HomeMy WebLinkAbout01272025 City Council Work Session Notes (with P&Z)WORK SESSION NOTES CITY COUNCIL
(With P & Z)
Called by: Mayor Sue McClure Time: 5:30pm Date: 1/27/2025
Council Members’ Present: John Osenga, Kevin Finch, Julie Crites, Randy Wells, Casie Warner, Robert Barnwell, and Mayor Sue McClure Present: Jodi Kurtz, Danny Meunick, Courtney Bringhurst, Clara Brown, P & Z Commissioners Present: Chair Carol Griswold, Sean Ulman, Rhonda Hubbard, Clair Sullivan, Brenan Hornseth Purpose: Discuss code change recommendations regarding marijuana establishments, accessory dwelling units, and building height requirements. The commission will also discuss their annual priorities and share feedback from a targeted review of the Municipal Lands Management Plan.
Notes on Discussion Regarding Building Height and Housing in Seward: Danny Meunick spoke and introduced Background and Context:
• First-Year Growth: Commissioner’s first year involved evolving into the position, moving from
challenges like lack of quorum to addressing substantial housing concerns.
• Upcoming Changes: Three commissioner terms are ending in February, with open seats upcoming. Efforts are being made to wrap up discussions on key issues, including housing.
• Structure of Discussion: Focused on housing-related topics, starting with building height regulations.
Building Height Discussion: (pg. 19) 1. Current Building Height Standards:
o Code Purpose: To prevent loss of life/property damage and maintain neighborhood character. Character of Neighborhood.
o Fire Safety Review: Fire Chief confirmed that fire safety concerns tied to building height are outdated and irrelevant. 2. Research on Other Towns: (pg. 27)
o Seward has one of the most restrictive building height limits (34 feet) compared to similar "viewshed towns" like Juneau, Homer, and Kenai.
o Other towns allow minimum heights in the range of 35–40 feet and often permit exceptions in certain zones. 3. Community Feedback from Surveys: (pg.21)
o A survey indicates 60% of the public supports the current three-story (34 feet) limit.
o Responses show split preferences beyond three stories, with some favoring one-to-two
stories and others open to four or more stories in certain areas of town.
4. Challenges for Developers:
o Feedback from developers highlights that the 34-foot limit makes building three stories more costly and complex.
o A 38-foot limit would allow a true three-story structure without additional expenses.
o Apartment complexes, especially those with family-oriented units, are needed but have a
long return on investment, making development less attractive. (2-3 bedrooms apartments)
WORK SESSION NOTES CITY COUNCIL
(With P & Z)
5. Potential Solutions:
o Increase the height limit in specific areas to 38 feet (true three-story structures) or 48 feet (four-story structures). Once hit over 3,000 sq ft, an elevator is required.
o Introduce height flexibility through:
Overlay Districts: Tailoring height limits to certain zones.
Conditional Use Permits: Allowing exceptions based on specific criteria. Main Considerations:
• Priorities: Housing is a major concern, but citizens value protecting scenic views and small-town character.
• Comprehensive Planning: Feedback from surveys and collaboration with developers and community members are vital for informed decisions. Next Steps for Commission to work on:
• Analyze additional survey results for community preferences.
• Explore models from other towns for conditional height adjustments.
• Develop recommendations on where height increases might be viable, ensuring minimal impact on the viewshed and neighborhood character.
Discussion
• Max Height?
• Density of more hotels
• 4-story hotels and their locations
• If hotel can be in any zone? CUP
• 4-story building overlays
• Airbnbs Efficiency Housing The proposed code amendment aims to address inefficiencies and restrictions in the current regulations
for efficiency apartments (essentially small accessory dwelling units or ADUs). Key points of the amendment include: 1. Attachment Requirement Removal:
o The current code mandates that efficiency apartments be attached to the main single-
family dwelling, with structures considered "attached" if connected by a breezeway.
o The amendment removes this requirement, allowing detached ADUs, provided they remain smaller than the main dwelling. 2. Single Room Limitation Removed: (pg. 11)
o Existing regulations allow only one habitable room in efficiency apartments.
o The amendment permits multiple rooms within the ADU, enabling more flexible use
while maintaining size restrictions relative to the primary residence. 3. Expanded Zoning Applicability:
o Detached ADUs would be allowed in higher-density zones (R2, R3, Urban Residential, etc.), including the Central Business District (CBD), reflecting evolving housing needs.
4. P & Z added:
o Suggestions were made to implement public notifications (within 300 feet) or a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for ADUs in specific zones to ensure community input on increased density.
o Concerns were raised about the effectiveness of CUPs due to enforcement issues.
WORK SESSION NOTES CITY COUNCIL
(With P & Z)
o The change aligns with national trends to deregulate ADU construction in response to the
housing crisis. Discussion
• Detached Garages – Finch
• Mixed opinions on requiring public notifications versus simplifying processes to encourage development.
• Advocacy for maintaining neighborhood character while allowing flexibility for homeowners.
• Strong emphasis on addressing practical concerns of affordability and family needs, such as
housing for elderly or disabled relatives.
• Some council members and participants highlighted the importance of involving neighbors in the decision-making process, suggesting Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) or public notifications for
building ADUs.
• The counterargument noted that similar projects had been completed without public notifications, raising questions about the necessity of requiring neighbor approval. 5. Parking Concerns: (Barnwell)
o The impact of additional units on parking, especially in winter conditions, has emerged as a significant concern.
o Existing rules for parking in nightly rentals could inform us how parking requirements are structured for long-term rental ADUs or family-use ADUs. 6. Development Requirements (Barnwell)
o Clarifications were provided that the current code only allows one ADU per single-family dwelling, and ADUs cannot be added to duplexes or triplexes.
o The discussion touched on existing property development limits, such as total allowable building area. 7. CUP Enforcement: (Crites)
o Concerns were raised about the lack of enforcement of CUP conditions post-approval.
o A potential solution was suggested: including CUP requirements in the checklist for issuing a certificate of occupancy to ensure compliance.
o Bringhurst stated you can only have 1 ADU per single family dwelling and 1 ADU for
with a single-family dwelling. Not duplex or triplex.
8. Utility Infrastructure: (Danny)
o Input from public works was identified as necessary for determining utility setups for detached ADUs, ensuring the city infrastructure could accommodate increased density.
Marijuana Code
1. Current Land Use Code Complexity:
o The existing code is convoluted, requiring cross-referencing of various sections to determine land use for marijuana establishments.
o A new, clearer land use table has been proposed and approved to simplify understanding.
(pg. 5-8)
o Four types of marijuana that falls under the establishments 2. Focus on Marijuana Establishments:
o Definitions for establishments (cultivation, testing, on-site consumption) were updated to provide clarity and align with state requirements.
WORK SESSION NOTES CITY COUNCIL
(With P & Z)
o The council aimed to preemptively regulate these uses to address potential public health
and land use conflicts. Proposed Changes: (pg. 4-8, see packet) 1. Distance Requirements:
o Updated regulations include clear spacing requirements for marijuana establishments
relative to other land uses.
o Specifically bold and underlined changes in the code reflect additional restrictions recommended by the commission.
2. On-Site Consumption (pg. 6)
o Indoor on-site consumption remains permitted in certain zones, while outdoor
consumption and walk-up windows are proposed to be disallowed.
3. Industrial Activities:
o A distinction was made between "light" and "heavy" manufacturing to address potential conflicts in Seward's limited industrial zones, which are often adjacent to residential areas.
o Heavy manufacturing involving significant noise or fumes (e.g., shipbuilding, welding) is
to be more restricted. Public and Council Concerns:
Cultivating process – Exhaust System? Griswold explained why they decided to tackle this.
• Simplification of Code: The commission aimed to address the confusion in the current code by clarifying definitions, organizing them alphabetically, and defining land uses as permitted,
conditional, or prohibited.
• Focus on Industrial Activities: Efforts were made to reduce industrial activities, particularly those generating fumes or nuisances, due to Seward's compact layout where industrial and residential zones often overlap.
• Heavy vs. Light Manufacturing: Heavy manufacturing was deemed incompatible with Seward's small-town character, while light manufacturing was considered appropriate.
• Alignment with Vision: These updates were designed to align with Seward's comprehensive
plan and small-town environment.
Hubbard also commented on why this is being addressed now
• Initiated in February last year when a business sought state endorsement for on-site marijuana consumption.
• Seward had no existing regulations to address this request.
• The proposal led to protest letters and concerns from neighbors near the proposed site, highlighting the need for clear regulations.
• Administration requested clarity in the code.
• Discussions included considerations for public health, not as a reaction to crime but as a
preemptive measure.
• The changes would not affect existing businesses but aim to regulate future establishments.
WORK SESSION NOTES CITY COUNCIL
(With P & Z)
• On-site consumption was a new concept for the community, requiring thoughtful planning.
Additional Discussions:
• Definitions for "light" and "heavy" manufacturing were clarified to avoid ambiguity.
• Specific examples of industries potentially impacted were highlighted (e.g., shipbuilding, candy making).
• Wells addressed a letter that he had emailed everyone from Tufted Puffin and questioned if the commission would be taking those into consideration.
o A letter with 107 signatures supporting the status quo and opposing changes was presented to the council late, limiting immediate review as it was only emailed to everyone at 4:10pm.
Mayor McClure questioned the retail walk up/drive up window? Griswold stated that concerns were raised about enforcing laws on driving under the influence, ensuring minors are not inappropriately exposed to other things that are hard to enforce. (Safety and Driving)
Sullivan spoke to parallels between marijuana and other regulated substances like alcohol and prescription drugs, questioning whether similar restrictions or allowances should apply. Crites spoke to drive up pharmacies and getting narcotics.
Finch spoke to his own personal preference of why he doesn’t go downtown Seward due to all the smoking from other people and/or in winter won’t go to Safeway because of parking. He feels it’s all come down to education. Mayor McClure questioned the testing facilities? Why oppose having testing facilities here? Griswold answered with
• Cannabis production is resource-intensive, requiring substantial water, electricity, and chemicals (e.g., herbicides, fertilizers).
• The local cannabis market is currently supplied by pre-packaged products sourced from larger facilities.
• This suggests that local production and processing may be unnecessary, as larger facilities are more efficient for large-scale operations. Warner question on ID checks, regulation on purchasing marijuana, verification? Wells explained the process on cannabis products: Existing state regulations were clarified, marketing sales outdoors, including strict ID checks, video surveillance requirements, and limits on amounts sold. (Online reserving, not purchase)
Spoke to what minor can go into a facility and how old they have to be Higher age limit for children inside a vehicle ? Must be a direct relative, any age. Wells also spoke to how the staff are trained to watch people and they can’t sell them cannabis if they are under the influence.
WORK SESSION NOTES CITY COUNCIL
(With P & Z)
Christiana Smith made a comment on how very strict it is on how much they sell to one person per day. Warner – questioned the walk up, currently do not allow. If this were to be considered, would we be reconsidering alcohol drive-up windows, pharmacy windows? Danny said that drive thrus are allow with a CUP.
Wells – commented on
• Cannabis has been legal for retail since 2014 in Alaska, and the state became the first in 2017 to legalize on-site consumption.
• Wells explains that the reason on-site consumption businesses are not widespread in the state is
due to the significant expense and barriers to entry for these businesses.
• Cannabis home cultivation and cannabis lab testing facilities have been legal since 2014, which raises a question about why there is a recent concern about the cannabis industry when there is only one legal cannabis business in the city. Elle Zarnia- commented that the entire Community or a lot of felt like the current business got through the process without many of the community even knowing what was going on. Maya Morarity spoke on a Public Vote Consideration:
• Some council members favor the idea of putting the matter to a public vote, citing it as a way to
engage the community and reduce tensions.
• Concerns were raised about the divisiveness of controversial votes, especially with the influence of social media. Christiana Smith – thinks there is a fine line here as she speaks on consumption, amount of alcohol
licenses in Seward (29) and a Festival that has outdoor consumption of alcohol with a visual component of people of all ages. Hubbard – a lot of testimony and health and how we pursue ourselves as a community. She shared stats from the Alaska Department of Revenue Tax – to make everyone aware of the well-being.
Discussion on WS:
• Discussed to schedule another work session to focus on specifics of the proposed code revisions, through Comprehensive Plan, possible have vote of the people for inside city limits, Maya Morarity spoke to the public vote:
• noted the difficulty of managing public discourse on controversial topics, referencing past experiences and the potential for negativity on social media. It is very dark and ugly. Follow-Up Actions:
• Administration was directed to organize another work session on public education and the specifics of this particular section.
• The priorities discussed will be reviewed at a future meeting. Adjournment: 6:56pm