CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1

Transcription

1 CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Tuesday, January 3, 2017 Meeting Agenda Planning Commission Chris Spivey, Chair Darrell Windsor, Vice Chair Debra Pohlman Randy Hughey Richard Parmelee 7:00 PM Harrigan Centennial Hall I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL II. CONSIDERATION OF THE AGENDA III. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES A PM-15 Approval of the November 16, 2016 meeting minutes. Attachments: November draft B PM-16 Approval of the December 20, 2016 meeting minutes. Attachments: December draft IV. REPORTS C Planning Regulations and Procedures. Attachments: Planning Regulations and Procedures V. THE EVENING BUSINESS D MISC Discussion and direction on the results compiled from the November 8, 2016 open house event. Attachments: web_nov Open House Results - Packet for January Planning Commissio VI. PLANNING DIRECTOR S REPORT VII. PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1 Printed on 12/29/2016

2 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda January 3, 2017 VIII. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: More information on these agenda items can be found at or by contacting the Planning Office at 100 Lincoln Street. Individuals having concerns or comments on any item are encouraged to provide written comments to the Planning Office or make comments at the Planning Commission meeting. Written comments may be dropped off at the Planning Office in City Hall, ed to or faxed to (907) Those with questions may call (907) Publish: December 27 and 28, CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 2 Printed on 12/29/2016

3 CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Legislation Details File #: PM-15 Version: 1 Name: Type: Planning Minutes Status: AGENDA READY File created: On agenda: Title: Sponsors: Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: 12/1/2016 In control: Planning Commission 12/20/2016 Final action: 12/20/2016 Approval of the November 16, 2016 meeting minutes. November draft Date Ver. Action By Action Result 12/20/ Planning Commission CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/29/2016 powered by Legistar

4 CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Minutes - Draft Planning Commission Chris Spivey, Chair Darrell Windsor, Vice Chair Debra Pohlman Randy Hughey Richard Parmelee Wednesday, November 16, :00 PM Harrigan Centennial Hall I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Spivey called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Present - Spivey, Windsor, Hughey, Parmelee Absent - Pohlman (excused), Knox (Assembly Liaison) II. CONSIDERATION OF THE AGENDA Julie Beall requested to pull her item from the agenda. III. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES A Approval of the October 19, 2016 meeting minutes. Windsor/Hughey moved to APPROVE the October 19, 2016 meeting minutes. Motion PASSED 4-0. IV. REPORTS B Planning Regulations and Procedures. C D V. THE EVENING BUSINESS Annual report for a bed and breakfast conditional use permit granted to Deanna Moore for 703 Biorka Street. No action required. Annual report for a short-term rental conditional use permit granted to Deanna Moore for 703 Biorka Street. No action required. E Public hearing and consideration of a final plat of a minor subdivision on Whale Island, zoned GI General Island. The request would result in 3 lots. The property is also known as Lot 2 Tract A US Survey The request is filed by David Russell. The owner of record is John W. Williams. Scarcelli described the request. DNR had raised concern for easement details CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1

5 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 in the preliminary plat, so the applicant submitted an amended plat for final consideration. Staff and DNR are satisfied with the trail depiction in the updated plat. Staff recommend approval with administrative adjustment to the plat notes to indicate that the city shall be a party to all easements. David Russell stated that he is agreeable to the administrative plat note adjustments recommended by staff. Spivey stated that the application has been discussed thoroughly. Hughey/Windsor moved to APPROVE the findings 1) that the proposed minor subdivision complies with the comprehensive plan by providing for the development of additional housing options; and 2) that the minor subdivision would not be injurious to the public health, safety, and welfare. Motion PASSED 4-0. Hughey/Windsor moved to APPROVE the final plat of a minor subdivision of a portion of Whale Island, also known as Lot 2 Tract A US Survey 3556 subject to the attached conditions of approval. The request is filed by David Russell. The owner of record is John W. Williams. a. The City is a part to all easements and noted on the plat. b. All easements comply with the Sitka General Code. c. Appropriate maintenance, use, and access agreements for all platted easements be noted on the plat before final recording. d. Applicant shall work with municipal staff to determine appropriate plat notes. Motion PASSED 4-0. F Public hearing and consideration of a final plat of a minor subdivision on Whale Island, zoned GI General Island. The request would result in 2 lots. The property is also known as Lot 5 Tract A US Survey The request is filed by Donald and Patricia Lehmann and Eric Speck. The owners of record are Donald and Patricia Lehmann and Eric Speck. Scarcelli described the request. DNR had raised concerns regarding easement details in the preliminary plat. The trail on the plat has been adequately amended, and staff recommend approval with administrative adjustments to plat note language. Spivey stated that he has a business relationship with the applicants, and the board permitted him to participate. Don and Patricia Lehmann represented the request. Don Lehmann stated that he has paid 100% of utility access to the island, and he is willing to extend that to other lot owners proportional to what he paid. Windsor/Hughey moved to APPROVE the findings 1) that the proposed minor subdivision complies with the comprehensive plan by providing for the development of additional housing options; and 2) that the minor subdivision would not be injurious to the public health, safety, and welfare. Motion PASSED 4-0. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 2

6 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 Windsor/Hughey the final plat of a minor subdivision of a portion of Whale Island, also known as Lot 5 Tract A US Survey 3556 subject to the attached conditions of approval. The request is filed by Donald and Patricia Lehmann and Eric Speck. The owners of record are Donald and Patricia Lehmann and Eric Speck. a. The City is a part to all easements and noted on the plat. b. All easements comply with the Sitka General Code. c. Appropriate maintenance, use, and access agreements for all platted easements be noted on the plat before final recording. d. Applicant shall work with municipal staff to determine appropriate plat notes. Motion PASSED 4-0. G Public hearing and consideration of a final plat of a minor subdivision at 1402 Sawmill Creek Road. The subdivision would reconfigure three existing lots into three proposed lots. The property is also known as a portion of US Survey 1947, a portion of US Survey 2365, and ATS 511 Tract A. The request is filed by Thomas and Danine Williamson. The owners of record are Thomas and Danine Williamson. Pierson described the request. The applicants seek to reconfigure three existing lots into three new lots. All three new lots will have ocean access. Access and utilities have been designated on the plat. Staff recommend approval. Tom Williamson stated that the item had been adequately explained. Hughey/Windsor the findings 1) that the proposed minor subdivision complies with the comprehensive plan by providing for the reconfiguring existing waterfront land to create water access for one additional parcel; and 2) that the minor subdivision would not be injurious to the public health, safety, and welfare. Motion PASSED 4-0. Hughey/Windsor moved to APPROVE the final plat of a minor subdivision of 1402 Sawmill Creek Road, also known as a portion of US Survey 2365, a portion of US Survey 1947, and ATS 511 Tract A. The request is filed by Thomas and Danine Williamson. The owners of record are Thomas and Danine Williamson. Motion PASSED 4-0. H Public hearing and consideration of a variance request for 1415 Davidoff Street in the R-1 Single Family and Duplex Residential District. The request is for the reduction of the front setback from 20 feet to 2 feet, the reduction of the easterly side setback from 8 feet to 2 feet, and substandard lot width. The property is also known as Lot 3 of Clyde Franks Subdivision. The request is filed by Sam Smith. The owner of record is Venneberg Family Trust. Scarcelli described the request and the history of soil wasting in the vicinity. Engineering studies have been included in the packet to address the soil wasting. Residential and undeveloped properties are adjacent. Windsor asked CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 3

7 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 if there are plans for further development of Davidoff Street. Bosak stated that there are no such plans at this time. Staff recommend postponement until a geotechnical analysis can be conducted. Hughey stated that a vacation of the street could result in a safer placement for the proposed house. Spivey asked if the vacation is feasible. Scarcelli stated that he does not want to speculate, but the applicant could pursue the process if he wishes. Sam Smith stated that this is one of the last few undeveloped view lots in town. Smith stated that test holes have been dug. Smith stated that he is pursuing quotes for geotechnical analysis. Smith stated that he believes the geotechnical analysis is in the purview of the Building Department, and if he built within the setbacks he would not be going through the Planning Commission process. Parmelee asked about the engineer, and Smith stated that he is working with Ryan Wilson. Parmelee stated confidence in Wilson s work. Smith stated that he plans to buy the lot and build on it for himself. Hughey asked if Smith is interested in vacating the right of way, and Smith stated that he didn t believe the adjacent owner would be interested. Hughey asked about the time frame. Smith stated that he would like to develop in the spring. Smith stated that he would work on attaining the geotechnical analysis. Scarcelli stated that the Building Department will require a geotechnical analysis regardless of the variance process. Conner Nelson stated that the landslide was not a natural slide, so he does not believe a geotechnical analysis will help. Spivey stated that geotechnical is under Building s purview, but would help in making the variance decision. Parmelee stated his preference to approve with the condition of approval that the geotechnical analysis meets Building s requirements. Spivey asked if the commissioners believe that they have enough information to make a decision. Parmelee stated that no neighbors have submitted comments. Windsor asked if Hughey has a conflict of interest with the Sitka Community Land Trust because of the organization s property. Hughey stated that he does not believe he has a direct conflict of interest. Bosak stated that it is the board s job to consider public health, safety, and welfare. Hughey/Parmelee moved to POSTPONE until geotechnical analysis is completed and submitted. Motion PASSED 4-0. I Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit request for marijuana retail at 4612 Halibut Point Road, in the C-2 general commercial and mobile home zone. The property is also known as Lot 1 of Wyatt-Cox Resubdivision #2. The request is filed by Aaron Bean for Green Leaf, Inc. The owners of record are Connor K. Nelson and Valerie L. Nelson. Scarcelli clarified the applicant and address for the record. The commission granted a permit for marijuana cultivation at 4614 Halibut Point Road. The proposed retail would be in an under-construction structure at 4612 Halibut Point Road. The property is not within 500 feet of sensitive uses. This new industry can be expected to bring revenue to the community. Staff recommend approval. Spivey clarified if staff support approval without a parking plan. Scarcelli stated that he believes the property will have enough parking, and a plan is a condition of approval. Parmelee stated that he has not known there to CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 4

8 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft be parking issues in the vicinity. November 16, 2016 Eric Van Cise and Conner Nelson represented the application. Nelson stated that there is a lot of parking on site. Nelson stated interest in buying some of the state right-of-way for parking in the future. Spivey stated that the packet is thorough. Parmelee asked about parking. Nelson and Scarcelli stated that parking seems to be available. Windsor asked about on-site consumption. Van Cise stated that there is a consumption area indicated on the second story with retail on the first story. Spivey asked to clarify if parking can be a condition of approval. Scarcelli stated yes. Windsor stated that he believes it s a good idea. Windsor/Hughey moved to APPROVE findings that there are no negative impacts present that have not been adequately mitigated by the attached conditions of approval. Motion PASSED 4-0. Windsor/Hughey moved to APPROVE the conditional use permit request filed by Green Leaf, Inc. for marijuana retail at 4612 Halibut Point Road, in the C 2 General Commercial and Mobile Home zone subject to the attached conditions of approval. The property is also known as Lot 1 of Wyatt-Cox Resubdivision #2. The owners of record are Connor K. Nelson and Valerie L. Nelson. Conditions of Approval: 1. Owners, operators, and staff of conditional uses shall comply with all state and municipal licensing regulations. 2. All licensed facilities shall comply with all life and safety regulations as promulgated by the municipal building official. 3. All licensed manufacturing and cultivation uses shall provide a fire safety plan, material handling plan, and comply with all fire safety regulations that satisfy the fire marshal or their designee and the building official. 4. All licensed facilities and/or uses shall provide screening from public view of any marijuana related commercial, retail, cultivation, or manufacturing use. 5. All licensed facilities and/or uses shall establish an active sales account and business registration with the municipality and shall comply with all standard and required accounting practices. 6. It shall be a standard regulation that all conditional uses comply with all applicable state regulations and licensing laws or it shall be deemed to abandon and extinguish any associated municipal license or conditional use permit. 7. All approved conditional use permits shall comply with all of the Sitka General Code or shall be deemed to abandon and extinguish any associated municipal license or conditional use permit. 8. Applicant shall provide a Parking Plan that complies with Section for all uses present and proposed at the current property including striped parking spaces where practical. 9. Odor Control shall include charcoal filters and other best means to limit and mitigate odor impacts to surrounding uses. Should a meritorious odor complaint be received the Planning Commission may require additional odor control measures to mitigate any actual negative impacts. 10. The proposed retail site shall not be located within 500 feet of any school grounds, recreation or youth center, religious service building, or correctional facility that was legally established prior to approval of this conditional use CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 5

9 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 permit as intended by licensing restriction and regulations of the state in 3 AAC Chapter The applicant shall provide the Planning Commission with a report after one year of operation. 12. The Planning Commission or Planning Department shall be able to schedule a hearing to resolve any issues, impacts, or review conditions of approval related to meritorious issues connected to the Public s health, safety, and welfare. 13. Hours of Operation shall comply with the submitted application. Motion PASSED 4-0. J Public hearing and consideration of a variance request for 503 Shennet Street. The request is for the reduction of the front setback from 20 feet to 5 feet and substandard parking for the construction of an accessory dwelling unit. The property is also known as Lot 3 Block A Sirstad Addition No. 2. The request is filed by Justin Olbrych. The owner of record is Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins. Pierson explained the request. The applicant seeks to construct a home on this undeveloped parcel. The parcel is wetlands. Shennet Street is not fully developed, and only 503 and 504 Shennet Street use this street for access. The applicant seeks a 5 foot front setback and to provide no parking on the lot. The applicant proposes to park on an undeveloped portion of the street, and intends to seek an encroachment permit from the municipal Public Works Department. The variances would help to preserve the wetlands environment by reducing required fill on the lot. Staff recommend approval. Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins stated that Shennet Street is 40 feet wide. The road is built toward the 504 Shennet Street side. The driveway shown in packet photos is all on the city s property. The intent is to park on the undeveloped city property rather than filling in the wetlands. Kreiss-Tomkins clarified that the structure would be approximately 30 feet from the actual street. Hughey asked if there are other access points to the BIHA property at the end of Shennet Street. Kreiss-Tomkins states that he believes there are several access points to the large parcel. Hughey asked if parking could be developed if Shennet is fully developed. Kreiss-Tomkins stated that it is possible to dump gravel in, and he is willing to take appropriate steps if any encroachment permits are revoked. Spivey stated that he would not necessarily classify Shennet Street as a street. Spivey stated that he is typically uncomfortable with 5 foot setbacks. Scarcelli clarified that BIHA owns the large parcel. Bosak and Hughey stated that the lot has multiple access points. Hughey stated that he wishes he could see the whole plan for the property. Bosak stated that the variance could be approved apart from the conditional use permit for the accessory dwelling unit. Spivey stated that he is not convinced that a setback variance is needed. Kreiss-Tomkins apologized for the quality of the drawings. He stated that he can kayak the property after a rain event, and the entire parcel is considered wetlands. The house will be built on piers. Kreiss-Tomkins stated that the placement with the requested variance would provide space between an existing structure to the rear. Windsor stated that it seems the structure could be rotated to be within setbacks. Kreiss-Tomkins stated that his schedule is flexible. Hughey stated that he would like to see full detailed drawings. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 6

10 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 Windsor suggested a site visit. Parmelee stated that he wanted to see building dimensions. Hughey/Parmelee moved to POSTPONE until more detailed plans are submitted. Motion PASSED 4-0. K Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit request for 503 Shennet Street. The request is for the construction of an accessory dwelling unit. The property is also known as Lot 3 Block A Sirstad Addition No. 2. The request is filed by Justin Olbrych. The owner of record is Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins. Scarcelli explained the request. Staff recommend postponement for more detailed drawings. Windsor asked how this is an accessory dwelling unit. Scarcelli stated the recommendation for the applicant to include both proposed structures in the plan. Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins stated that the intent is to reserve the ability to build a primary structure in the future, but he only plans to build an ADU at this time. Windsor asked if the applicant could build a small structure now then make it an accessory dwelling unit in the future when he builds a larger house. Scarcelli stated that he could apply for an ADU conditional use permit either now or later, but he is vesting his property rights by applying now. Windsor/Hughey moved to POSTPONE until more detailed plans are submitted. Motion PASSED 4-0. L Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit application for a short-term rental at 1307 Halibut Point Road. The property is also known as Lot 3 Block 13 US Survey 3303B. The request is filed for Joan and Chris Gianotti. The owners of record are Joan and Chris Gianotti. Pierson described the request. The owner lives in Juneau, and seeks to rent this house as a short-term rental to allow flexibility for her to use the house when she is in Sitka. She has family in Sitka who will maintain the property. The property has direct access from Halibut Point Road. The property has a two-car carport. Staff recommend approval. Pat Hughes represented the short-term rental request, and stated that the request has been covered. No public comment. Windsor stated that short-term rentals have been on nearly every agenda, and wondered if the board would discuss them. Spivey stated that a larger-scale discussion is later on this agenda. Parmelee stated that is straight-forward and the property is well set up for this. Hughey/Windsor moved to APPROVE and adopt the required findings for conditional use permits as discussed in the staff report. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 7

11 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 Required Findings for Conditional Use Permits. The planning commission shall not recommend approval of a proposed development unless it first makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. The city may use design standards and other elements in this code to modify the proposal. A conditional use permit may be approved only if all of the following findings can be made regarding the proposal and are supported by the record that the granting of the proposed conditional use permit will not: a. Be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare; b. Adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity; nor c. Be injurious to the uses, property, or improvements adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the site upon which the proposed use is to be located. 2. The granting of the proposed conditional use permit is consistent and compatible with the intent of the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan and any implementing regulation. 3. All conditions necessary to lessen any impacts of the proposed use are conditions that can be monitored and enforced. 4. The proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated to protect adjacent properties, the vicinity, and the public health, safety, and welfare of the community from such hazard. 5. The conditional use will be supported by, and not adversely affect, adequate public facilities and services; or that conditions can be imposed to lessen any adverse impacts on such facilities and services. 6. Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed conditional use meets all of the criteria in subsection B of this section. The city may approve, approve with conditions, modify, modify with conditions, or deny the conditional use permit. The city may reduce or modify bulk requirements, off-street parking requirements, and use design standards to lessen impacts, as a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. In considering the granting of a conditional use, the assembly and planning commission shall satisfy themselves that the general criteria set forth for uses specified in this chapter will be met. The city may consider any or all criteria listed and may base conditions or safeguards upon them. The assembly and planning commission may require the applicant to submit whatever reasonable evidence may be needed to protect the public interest. The general approval criteria are as follows: 1. Site topography, slope and soil stability, geophysical hazards such as flooding, surface and subsurface drainage and water quality, and the possible or probable effects of the proposed conditional use upon these factors; 2. Utilities and service requirements of the proposed use, including sewers, storm drainage, water, fire protection, access and electrical power; the assembly and planning commission may enlist the aid of the relevant public utility officials with specialized knowledge in evaluating the probable effects of the proposed use and may consider the costs of enlarging, upgrading or extending public utilities in establishing conditions under which the conditional use may be permitted; 3. Lot or tract characteristics, including lot size, yard requirements, lot coverage and height of structures; 4. Use characteristics of the proposed conditional use that affect adjacent uses and districts, including hours of operation, number of persons, traffic volumes, off-street parking and loading characteristics, trash and litter removal, exterior lighting, noise, vibration, dust, smoke, heat and humidity, recreation and open space requirements; CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 8

12 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, Community appearance such as landscaping, fencing and screening, dependent upon the specific use and its visual impacts. Conclusion on Findings: The required findings of fact have been met as the conditional use as conditioned would not be detrimental to the public s health, safety, or welfare; that the conditions of approval have satisfactorily mitigated any potential harm or impact to the surrounding land uses and properties through the conditions of approval, by meeting all applicable SGC regulations, and by being in support of the Comprehensive Plan regarding transient housing supply. Motion PASSED 4-0. Hughey/Windsor moved to APPROVE the conditional use permit application for a short term at 1307 Halibut Point Road, in the R 1 single family and duplex residential district subject to the attached conditions of approval. The property is also known as Lot 3 Block 13 US Survey 3303B. The request is filed by Joan and Chris Gianotti. The owners of record are Joan and Chris Gianotti. Conditions of Approval: 1. Contingent upon a completed satisfactory life safety inspection. 2. The facility shall be operated consistent with the application and plans that were submitted with the request. 3. The facility shall be operated in accordance with the narrative that was submitted with the application. 4. The applicant shall submit an annual report every year, covering the information on the form prepared by the Municipality, summarizing the number of nights the facility has been rented over the twelve month period starting with the date the facility has begun operation. The report is due within thirty days following the end of the reporting period. 5. The Planning Commission, at its discretion, may schedule a public hearing at any time for the purpose of resolving issues with the request and mitigating adverse impacts on nearby properties. 6. Failure to comply with all applicable tax laws, including but not limited to remittance of all sales and bed tax, shall be grounds for revocation of the conditional use permit. 7. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions may result in revocation of the conditional use permit. 8. The property owner shall register for a sales account prior to the Conditional Use Permit becoming valid. 9. Owners shall provide renters with a brief rental overview including respecting the residential neighborhood and regarding directions and traffic circulation patterns to mitigate any potential traffic impacts. Motion PASSED 4-0. M N CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit application for a short-term rental at 227 Lakeview Drive. The property is also known as Lot 12 Lakeview Heights Subdivision. The request is filed by Julie Beall. The owner of record is Julie Beall. PULLED by applicant. Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit application for an accessory dwelling unit at 3201 Halibut Point Road. The property is also Page 9

13 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 known as Lot 1 Kinberg/Sturm Subdivision. The application is filed by James Sturm. The owner of record is James Sturm. Pierson described the request for accessory dwelling unit. The existing mobile home has an approved variance for a 0 foot side setback. The proposed structure would fit within required setbacks. The required 4 parking spaces are available on-site. If approved, the structure would have to meet building requirements for permanent structures, as well as additional utility fees. Hughey clarified that dwelling units do not have to have separate rooms. Staff recommend approval. James Sturm stated that he wants to add another dwelling unit on the lot and either rent it out or move into it himself. Spivey stated that this is what we re trying to achieve with accessory dwelling units. Windsor/Hughey moved to APPROVE the required findings for conditional use permits for accessory dwelling units as discussed in the staff report. Required Findings for Conditional Use Permits. The planning commission shall not recommend approval of a proposed development unless it first makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. The city may use design standards and other elements in this code to modify the proposal. A conditional use permit may be approved only if all of the following findings can be made regarding the proposal and are supported by the record that the granting of the proposed conditional use permit will not: a. Be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare; b. Adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity; nor c. Be injurious to the uses, property, or improvements adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the site upon which the proposed use is to be located. 2. The granting of the proposed conditional use permit is consistent and compatible with the intent of the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan and any implementing regulation. 3. All conditions necessary to lessen any impacts of the proposed use are conditions that can be monitored and enforced. 4. The proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated to protect adjacent properties, the vicinity, and the public health, safety, and welfare of the community from such hazard. 5. The conditional use will be supported by, and not adversely affect, adequate public facilities and services; or that conditions can be imposed to lessen any adverse impacts on such facilities and services. 6. Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed conditional use meets all of the criteria in subsection B of this section. The city may approve, approve with conditions, modify, modify with conditions, or deny the conditional use permit. The city may reduce or modify bulk requirements, off-street parking requirements, and use design standards to lessen impacts, as a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. In considering the granting of a conditional use, the assembly and planning commission shall satisfy themselves that the general criteria set forth for uses specified in this chapter will be met. The city may consider any or all criteria listed and may base conditions or safeguards upon them. The assembly and planning commission may require the applicant to submit whatever CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 10

14 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 reasonable evidence may be needed to protect the public interest. The general approval criteria are as follows: 1. Site topography, slope and soil stability, geophysical hazards such as flooding, surface and subsurface drainage and water quality, and the possible or probable effects of the proposed conditional use upon these factors; 2. Utilities and service requirements of the proposed use, including sewers, storm drainage, water, fire protection, access and electrical power; the assembly and planning commission may enlist the aid of the relevant public utility officials with specialized knowledge in evaluating the probable effects of the proposed use and may consider the costs of enlarging, upgrading or extending public utilities in establishing conditions under which the conditional use may be permitted; 3. Lot or tract characteristics, including lot size, yard requirements, lot coverage and height of structures; 4. Use characteristics of the proposed conditional use that affect adjacent uses and districts, including hours of operation, number of persons, traffic volumes, off-street parking and loading characteristics, trash and litter removal, exterior lighting, noise, vibration, dust, smoke, heat and humidity, recreation and open space requirements; 5. Community appearance such as landscaping, fencing and screening, dependent upon the specific use and its visual impacts. Conclusion on Findings: That the proposed conditional use as conditioned would not be detrimental to the public s health, safety, or welfare; that the conditions of approval have satisfactorily mitigated any potential harm or impact to the surrounding land uses and properties; and that the required findings have been met as the proposal complies with SGC and Comprehensive Plan sections regarding ADUs and variances, and affordable housing while protecting the character of the neighborhood and the public s health, safety, and welfare. Motion PASSED 4-0. Hughey/Windsor moved to APPROVE the conditional use permit request for an accessory dwelling unit at 3201 Halibut Point Road, with the condition that all requirements from the Building Department are met. The property is also known as Lot 1 Kinberg Sturm Subdivision. The request is filed by James Sturm. The owner of record is James Sturm. Motion PASSED 4-0. O Public hearing and discussion of the Historic Preservation Plan draft. The request is filed by the City and Borough of Sitka Historic Preservation Commission. Scarcelli presented a staff memo on the Historic Preservation Plan draft. Staff commend the Historic Preservation Commission on its work. Scarcelli stated that staff would like to see the Historic Preservation Plan to fall within the Comprehensive Plan process. Scarcelli stated that the cover image should not only depict the Russian Era but also cultures prior. Scarcelli stated that staff would like to see additional public outreach and outreach to Sitka Tribe of Alaska. Staff recommend that action steps are clarified. Anne Pollnow introduced herself as Historic Preservation Plan chair. Pollnow stated that she was unaware of the staff s comments before seeing this memo. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 11

15 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 Pollnow stated that it s inappropriate to name specific ordinances or code amendments, but just that they need to take place. Pollnow stated that they do not currently have the expertise on the board or involved public to draft ordinances or code amendments. Pollnow stated the dates listed in the plan are listed in the Alaska Heritage Resources Inventory. Pollnow stated that much of the detail is in the appendix. Pollnow stated that there are an array of photos that represent the community. Pollnow stated that the commission has attempted to engage the Tribe, and the plan has been in development in Pollnow stated that the last public survey was conducted in 2010, but that the commission hoped that the draft would receive public comment during the Comprehensive Plan process. Spivey asked about public input. Pollnow stated that surveys were available around town, and public meetings were held. Spivey asked if outreach was done to develop a multicultural plan. Pollnow stated that the Tribe has a seat on the commission. Pollnow stated that a consultant was involved with the plan in Pollnow stated that she worked on the plan as a private consultant when she wasn t on the board. Hughey asked about proposed zoning changes as cited in the Plan. Pollnow stated interest in an overlay district, but that would involve an additional process and work with professionals. Spivey stated that he s uncomfortable with the unknowns. Pollnow stated that the current review process is very confusing and inconsistent. Pollnow stated that the municipality s status as a Certified Local Government requires a historic preservation plan. Windsor asked for an example of zoning changes. Pollnow stated that there could be a GIS overlay over areas such as Sheldon Jackson Campus so that everyone can understand that extra review may be required. Bosak clarified that this meeting is to provide comment on the plan. Spivey recommended that the Historic Preservation Commission continue to work toward public outreach and collaboration with STA. Hughey expressed appreciation for the Historic Preservation Commission s work on the plan. Scarcelli stated that historic preservation can benefit the community economically. P Discussion and direction on short-term rental and bed and breakfast conditional use permits. Scarcelli explained that there are many pros and many cons to short-term rentals. Research comes down on both sides of the issue. We need to understand what short-term rentals mean for Sitka. Sitka has approximately 53 short-term rentals. Bosak suggested a quarterly report, and suggested that the commission not make decisions on the future of short-term rentals until after Aspen Hotel opens. Commissioners agreed to quarterly reports and delaying action. Ray Stonebreaker asked how many short-term rentals we really need, as there are several hotels in town. Stonebreaker urged caution. Stonebreaker stated that he spoke to a realtor who stated that a short-term rental could negatively impact his property value. Stonebreaker stated that he could have a new neighbor every day. Stonebreaker stated that there are no sidewalks on Lakeview Drive, and kids play in the street. Stonebreaker does not want to see residential neighborhoods commercialized. Someone shouldn t make a buck at the rest of the neighborhood s expense. Stonebreaker said you can develop relationships with long-term renters but not short-term renters. Parmelee stated that short-term rentals are often short-lived. Parmelee said that his neighbors have a short-term rental and he doesn t notice people coming and going. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 12

16 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft November 16, 2016 Parmelee said that some people are doing short-term rentals to supplement their income during this economy. Parmelee stated that perhaps the commission should consider if certain neighborhoods are less fit for short-term rentals. Spivey stated that the commission should keep an eye on how many are in individual neighborhoods. Stonebreaker thanked the commission for hearing his concerns, and stated that these decisions impact our neighborhoods. Spivey stated that the commission takes neighbor concerns very seriously. Hughey stated that neighborhood quality and long-term rental availability may be impacted. Parmelee stated that the new hotel rooms developing may discourage some future short-term rental applicants. Bosak recommended additional monitoring until the new hotel opens. Bosak recommended quarterly reporting to the Planning Commission. VI. PLANNING DIRECTOR S REPORT Bosak reported that over 80 attended the November 8th open house. Bosak suggested the December 6th Comprehensive Plan meeting be cancelled and compiled information would be provided online. Commissioners agreed to the cancellation. VII. PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR VIII. ADJOURNMENT Windsor/Parmelee moved to ADJOURN at 10:05 PM. Motion PASSED 4-0. ATTEST: Samantha Pierson, Planner I CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 13

17 CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Legislation Details File #: PM-16 Version: 1 Name: Type: Planning Minutes Status: AGENDA READY File created: On agenda: Title: Sponsors: Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: 12/20/2016 In control: Planning Commission 1/3/2017 Final action: Approval of the December 20, 2016 meeting minutes. December draft Date Ver. Action By Action Result CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/29/2016 powered by Legistar

18 CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Minutes - Draft Planning Commission Chris Spivey, Chair Darrell Windsor, Vice Chair Debra Pohlman Randy Hughey Richard Parmelee Tuesday, December 20, :00 PM Harrigan Centennial Hall I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Vice-Chair Windsor called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM. Present: Windsor, Pohlman, Parmelee Absent (excused): Spivey, Hughey II. CONSIDERATION OF THE AGENDA Pohlman/Parmelee moved to POSTPONE item D until the applicant can be present. Motion PASSED 3-0. III. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES A Approval of the November 16, 2016 meeting minutes. No action taken. IV. REPORTS B Planning Regulations and Procedures. V. THE EVENING BUSINESS C Public hearing and consideration of a variance request for 503 Shennet Street. The request is for the reduction of the front setback from 20 feet to 5 feet and substandard parking for the construction of a house. The property is also known as Lot 3 Block A Sirstad Addition No. 2. The request is filed by Justin Olbrych. The owner of record is Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins. Pierson explained the request. The owner seeks a reduction of the front setback to 5 feet for a new house and to provide no on-site parking. The property is wetlands. The owner proposes to park on an undeveloped portion of Shennet Street. Public Works is willing to grant an encroachment permit, but CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1

19 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 it would be revokable. Bosak clarified that this request is for a single-family home, not an accessory dwelling unit. Staff recommend approval. Justin Olbrych explained the request. Olbrych stated that the neighbors are in support, and one of the neighbors will allow him to tie into their utilities. Pohlman clarified that the neighbors who are currently parking on the street are in support, and Olbrych stated yes. Olbrych stated that the Army Corps of Engineers permit has been granted. Scarcelli asked if the owner is aware that parking would be required on-site if the encroachment permit is revoked, and Olbrych stated yes. Parmelee states that it is straight-forward. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the required findings for major structures or expansions as discussed in the staff report. Required Findings for Variances. 1. Required Findings for Variances Involving Major Structures or Expansions. Before any variance is granted, it shall be shown: a) That there are special circumstances to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other properties, specifically, that the lot is currently an undeveloped wetland environment; b) The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of use possessed by other properties but are denied to this parcel, specifically, the ability to economically develop a residential structure while protecting the wetland environment; c) That the granting of such a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property, nearby parcels, or public infrastructure, specifically, that the structure as proposed would limit adverse impacts to the natural environment; and d) That the granting of such will not adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan: specifically, Section which states, Minimize impacts on diversity and integrity of the ecosystem, by allowing flexibility in development standards to reduce effects on wetlands. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the variance request at 503 Shennet Street. The request is for the reduction in the front setback from 20 feet to 5 feet and substandard parking for the construction of a house to the attached conditions of approval. The property is also known as Lot 3 Block A Sirstad Addition No. 2. The request is filed by Justin Olbrych. The owner of record is Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins. a. Conditions of Approval: i. All United States Army Corp of Engineer permits are secured and followed. ii. Use of the Right of Way for on-street parking is approved by a valid encroachment permit by the City and Borough of Sitka s Public Works Department or the property and use come into immediate compliance with off-street parking requirements. iii. Applicant will provide a floor plan for staff approval. Motion PASSED 3-0. D Public hearing and consideration of a variance request for 220 Lakeview CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 2

20 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 Drive. The variance is for the reduction in the side setback from 8 feet to 3 feet for the construction of a shed. The property is also known as Lot 2 Lakeview Glen Subdivision. The request is filed by Randy Hughey. The owners of record are Randy and Carol Hughey. Item PULLED by the applicant. E Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit application for a short-term rental at 227 Lakeview Drive. The property is also known as Lot 12 Lakeview Heights Subdivision. The request is filed by Julie Beall. The owner of record is Julie Beall. Pierson explained the request. The applicant seeks to rent out 1 unit of a duplex. Sufficient parking is provided, and it accesses directly from Lakeview Drive. Conditional use permits are to be granted unless they can be found to be detrimental. Staff recommend approval. Julie Beall stated that she read her neighbor s comments. Beall stated that her family is supported by a single income, and a rental would be helpful to supplement that. Beall stated that she plans to target traveling medical professionals and parents traveling for sporting events. Beall stated that she lives on-site so she can keep track of the rental. Beall stated that Welcome Home Rentals would manage the rental. Parmelee clarified that Beall has 3 driveways, and she stated that it is correct. Beall stated that she has a separate freezer for trash. Beall stated that she is only aware of one neighbor in opposition to the rental. Parmelee stated that he doesn t believe it will make a difference with traffic if it s a short-term rental or a long-term rental. Windsor believes it s a step above a duplex since the owner lives in one of the units. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the required findings for conditional use permits as discussed in the staff report. Required Findings for Conditional Use Permits. The planning commission shall not recommend approval of a proposed development unless it first makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. The city may use design standards and other elements in this code to modify the proposal. A conditional use permit may be approved only if all of the following findings can be made regarding the proposal and are supported by the record that the granting of the proposed conditional use permit will not: a. Be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare; b. Adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity; nor c. Be injurious to the uses, property, or improvements adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the site upon which the proposed use is to be located. 2. The granting of the proposed conditional use permit is consistent and compatible with the intent of the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan and any implementing regulation. 3. All conditions necessary to lessen any impacts of the proposed use are conditions that can be monitored and enforced. 4. The proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated to protect adjacent properties, the vicinity, and the public health, safety, and welfare of the community from such hazard. 5. The conditional use will be supported by, and not adversely affect, adequate public facilities and services; or that conditions can be imposed to CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 3

21 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 lessen any adverse impacts on such facilities and services. 6. Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed conditional use meets all of the criteria in subsection B of this section. The city may approve, approve with conditions, modify, modify with conditions, or deny the conditional use permit. The city may reduce or modify bulk requirements, off-street parking requirements, and use design standards to lessen impacts, as a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. In considering the granting of a conditional use, the assembly and planning commission shall satisfy themselves that the general criteria set forth for uses specified in this chapter will be met. The city may consider any or all criteria listed and may base conditions or safeguards upon them. The assembly and planning commission may require the applicant to submit whatever reasonable evidence may be needed to protect the public interest. The general approval criteria are as follows: 1. Site topography, slope and soil stability, geophysical hazards such as flooding, surface and subsurface drainage and water quality, and the possible or probable effects of the proposed conditional use upon these factors; 2. Utilities and service requirements of the proposed use, including sewers, storm drainage, water, fire protection, access and electrical power; the assembly and planning commission may enlist the aid of the relevant public utility officials with specialized knowledge in evaluating the probable effects of the proposed use and may consider the costs of enlarging, upgrading or extending public utilities in establishing conditions under which the conditional use may be permitted; 3. Lot or tract characteristics, including lot size, yard requirements, lot coverage and height of structures; 4. Use characteristics of the proposed conditional use that affect adjacent uses and districts, including hours of operation, number of persons, traffic volumes, off-street parking and loading characteristics, trash and litter removal, exterior lighting, noise, vibration, dust, smoke, heat and humidity, recreation and open space requirements; 5. Community appearance such as landscaping, fencing and screening, dependent upon the specific use and its visual impacts. Conclusion on Findings: The required findings of fact have been met as the conditional use as conditioned would not be detrimental to the public s health, safety, or welfare; that the conditions of approval have satisfactorily mitigated any potential harm or impact to the surrounding land uses and properties through the conditions of approval, by meeting all applicable SGC regulations, and by being in support of the Comprehensive Plan regarding transient housing supply. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the conditional use permit application for a short term at 227 Lakeview Drive, in the R 1 single family and duplex residential district subject to the attached conditions of approval. The property is also known as Lot 12 Lakeview Heights Subdivision. The request is filed by Julie Beall. The owner of record is Julie Beall. Conditions of Approval: 1. Contingent upon a completed satisfactory life safety inspection. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 4

22 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, The facility shall be operated consistent with the application and plans that were submitted with the request. 3. The facility shall be operated in accordance with the narrative that was submitted with the application. 4. The applicant shall submit an annual report every year, covering the information on the form prepared by the Municipality, summarizing the number of nights the facility has been rented over the twelve month period starting with the date the facility has begun operation. The report is due within thirty days following the end of the reporting period. 5. The Planning Commission, at its discretion, may schedule a public hearing at any time for the purpose of resolving issues with the request and mitigating adverse impacts on nearby properties. 6. Failure to comply with all applicable tax laws, including but not limited to remittance of all sales and bed tax, shall be grounds for revocation of the conditional use permit. 7. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions may result in revocation of the conditional use permit. 8. The property owner shall register for a sales account prior to the Conditional Use Permit becoming valid. 9. Owners shall provide renters with a brief rental overview including respecting the residential neighborhood and regarding directions and traffic circulation patterns to mitigate any potential traffic impacts. Motion PASSED 3-0. F Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit request for a short-term rental at 714 Pherson Street. The property is also known as Lot 12 Block 1 Amended Plat of Sirstad Addition No. 2. The request is filed by Ashley McNamee. The owners of record are Shawn Marie Buckroyd and Leana Jean Buckroyd Youle. Pierson explained the request. The applicant seeks to operate a short-term rental out of the second story of a duplex. The first story would be long-term inhabited. The property was previously used as an illegal lodge, then the operator passed away. A short-term rental is less intensive of a use than a lodge. There is sufficient parking. Staff recommend approval. Parmelee stated that he knows the applicant, but the commission allowed him to participate. Ashley McNamee stated that she wants to get this squared away as the previous owner attempted to before he passed away. Parmelee stated that he believes there are other short-term rentals in the area. Parmelee stated that it s better than a lodge. Parmelee stated that the area is spread out with lots of parking. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the required findings for conditional use permits as discussed in the staff report. Required Findings for Conditional Use Permits. The planning commission shall not recommend approval of a proposed development unless it first makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. The city may use design standards and other elements in this code to modify the proposal. A conditional use permit may be approved only if all of CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 5

23 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 the following findings can be made regarding the proposal and are supported by the record that the granting of the proposed conditional use permit will not: a. Be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare; b. Adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity; nor c. Be injurious to the uses, property, or improvements adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the site upon which the proposed use is to be located. 2. The granting of the proposed conditional use permit is consistent and compatible with the intent of the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan and any implementing regulation. 3. All conditions necessary to lessen any impacts of the proposed use are conditions that can be monitored and enforced. 4. The proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated to protect adjacent properties, the vicinity, and the public health, safety, and welfare of the community from such hazard. 5. The conditional use will be supported by, and not adversely affect, adequate public facilities and services; or that conditions can be imposed to lessen any adverse impacts on such facilities and services. 6. Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed conditional use meets all of the criteria in subsection B of this section. The city may approve, approve with conditions, modify, modify with conditions, or deny the conditional use permit. The city may reduce or modify bulk requirements, off-street parking requirements, and use design standards to lessen impacts, as a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. In considering the granting of a conditional use, the assembly and planning commission shall satisfy themselves that the general criteria set forth for uses specified in this chapter will be met. The city may consider any or all criteria listed and may base conditions or safeguards upon them. The assembly and planning commission may require the applicant to submit whatever reasonable evidence may be needed to protect the public interest. The general approval criteria are as follows: 1. Site topography, slope and soil stability, geophysical hazards such as flooding, surface and subsurface drainage and water quality, and the possible or probable effects of the proposed conditional use upon these factors; 2. Utilities and service requirements of the proposed use, including sewers, storm drainage, water, fire protection, access and electrical power; the assembly and planning commission may enlist the aid of the relevant public utility officials with specialized knowledge in evaluating the probable effects of the proposed use and may consider the costs of enlarging, upgrading or extending public utilities in establishing conditions under which the conditional use may be permitted; 3. Lot or tract characteristics, including lot size, yard requirements, lot coverage and height of structures; 4. Use characteristics of the proposed conditional use that affect adjacent uses and districts, including hours of operation, number of persons, traffic volumes, off-street parking and loading characteristics, trash and litter removal, exterior lighting, noise, vibration, dust, smoke, heat and humidity, recreation and open space requirements; 5. Community appearance such as landscaping, fencing and screening, dependent upon the specific use and its visual impacts. Conclusion on Findings: The required findings of fact have been met as the conditional use as conditioned would not be detrimental to the public s health, CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 6

24 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 safety, or welfare; that the conditions of approval have satisfactorily mitigated any potential harm or impact to the surrounding land uses and properties through the conditions of approval, by meeting all applicable SGC regulations, and by being in support of the Comprehensive Plan regarding transient housing supply. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the conditional use permit application for a short term rental at 714 Pherson Street subject to the attached conditions of approval. The property is also known as Lot 12 Block 1 Amended Plat of Sirstad Addition No. 2. The request is filed by Ashley McNamee. The owners of record are Shawn Marie Buckroyd and Leana Jean Buckroyd Youle. Conditions of Approval: 1. Contingent upon a completed satisfactory life safety inspection. 2. The facility shall be operated consistent with the application and plans that were submitted with the request. 3. The facility shall be operated in accordance with the narrative that was submitted with the application. 4. The applicant shall submit an annual report every year, covering the information on the form prepared by the Municipality, summarizing the number of nights the facility has been rented over the twelve month period starting with the date the facility has begun operation. The report is due within thirty days following the end of the reporting period. 5. The Planning Commission, at its discretion, may schedule a public hearing at any time for the purpose of resolving issues with the request and mitigating adverse impacts on nearby properties. 6. Failure to comply with all applicable tax laws, including but not limited to remittance of all sales and bed tax, shall be grounds for revocation of the conditional use permit. 7. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions may result in revocation of the conditional use permit. 8. The property owner shall register for a sales account prior to the Conditional Use Permit becoming valid. 9. Owners shall provide renters with a brief rental overview including respecting the residential neighborhood and regarding directions and traffic circulation patterns to mitigate any potential traffic impacts. Motion PASSED 3-0. G Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit request for a short-term rental at 414 Hemlock Street. The property is also known as Lot 1 Block 24 McGraw Subdivision. The request is filed by Ali Clayton. The owner of record is Ali Clayton. Pierson explained the request. The single-family home has recently been renovating. Sufficient parking is on-site. A dental clinic is next door, and another short-term rental is down the street. Staff recommend approval. Parmelee stated that it is down the street from him, and he received notice. Ali Clayton stated that she has been operating a short-term rental on Davidoff Street for about a year and a half so she s familiar with short-term rentals. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 7

25 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Pohlman stated that the request is straight-forward. December 20, 2016 Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the required findings for conditional use permits as discussed in the staff report. Required Findings for Conditional Use Permits. The planning commission shall not recommend approval of a proposed development unless it first makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. The city may use design standards and other elements in this code to modify the proposal. A conditional use permit may be approved only if all of the following findings can be made regarding the proposal and are supported by the record that the granting of the proposed conditional use permit will not: a. Be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare; b. Adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity; nor c. Be injurious to the uses, property, or improvements adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the site upon which the proposed use is to be located. 2. The granting of the proposed conditional use permit is consistent and compatible with the intent of the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan and any implementing regulation. 3. All conditions necessary to lessen any impacts of the proposed use are conditions that can be monitored and enforced. 4. The proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated to protect adjacent properties, the vicinity, and the public health, safety, and welfare of the community from such hazard. 5. The conditional use will be supported by, and not adversely affect, adequate public facilities and services; or that conditions can be imposed to lessen any adverse impacts on such facilities and services. 6. Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed conditional use meets all of the criteria in subsection B of this section. The city may approve, approve with conditions, modify, modify with conditions, or deny the conditional use permit. The city may reduce or modify bulk requirements, off-street parking requirements, and use design standards to lessen impacts, as a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. In considering the granting of a conditional use, the assembly and planning commission shall satisfy themselves that the general criteria set forth for uses specified in this chapter will be met. The city may consider any or all criteria listed and may base conditions or safeguards upon them. The assembly and planning commission may require the applicant to submit whatever reasonable evidence may be needed to protect the public interest. The general approval criteria are as follows: 1. Site topography, slope and soil stability, geophysical hazards such as flooding, surface and subsurface drainage and water quality, and the possible or probable effects of the proposed conditional use upon these factors; 2. Utilities and service requirements of the proposed use, including sewers, storm drainage, water, fire protection, access and electrical power; the assembly and planning commission may enlist the aid of the relevant public utility officials with specialized knowledge in evaluating the probable effects of the proposed use and may consider the costs of enlarging, upgrading or extending public utilities in establishing conditions under which the conditional use may be permitted; 3. Lot or tract characteristics, including lot size, yard requirements, lot coverage and height of structures; CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 8

26 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, Use characteristics of the proposed conditional use that affect adjacent uses and districts, including hours of operation, number of persons, traffic volumes, off-street parking and loading characteristics, trash and litter removal, exterior lighting, noise, vibration, dust, smoke, heat and humidity, recreation and open space requirements; 5. Community appearance such as landscaping, fencing and screening, dependent upon the specific use and its visual impacts. Conclusion on Findings: The required findings of fact have been met as the conditional use as conditioned would not be detrimental to the public s health, safety, or welfare; that the conditions of approval have satisfactorily mitigated any potential harm or impact to the surrounding land uses and properties through the conditions of approval, by meeting all applicable SGC regulations, and by being in support of the Comprehensive Plan regarding transient housing supply. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the conditional use permit application for a short term rental at 414 Hemlock Street subject to the attached conditions of approval. The property is also known as Lot 1 Block 24 McGraw Subdivision. The request is filed by Ali Clayton. The owner of record is Ali Clayton. Conditions of Approval: 1. Contingent upon a completed satisfactory life safety inspection. 2. The facility shall be operated consistent with the application and plans that were submitted with the request. 3. The facility shall be operated in accordance with the narrative that was submitted with the application. 4. The applicant shall submit an annual report every year, covering the information on the form prepared by the Municipality, summarizing the number of nights the facility has been rented over the twelve month period starting with the date the facility has begun operation. The report is due within thirty days following the end of the reporting period. 5. The Planning Commission, at its discretion, may schedule a public hearing at any time for the purpose of resolving issues with the request and mitigating adverse impacts on nearby properties. 6. Failure to comply with all applicable tax laws, including but not limited to remittance of all sales and bed tax, shall be grounds for revocation of the conditional use permit. 7. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions may result in revocation of the conditional use permit. 8. The property owner shall register for a sales account prior to the Conditional Use Permit becoming valid. 9. Owners shall provide renters with a brief rental overview including respecting the residential neighborhood and regarding directions and traffic circulation patterns to mitigate any potential traffic impacts. Motion PASSED 3-0. H Public hearing and consideration of a conditional use permit request for an accessory dwelling unit at 2003 Anna Court. The property is also known as Lot 6 Verstovia Park Subdivision No. 2. The request is filed by CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 9

27 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft William Patrick. The owner of record is William Patrick. December 20, 2016 Pierson explained the request. A mobile home exists on-site, and the applicant seeks to build an accessory dwelling unit. A detailed floor plan was not submitted because the applicant wanted to receive approval before purchasing plans. Sufficient parking exists on the lot. Staff recommend approval. William Patrick stated that his building would be approximately feet high. Patrick stated that the location of the structure would not block light access to other structures. Patrick stated that the site is flat. Pohlman asked if Patrick was okay with a 16 foot maximum height, and Patrick stated that he guessed so. Pohlman stated that if he exceeds 16 feet, he will not meet the conditions of approval. Scarcelli clarified that accessory dwelling units may be a maximum of 25 feet or the height of the primary structure. Patrick stated that he can come back to the commission if he needs additional height. Windsor stated this is what we want ADUs for. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the required findings for conditional use permits for accessory dwelling units as discussed in the staff report. Required Findings for Conditional Use Permits. The planning commission shall not recommend approval of a proposed development unless it first makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. The city may use design standards and other elements in this code to modify the proposal. A conditional use permit may be approved only if all of the following findings can be made regarding the proposal and are supported by the record that the granting of the proposed conditional use permit will not: a. Be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare; b. Adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity; nor c. Be injurious to the uses, property, or improvements adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the site upon which the proposed use is to be located. 2. The granting of the proposed conditional use permit is consistent and compatible with the intent of the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan and any implementing regulation. 3. All conditions necessary to lessen any impacts of the proposed use are conditions that can be monitored and enforced. 4. The proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated to protect adjacent properties, the vicinity, and the public health, safety, and welfare of the community from such hazard. 5. The conditional use will be supported by, and not adversely affect, adequate public facilities and services; or that conditions can be imposed to lessen any adverse impacts on such facilities and services. 6. Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed conditional use meets all of the criteria in subsection B of this section. The city may approve, approve with conditions, modify, modify with conditions, or deny the conditional use permit. The city may reduce or modify bulk requirements, off-street parking requirements, and use design standards to lessen impacts, as a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. In considering the granting of a conditional use, the assembly and planning commission shall satisfy themselves that the general criteria set forth for uses specified in this chapter will be met. The city may consider any or all criteria listed and may base conditions or safeguards upon them. The assembly and CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 10

28 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 planning commission may require the applicant to submit whatever reasonable evidence may be needed to protect the public interest. The general approval criteria are as follows: 1. Site topography, slope and soil stability, geophysical hazards such as flooding, surface and subsurface drainage and water quality, and the possible or probable effects of the proposed conditional use upon these factors; 2. Utilities and service requirements of the proposed use, including sewers, storm drainage, water, fire protection, access and electrical power; the assembly and planning commission may enlist the aid of the relevant public utility officials with specialized knowledge in evaluating the probable effects of the proposed use and may consider the costs of enlarging, upgrading or extending public utilities in establishing conditions under which the conditional use may be permitted; 3. Lot or tract characteristics, including lot size, yard requirements, lot coverage and height of structures; 4. Use characteristics of the proposed conditional use that affect adjacent uses and districts, including hours of operation, number of persons, traffic volumes, off-street parking and loading characteristics, trash and litter removal, exterior lighting, noise, vibration, dust, smoke, heat and humidity, recreation and open space requirements; 5. Community appearance such as landscaping, fencing and screening, dependent upon the specific use and its visual impacts. Conclusion on Findings: That the proposed conditional use as conditioned would not be detrimental to the public s health, safety, or welfare; that the conditions of approval have satisfactorily mitigated any potential harm or impact to the surrounding land uses and properties; and that the required findings have been met as the proposal complies with SGC and Comprehensive Plan sections regarding ADUs and variances, and affordable housing while protecting the character of the neighborhood and the public s health, safety, and welfare. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the conditional use permit request for an accessory dwelling unit at 2003 Anna Court, with the conditions that 1) the structure will be no taller than 16 feet and 2) the applicant submits a detailed floor plan for staff approval. The property is also known as Lot 6 Verstovia Park Subdivision No. 2. The request is filed by William Patrick. The owner of record is William Patrick. Motion PASSED 3-0. I Public hearing and consideration of a concept plat of a major subdivision of 800 Alice Loop to result in 11 lots. The property is also known as Lot 16 Ethel Staton Subdivision. The request is filed by Shee Atika, Inc. The owner of record is Shee Atika Holdings Alice Island, LLC. Scarcelli explained the request for a subdivision to result in 11 lots. The lot is on the inside of Alice Loop. The lots on the outside perimeter of Alice Loop had strict covenants recorded, but this lot was not bound by those covenants. The access easement should be amended to be called a parking easement. This easement would not be large enough to provide the required parking for the townhome development as outlined in the plat note of a previous plat. Pohlman stated that the Commission was required to consider variances for virtually every lot on the periphery of Alice Loop. Pohlman stated that she does CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 11

29 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 not want to see every lot of this proposed subdivision to come before the board in the future for variances. Scarcelli stated that a planned unit development could address setbacks during the subdivision process. Bosak stated that variances in the peripheral lots were impacted by the flood line, which wouldn t apply for these lots. Pohlman asked if there were any lots that would clearly need a variance. Scarcelli stated that the lots on the ends of the oval may need variances because of the extensive front setback. Ken Cameron represented Shee Atika. Cameron thanked staff, and stated that they tried to design the subdivision so that variances would not be necessary. Windsor asked if Cameron could work with staff on the parking issue, and Cameron stated yes. Parmelee asked about the purpose of the access parking, and Cameron replied that it is for the townhouses. Caprice Pratt asked when they will find out if covenants are included in the plan. Scarcelli stated that covenants are determined privately. Pratt asked if commercial use could be allowed, and Scarcelli stated yes. Scarcelli stated that code and the coastal management plan places a lower priority on waterfront residential than water dependent uses. Pratt stated that the neighbors have made substantial investments on their properties. Paul Haavig stated that his decision to buy was based on how it was advertised, as pristine view lots. Haavig stated concern if there are no limits on the development of these new lots. Haavig stated that he believes he previously saw a proposed layout with fewer lots. Pohlman stated that she would like to see the parking better developed and work to ensure that variances aren t required. Pohlman stated that she understands the concerns of neighbors, and understands that this lot is zoned waterfront. Scarcelli stated that he will work with the applicant, and stated that developers of individual lots would have to go before the Historic Preservation Commission. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE findings that: a. the proposed major subdivision concept plat complies with the comprehensive plan by providing for the development of additional waterfront zoned property; b. That the proposed major subdivision concept plat complies with the Subdivision Code as conditioned; and c. That the major subdivision concept plat would not be injurious to the public health, safety, and welfare. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the concept plat of the major subdivision of Alice Loop Subdivision. This approval is subject to the attached conditions of approval. The request is filed by Ptarmica McConnell. The owner of record is Shee Atika Holdings Alice Island, LLC. Conditions of Approval: 1. The municipality shall be a party to all easements. All easements shall be recorded and no changes shall occur without municipal approval. 2.BAll major subdivision regulations be followed and any deviations from code be corrected prior to review of the final plat (e.g. flagging, easements, CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 12

30 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft easement area details, and monumentation). December 20, 2016 Motion PASSED 3-0. J Public hearing and consideration of a boundary line adjustment request for 3614 Halibut Point Road and 109 Harbor Mountain Road. The properties are also known as Lot 4 Tract A US Survey 3317, and Lot 2 Lot Line Adjustment of Lot 3 US Survey The request is filed by Del Stengl and Ernestine Massey. The owners of record are Del Stengl and Ernestine Massey. Scarcelli explained the request for a boundary line adjustment. 109 Harbor Mountain Road has a trailer court and single family home Halibut Point Road is undeveloped. The boundary line adjustment would swap equal portions of land to correct for encroachments from 109 Harbor Mountain Road onto 3614 Halibut Point Road. Encroachments will still exist from 109 Harbor Mountain Road onto municipal property. Department policy states that planning applications will not be approved when encroachments exist. Easements should be increased to the mandatory minimum width of 20 feet. Windsor asked if staff would have denied the request administratively, and Scarcelli stated yes because of the department policy regarding encroachments. Ernestine Massey and Del Stengl came forward to represent the request. Massey stated that the 15 foot right of way was agreed upon in the 1970 s for a water line. Massey stated that she is doing her estate planning and wants to separate the house from trailer court to make things easier to her heirs. Massey stated that the previous surveyor was in error. Massey doesn t understand why the easement needs to change to 20 feet when 15 feet has been sufficient in the past. Windsor asked if Massey would come into conformance with the easement, and she stated that she was not aware that the easement would have to be 20 feet. Massey stated that some of her tenants have bought their trailers with encroaching structures. Massey stated that she does not know how to force people to remove these structures from their trailers. Pohlman asked if the city can notify individuals to remove their encroaching structures. Scarcelli stated that the city can take action, but the property owner also can. Scarcelli stated that an approval could be used as a stick and carrot to motivate Massey to take action. Massey stated that she has tried to get encroachments removed, to no avail. Pohlman asked if the encroachment is a city enforcement issue. Scarcelli stated yes, at significant legal cost. Scarcelli stated that approval could be granted with conditions that encroachments and the easements come into conformance. Massey stated that she does not know how to get rid of the encroachments. Scarcelli stated that staff can facilitate discussion with the applicant and municipal attorney. Stengl stated that the lot-line adjustment is on the table, and he is being held hostage for what is happening on the other side of the property line. Pohlman stated that they re being held hostage by the people who are encroaching. Parmelee stated that it seems like 2 different issues, and Scarcelli stated that he disagrees. Scarcelli stated that other boundary line adjustments have been denied for similar encroachment issues. Windsor stated that essentially the city is passing the buck on enforcement. Bosak stated that she sees encroachment correction as a joint effort between the city and the owner. Massey stated that it would be helpful for the city to send out letters when standards change. Stengl stated that he has a DOT permit in process for access to his property from Halibut Point Road. Wayne Dye introduced himself CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 13

31 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 as the project surveyor. Dye stated that the proposed boundary line adjustment corrects some of the encroachments. Dye stated that Shuler Drive isn t fully developed. Dye stated that the city hasn t been diligent to ensure that people aren t encroaching. Don Seese stated that these problems happened many years ago, and he believes a resolution is possible. Parmelee/Pohlman moved to APPROVE findings that: a. As proposed, the BLA: i. Does not provide for orderly and consistent development consistent with the Sitka General Code and the principles, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan by not coming into compliance with existing design and development standards regarding easements as well as not correcting existing encroachments into adjacent property, both of which present detrimental impacts to the public s health, safety, and welfare. Further, the proposal does not present facts that support the necessary findings regarding variances, which the SGC and the Comprehensive Plan require. ii. Access for firefighting apparatus would be dimensioned and below standard, which could be detrimental to the public s health, safety, and welfare. iii. The encroachments into the adjacent municipal property and the right of way (North Shuler) would be injurious to those property rights. iv. There are not facts presented, as required by the findings for platting variances, to support a lot of unusual size and shape or topographical features, and the facts support a lot of adequate size and shape with no unusual topographical features in the areas surrounding the easements location. v. There are no facts presented to support undue and substantial hardship to provide the appropriate easements and to correct the encroachment. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE findings that: a. If modified subject to the attached conditions of approval that the easements be platted in accordance with existing design standards for easement widths (i.e. 20 feet) and all encroachments connected to the properties in question into adjacent properties be removed prior to recording the Boundary Line Adjustment that the modifications and conditions of approval would eliminate the detrimental impacts to public, health, safety and welfare and the potential injuries to adjacent property. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the Boundary Line Adjustment of 109 Harbor Mountain Road and 3614 Halibut Point Road in the R-1 MH district, subject to the attached conditions of approval. The property is also known as Lot 4 of USS 3317 and Lot 2 LLA of Lot 3 of USS The request is filed by Del Stengl and Ernestine Massey. The owners of record of the respective lots are Del Stengl and Ernestine Massey. a. Conditions of Approval: i. The easements be platted in accordance with existing design standards for easement widths (i.e. 20 feet); and ii. All encroachments connected to the properties in question into adjacent properties be removed prior to recording the Boundary Line Adjustment. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 14

32 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 Motion PASSED 3-0. K Public hearing and consideration of a platting variance request for substandard easements at 109 Harbor Mountain Road. The property is also known as Lot 2 Lot Line Adjustment of Lot 3 US Survey The request is filed by Ernestine Massey. The owner of record is Ernestine Massey. Item PULLED by the applicant. L Public hearing and consideration of a preliminary plat of a minor subdivision request for 109 Harbor Mountain Road, which would result in 2 lots. The property is also known as Lot 2 Lot Line Adjustment of Lot 3 US Survey The request is filed by Ernestine Massey. The owner of record is Ernestine Massey. Scarcelli described the request for a minor subdivision to result in two lots. With the conditions of easements and encroachments coming into conformance, staff recommends approval. Ernestine Massey stated that she does not know what to do about the encroaching structures. Bosak stated that she believes a resolution can be found. Massey stated that there is a trailer encroaching minimally across the property line into North Shuler Drive. Massey stated that the trailer is too old to move according to city code. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE findings that: a. As proposed, the BLA: i. Does not provide for orderly and consistent development consistent with the Sitka General Code and the principles, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan by not coming into compliance with existing design and development standards regarding easements as well as not correcting existing encroachments into adjacent property, both of which present detrimental impacts to the public s health, safety, and welfare. Further, the proposal does not present facts that support the necessary findings regarding variances, which the SGC and the Comprehensive Plan require. ii. Access for firefighting apparatus would be dimensioned and below standard, which could be detrimental to the public s health, safety, and welfare. iii. The encroachments into the adjacent municipal property and the right of way (North Shuler) would be injurious to those property rights. iv. There are not facts presented, as required by the findings for platting variances, to support a lot of unusual size and shape or topographical features, and the facts support a lot of adequate size and shape with no unusual topographical features in the areas surrounding the easements location. v. There are no facts presented to support undue and substantial hardship to provide the appropriate easements and to correct the encroachment. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE findings that: a. If modified subject to the attached conditions of approval that the easements be platted in accordance with existing design standards for easement widths (i.e. 20 feet) and all encroachments connected to the properties in question CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 15

33 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 into adjacent properties be removed prior to recording the Boundary Line Adjustment that the modifications and conditions of approval would eliminate the detrimental impacts to public, health, safety and welfare and the potential injuries to adjacent property. Motion PASSED 3-0. Pohlman/Parmelee moved to APPROVE the Boundary Line Adjustment of 109 Harbor Mountain Road and 3614 Halibut Point Road in the R-1 MH district, subject to the attached conditions of approval. The property is also known as Lot 4 of USS 3317 and Lot 2 LLA of Lot 3 of USS The request is filed by Del Stengl and Ernestine Massey. The owners of record of the respective lots are Del Stengl and Ernestine Massey. a. Conditions of Approval: i. The easements be platted in accordance with existing design standards for easement widths (i.e. 20 feet); and ii. All encroachments connected to the properties in question into adjacent properties be removed prior to recording the Boundary Line Adjustment. Motion PASSED 3-0. M Discussion and direction regarding monumentation and flagging requirements in Title 21. Scarcelli gave some background on monumentation and flagging in relation to municipal code. Primary monumentation can be very costly. Flagging is currently required for all subdivisions. Scarcelli stated that monumentation requirements have not been strictly followed in the past. The city s requirements go beyond state minimums. Staff recommends relaxing monumentation and flagging requirements. Pohlman asked if flagging would have had anything to do with the construction project on Swan Lake that was stopped, and Bosak stated no. Pohlman expressed concerns for ambiguous decision-making on flagging. Bosak stated that there could be an internal policy to provide guidance. Parmelee stated that simpler code is better. Local surveyors Wayne Dye and Kelly O Neill came forward. Dye stated that they often drive 4 to 8 feet. Scarcelli asked if they see any benefit to primary monuments. Dye stated that people destroy primary monuments just like they do secondary monuments. Dye stated that primary monuments take a lot of work and are expensive. Dye stated that code also requires 2 reference points for each primary monument. Dye recommended 2 primary monuments for minor subdivisions in excess of 32,000 square feet. O Neill stated that they don t want to replace historic secondary monuments with primary monuments, as historic monuments are important to the record. Bosak asked about islands. Dye stated that original island surveys had only one monument per island and used meanders. Dye stated that in 1998, Wells Williams put his interpretation of monumentation into a memo, and the surveyors have been working off of that interpretation. Dye stated that primary monuments are 6 to 10 times more expensive than secondary monuments. Pohlman stated preference for flagging on an as-needed basis, as long as there is a guideline for the determination. CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 16

34 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 20, 2016 VI. PLANNING DIRECTOR S REPORT Bosak reported on a stop-work order that was issued then lifted from a project at 613 Lake Street. Bosak reported that a grant application for hazard mitigation planning was submitted. Scarcelli reported on the Smart Growth America application for Sitka that was recently approved. Pierson stated that a commissioner training would be held at 6 PM on February 7th, and staff are working on compiling a commissioner handbook. VII. PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR VIII. ADJOURNMENT Pohlman/Parmelee moved to ADJOURN at 10:23 PM. Motion PASSED 3-0. Attest: Samantha Pierson, Planner I CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 17

35 CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Legislation Details File #: Version: 1 Name: Type: P&Z Miscellaneous Status: AGENDA READY File created: On agenda: Title: Sponsors: Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: 3/22/2016 In control: Planning Commission 4/19/2016 Planning Regulations and Procedures. Planning Regulations and Procedures Final action: Date Ver. Action By Action Result CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/29/2016 powered by Legistar

36 Planning Regulations and Procedures Planning Commission: 2007 Comprehensive Plan Contains goals and policies in ten chapters Land use goals and policies are sections 2.4 through 2.8 Sitka General Code Title 21 consists of Subdivision Regulations (subdivision code) Title 22 is the zoning code Creatures of the Subdivision Code Boundary Line Adjustments formal subdivision plat required approved in house Minor Subdivision create up to four lots from one parcel Concept plat Final plat Approved by the Planning Commission except PUD or if subd. appealed (then goes to the Assembly) Major Subdivision five or more lots from one parcel with roads and utilities built to Municipal standards Planning Commission Approvals Concept plan Preliminary plat Final plat Assembly review of final plat Zero Lot Lines two units attached to each other with each one on its own lot and the lot line going through the center of connecting wall Concept plan Preliminary plat Final plat Approved by the Planning Commission unless appealed to the Assembly Planned Unit Developments Creatures of the Zoning Code Zoning ordinance text amendments Recommendation by the Planning Commission with approval by the Assembly Zoning ordinance map amendments Recommendation by the Planning Commission with approval by the Assembly Variances to allow for reductions of setbacks Approved by the Planning Commission unless appealed to the Assembly Administrative approvals for two foot setback reductions Conditional Use Permits Approval by the Planning Commission with appeal to the Assembly Examples: Bed and Breakfasts Short-term rentals (rental of an apartment for less than 14 days) Other aspects of the zoning code: Land use district shown on zoning map Regulations for each zone such as uses, building height, setbacks, lot size Sign ordinance Parking regulations Other Approvals Street Vacations Planning Commission and Assembly review (by ordinance) Covered by SGC Tidelands Leases Covered by Sitka General Code Title 18 Assembly review only Land Sales Covered by SGC Title 18 Assembly review only Floodplain Regulations SGC Title 20 Chris Spivey Darrell Windsor Debra Pohlman Randy Hughey Tamie Parker Song Staff : Maegan Bosak (office) Michael Scarcelli, J.D (office) Samantha Pierson (office) Assistant/P&Z Misc/Planning Regulations and Procedures-10/28/15

37 CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Legislation Details File #: MISC Version: 1 Name: Type: P&Z Miscellaneous Status: AGENDA READY File created: On agenda: Title: Sponsors: Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: 12/20/2016 In control: Planning Commission 1/3/2017 Final action: Discussion and direction on the results compiled from the November 8, 2016 open house event. web_nov Open House Results - Packet for January Planning Commission Meeting Date Ver. Action By Action Result CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/29/2016 powered by Legistar

38 December 12, 2016 Greetings, I hope you had a good thanksgiving and will have some time off over the holidays! Attached is your packet for the January 3 Meeting. This contains: 1. For Land Use, Housing, and Economic Development Draft Goal and Objectives Actions, now in priority order with the vote tallies from the November Open House Comments for each topic received during the open house 2. The results of the Spend $100 City Bucks exercise 3. A mock-up of the 2030 Sitka Comprehensive Plan, so you can see how this will all come together On page 1 you will find a draft Vision for Sitka s Future completed for review. This is based on the many comments we have received on Sitka s Vision, Sitka s assets, and Sitka s strengths and weaknesses. You have seen these pieces before in other meetings, but I can bring them again if desired. I wanted to have the draft Land Use, Housing, and Economic Development Chapters inserted in the Comp Plan mock-up too, but they are not quite ready and I don t want to delay any longer in getting this packet to you. See you soon! Barbara Sheinberg

39 January 3, 2017 Planning Commission packet Table of Contents LAND USE GOAL AND OBJECTIVES... 1 LAND USE ACTION, RESULTS OF VOTING... 2 HOUSING GOAL AND OBJECTIVES... 5 HOUSING ACTIONS, RESULTS OF VOTING... 6 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES... 9 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS, RESULTS OF VOTING SPEND $100 CITY BUCKS MOCK-UP OF 2030 SITKA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN... 14

40 LAND USE GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Draft LAND USE GOAL (Big Picture Sitka is working to achieve, how we do business.) Guide the orderly and efficient use of private and public land in a manner that fosters economic opportunity, maintains Sitka s small-town atmosphere and rural lifestyle, recognizes the natural environment, and enhances the quality of life for present and future generations. Draft LAND USE OBJECTIVES (More specific programs, initiatives, or directions to achieve the goal) 1. Municipal Land. Manage municipal land in a fair and strategic manner. Ensure there is an adequate supply of land zoned to meet residential, commercial, industrial, public, and recreational needs. 2. Downtown. Develop and sustain an active town center. 3. Promote Social Interaction. Provide a network of quality, dedicated public spaces that promote social connection and interaction. 4. Environmental Quality. Maintain the clean air, water, and soil that supports healthy plant, fish, and wildlife populations which Sitkans depend upon to harvest, gather, and grow food we eat, share, and sell. 5. Incompatible Land Use. Prevent incompatible adjacent land uses through zoning and the use of buffers, setbacks, hours of operation, and similar permit conditions. 6. Future Growth. Establish desired future growth patterns and zoning for all land in borough; eliminate default holding zones. 7. Efficiency and Cost Control. Maximize development along existing roads and utility lines. Use Local Improvement Districts (LID) for new infrastructure. 8. Enhance Resilience. Site planning and infrastructure design works with the natural environment. For example, use of stormwater bio-swales and porous pavement, protecting wetlands, setbacks along anadromous streams, minimizing development in hazard areas. December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 1

41 LAND USE ACTION, RESULTS OF VOTING Results of Voting for Priorities, November 2016 Open House Actions now listed in priority order, from most total votes to least votes LAND USE ACTION m) Maintain and improve downtown s compact, dense, and walkable nature. This includes supporting mixed-use development, multi-story development, and development of vacant properties. n) Promote social-connectedness such as activities in public spaces, development of a series of small destinations connected by sidewalks and bike lanes, meeting places and social nooks along paths, playgrounds, etcetera. g) Revise sale and lease codes/policy to reflect a Triple Bottom Line approach that considers environmental and social-cultural-historic return and community character as well economic return. v) Encourage green site and infrastructure design and development that: minimizes wastewater volume by using natural systems for filtration and runoff, reduces erosion, and protects anadromous fish stream habitat. s) For waterfront land use: 1. Protect the working waterfront that is needed by Sitka s marine-dependent industrial and commercial businesses and wellused harbors. 2. Provide for public waterfront access, enjoyment, and the ocean views that define Sitka s sense of place. i) Allow use of municipal land for neighborhood and community gardens (not for profit), including small parcels and spaces in rights-of-way and culde-sacs, as appropriate. t) Maintain and improve Sitka s walking and biking transportation routes. Focus on those that connect residential areas with schools and employment centers. Cross-reference with Transportation Action x-x. delete 1-2 yrs 3-5 yrs 6-15 yrs b) Identify municipal property for sale for residential development in r) Land use planning and actions will consider and help implement the Sitka Sustainable Outdoor Recreation Action Plan and the Sitka Trail Plan. e) Acquire state lands to facilitate further development opportunities that are adjacent the road system at Millersville on Japonski Island, north of Indian River quarry, 2 parcels at Starrigavan/Katlian Bay, and at end of Seward Avenue. l) Support business use as primary in the downtown central business district with residential limited to second floor and above. f) Establish an improved system for inventorying and managing municipal land. p) Recognize, value, and celebrate Sitka s historic and cultural assets and properties December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 2

42 LAND USE ACTION y) Do not develop public facilities in high or moderate landslide and mass wasting hazard areas that would concentrate people in hazard areas. Do allow roads through hazard areas. j) Segregate industrial and heavy commercial land use from residential land use to reduce Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) complaints. Recognize that more to less intensive land uses are as follows: industrial, heavy commercial, light commercial, mixed use, high density residential, low density residential. w) As a result of geotechnical hazard mapping, designate areas with moderate and high landslide/mass wasting hazard in the municipal GIS database, maps, and update Municipal Land Management Plan. delete 1-2 yrs 3-5 yrs q) Develop a Sitka Historic Preservation Plan, adopt, and implement. 7 3 o) Along transit routes, support denser residential and mixed-use development. u) Remove obstacle to accessibility, which is increasingly important given Sitka s growing senior population and the increased number of traveling older visitors. Cross-reference with Transportation Action x-x. d) Issue RFP to sell municipal RV parking area by Sealing Cove for apartment or condominium development. Could include offices or retail or 1 st floor. Seek proposals that include space for social interaction and that enhance community character. a) Develop a Municipal Land Management Plan with proposed uses for each municipal area/parcel and recommendations to retain, lease, or sell within 1-2 years, 3-5 years, or evaluate as needed/in future. Include tidelands and uplands. x) Revise land use and/or building codes to require mitigating measures for development in landslide and mass wasting hazard areas. These standards may include dissipating structures or dams, appropriate structural and special engineering, or other techniques that respond to the specific hazards of the site. Development in moderate and high hazard areas must include mitigating measures that respond to the specific hazards of that site. h) Engage in land exchanges and acquisition as needed to accomplish Sitka s Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. k) Develop options, consider, and implement to reduce incompatible land use in the Smith-Price-Lance-Chirikov Streets neighborhoods/area, and the Granite Creek area. c) Change Sitka s Charter to place revenue from municipal land sales and leases into a dedicated account used to finance further municipal lands sales and related subdivision/ infrastructure development yrs December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 3

43 LAND USE WRITTEN IDEAS FROM OPEN HOUSE (note some overlap with housing) Encourage sharing economy without incentive to dodge taxes, regulations, and fees. Climate change/sea level rise anticipate and provide for changes in sea level along waterfront as well as increased frequency/severity of storms. Maintain and respect R1 neighborhoods. Try to group uses to reduce spot zoning and incompatible uses occurring in proximity to each other; A couple more 6 story apartment buildings. Find a way to replace decrepit pre-existing housing (trailers and homes) for those who can t afford it; Housing for the homeless. Most of us seem to be ignoring all but 1-2 years for setting priorities; develop or work with trailer court owners to upgrade their courts with possibilities of seeking federal assistance for financing or grants for tenants to upgrade their individual homes. Zoning compliance for trailer court owners to keep their properties properly maintained rather than just collecting rents and letting their properties become unsightly. Katlian Street develop and sustain as active small town. Sell unused municipal properties at market value only absolutely no more giveaways like Silver Bay and community land trust special sweetheart deals. Invest in landslide warning/information systems to help protect and inform citizens having this technology will help settle fears of living near the mountain and give real information not just a guess. December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 4

44 HOUSING GOAL AND OBJECTIVES draft HOUSING GOAL (Big Picture Sitka is working to achieve, how we do business.) Expand the range, affordability, and quality of housing in Sitka while maintaining attractive, livable neighborhoods. draft HOUSING OBJECTIVES (More specific programs, initiatives, or directions to achieve the goal.) 1. Range. Encourage a diverse range of housing opportunities and choices. 2. Affordability. Facilitate development of affordable housing (that which requires 30% or less of monthly income) 3. Quality. Promote quality housing and encourage the rehabilitation and/ or reuse of declining housing stocks. 4. Focus Priority Attention on: Housing to attract and retain young adults and young families (such as affordable apartments/condos, smaller homes, tiny homes). Housing to meet the needs of the increasing number of seniors (such as smaller homes and apartments/condos in walkable downtown, assisted living and long-term care options). Housing to accommodate the seasonal workforce (affordable short term rentals, bunkhouses). Update mobile home parks to offer affordable, safe, and attractive housing. Increase the number of long term rental units. 5. Regulations. Review zoning codes and development standards and amend to promote housing development. 6. Information. Information about rentals, homes for sale, and financing must be more easily available. December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 5

45 HOUSING ACTIONS, RESULTS OF VOTING Results of Voting for Priorities, November 2016 Open House Actions now listed in priority order, from most total votes to least votes HOUSING ACTION a) Seek or initiate Sweat Equity housing development programs (such as homesteading, Habitat for Humanity, other). r) Allow tiny homes on wheels with a connection to sewer and water, in all residential zones (or identify certain zones or areas where okay), require visual buffers as needed. v) Review zoning code and amend as appropriate to allow smaller homes in more places, by right. k) Build and operate dwelling units and structures in an environmentally responsible and resource-efficient manner. For example, encourage use of LEED or similar building design and construction standards by the public and private sectors. w) Support development of a tiny home - manufactured housing subdivision/community. h) Support housing development to meet needs of Sitka s growing senior population. This includes but is not limited to smaller units in downtown, attached and detached accessory dwelling units, assisted living options for those that need support with the activities of daily living, and long-term care. Be flexible and open to new ideas. l) When selling or developing municipal land for housing, carefully consider need given current stable population (with possible projected declines), type of housing for which there is pent-up demand, and rate of land disposal to meet needs yet not unduly influence housing and land markets. u) Reduce required parking and/or create a fee in lieu of parking program to encourage higher density residential development downtown. Funds raised dedicated to parking management, improvements, and added parking. December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 6 delete 1 2 yrs 3-5 yrs Other? 9 j) Work with the Coast Guard to understand and help meet their housing needs in a manner that does not unduly suppress or inflate the local housing market. g) Work with mobile home owners and park owners to find options and incentives to replace older, unsafe mobile homes with manufactured homes and smaller homes. Do in a manner that does not cause undue hardship to homeowners. Consider all options such as utility upgrade programs, owner co-ops, low interest loans to upgrade, etcetera. c) Support mechanisms that increase the number of permanently affordable homes, such as deed restrictions, targeted financing programs, community land trusts, etcetera yrs

46 HOUSING ACTION b) Subsidize development of affordable housing by providing municipal rock and fill at a discount, by reducing development fees, by offering property tax reductions or abatement allowed in Alaska, by providing municipal land below fair market, or similar methods. Define terms to qualify prior to offering discounts or incentives (e.g. how many units or what % of development must be affordable or permanently affordable units). d) Facilitate use of boats for live-aboard housing. This could require either code or infrastructure changes. s) Amend accessory dwelling unit (ADU) code to allow more properties to develop ADUs without a conditional use permit. Allow attached or detached, first or second story with less restrictions (e.g., height, P (14), etcetera). q) Promote construction of more and higher density housing, infill development, and housing stock rehabilitation in the downtown and Katlian areas (from Jeff Davis Street to west side of Katlian Street (see future growth maps, what areas do YOU think should be included?)[1]. i) Support change to State regulations and budgets that prevent full occupancy at the Pioneers Home, a public assisted-living facility. o) Create educational campaign for property owners about accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and Planned Unit Developments (PUDs). x) Review zoning code and amend as appropriate to promote multifamily development (tri-plex or higher). m) Support development of a website to host rental information. (Question: do existing Facebook pages already serve this purpose?) p) Support and participate in public-private collaborations with BIHA, USDA-RD, AHFC, and other funders and developers to design and build subdivisions and Planned Unit Developments with a diversity of housing types and target markets. n) Sponsor housing info-sharing and outreach events like Housing Fairs with information on properties, finance and loan information for potential renters and home-buyers, and for housing developers. t) Evaluate zoning code to reduce number of variance requests. Review and as appropriate reduce lot setbacks, required parking, and lot size requirements. e) Establish a baseline count of the number of short term and long rentals in Sitka so that change can be measured. Identify target number of additional long term rentals to add. f) Increase the number of Long-Term-Rentals by considering a limit on the number of home-based Short-Term-Rentals (STRSs) to a certain number per area or block, OR limit/prohibit in some areas, OR ---other ideas? delete 1 2 yrs 3-5 yrs yrs December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 7

47 HOUSING IDEAS AND COMMENTS FROM OPEN HOUSE (SOME OVERLAP WITH LAND USE): Make roads, sell city land Start fining wrong way bike riders Land trust houses under 1000 square feet Incentivize apartment development Maintain R1 Support IRC code Muni owned affordable rentals Smaller lots for tiny homes Keep moorage rates low Cargo container housing 2 apartment buildings like Cathedral Arms More sidewalks Pave streets No modular neighborhoods Sitka is in dire need of senior housing, not P. Home style Yes to infill, ADUs, tiny houses, and homesteading No more dumpy mobile home parks, eliminate as opportunities arise Yes to tiny houses, ADUs, cottage communities, houseboat row If a house is burned out, make the owner tear it down, not remain as an unsightly hazard Tiny houses on individual lots Keep parking in downtown, already limited Tiny houses if there is tougher enforcement of junk/litter on private property Preserve green space along water Sealing Cove to Historical Park No spot zoning, keep zoning in residential, small areas neighborhoods consistent Year round livable wage jobs translate to affordable housing opportunities Another 6 story apartment building or 2 Find a way to replace decrepit housing for residents who can t afford to do it themselves Subsidize loans to fix up properties that are in such bad shape you can t get a good loan, or other incentives to fix up decrepit properties December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 8

48 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Draft ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY GOAL (Big Picture Sitka is working to achieve, how we do business.) Increase year round employment and population in Sitka by: Supporting local businesses; Attracting new sustainable businesses that bring spending into town; and Supporting efforts and enterprises that keep residents money local and circulating through the community rather than leaking outside. Draft ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY OBJECTIVES (More specific programs, initiatives, or directions to achieve the goal.) 1. Maritime. Strengthen and increase Sitka s maritime work and enterprises. (Including but not limited to seafood processing, commercial fishing, boat building and repair, marine science, marine transportation, charter fishing, marine-related manufacturing.) 2. Healthcare. Leverage Sitka s position as a regional and local healthcare leader by focusing on efficiencies, filling specialty care gaps, and preparing for the increasing senior population. 3. Education. Increase use of Sitka s significant educational campuses, facilities, assets, and programs that bring academics, researchers, students, and visitors to Sitka. 4. Tourism. Strengthen Sitka s independent and cruise-related tourism work and enterprises. 5. Arts & Culture. Sitka s mix of Tlingit, Russian, and Alaskan history, places, arts, and culture has intrinsic value, is enjoyed by residents, and attracts visitors. This diversity creates economic opportunities to respectfully share and interpret. 6. Downtown. Maintain Sitka s compact highly walkable downtown with locally-owned stores. 7. Leverage Municipal Assets. Leverage use of Sitka s municipal land, capital investments, abundant electrical energy and water, the Gary Paxton Industrial Park, in-house technical assistance, fees and taxes, and other tools to create a positive business environment and provide strategic business assistance. This may take the form of public-private partnerships. 8. Business Innovation. Encourage innovation, research, development, and commercialization of new technologies, products, and services. 9. Cost of Living. Support efforts to increase wages and decrease the cost of living, both of which raise Sitka s buying power and make living here more affordable. 10. Workforce Development. Encourage and support career and technical education that allows Sitkans to acquire needed employment skills, and to climb the employment and wage ladder. 11. Fiscally Stable Municipal Government. Promote a high jobs-to-households ratio that supports tax revenue growth at pace with residential demand for municipal services. December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 9

49 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS, RESULTS OF VOTING Results of Voting for Priorities, November 2016 Open House Actions now listed in priority order, from most total votes to least votes ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTION o) Convert public and private sector vehicle fleets to electric to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, lower fuel costs, and increase users of Sitka s abundant electricity. Investment in EV charging stations at strategic locations will be needed. b) Develop a Marine Center at Gary Paxton Industrial Park to increase business for Sitka s marine repair and build businesses and support the commercial, charter, and water transportation fleets. Desired elements include: 1) Drive-down dock sized to accommodate transshipment of processed fish and containerized water, and truck/worker access for in-water work such as welding. 2) Space for large vessels (over 100 feet) and others to tie-up. 3) A lift or tractor-trailer haul-out for vessels under 50 ton. 4) Upland service area suitable for work by sand blasters, painters, fiberglassers, welders, electricians, etcetera that local businesses can easily access. r) Support local agriculture and food production in order to reduce food costs, provide access to healthier and more nutritious food, and create employment. g) Market Sitka to attract independent visitors of all types, including those seeking places with high cultural and historic assets, performing art activities, and marine-based recreation and education. aa) Use plans and investments to help create a positive business environment in Sitka and provide strategic assistance to retain, expand, and attract businesses. z) Support small business and entrepreneurship networking, events, and education to strengthen and add more locally owned and operated businesses. December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 10 Delete 1-2 yrs 3-5 yrs yrs h) Market Sitka to attract smaller cruises p) Work to attract business that will use Sitka s abundant electricity and clean water. t) Review zoning code to identify any changed needed to make more land available for agriculture and horticulture. m) Expand availability of specialty care services, assisted living, and longterm care in Sitka. w) Support career technical training, partnerships, and mentoring-job shadowing opportunities. Support sector-focused workforce training ( i.e. hospitality, health care, marine trades and science). j) Encourage investment in tourism infrastructure and improvements that can be used and enjoyed by residents as well as visitors

50 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTION s) Investigate the feasibility and whether there is a role for the CBS or SEDA in a community greenhouse to encourage food production. a) Advocate for and facilitate faster more reliable internet service. This will support existing businesses and provide increased opportunity for locationneutral work. bb) Encourage the sharing economy among individuals, businesses, nonprofits, and government to market, distribute, share, and reuse excess capacity in goods and services. This includes peer-to-peer transactions, crowd-funding platforms, and a variety of business models to facilitate borrowing and renting unused resources. l) Strive to preserve and increase the healthcare workforce in Sitka, even as the local industry evolves. Support Sitka s many healthcare businesses and nonprofits. e) Testify and lobby as needed to support Sitka s maritime industries including seafood processors, commercial and charter fishing fleets and businesses, and water transportation and boat building and repair industry. k) Prevent empty or papered over winter storefronts; require seasonal downtown businesses to have a window display in the off-season and penalize if not done. c) If availability of private sector haul-out services for vessels over 50 tons ceases or become rate-prohibitive, reevaluate cost/benefits of public facility. Optimal locations are at GPIP, near Price Street, and near ferry terminal. x) Support efforts to extend seasonal industries and move toward year round employment. d) Maintain financially healthy harbors with the capacity to address ongoing maintenance needs and provide adequate space for local and visiting vessels. n) Support efforts to expand existing, and add additional, small and large value-added manufacturing businesses. f) Hold local fishing days to help those without boat access enjoy Sitka s marine-oriented way of life and harvest some food. Find fair ways to allocate limited spots to participate. December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 11 Delete 1-2 yrs 3-5 yrs 6 15 yrs Other? "Tourism" 6 y) Catalyze and support local service industries, resource production, and value-added enterprises. i) Identify any incompatibilities or conflicts that occurred due to tourism activity at the end of each season and work with industry to develop Tourism Best Management Practices to buffer, mitigate, and reduce negative impacts. u) Invest in Capital Projects that have high Return on Investment. Use a Triple Bottom Line approach that values economic, social-culturalhistorical/community character, and environmental return

51 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTION v) Strengthen collaboration between SEDA, which has a strategic plan whose goals and objectives mirror those in the Comprehensive Plan, and the Sitka Community Planning and Development Department. Delete q) Structure utility rates to incentivize high-usage businesses, as feasible yrs 3-5 yrs 6 15 yrs ECONOMIC - WRITTEN IDEAS FROM OPEN HOUSE: Tourism Local lumber mill needed Manufacturing not boat related Collaboration with STA Cruise ship dock downtown Keep our boats in Sitka EV car charging stations Merge or reincorporate healthcare corporations Hydroponic farm Server farm Incentives for buying electric cars with fast charger downtown Stop SEDA from giving away new haulout at GPIP Stop raising moorage rates until low income housing is solved Family wage jobs Eliminate SEDA lease or privatize GPIP Overhaul GPIP just gives everything away Attract conferences Increased electric vehicle use Privately operated haulout December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 12

52 SPEND $100 CITY BUCKS December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 13

53 MOCK-UP OF 2030 SITKA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COVER Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan December 2016 Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan page 14

54 Acknowledgements

55 Working Table of Contents Vision for Sitka s Future... 1 How to Use this Plan... 2 Introduction... 3 Context... 3 Process to Develop... 3 Quality of Life... 4 People, History, and Context... 5 Physical Environment... 6 Climate... 6 Topography and Geology... 6 Habitat... 6 Wildlife... 6 Hazards... 6 Coastal Management / Areas Meriting Special Attention... 6 Economic Opportunity and Challenges... 7 Current Status... 7 Demographics... 7 Income, Jobs, Wages, Businesses, Gross Sales... 7 Opportunities and Challenges... 7 Goals, Objectives, Actions... 7 Housing... 8 Current Status... 8 Issues, Opportunities and Challenges... 8 Goals, Objectives, Actions... 8 Transportation... 9 Current Status... 9 Passengers and Air Access... 9 Harbor and Dock Facilities and Marine Access... 9 Roads and Non-motorized Routes... 9 Transit... 9 Issues, Opportunities and Challenges... 9 Goals, Objectives, Actions... 9 Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Current Status Developed Parks and Facilities Programming and Services... 10

56 Trails Open Space Issues, Opportunities and Challenges Goals, Objectives, Actions Current Land Use and Future Growth Patterns Current Land Use Issues, Opportunities and Challenges Overall No Name Mountain-Granite creek Katlian-Marine area Downtown Indian River Industrial Park area Other? Future Growth Maps Goals, Objectives, Actions Utilities Current Status Water Sewer Solid Waste Electrical Issues, Opportunities and Challenges Goals, Objectives, Actions Community-Civic Facilities and Services Current Status Public Safety Library Centennial Hall Arts and Culture Medical Services Education Issues, Opportunities and Challenges Goals, Objectives, Actions Appendix 1- Action Plan: Goals Objectives and Actions Appendix 2 - Municipal Land Management Plan... 15

57 Vision for Sitka s Future Residents offered ideas at several meaning on their Vision for Sitka s Future, and on the assets, strengths, and challenges of Sitka. Appendix X lists all the ideas shared by residents. They are pulled together in the Sitka Vision below. The Sitka Vision organizes around three types of capital or wealth natural, social, and economic. Together these three kinds of wealth make a Triple Bottom Line that Sitka considered as it prepared its Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Sitka s Vision Natural Capital Sitkans live nestled between steep mountains, rich forest, and a wild ocean. Sitka s natural beauty is profound, everywhere, and enjoyed daily in active and passive ways. Social Capital Residents are proud of Sitka s diverse culture and history; they work hard to understand each other and build a common future. Being isolated teaches self-reliance but as importantly, reliance upon each other. A community that is affordable, equitable, and fair for all is important. Places for Sitka s diverse population to live range from safe and attractive manufactured home parks, to apartments and small houses, to dream houses with ocean views, and more. Economic Capital There is work for all that want it. Creative and entrepreneurial residents have built businesses that take advantage of the bounty offered by the area s natural assets the sea, forest, water, soils, rock, views and more. Other jobs provide needed goods and services. Well-developed community infrastructure and facilities exist for a place the size of Sitka and are enjoyed by all; maintaining them is another cornerstone of the economy. Natural Social Economic Sitka 2030 Comprehensive Plan December 2016 Draft page 1