By Hal Shepherd

Homer Independent Press

This month, the Homer Planning Commission continued shaping housing, development, wetlands and watersheds regulations that affect public health, safety and welfare and fish and wildlife habitat. On Jan. 7, the Commission held another work session addressing potential changes to the Environmental Features sections of Title 21 of the Homer Zoning Code.

The work session consisted primarily of a slide presentation conducted by the Planning Team made up of the Agnew-Beck Consultants and the City Planning Department. The team described a watercourse as “any natural or artificial stream, river, creek, ditch, channel, canal, conduit, culvert, drain, waterway, gully, ravine or wash, in and including any adjacent area that is subject to inundation from overflow or floodwater.” A wetland is an “area of land that is inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.”

The Planning Team noted that there are currently no requirements under the code for development setbacks or areas where building is prohibited on or around wetlands or water courses. Unlike Homer’s code, other municipalities have some regulatory structure designed to protect wetlands, rivers and streams. Anchorage, for example, has mapped its wetlands and then classified them into three types: where A or B require permitting by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers while C is suitable for development without a Corps permit. Also, setbacks are required for water bodies, drainage ways, riparian edges and wetlands.

Unlike development provisions for the scoping process in previous work sessions, during the Jan. 7 session, the Team did not recommend changes and instead chose to ask the Planning Commission members present if there was a need for such regulation. In the Title 21 update, the team said that the “City lacks accurate data to guide wetland and watercourse management. The basis for all wetland regulations via zoning requires a clear wetland boundary. Without that data or a clear way to create it, staff would have no way to evaluate a development proposal/land use application.”

In an effort to offset the lack of maps that could apply to wetlands and streams regulations, the Kachemak Bay Conservation Society (KBCS) and other members of the public have submitted ideas for mapping of sensitive environmental areas, protecting watersheds from over development and preventing flooding and landslides hazards. 

According to KBCS Vice President Penelope Haas, “You can always criticize maps for not being accurate enough. The alternatives are either to ignore that there are any limitations – the staff proposal, or to require burdensome hiring of engineers, hydrologists etc., the latter likely being appropriate for a CUP (Conditional Use Permit) or PUD (Planned Unit Development) application in mapped sensitive areas, just as we do with requirements for traffic analysis.” 

Haas also noted that “Maps are very helpful rules of thumb that mitigate a lot of bureaucracy and expense while helping protect folks from the impacts of poor planning and helping protect some of the valuable green spaces around Homer.” 

The commission members present at the work session almost unanimously supported strengthening protections for wetlands. Commissioner Heath Smith mentioned the need for examples of where the code framework has failed.

During the work session, the Planning Team also presented on steep slopes and bluffs. Unlike for wetlands and watersheds, the current code has some regulatory framework for steep slopes and bluffs that limits development activity and structures in areas affected by slopes, bluffs, ravines and the coastal edge. Similarly, during the meeting, city planning staff referred to mapping tools that can be used to identify steep slopes, etc., that may need extra protections. These tools, including a steep slope overlay, wetlands mapper and calculator, consist of an in-house Geographic Information System mapping tool that allows the staff to look at parcels affected by steep slopes, stream drainages and wetlands.

For the steep slopes issue, the need for changes to the code were mixed among the commissioners, with some members strongly advocating for strengthening the code due to the increased level of development occurring in such areas and the need for public safety related to landslides.

During the public testimony portion of the work session, former Homer Public Works Department Director Jan Keiser said, “The number of examples where the code has failed us in both wetlands, water drainages and steep slopes are too numerous to mention here,” and she offered to draft a list of such examples that she will submit in her next set of comments to the commission and the Homer City Council. 

These sentiments are echoed by a large percentage of people surveyed at an open house the city held in November, who called for a better definition of wetlands and peatlands, creation of stronger management standards, improving oversight, monitoring and environmental review, and closer review of development of steep slopes and bluffs.

Regardless of the issues with the current code, Keiser said she remains enthusiastic about the current process.

“I was encouraged by the discussions the Planning Commission had about these issues,” she said. “It was obvious they were concerned about many of the same things I am concerned about — protection of wetlands, development on steep slopes and more. I’m really looking forward to the next iteration of proposed Title 21 revisions.”

There is still time for the public to participate in the code changes process including a work session with the city council on Jan. 26 at 4 p.m. During these future work sessions the Planning Team has suggested that the council go over the public review process draft, comment collection and next steps toward adoption. The launch of the Public Review Draft of the Code is tentatively for late January or early February.