local option zone where applicable. 20.60.180. - Plat notes. A. Plat notes shall not be placed on a final plat unless required by borough code or by the planning commission in order to promote or protect the public health, safety, and welfare consistent with borough and state law. B. Revision of or not carrying forward, an existing plat note from the parent plat will adhere to 20 50 010 Separate advertising of the plat note removal is not required. Notification of the requested change will be sen t by regular mail to all owners within the subdivision (,parent plat and subsequent replats) as shown on the borough tax rolls. Upon approval by the planning commission the revision or removal of the record plat note shall be finalized by recording a planning commission resolution or subdivision lat. 20.60.210. - Approval —Authority --Certificate issued when. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELE'rm TF.Vr BRACKETED] Ordinance 2020- 94/ 13 0 page 12 of 20 E. When an application to amend a recorded plat as defined by I l AAC 53.900, is received, notice by regular mail of the requested amendment to the plat shall be sent to owners of the affected lot or tract and/or the owners in the subdivision per borough tax rolls. Sepa advertisingoproposed plat amendment is not required. 1. The surveyor shall subm it a col2y of the plat showing the proposed new wording T and/or a sketch of the proposed amendment with the application. 2. The plat amendment may be scheduled as a consent agenda item unless otherwise requested by the owners), planning director or planning commission. CHAPTER 20.70. — VACATION REQUIREMENTS 20.70.035. — Approval of Vacations. The planning commission shall consider the merits of each request to vacate a street Lblic right-of-way, public area or public easement and in all cases the planning commission will deem the area being_vacated to be of value to the borough unless proven otherwise. The burden of proof shall lie entirely with the petitioner. In considering any vacation of a street. public right-of-way, public area, or public easement the borough shall consider the following: 1. The current and future needs of the ri ht-of-wa ublic access easement or public areas. 2. The vacation of the right-of-way, public access easement public areas will not limit access to surrounding property. 3. The vacation of the right-of-way or public access easement will not be detrimental to the public welfare. 4. The borough will consider realignment of right of way by vacation and rededication where it can clearly be shown the right of way realignment will enhance access and the realigned right-of-way is located to prov ide reasonable means of ingress and egress. 20.70.040. - Application —Petition required. A. A platted right-of-way or platted public area may not be vacated, except upon petition by resolution of the governing body from a municipa lity in which the property is located or by the owners of the majority of land fronti ng or abutting the right-of-way or public area to be vacated. The petition shall be filed with the planning commission. B. A petition to vacate a utility easement [ONLY MUSTIDLay be submitted by the state, the borough, a public utility, the owners of the land subject to the easement. 20.70.050. - Petition —Information required. B. Persons listed on the borough assessor' s tax roll shall be deem ed the legal owners for purposes of the vacation petition. The petition shall include a statement containing the reasons in support of the vacation and be accompanied by a minimum of three copies of a sketch clearly indicating the proposed vacation, submitted to the planning department at least 30 calendar days in advance of the m eeting at which it will be considered. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New'Fext Underlined: [DFLFTH) TF.%n Ba.4cr,ETFE)l Ordinance 2020- 95/130 Page 13 of20 [ADDITIONAL COPIES MAY BE REQUIRED AS NEEDED.] The format and number of copies shall be determined by the planning director. In cases where encroachments on public rights -of -way are in question, an as -built survey, sealed by a surveyor, is required showing the improvements, existing travelways, amount of encroachment, and any other submittal as requested by the planning commission. The burden of proof shall lie with the petitioner to support the vacation. 20 70.080. - Utility easement vacations. A. Where a vacation petition is for a utility easement only, the petitioner has the responsibility to obtain comments from the KPB Road Service Area and all appropriate utility providers and the iurisdictional authority of the adjoin inia right-of-way, ifapplicable, and subm it those comments with the petition. The petition must be signed by the owners of the land subject to the easem ent as shown on the Ke nai Peninsula Borough tax rolls. A sketch showing the location of the requested vacs tion must accompany the petition. A public hearing is not required in the case of vacation of a utility easement that is not associated with the vacation of a right-of-way. B. Publication of a notice in the newspaper is not required for utility easement vacations. C. A notice shall be sent by regular m ail to each property owner as shown on the Kenai Peninsula Borough tax rolls within a 300-foot radius from the utility easement proposed for vacation at least 14 days prior to the scheduled public hearing . D. When the application is complete, the planning director will schedu le the petition to be heard by the Planning Comm ission [TAKE ACTION ON THE REQUESTED VACATION]within ten working days.[ , EITHER APP ROVING OR DENYING THE REQUESTED VACATION. IF THE DIRECTOR APPROVES THE VACATION,] The vacation may be finalized_a vacation reso lution that will be prepared and taken to the planning commission for adoption, in accordance with KPB 20.70.140, or[.Ithe owner may finalize the vacation in coniunction with a preliminaa plat depicting the requested vacation that shall be subm itted in accord ance with KPB Title 20. [1F DIRECTOR DENIES THE VACATION, A LETTER CONTAINING THE REASONS SUPPORTING THE DENIAL WILL BE SENT TO TH E PETITIONER. THE DIRECTOR MAY CHOOSE TO FORWARD ANY UTILITY EASEMENT VAC ATION REQUEST TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR ACTION. IF THE RE ASONS FOR DENIAL ARE RESOLVED, THE PETITIONER MA Y SUBMIT A NE W PETITION F OR VACATION WITH DOCUMENTATION THAT THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN RESOLVED, ACCOMPANIE❑ BY A NEW FEE.] E. If the utility easement vacation will be fina lized in conjunction with the re cording of a subdivision l2lat in accordance with KPB Title 20 the final plat m ust be recorded within one year of the planning commission's approval or the municipal vacation consent in KPB 20.70.050 F . Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined: [DELI: i rn Il xr BR.ACK]I 11:1)1 Ordinance 2020- 96/ 13 0 Page 14 of 20 F. When a utility easement vacation is located within an incorporated city, the city may veto the approval within 30 calendar days in accordance with KPB 20.70.110. G. A party of record can appeal the p lanning commission decision of a petition to vacate a utility easement in accordance with KPB 21.20. H. For the purposes of vacations a utility easement is defined to include the easements listed in the definition of Utility Easement under KPB 20.90.010. 20.70.090. - Notice required. Notice of public hearing shall be posted in a public area such as a post office community center, or library. Public hearingswill be advertised twice once on the agenda in a local newspaper and either on the KPB website or social media. The notice shall include: a. name of applicant and/or surveyor b. general location c. legal description d. summarized purpose e. time and location of public hearing f. KPB File number. [THE PLANNING DIRECTOR SHALL PUBLISH A NOTICE STATING WHEN AND BY WHOM THE PETITION WAS FILED, ITS PURPOSE, AND THE TIME AND PLACE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE NOTICES HALL DESCRIBE, THROUGH BOTH LEGAL AND GENERAL DE SCRIPTION, THE LOC ATION, NATURE, AND EXTE NT OF THE VACATION. THE NOTICE S HALL BE PUBLISHED ONCE A WEEK FOR T WO CONSECUTIVE WEEKS IN A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION IN THE AREA OF THE VACATION.] Certified mail notice shall [ALSO] be mailed to each property owner as shown on borough tax rolls within a 300-foot radius and regular mail notice sent to owners within the next 300-foot radius to e qual a 600-foot total not ice radius from the boundaries of the area proposed to be vacated. If the 600-foot radius does not include owners other than the petitioner(s), notice must be sent to owners of parcels adjoining the boundaries of the parcel(s) that contain the area of the proposed vacation. Notice [BY REGULAR MAIL] shall be sent to all public utilities operating within the general area of the vacation and to the municipality in which the property is located. 20.70.110. - Vacation [CONSENT] decision - City council or assembly. Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined: [DELETED TEXT BRACKEIFD] Ordinance 2020- 97/ 13 0 Page 15 of 20 A vacation approval, or deni al, by the Planning Comm ission of a [CITY] street, public right-of-way, public area, utility easement, or public easement located within an incorporated city [may not be approved without the consent of the city council] must be sent to the city for consent, or veto of the vacation decision. A vacation of a street, right-of-way, public area, utility easement, or public easement within the borough outside of the boundaries [LIMITS]ofa city[IES MAY NOT BE MADE WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE BOROUGH ASSEMBLY] must be sent to the assembly for consent or veto of the vacat ion decision. The assembly or council shall hav e 30 days from the date of [APPROVAL]the planning commission decision in which to consent or veto the planning commission deci sion. If no consent or veto d ecision is made [IS RECEIVED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR] within [THE SPECIFIED PERIOD] 30 days of the date of the planning commission decision, the city or borough shall be considered to have given consent to the vacation. An appeal of a city council or borough assembly action under this provision must be filed in the superior court in accordance with the Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure. 20.70.130. - Vacation plat --Preparation, approval and recording. Upon approval of the vacation requ est by the p tanning commission and consent [NO VETO] by the city council or assembly, the applicant shall have a surveyor prepare and submit a plat including the entire area approved for vacation in conformance with. KPB 20.10.080, or KPB 20.25. Only the area ap proved for vacation by the assem bly or council may be included on the plat. The final plat m ust be recorded within one year of the vacation consent in KPB 20.70.110. No extensions of time may be granted for the ri ght of way vacation. To allow tim e for State of Alaska DNR review and approval, section line eas ement vacation plats must be recorded within four vears of the vacation consent in KPB 20.70.110. 20.70.140. - Vacation resolution —Easement. Upon approval of an easement vacation not associated with the vacation of a right-of-way or not requiring trap sfer of title or p tatting action, a vacation resolution may be adopted by the planning commission and recorded by the planning de partment within the time frame set out in the resolution to finalize the vacation. The petitioner is responsible for the recording fees as well as a legal description of the area to be vacated. The legal description shall be a written description and/or a drawing prepared, stamped, and signed by a land surveyor. 20.70.220. — Section line easement vacations. Section line easement vacation petitions m ust comply with the requirem ent of KPB 20.70.040, 20.70.050 and 20.70.060 [A FEE IS REQUIRE D IN COMPLIANCE W ITH KPB 20.70.060]. Public hearing and notice m ust comply with the requirem ents or KPB 20.70.070, [20.70.080]2.0.70,090, 20.70.100, 20.70.110,_[AND] 20.70.120, and 20.70.130. ITHE MAIL NOTICE REQUIRED IN KPB 20.70.090 MAY BE BY REGULAR MAIL. PUBLICATION ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGE NDA, ADVERTISED ONCE IN LOCAL PAP ERS, POSTED IN PUBLIC AREAS, AND ON THE BOROUGH WEBSITE PRIOR TO T HE MEETING WILL SATISFY THE PUBLISHING REQUIREMENT.] The petitioner is responsible for all submittals requ feed by the State of Alas ka Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined; [DF1.F-rFtl TEXT 6RACJ<.TrDI ordinance 2020- 98/130 Page 16of20 compliance with their procedures. T he petition must be reviewed and approved by the planning commission but final authority for approval and platting of th a vacation rests with DNR. The petitioner is responsible for coordination with DNR and submittals to DNR. CHAPTER 20.90. — DEFINITIONS 20.90.010. - Definitions generally. "Architect" or "qua lifted architect" means a licensed architec t registered to practice in Alaska under AS 08.48 and 12 AAC 36 in the branch of arhitecture defined by 12 AAC 36.068 applicable to the _pro ject. "Date of distribution" or "distribution" means the date a notice, decision or other docum ent is provided, manually or electronically, or is postmarked. [, TO A PARTY OF RECORD.] "Monument" means a point marked on the surface of the earth for comm encing or controlling a survey. ["NOMINAL FIVE ACRES" MEANS OF, LI KE, OR RELATING TO AN ALIQUOT FIVE - ACRE PART.] ["PARTIES OF RECORD" UNLE SS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE MEANS THOSE PERSONS WHO HAVE COMMENTED IN A WRITTEN AND SIGNED DOCUMENT OR IN PERSON ON AN AGENDA ITEM BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR PLAT COMMITTEE WHO OWN PROPERTY W ITHIN THE NOTIFI CATION RADII ESTABLISHED IN THIS CHAPTER.] "Right-of-way dedication" or "right-of-way" means a right -of -wad dedicated on a plat for road, street or utility purposes in accordance with the platting requirements of the Kenai Peninsula Boroujah, or such rights -of -way as have been sl2eci final!y granted by ease ment or dedicated b statute rMEANS TRANSFER OF FEE SIMPLE UNDERLYING OWNERSHIP OF A RIGHT- OF-WAY TO THE STATE, BOROUGH, OR A MUNICIPALITYI. "Subdivision" means the division of atract or parcel of land into twoor more lots, or other divisions for the purpose of sale or building developm ent, and includes resubdivision and relates to the process of subdividing or to the land or areas subdivided. As used in this Chapter, it also includes the elimination of lot lines and/or anv change to an existing property line. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined. [D2LE"rE❑ TEXT BRACKPTED1 ordinance 2020- 99/ 13 0 Page 17 of 20 CHAPTER 21.20. — HEARING AND APPEALS 21.20.210 — Definitions A. For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning: "Party of record" means: a. The applicant before the planning commission, b. Any party or person aggrieved by the decision where the decision has or could have an adverse eff ect on value, use or enjoyment of real property owned by them w ho appeared before the planning commission with either an oral or written presentation, and who owns lands within the n otification radii. A signature on a petition does not qualify the signatory as a party of record. (1) a signature on a petition does not qualify the signatory as a party of record [W ITHOUT A S EPARATE ORAL OR WRITTEN PRESENTATION TO T HE PLANNING COMMISSION]. 21.20,230. - Jurisdiction. [B. THE ASSEMBLY SHALL CONSIDER VACATION PETITIONS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN ACC ORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURES IN KPB CHAPTER 20.70.] 21.20.250 E. Entry of appearance. The borough clerk shall mail or otherwise deliver copies of the notice of appeal to all parties of record in th a proceeding appealed within 15 days of the date of filing the notice of appeal. Proof of service upon each party shall accompany the notice of appeal. Any party desiring to participate in the appeal process m ust file an en try of appearance containing that party's name and address and signature, orthe name and address of the party and the name and address and signature of the party's representative, within 15 days of the date of mailing of the notice of appeal by the borough clerk. if borough staff is not )participating in the appeal beyond providing the required staff overview, a notice of non -participation should be filed with the borough clerk. Proof of service of the entry of appearance upon each party shall be made in the manner prescribed in KPB 21.20.280(D). Any party filing an entry of appearance m ay file additional designations of error or other alternative requests for modification or reversal of the decision. Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text L't1derl.ined: I DT'l fT1 DI t r BRAC KETH) Ordinance 2020- 100/130 Pare 18 of 20 21.20.270. - Record on appeal. C. A al on the record; new evidence. Appeals to the hearing officer shall be on the record. No new evidence or illustrative docum ents or attachments to written statements, may be tiled without l2rior approval of the hearing officer after a showing by the moving art that there exists cause for supplementing the record and that even with due dill eg_nce the new evidence could not have been provided at the hearing before the planning commission. 21.20.280. -Written statements. A. Opening statement. A party of reco rd who entered an app earance in the ppeal[APPELLANT, STAFF AND THE APPL ]CANT IF THE APPLICANT IS NOT THE APPELLANT] shall submit a written statement which shall be filed with the borough clerk within 20 days of the clerk issuing notice that a completed record and transcript have been filed. The written statement may include a statement of facts as derived from the record on appeal, a statement of the party's perception of the correctne ss of the planning commission decision, a list of asserted errors , and any citations to applicable statutes, ordinances, regulations or othe r legal authority for the position taken by the party to the appeal. Failure to timely submit the opening written statement will result in dismissal of that party from the appeal. Multiple parties may preserve their party status by filing a single written statement; however, the written statement must clearly identify all parties filing the single statement. The hearing officer may waive irregularities in the content of the notice of appeal or written statements. In appeals where staff does not enter an appearance, the staff overview may be provided in writing when opening statements are due. E. Additional written statements. Unless the hearing officerrequests supplem ental written statements from the parties of record or staff, no additional written statements shall be accepted. 21.20.300. - Motions. A. Parties. Motions for continuances, shortened time, or other m atters may be fled by the following parties and served in the manner prescribed by KPI3 21.20.280(D): The appellant; 2. The applicant if that party is not the appellant; 3. A borough official if borough staff enters an appearance in the matter. SECTION 1 That this ordinance is effective January 1, 2021. ENACTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THEKENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS * DAY OF * 2020. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined: [DFr.erF.n TFxT BRACKFTFII] ordinance 2020- 101/130 Page 19of20 Kelly ATTEST: Johni Blankenship, MMA, Borough Clerk Cooper, Assembly President Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2020- 102/130 Page 20 of 20 City of Seward, Alaska March 3, 2020 CALL TO ORDER Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Volume 7, Page 390 The March 3, 2020 regular meeting of the Seward Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Cindy Ecklund. OPENING CEREMONY Commissioner Charbonneau led the pledge of allegiance to the flag ROLL CALL There were present: Cindy Ecklund presiding, and Nathanial Charbonneau Tom Swann Craig Ambrosiani Gary Seese Comprising a quorum of the Board; and Also Present Jackie C. Wilde, Community Development Director Andy Bacon, Planning Assistant Excused Kelli Hatfield Liz DeMoss CITIZENS' COMMENTS ON ANY SUBJECT EXCEPT THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING Tony Baclaan, inside city, thanked the Commission for their work on the walkable mural policy. Baclaan welcomed commissioner DeMoss to her first P&Z meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Motion (Swann/Charbonneau) Motion (Swann/Charbonneau) Motion Passed Motion (Swann/DeMoss) Motion Passed Approve the agenda and consent agenda Amend the agenda to add New Business item D to discuss process for presenting a gold pan to Martha Fleming Unanimous Amend the agenda to add New Business item E to discuss and request staff move forward on beach restoration project Unanimous 103/130 City of Seward, Alaska Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 3. 2020 Volume 7. Page 391 Motion (Ecklund/Swann) Motion to remove February 4, 2020 from the consent agenda Motion Passed Unanimous Main Motion Passed Unanimous SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS Administration Report Jackie Wilde updated the Commission on the following business items • Wilde presented the Commission with 2020 Alaska Planning Association Conference hand painted mugs. • Wilde announced that a job offer for the new City Planner was accepted and the new hire is set to begin work on April 6. • Bacon discussed a couple of sessions he attended from the 2020 planning conference, including one on coastal hazard mapping, and one on tourism best management practices from the City of Juneau. Other Reports, Announcements, and Presentations Planning conference report from attendees: Ecklund, Charbonneau, and Swann Swann discussed some aspects of the Commissioner training program involving making findings on variance applications, which he found very educational and relevant to tonight's meeting. Swan found the conference to be very beneficial, and looks forward to attending future conferences. Charbonneau stated that the meeting sessions were very beneficial, and discussed a session on public noticing that outlined various ways of providing public notice in addition to direct mailing and public posting, Eeklund discussed ways in which meeting procedure might be modified to allow additional input from applicants or their representatives, based on some discussion from the Commissioner training session. New Business Items requiring a Public Hearing Resolution 2020-03 Granting a Variance From Seward City Code 15.10.222 Development Requirements Table To Charles McEldowney, Permitting An Exception To The Zoning Code To Allow A 5 Foot Side Yard Setback To A Street Ou Lot 20, Block 38, Original Townsite Seward 601 Fourth Avenue, Within The Office Residential Zoning District Bacon stated that the applicant requested this variance to expand the buildable envelope on their lot from fifteen feet to twenty feet. Bacon discussed the current site plan and use of the property, and noted the house presently located on the lot is a legal nonconforming structure with encroachments into 2 setbacks and the right of way. The applicant's development plan would eliminate encroachments into the right of way. Bacon discussed surrounding coning and land uses. Bacon stated that no objections from staff were received, and all public notice requirements were 104/130 City of Seward, Alaska Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 3, 2020 Volume 7. page 392 met. Bacon stated that staff recommends approval of this variance application with conditions that the owner work with the electric and building departments on any requirements for the new site plan, and that the applicant adhere to a 10 foot rear yard setback. Chair Ecklund opened public hearing on this item Mark Chilman, inside city, discussed concerns with the ability to maintain adequate room for drainage and sidewalks along rights of way in this area. Wanice Cowles, inside city, stated that she lives next door to the subject property and wanted to clarify that this item does not affect her property and that she is here in support of the applicant. Motion (Swann/Ambrosiani) Approve Resolution 2020-03 Granting a Variance From Seward City Code 15.10.222 Development Requirements Table To Charles McEldowney, Permitting An Exception To The Zoning Code To Allow A 5 Foot Side Yard Setback To A Street On Lot 20, Block 38, Original Townsite Seward 601 Fourth Avenue, Within The Office Residential Zoning District Swann stated that he is in favor of the application, and believes that the applicant meets the criteria where approval is acceptable. Swann stated a finding that the setback restriction was put in place after the property was platted, causing this corner lot to have a buildable restriction greater than the neighboring lots. Swann agreed with the finding in the resolution that the variance requested was the minimum variance necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property, ad stated that the applicant is not asking for greater relief than what is permitted in the surrounding lots. Ecklund asked to clarify some comments from the staff report, regarding possible alternatives. Swann addressed public comment by noting that the sidewalks and gutters were on city property and that the applicants request for variance is wholly on their property so the two do not conflict.. Ambrosiani thanked staff for all the information provided in the packet. Motion passed AYES: Swann, Seese, Charbonneau, Ambrosiani, DeMoss, Ecklund NOES: none 105/130 City o,,f'Seward, Alasiw Seward Planning c& Zoning Commission Minules March 3, 2020 Volume 7, Page 393 Resolution 2020-04 Granting A Conditional Use Permit To Sockeye Point Marine Services LLC To Construct and Operate A Bunkhouse On Tract F Fourth Of July Creek Subdivision Number Two Within The Industrial Zoning District Bacon described the subject property size and current use. Bacon referred to an aerial image of the property, showing where the proposed bunkhouse would be located in relation to the road and the industrial uses taking place on the property. Bacon described the proposed bunkhouse structure based on application materials. Bacon described surrounding land use and zoning, on -site utilities available, and stated that the applicant is planning on using a septic pumping service in conjunction with two 2,000 gallon holding tanks for wastewater disposal. City staff have reviewed the project, and their comments are provided in the packet and reflected in the conditions. Public notice was provided in accordance with City Code. Chair Ecklund opened public hearing on this item Charles McEldowney, outside city, stated that he supports this resolution based on the identified community need for employee housing in Seward. McEldowney stated that he has attended public meetings over the years on economic development and promoting the marine trades, and that the need for additional employee housing is discussed often. Tony Baclaan, inside city, stated that he supports this application, and supports ideas to promote mixed uses of property and increasing housing in Seward. Baclaan stated that he liked the idea of pumping out wastewater so as not to put additional strain on City facilities adjacent to SMIC. Rob Enderbrock, outside city, stated that he was the applicant, and has worked on the North Slope for 35 years, and has lived in similar housing during his career. The unit he proposed to move down to Seward was up until very recently being used for housing. Tim Jagielski II, inside city, stated that JAG has grown considerably since taking over the drydock and is really struggling to find housing for their employees. Jagielski stated concerns about lost work opportunity as a result of not having places to house employees and visiting boat crews who utilize local hotels and restaurants. Jagielski stated that the increased business that would result from having more housing would benefit multiple sectors of the Seward economy. Motion (Ambrosiani/Swann) Approve resolution 2020-04 Granting A Conditional Use Permit To Sockeye Point Marine Services LLC To Construct and Operate A Bunkhouse On Tract F Fourth Of July Creek Subdivision Number Two Within The Industrial Zoning District Ambrosiani stated that he looked forward to hearing comments from Fire Chief Crites because we are hearing two really important sides to this issue in the need for more housing while also ensuring safety of residents, especially in the SMIC area which is located farther away from first responders. Ecklund requested the Fire Chief come to the podium and discuss building safety for 106/130 City of Seward Alaska Seward Planning c Zoning Commission Minutes Nfarch 3. 2020 Volume 7, Page 391 this application. Clinton Crites stated in response to Ambrosiani that there are just a few single family houses that are in the SFD coverage area along Nash Road. Crites stated that he understands and supports the creation of additional employee housing in the SMIC area, but cautioned the Commission that increased response times to reach that area in an emergency necessitated additional building safety measures, and urged the Commission to act in their abilities to support that mission. Crites stated that any building relocated into City Limits needed to meet adopted City Codes. In response to Ecklund, Crites gave an overview of fire department assets in the SMIC area. Swann stated that he supports this application, and noted that at the last meeting the Commission reviewed a CUP for employee housing in tents, and at that meeting the Commission discussed wanting to see more permanent structures used for employee housing, and as such approved the use of tents for just one more year. Swann suggested adding a condition to maintain a vegetative buffer between the housing and industrial work taking place on the property. Commission discussed adding additional life safety conditions beyond what is currently recommended. Ecklund stated that she was in support of the resolution as written, and stated that she hoped to see additional fire department resources in the future. DeMoss stated that she supported the resolution as written, and would defer to the Fire Department to ensure buildings were up to code. Motion (Swann/Charbonneau) Motion Passed Motion (Swann/ Charbonneau) Motion Passed Motion passed UNFINISHED BUSINESS - none NEW BUSINESS A. Elect Commission Chair and Vice Chair Amend section F7 of resolution to delete the word "animal" and replace with "bear" Unanimous Amend section FG of resolution to state that a vegetation greenbelt shall be maintained surrounding the bunkhouse AYES: Swann, Ambrosiani Charbonneau, Seese, Ecklund NOES: DeMoss AYES: Swann, Ambrosiani Charbonneau, Seese, DeMoss, Ecklund NOES: none 107/130 City of Seward, Alaska March 3. 2026 Motion (Swann/Seese) Motion (Swan n/Ambrosiani) Motion Passed Seward Planning & Zoning Commission .-Winules 6'olume 7,. Page 395 Elect Cindy Ecklund as Planning and Zoning Commission Chair Elect Tom Swann as Planning and Zoning Commission Chair Vice Chair Unanimous B. Set work session topic for March 17, 2020 as "Comprehensive Plan review: Land Use" and "Discuss crosswalk (walkable murals) application process" Commission discussed and set work session topics to those recommended in the agenda. The Chair polled the Commission for availability C. Approval of February 4, 2020 Regular Meeting Minutes Chair Ecklund pointed out a housekeeping omission from the February 4, 2020.meeting minutes D. Discuss presenting a gold pan to former Commissioner Fleming Motion (SwannlSeese) Order a gold pan for Commissioner Martha Fleming to be presented by Council at a future meeting. Motion Passed Unanimous E. Request staff write a letter re beach nourishment Motion (Swann/Ecklund) Motion Passed Direct staff to write a letter to the flood service area board requesting funding for project design for beach revitalization and place two test piles of fill material above the high-water mark for the purpose of observing natural erosion Unanimous Commission Comments: Charbonneau- Thanked staff for their work and thanked the public for attending the meeting Swann- updated staff and commission about upcoming meeting availability Seese- Thanked Ecklund and Swann for their service as officers Ambrosiani- Thanked staff for the information provided in the packet Ecklund- Thanked the public for attending and providing input on the public hearing items. 108/130 City of Seward, Alaska March 3, 2020 Citizens' Comments: Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Volume 7, Page 396 Tony Baclaan, inside city, thanked Liz DeMoss for joining the Commission and congratulated Commissioners Swann and Ecklund for their willingness to serve as officers. Baclaan discussed mitigating measures to allow for the increase in housing opportunities at SMIC. Tim Jagielski II, inside city, thanked the Commission for their work, and highlighted the importance of employee housing to the growth of businesses in Seward. Jagielski stated that he would be totally open to adding fire suppression systems to employee housing. Commission and Administration Response to Citizens' Comments ADJOURNMENT (Swann) The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 PM Jackie C. Wilde Community Development Director (City Seal) Cindy L. Ecklund Chair 109/130 City of Seward, Alaska Seward Planning & 7oning Commission Minutes Ane 2, 2920 volume 7. Page 397 CALL TO ORDER The June 2, 2020 regular meeting of the Seward Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Cindy Ecklund. OPENING CEREMONY Commissioner Ambrosiani led the pledge of allegiance to the flag ROLL CALL There were present: Cindy Ecklund presiding, and Nathanial Charbonneau Craig Ambrosiani Tom Swann Comprising a quorum of the Board; and Also Present Jackie C. Wilde, Community Eric Kazielski, Planner Andy Bacon, Planning Assisi CITIZENS' C FOR PUBLIC Andrew Koster, in l directly adjacent to a significant exp;mc and his zoni uld liav door fal slap, Mary Be i the Lutheran for everyone be found. OeDeMoss iatf ielc ITEMS SCHEDULED Wr the poWial siting of a cell phone tower stated that he has just finished going through se in character with the neighborhood, when. tated that a cell phone tower going in next with the neighborhood. to cems over the potential siting of a cell phone tower in :oste ed that a tower in this location would be an eyesore Third Avenue. Koster felt that a more suitable location could Ristine Casagranda, 11%W, stated that she is concerned that the Planning and Zoning Commission priorities con reference to finding a solution to longterm housing and looking at lodging in the same sentence. Casagranda stated that one industry should not be stifled to solve another problem. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Motion (Swann/Charbonneau) Approve the agenda and consent agenda 110/130 City of Seward, Alaska June 2. 2020 Motion (Ecklund/Swann) Motion Passed Main Motion Passed SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND Administration Report Jackie Wilde updated the Commission on the • Wilde thanked the Commission fo was discussing with UAF the puss building. UAF policy at this time re lifted the potential exists to use that • Wilde notified everyone ew email address: planning mprovement work kvelopment being Other Repo New Business Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Volume 7, Page 398 Motion to remove March 3, 2020 meeting minutes from the consent agenda Unanimous AYES: Charbonneau, Swann, DeMoss, Ambrosiani, Seese, Hatfield, Ecklund NOES: ding the meetinA9 of locating public i Caroup um, due to stated that the Clerk kg' at the KM Rae . but once that is general Community Development Planner me badound on his work history and ve and becoming part of the ;Sion protocols to continue to do discussed issues with increased kh open meetings act. uncil would soon hold capital project priorities, Fort Raymond potential projects. Public Hearing Resolution 2020-05 Rnding Kenai Peninsula Borough Approval of The Point Subdivision; Creating Tw 2) Tracts, Each Located Inside and Outside Seward Municipal Boundaries; Vacating Lot Lines, Dedicating Rights -Of -Way and Utility Easements; Located on Nash Road Within The Industrial (I) Zoning District Bacon stated the purpose of the plat was to vacate lot lines, dedicate right of way and create two parcels that would be located both within and outside City limits. Bacon stated that a subdivision agreement is not required due to the parcel location, discussed the surrounding land uses and stated that a portion of the property is in a flood zone. Staff reviewed the replat and noted the presence of the applicant's personal property located in the right of way to be dedicated, and that this area 111/130 City of Seward Alaska June 2, 2020 Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Minnies Volume 7, Page 399 be free and clear of any obstructions prior to final plat approval. Bacon stated that the applicant did not properly post the public notice sign adjacent to the nearest improved street, but that instead it was placed further back on the property where visitors enter for fishing and camping. Staff recommended that Commission postpone this item until next meeting so the hearing can be properly noticed. Chair Ecklund opened public hearing on this item. No one from the audience appeared to give testimony. Planner Eric Kozielski stated that he had received written comments from a citizen wo wished them to be read into the record: AL Mike Insalaco, inside city, stated that he owned p concerns over the proposed dedication of right of further noted that the public notice sign was not b( Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to Motion (Swann/Ambrosiani) Ambrosiani."ed about that there. 1 based a'' gal ii determ n. E of way br` L and the locat the inclusion o of rights of way. Motion (Sw Motion Passed to the subject property and had )utherly property line. Insalaco played facing Nash Road rig Kenai sula Borough F The Poiff Subdivision; o (2) Tracts, Each Located Outside Seward Municipal 6 Vacating Lot Lines, hts-Of-Way and Utility ocated on Nash Road Within iI (1) Zoning District ructun the proposed right of way. Bacon stated s outbuildings in the proposed right of way lai lines may not be precise enough to make that xation of the adjacent property with respect to the right lcon showed the location of adjacent parcel on the map andlocked by this platting action. Ecklund requested and discussed Borough requirements for the dedication Amend Section I of resolution to add the condition that all structures in the 30 foot right of way shall be removed, as recommended by staff AYES: Hatfield, Swann, Seese, Charbonneau, Ambrosiani, DeMoss, Ecklund NOES: none 112/130 City of'Seward Alaska June 1. 2020 Motion (Hatfield/Swann) Motion Passed Seward Planning & Zoning Commission ,Lfinules Volume 7, Page 400 Postpone this item until the duly 7, 2020 meeting Unanimous Resolution 2020-06 Recommending City Council Approval Of The Rezoning Of Lots 2, 3, 4- 5 And NV2 Of Lot 6 Block 16 From Multi -Family Residential (R3) To Central Business District (CB) s Kozielski described the location proposed to be rezon Multi -family (R3) to Central Business (CB) and identified the properties for conside at ielski stated that the application indicated the purpose of the rezoning was to bring tha#ierty onformance with the land use plan and allow for a wider variety of uses, including the possib ation of a communication tower. Kozielski stated that the 2030 Comprehensive Plan recomm implementing the land use plan and noted the ways in which this df ation for rezoning de requirements for consideration of a land use amendment. Koziel ited thauired pu oticing guidelines were followed for this hearing item. KozielskilMNkscuss , r ounding la es and zoning designations. Kozielski stated that iewed the applies n and no objectio were received. Kozielski stated that prior to publica swered one public inquiry as to the location of the proposed rezoning, and that after publi 'o acket, a'' and property owner of one of the properties signed on to the application a in o n to the proposed rezoning. Kozielski stated the sta endation postp item nsider adding the remaining Multi -Family reside op the sou t zone and to also consider adding the Multi -Family re ial prop s across venue b the area into conformance with the future land use plan. Commi the apq this apX Chair EckluM ruled that a con Chair Ecklund Pin that she has a business relationship with interest in any of the properties affected by sioW discussed the potential conflict and the Commission Commissioner DeMoss remained at the dais. Ristine Casagranda, inside —city, provided background on how she purchased the property from the previous owner and then learned that it was zoned Multi Family and subject to use and development restrictions, specifically about setback requirements in the R3 zoning district. Casagranda stated that she was then contacted by a representative inquiring about locations for a communication tower and began considering that as a potential use of her property. Casagranda stated that she is not attached to any specific development plan for the property at this time. Casagranda discussed the process in which her application is being reviewed, and has a problem with the recommendation that other properties would be added to her application when she spent the time putting it together and paying a filing fee. Casagranda stated she does not object to the 113/130 City of Seward, Alaska Seward Planning c& 7oning Commission ;tfinutes June ?, 2020 Volume 7, Page 401 proposed addition of the other properties, but feels that if the City pursues that then she ought to receive a refund of her filing fee. Meghan Coppock, inside city, stated that she has owned the property to the north For 22 years, and that the co-owner has been outside the state of Alaska for 21 °n of those years. Coppock stated that this is her primary residence, and she is in the process of a historic renovation of the home. Coppock stated that she was not informed or consulted about the proposed rezoning and does not consent to her home being rezoned. Coppock discussed the surrounding historic homes on the street and stated she did not want to see the historic character oLhe neighborhood changed. Motion (Charbonneau/Swann) Ap Resolution 2020-06 ding City Council Approval e ing Of Lots 2, 3, 4-5 And N'/x f Lot 6 16 From Multi -Family Residential To Central Business District (CB) Motion (Swann/DeMoss) V title ofRe on 2020-06 to ords "Originot' Townsite of ter "Block 16" Motion Passed Charbonneau state ern this ac a lane R3 zoned property in the middle of the block. oss as fit was that a p erty owner should seek to bring adjacent properties into conforma with the land use map when seeking a similar change for their ow erty. In respo ski di ed a recent rezoning of properties in Forest Acres th issue, n ' de ssed the process by which this item would be re- sed for hea a inclu t er R3 zoned properties in the area. Swann asked f a property er o g to a zo ing change would not have to be included, to which ffirmed. Dis 'on fo d relating to code requirements for enacting land use amendments developme quire s for R3 and CB zoning districts. Chair Ecklund relaxed the rule k the apple t additional questions. Casagranda stated that she would prefer to see this move f d with n rther delay, but stated that is Commission deems this better for the community then ill ient. Back on the rules. Swann stated concerns about requiring that a property owner eir zoning to CB, due to the residential setback requirements ascribed to CB lots that are scent to residential zoned lots. Wilde stated that staff would contact property owners in the area to get a clear understanding of their wishes and bring it back to the Commission. DeMoss asked if there was any way to allow the applicant to move forward with her plans while staff researched this question, noting that there would likely be much discussion about the rezoning, while the applicant is being required to hold off on their plans to develop. Wilde and Demoss discussed the public notification process. DeMoss reiterated concerns about putting the applicant through unnecessary delays. Ambrosiani asked why the Commission should delay this for lack of notification when the individual who was not notified by mail still heard about it and had opportunity to speak, and further asked if staff was going to use a rezone application to bring 114/130 City of Seward, Alaska Seward Planning & Zoning Commission hlinures .tune 2. 2020 Volume 7, Page 402 nearby properties into conformance with the land use map, then why is an application fee collected in the first place. Wilde discussed the zoning application filing fee and process, and stated that city staff does not initiate zoning changes, but makes recommendation to Commission when citizens initiate a request, or makes recommendations for zoning changes as directed by Council or the Commission. Motion (Charbonneau/HatGeld) Postpone Resolution 2020-06 until the July 7, 2020 meeting Ambrosiani stated that he wanted to see a date given for the nit hearing, and the motion was rephrased to include the date of July 7". Swann reiterated'kat an objecting property owner should not be required to change their zoning. Hatfield asked "would he done in a situation in which two property owners disagreed, to which Wilde r+ed at bn operty owners would need to be in agreement to affect a zoning change. Ecklu that she ed to postpone this because the title was incorrect and it was not properlyrom the outse Motion passed UNFINISHED BUSINESS - none NEW BUSINESS Resolution 2020-07 RM Commissior'LL&rities Wild is an Motion AYES: Swann, Seese, Hlield, Charbonneau, City Council Approval of The Planning And Zoning, M20 To April 2021. and Commission and stated that this Approve Resolution 2020-07 Recommending City Council Approval of The Planning And Zoning Commission Priorities From April 2020 To April 2021 Swann discussed the priority regarding communication tower education and suggested adding an action. Swann stated that this had been a priority for years and the Commission should move forward on it. Ecklund wanted to state that nuisance abatement is an ongoing issue, and the priorities should be changed to use the word 'ongoing' Motion (Swann/Ecklund) Amend priority number 6 to include "and recommend draft ordinance to Council' 115/130 City of Seward, Alaska June 2, 2020 Motion Passed Motion (Ecklund/Charbonneau) Motion Passed Main Motion Passed as Amended B. Commission set June 16 work session for Communication Towers. Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Volume 7, Page 403 Unanimous Amend priority number 3 to strike the word "annual" and replace with "ongoing" Unanimous AYES: atfield, Swann, DeMoss, Ambro ' Seese, Charbonneau, D. Approval of March 3, 2020 Regular Meeting Ecklund stated that Commissione name s DeMoss. DeMoss stated that she had yr O n an had been noted in the minutes as giving a ` CS' - V46 Motion (Ecklu Motion Commission ents: Charbonneau- T d the pu for attending the meeting Ambrosiani- Welco la ric Kozielski to City staff and thanked him for his meeting preparation Seese- Stated that he agree ith Commissioner Ambrosiani Swann- Stated that he is happy to see that everyone looks and sounds physically and mentally well Ecklund- Stated that there can be much to say about what is going on around the world, but instead thanked the public and fellow commissioners for wearing their masks, and politely urged everyone to keep washing their hands. design 'development standards in the minutes instead of at the March 3 meeting, but e 9 to delete Fleming from roll hall, repW with DeMoss and amend the motion for Resolution 2020-03 on page 6 to e "motion by Swann second by brosiani", and make correction to the vote on the amendment by DeMoss. 116/130 City of Seward, Alaska Seward Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 2, 2020 Volume 7, Page 404 Citizens' Comments: Ristine Casagranda, inside city, stated that she is doing her best to be patient and mold to everyone's needs, but is disappointed in the outcome of tonight's meeting because what was her rezoning application has now become everyone's application. Casagranda asked for verification that she could go to Council to request a filing fee refund. Casagranda stated that as a lodging owner she wanted to reiterate the obstacles that come from Community Development towards her industry. Casagranda stated that the application process has become increasingly difficult and is now more difficult than a home appraisal. Casagranda questi ed the efficacy City's ongoing subscription to lodging activity monitoring software, objecte e City paying 9,000 a year for this service, and stated that this year the only businesses 1 ating are the ones that have been in the industry for a long time. Tony Baclaan, inside city, thanked the Commi outcomes of the rezoning application, noting up with isolated R3 properties, and stated heVN Commission and Administration Response to Bacon apologized to Commission appreciated that they are being read Ecklund stated that the contracted soft pandemic had delay not yet been reques monitoring, a1 year for f paid a eginnir self -in on forn maintain cin� property owrNMe, ADJO Jackie C. Wilde Community Development Director (City Seal) or their tikth, discussed potential -dless of poshe city may still end sted in seeinome. is the Maeeting minutes, and stated that he Ythe ity b on information gathered by o Ecklund recognized that the ctivity; the extent that such a report has es not pay 9,000 per year for compliance company is extending the contract by one d t 000 dollars was for three years of service, i w a four-year contract. Wilde stated that the rs wee meant to keep staff and the public safe by self -inspection, and it is two pages of safety items a Cindy L. Ecklund Chair 117/130 m mi 118/130 COM NG SOON T(O A NEIGHBOPHOOD NEAR U?. From siting and permitting to the digital divide, 5G offers U.S. communities a full spectrum of opportunities —and challenges. ByDANIELC.VocK IFTH-GENEFLhTION, or 5G, data networks promise to transform cities --even society — with network speeds more than 100 times 3' FThe Panel, 1, antht enna nn widel be o greater than all not faster than the 4G networks that most of extend more than 16' from the poles our mobile phones currently life to transmit infer- Maximum of three 16" surface to the outside edge of antenna. Panel antenna shall he no greater than side -mounted 5G call also handle 100 times as many panel antennas 3 Cubic feet in volumemation. devices as current 4G infrastructtu�e, which could �M1aiN�"" allow everything from parking meters to air quality Panel antenna shall be sensors to constantly share information in real time, located at least 12" potentially paving the way for truly smart" cities. above streetlight arm These upgrades in speed and capacity could facilitate the deployment of a whole new range of applications, from surgeons operating remotely on patients hundreds of miles away to autonomous Maximum of [wo 3" vehicles that communicate with nearby cars, trucks, or smaller Cabinet shall be no greater than 4a` long x 21'wide x 2T deep and road infrastructure as they navigate city streets. telecommunications conduits and 4- 'I The higher speeds would also make it easier to facil- one T power Conduit itate live video conferencing and other interactive as'Maxi m forms of communication like virtual reality that make it easier for people to work, study, or social- ize from home —functions that are front of mind 2s^ ikpnum from for many during the COVED-19 pandemic and will polewrFate likely continue to be as we look to the future. Despite this potential, many, cities have been wary of carriers installing SG infrastructure. one opposite page: a small way5G equipment can cars s much more infer- 1 s'-s y k� cell on a light post in Pittsburgh; left a Minimum oration than current equipment is by using higher Instance diagram of Seattle's frequency electromagnetic waves. But they dorzt from grade design guidelines for a travel as far as lower frequency waves, just like waterfront metal pate top -mount antenna. FM radio stations broadcast a clearer signal than Seattle published its their AM counterparts but dont have nearly the design standards for small wireless facilities same range. That means, in order for 5G to work, -- earlier this year. 119/130 American Planning Association 31 5G installation options: a partially concealed small cell topper on a light pole in St. Louis (above), on a rooftop (middle), and mounted on a combination lamp post and telephone pole in Seattle. carriers must install far more equipment, which is often mounted on existing infrastructure, like light posts, utility poles, and buildings. The total number of cell sites, by one industry estimate, would increase by 769,000 by 2026 to achieve nationwide coverage. That's in addition to the 350,000 5G sites installed in 2018. The 5G small -cell equipment is smaller than its predecessors meaning it can hang from street- lights or utility poles —so wireless companies have pushed for the ability to mount them on public infrastructure. Each of the small cells has to be con- nected to fiber optic cables, which requires tearing up city streets where they're not ah-eady installed. All of that means costs to cities, which many local governments are trying to pass along to the mobile carriers through permit and rental fees. Disputes between municipalities and mobile carriers over the size of the fees local governments can charge and the placement of 5G equipment are playing out in state legislative chambers, federal regulatory hearings, and more than a few court- rooms. The outcomes will have big implications for planners and the communities they serve, from the short-term surge in permit applications coming to cities and in the long-term consequences on dispar- ities among residents in the types of technological resources they will have in their neighborhoods. 5G4riendly approach One of Pan[ TenHakens first actions after becoming mayor of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, in 2018 was to try to convince mobile phone providers to install the next generation of high-speed data networks in his dys downtown. Where officials in many cities see obstacles with 5G, TenHaken recognized opportunity. He saw the "fast, reliable connectivity" of 5G as a way for local companies like CarsForWe.com and Experity a provider of medical records software, to thrive. He also thinks the faster network would help tele- medicine, allowing doctors from elsewhere in the state to consult virtually with specialists in Sioux Falls and eliminating the need for patients to drive hours each way for appointments. "The potential [of 5G technology] is great and the benefits are tremen- dous; says TenHaken. He promoted Sioux Falls as an easy place for carriers to install 5G technologies in the hopes that mobile companies would choose it as one of the first cities they upgraded. "The strategy for the city of Sioux Falls in dealing with wireless carriers was simple: cover our costs, TenHaken testified before a congressional eomrnittee in December. As mayor, it is not my intent to profit off carriers to deploy small - cell infrastructure." The strategy worked. When Verizon expressed interest in 2018, Sioux Falls engineers and law- yers worked with the company's representatives to develop a 5G permitting process. City workers processed mock applications for small -cell anten- nae installations to figure out how much time it would take them to decide whether to approve an application, and how much to charge the companies to apply for a permit Sioux Falls employees also researched the costs for electricity and pole mainte- nance to help determine annual rental fees - In the end, the city let Verizon lease its poles for 10 years, with the option for a five-year extension. Sioux. Falls charged $500 per pole in application fees and $175 per pole in rental fees annually. It also agreed to process all applications within 60 days. Verizon began offering 5G service in Sioux Falls in November 2019, making the city of 200,000 people one of the first 18 nationwide where Verizon offered the service. The mayor expects other wireless carri- ers to follow. While states in middle America are often over- looked because we lack the population sixes com- pared to the coasts, our infrastructure needs are equal to those of the largest states in the nation," TenHakeu told the senators last winter. "in a global economy reliant on the internet; the fifth generation of mobile infrastructure is not a `nice to have asset for Sioux Falls —it is a necessity." Regulatory debates The technologythat is broadly labeled 5G is actually a collection of improvements to wireless infrastructure that will boost speeds for end users. It uses different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum —and more of it --than its predecessors and incorporates several ways muse those signals more efficiently. But the exact types of upgrades depend on the carrier and on the location. For example, rural areas may we faster connections compared to existing 4G networks, but not the ilop-of-the-line speeds available in down- town business districts. On the other hand, those downtown districts will require a lot more antennae, spaced closer together, in order to get those higher speeds, because the equipment used to produce those higher speeds uses high -frequency wavelengths that can be blocludby buildings and other structures. Wor wireless carriers have all started rolling out 32 Planning July 2020 120/130 5G technology in the U.S., but so far, those efforts are still in their early stages. (To make matters more con- fusing, AT&T rebranded some of its 4G network as "5G E, which is not actually 5G,) The only consum- ers currently able to take advantage of the upgrades have to have a 5G-enabled device, but most mobile phones —including the Apple iphane—are not cur- rently equipped to work with 5G technology. But 'Verizon and AT&T both indicated this spring they plan to ramp up the construction of 5G infrastructure, which prompted Politico to ponder whether there would be a post -virus "5G gold rush." Even before the pandemic, the telecommuni- cations industry had planned wider rollouts of 5G throughout 2020. Not only are companies compet- ing with each other to offer the new service, they're also trying to position the U.S. as the global leader in deploying 5G technology in order to attract devel- opers and technology companies. To speed up the process, the telecommunications industry has tried to bypass many local siting and permitting regulations that it sees as too cumber- some. Companies have worked at state and federal levels to get uniform standards imposed on localities that cover things like how much the municipalities can charge for leasing light poles and other infra- structure, how long the local regulators can take to decide on whether a permit should be issued (what the industry refers to as "shot clocks"), and when local regulations should be preempted. By and large, the telecommunications companies have been successful. More than half of the states in the country have passed laws setting standards for municipalities to follow for 5G equipment instal- lations, according to the Wireless Infrastructure Association, an industry group. The bigger shock came when the Federal Com- munications Commission passed sweeping reg- ulations in 2018 imposing similar restrictions on municipalities nationwide. The FCC rules order lim- ited application fees for small wireless equipment to $500 for the first five sites and $100 for sites beyond that, and capped recurring annual fees to cover the cost of maintaining rights -of -way at $270. They also limited aesthetic requirements that would apply to rules published in advance that were "reasonable and no more burdensome than the rules for other types of infrastructure. The FCC also stipulated that municipalities must rule on applications for sites where small cells already exist within 60 days and on new sites within 90 days. Local government groups, including the National HOW DOES SG WORK? 5G's shorter wave signals can degrade It they encounter structures, vegetation, or rain. That means more cell towers are required to relay signals From the macrocell, or high -power, tower. 4G's longer wave signals travel W miles From the macrocell tower, unaffected by weather or buildings, but more users can slow down service. 5G technology relies on more cells than its predecessor systems in order to transmit the shorter wavelength signals. Cells can be mounted on new or retrofitted infrastructure. Macroceil tower Telephone pole Small cell tower League of Cities and the National Association of Counties, denounced the new rules. San lose, Cali- fornia, and 22 other cities and counties, meanwhile, have sued the FCC over the regulations. ney argue, among other things, that the FCC overstepped its authority by issuing the directives, Under federal law; municipalities cannot ban telecommunications services or equipment in their jurisdictions. The FCC regulations rely on that principle to build the time limits for applications; municipalities that take too long to process applica- tions, for example, are presumed to be prohibiting the new service. Opponents claim that is too much of a stretch to meet legal criteria. The cik.es' lawsuits were combined and are now before a San Francisco - based federal appeals court. Meanwhile, the under- lying regulations remain in effect. v Antennas f Equipment cabinet SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES AND FACILITIES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY' APRsKnowledge- base Collection lets you search for small wireless resources that pro- vide background, policy guidance, and examples of local zoning and other municipal standards from across the country. EXPLORE planning.org/ knowledgebasa/ smallwMess 121/130 American Planning Association 33 9 ARA Learn Right -of -Way Management: Small Cells to Scooters Learn how to manage the public right-of-way and regulatory tools for best practices, and understand the challenges presented by small wireless Facilities and shared mobility services. CM 11.5 (1.5 Law) NONMEMBER PRfCE. $60 MEMBER PRICE: $30 Planning.org/APALewn EQUAL ACCESS EQUALS DPPORTUNf l ry Planners in small towns and rural areas are increas- ingly looking to broadband to spur local growth and prosperity. Eric Frederick's July 2019 article in Manning explains. READ planning,arg/ planning/2019/'IuV equalaccess Deployment priorities Brian Dillard, chief innovation officer for San Anto- nio, Texas, is wary of industry promises about the benefits that 5G will bring. His primary focus is on promoting equity among San Antonio residents, which, he says, is not a priority for telecommuni- cations companies. He anticipates mobile carriers will roll out 5G much the same way they introduced 4G: in the most affluent neighborhoods first The delays in bringing modern internet connec- tions to lower -income neighborhoods have lasting consequences, Dillard says. The COVID-19 pan- demic brought the issue into clear focus when a local school district tried to distribute 500 mobile hotspots to students to facilitate at-home learning. He says that many students couldnt use them because the devices required a common mobile technology that wasn't available in their neighborhoods. 'If the telecoms are telling [planners] that 5G will solve all their problems, make them prove it. We have big problems of economic segregation. Those are the problems we need to solve. Digital inclusion can be a big part of it;' Dillard says. But that would require the companies to upgrade already lagging infrastructure in neighborhoods. "Go out to this neighborhood and fix that problem first, before you get to the next level, he says. Many planners, community activists, and city officials welcome the upgrades in technology but, like Dillard, are more worried about how and where they will be deployed. Even in areas with ample services, many residents caet take advantage of the improvements because they lack the money to pay for them or the skills to use them. "There's nothing different that I know of with the traditional [telecommunications] business model that will make 5G more equitable; says Brenna Berman, CEO of the Chicago -based City Tech Collaborative, which works with private companies and cities to address urban problems. She says policy makers should explore other business models to encourage the providers to better serve disadvan- taged populations. "We have a moral obligation to make sure that we doet further broaden that dig- itai gap, and the time to think about that is now," she says. Eric Frederick, Amp, vice president of commu- nity affairs for Connected Nation, which focuses on bringing better internet connectivity to rural areas, says many of the physical features of 5G—particu- larly its reliance on high -frequency transmissions and fiber optic networks —mean that "5G is not going to be a rural broadband solution.- The spread - out nature of rural areas, low densities, and topo- graphic features mean rural 5G is not a great match. Technical specifications aside, Frederick says investment and market forces pose barriers to rural deployment as well. The FCC announced it would award $9 billion in grants for Waal areas, but Frederick says that's only a fraction of what would be needed Besides, he adds, theres not a lot of state or federal regulatf on to determine where new service is provided, so the carriers' decisions are market driven and almost always go to areas where they can serve the highest number of households in a small space. That doesn't mean local governments' hands are tied. Frederidc says planners should think ahead about the type of internet access they want in their communities and include plans to secure it in their long-term ptanning documents, as New York City did earlier this year. At the same time, they should start building relationships with their local telecom.- munications providers, even if the administrators are based far away: 'Its worth the effort; he says. Planning for demand From the perspective of infrastructure installers, making the permitting and application process for new 5G equipment uniform and easier for appli- cants can encourage the deployment of new network equipment in more neighborhoods, says Karmen Rajamani, the director of permitting and utilities for the eastern US. region for Crown Castle, a company that installs and owns telecommunications equip - merit and leases it to providers around the country. Crown Castle only builds network infrastructure where there's already demand for the upgrades. But demand often grows when the new service is avail- able in nearby areas. "Wove found that once [infra- structure improvements] are installed and used, then they grovK' Rajamani says. She also stressed that communities should have "frank conversations" with infrastructure companies and mobile carriers to con- vey their priorities. Jonathan S_ Adelstein, president and CEO of the Wireless Infiastructure Association, says low - in -come neighborhoods are actually attractive to mobile carriers. Those areas tend to be densely populated and, because residents there rely so heavily on their mobile devices for internet connections, they tend to prioritize paying their bills for wireless service. But he caitions against city officials interfering with the carriers' plans for 5G deployment. `SCarriers are looldng at rational investments. They are going 1 22/ 1 O 14 planning July 2020 WHAT'S NEXT FOR SG? s telecommunications provid- ers introduce 5G to more areas in the coming years, here are a few issues that may determine how that rollout progresses and how it will benefit consumers.. LITIGATION. Three judges considered the fate of the FCC regulations on 5G regulations during a February hearing in a courtroom in Pasadena, California, Lawyers for municipalities and the FCC sparred over many aspects of the order, and whether the extensive rules would, for example, allow Pasadena to halt construction on SG projects while it erected grandstands for the Rose Bowl parade or require the city to let telecommunications companies put antennae on its decorative streetlights. it could be months before the three - judge panel of the U.S.. Court of Appeals for the Plinth. Circuit rules on the case, but more litigation is likely to follow. DISINFORMATION. Perhaps it's not surprising that, as a new technology, 513 has already been the subject of conspir- acy theories and hoaxes, Whats more troubling for industry leaders is that at least some public officials have believed the hoaxes and considered trying to ban 5G equipment altogether. That was the case in Trenton, New Jersey, where city council members drafted an ardinance to ban construc- tion of wireless infrastructure after they received a letter alleging that "wireless Conspiracy theories about 5G have sparked worldwide protests, including this one in London in January. providers are using the COVID-19 emer- gency as cover to expand and cement their rapid and virtually unsupervised deployment of harmful wireless infra- structure." There is no evidence that wireless infrastructure is harmful, and the Trenton ordinance never passed. Other hoaxes and conspiracy theories persist. Vandals in the United Kingdom tried to set fire to some 50 cell towers and other equipment, and attacks have happened in other Euro- pean countries after false information spread linking 5G and the spread of COVID-19. The hoaxes could be corning from coordinated misinformation cam- paigns backed by a foreign government or other entity, Internet researchers say.. to go where the customers are, But they have lim- ited capital venture. Even though they'll be spend- ing $30 billion a year mostly for 5G, it still is not enough to meet the need, he says. "If you try to arti- ficially change where investments go, you will get no investments. Some cities have the leverage to pull it off, but some dor t. They could end up with less net investment rather than more." Dillard, the San Antonio innovation officer, encourages cities to mobilize their residents to make The spread of misinformation could have real consequences if local officials believe it or don't stamp out rumors, says Jonathan S. Adelstein, president and CEO of the Wireless infrastructure Association. Carriers will shy away from installing infrastructure in places where they know they will encounter resis- tance for "spurious reasons." RIPPLE FFFFFEC'T5. The benefits of installing 5G could extend beyond the mobile customers who use it directly. Small cells require direct connection to Ober optic cables, and those super -fast lines could also be used to extend land - based broadband to nearby areas too. "It provides more options for other last -mile broadband providers to pur- chase their backhaul. If a new subdi- vision is equipped with a 5G cell, now other [internet service providers] can connect with that fiber as well. That is a big benerit of 5G;' says Eric Frederick. vice president of community affairs for Connected Nation. Many neighborhoods getting SG will already have plenty of Infrastructure, he notes, "but at the edges, you're going to see spin-offs." Adelstein says the network improve- ments will create value throughout the economy, much in the same way that. the rollout of 4G to power smartphones led to a surge in tech innovations like streaming video and delivery apps.. "People don't think about the fact that they wouldn't have Uber without 4G;' he says. sure 5G service is rolled out fairly. Building those networks will take three to five yews, but cities need to be active as it happens, he says. "Keep awareness of where [coverage] is and where it isn't. Make it physically aware to residents with network maps, and dorit go a year between updating them,' he says. "Get residents involved, because residents are going to demand something better' Vock is a public policy reporter based in W4MMgtce. VC 123/130 American Planning Association 35 Nem m Regon 10 BRIC - Summer Engagement Series FEMA announces new grant program FEMA is in the process of rolling out a brand-new grant program, Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC). BRIC will support tribes, states, local communities, and territories, as they undertake hazard mitigation projects reducing the risks they face from disasters and natural hazards. BRIC is a new FEMA pre -disaster hazard mitigation program that replaces the existing. Pre -Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program and is a result of amendments made to Section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by Section 1234 of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018. The BRIC program guiding principles are supporting communities through capability- and capacity -building; encouraging and enabling innovation; promoting partnerships; enabling large projects; maintaining flexibility; and providing consistency. During the month of July, FEMA Mitigation is hosting five virtual sessions geared towards a broad audience of federal employees, leaders in states, tribes, local communities, and territories, as well as private sector entities, private non- profit organizations, and individuals interested in learning more about the grant program. These sessions will be offered each Wednesday in July and recordings will be available on the BRIC website about two weeks after each session. • July t - Introduction to Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Grant Program • July 8 - Meaning of the BRIC Name • July 15 - BRIC and Building Codes • July 22 - BRIC and C:ommunit% Lifelines • July 24 - BRIC and Nature -Based Solutions For more information on the BRIC program and to register for the .summer Engagement Series sessions, please visit htt :11www. emu. gov/bric. UL Y 2'92Q 124/130 NEWS FROM REGION 10 Project Update: Comprehensive Planning Improvements Resource Handbook & Project Advisory Committee In the fail of 2019, the Washington Department of Commerce and FEMA Region 10 partnered to provide Washington land use planners the opportunity to help structure the way natural hazard mitigation data and risk reduction strategies are integrated into Comprehensive Planning. The widespread need for more thorough guidance and examples for this integration became clear over a series of workshops held in October and November. A summary of the workshops will be available until July 22111 online here. Through collaborative discussions, FEMA and the Department of Commerce identified two projects to support local planners in the near - term; a Resource Handbook and a Project Advisory Committee who will work to develop more in-depth guidance on plan integration. The creation of the Department of Commerce Resource Handbook will be completed through a resource and technical assistance audit of current information and guidance supporting the integration of natural hazards information into Comprehensive Plans. Available resources will be captured and consolidated into a user-friendly tool. There will also be an Advisory Committee that will be convened later this year to support the development of additional tools and products to help better integrate natural hazard data into Comprehensive Plans. The Department of Commerce will lead the committee, with FEMA supporting the efforts. Planning and work to execute both projects have begun. The Resource Handbook is projected to be complete by Summer 2020, and the first Project Advisory Committee meeting will be scheduled to take place this fall or winter. For more information about these efforts, please contact Cynthia Palmer HM4 Specialist. Ask the Help Desk The Region 10 Service Center is here to help local community officials and stakeholders with technical, training, mitigation, and mapping questions.. Email RegionXHelpDesk@starr- team.com. Stakeholder Engagement Underway for ESA Requirements in Oregon Erin Cooper, CFM — Senior NFIP ESA Specialist, FEMA Region 10 The Floodplain Management and Insurance (FM&I) Branch, along with nonprofit partner, the Willamette Partnership, is leading a series of stakeholder engagement webinars to discuss strategies for a new approach to implementing the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in Oregon. These webinars are being held as part of the current implementation planning process for the Biological Opinion (BiOp) and Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) issued by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regarding the impacts of NFIP implementation oil threatened and endangered species habitat in floodplains across the state. The goal of these workshops (now virtual due to COVID-19) is to ultimately find solutions for a BiOp implementation Plan that not only protect critical habitat but also promote community vitality. FEMA is also working in close coordination with NMFS and with Oregon's Department of Land Conservation and Development throughout this planning process. Together, this team is developing a framework for communities to adjust how the NFIP is implemented locally based on the intent of the BiOp and RPA. Specifically, the focus is on regions of the state where NMFS determined implementation can impact the critical habitat of several salmon species and in turn contribute to impacts on the Southern Resident Killer Whale population. A collaboration platform has been established at htt s://ore onnfi .or 7. Currently, feedback is being solicited via a `virtual flipchart' on solutions that can inform the final implementation options offered to NFIP participating communities. Individuals can provide this feedback at the 'Brainstorming Local Options' page. More information and details about previous or upcoming events are also available. Despite the changes to a virtual format, the team is looking forward to bringing people together to discuss their ideas for how the agency can develop a compliance framework that works for people and for fish. 125/130 NEWS FROM REGION 10 NORFMA 2020 virtual Conference: Call for Abstracts This year, the Northwest Regional Floodplain Management Association (NORFMA) will be holding its annual conference virtually, September 22-24. 2020. This year's theme is "The Path Forward: Reducing Floods, Increasing Resilience." Continuing. Education Credits (CECs) will be available for conference attendees. Online Training (All times Pacific) Tools for Determining BFE July 16, 10 am Online - 1 CEC CRS: Preparing an Annual Recertification July 21, 10 am Online - 1 CEC CRS: Changes to Activity 310 (Elevation Certificates) July 22, 10 am Online - 1 CEC Registration will open in early July, and the call for abstracts is now open. Submissions on Long-term Planning and Partnerships, Implementing Floodplain Projects, Acquisitions, Open Space Preservation, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Permitting, Compliance, Higher Regulatory Standards, Climate Science and Sea Level Rise, Engineering and Mapping (Methods and Tools), Hazard Mitigation, Stormwater and Urban Flooding, Coastal Flooding Issues, and other emerging and relevant issues are welcome. NFIP Basics July 23, 10 am Online - 1 CEC Floodplain Development Permit Review August 6, 9 am Online - 1 CEC Inspecting Floodplain Development August 6, 10:30 am Online - 1.5 CECs CRS: The Role of the Community Coordinator August 18, 10 am Online - 1 CECs 3 All abstract submissions are encouraged, and the due date is Wednesday, July 29, 2020. Please submit all abstracts here. For more information, please visit the conference website at: hops .11nor�ma. org12020Conference. ST RR CR5: Activity 450 Watershed Management August 19, 10 am Online - 1 CEC To register for online courses, visit STARR's training site: i_mo/s arronlinetraining, or email RXTra i ni ng2sta rr-team.com. 17_ �0 2 126/130 co LL 7 U) L M U) LL L ~ .E 0 N UJ V� US CL a N N 2 U} (T3 U� li.. C 2 Ud ce) 0 r• V r r r N M NCTi(Dc0ycM 00 LO N N ti N N N N � 0 r Y r N r-- co 0 r T N T r N CO N CD CD n 0 T N (r) T Cc U-) N N CO w C) N LOCN CD (C) CO L() T T cV T co r r N CO N fT1 N M °COr (N N r CO (D 0 N LC) N Cn (D T r N �s 0()U1 ~ r N N L_ N N G N 0) to LO r T N T co LC] r r N 0 0r-v— Zr T N N (p 0 T co LC) N 6) co T 00,T N N 'o U- r- T�— N co 0 F- V- N N H Q �Co LoN C CO N0) U]Ncn NCJM �TCO,NN �tC4CV OOPI m (D�©N r T 0 co r 1 ruz)3 �rrNco U- r N CO tV CC7r �- NN Ri L 0 LO N M to N LLB rr�N LO 0 crS r- C N CT) U) N M N Im co r N L LL�TrN r..Ly CO LC) ai W � ti er r NM G: NM 0 �-cor N N T N w co T 0 N - N L4 N 137 19 Co lo ~ co 0 r N � E w 7 }� N M, co co N N °- co U) N a) r N N 2, � T N co CQcoco NN M to 0 r- [/] T N N N Ll CO U) r (v (T7 N CS3n0 l( 7 a7 r r N (J] ~ r r N 00 N U )~- NN N N LL LLON f3) (Q 0 � r000') 7 t7 N T � M N (9 O T m {/] T , N N C C U C Q U � .aC � CU U `� E U t:! CL) U CD m O C . = w � C Q N f- +� E C,] co C N CO M Q) y Q CO O C E r m w 4) o�F= dQ m m o N �] t .ac a�i r G C U� 0 +�.�N co i' :AJ uS U3 co n U � L U C — o c U A 4 U U � CL r- Q M M co ca C = T- N C 17 ca 0 U s37 N � (ll C 47 N (1) � = L (U U) © CO 4) cn N rn n y00 Th August July 202 July a SuMo TuWTh Fr Sa SuMo TuWe Th Fr Sa Th 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 91011 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 12 1314 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 19 20 21 22 23 2425 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 26 27 2e 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY Jun 28 I 29 30 Jul 1 2 3 4 15:30pm Special City Holiday Independence Council bay Meeting (Virtual Meeting) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 7:00pm P&Z Mtg 6:00pm HPC - Rescheduled Regular (Council Meeting Chambers) (Council 6:00pm Cancelled -HP C Work Session 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 6:00pm CC Work Session (Council C.h.ambe_.rs) _ 7:00pm CC Mtg (Council Chambers) 19 20 21 22 2.3 24 25 Candidate for 6:0opm P&Z Council Work Session Packets (Council Available (City Chambers) Clerk's Office) 700pm P&Z Special Mtg (Council Chambers) 26 27 28 29 30 31 Aug 7:00pm CC Mtg (Chambers) Council Calendar 1 7/8/2UZU &Z8 AM 128/130 August 2020 August September 2020 Sumo TuWe Th Fr Sa SuMo TuWe 7h Fr 5a Th 1 1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9101112 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1314 15 16 17 18 19 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2021 22 23 24 25 26 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 27 28 29 30 30 31 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY JuI 26 27 28 29 30 31 Aug 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Candidate for 7:00pm P&Z Mtg' Council Packet (Council Submissions Chambers). (City Clerk's Office) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 7:00pm CC Mtg 6 00pm HPC (Council Work Session Chambers) (Council 7.30pm HPC Regular Meeting 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 8:00am 6:00pm P&Z Candidate for Work Session Council (Council Packets Chambers) Deadline (City Clerk's Office) 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 7:00pm CC Mtg ( (Chambers) 30 31 Sep 1 2 3 4 5 Council Calendar 2 71b12UZU 8:2b AM 129/130 Septe Tu her 2020 October 2020 September 2020 Su M7u We Th Fr Sa SumoTuTu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 5 6 7 8 910 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 2021 22 23 24 25 26 18 19 20 21 2223 24 27 28 29 30 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY Aug 30 31 Sep 1 2 3 4 7:00pm P&Z Mtg 12:00pm PACAB (Council Mtg. Chambers). 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Labor Day 00pm HPC Holiday Work Session (Council Chamber) [_(Cmuncil 30pm HPC Regular Meeting 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 7:00pm CC Mtg 6:00pm P&Z 12:00pm PACAB (Council Work Session Work Session Chambers) (Council (Chambers) Chambers). 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Oct 1 2 3 7:00pm CC Mtg (Chambers) Council Calendar 3 130/130