121499 - City and Borough of Juneau

MINUTES 

PLANNING COMMISSION 

CITY AND BOROUGH OF JUNEAU, ALASKA 

REGULAR MEETING 

December 14, 1999 

The regular meeting of the City and Borough of Juneau Planning Commission, held in the 

Assembly Chambers of the Municipal Building, was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Johan 

Dybdahl. 

I. ROLL CALL 

Commissioners present: 

Commissioners absent: 

Dan Bruce (7:03 p.m.), Johan Dybdahl, Marshal Kendziorek, Mark 

Pusich, Merrill Sanford, Jody Vick, Ken Williamson 

Mike Bavard, Tracey Ricker 

A quorum was present. 

Staff Present: 

Other CBJ Staff: 

Cheryl Easterwood, Community Development Director; Tim Maguire, 

CDD Planning Supervisor; Katharine Heumann, CDD Planner; Daniel 

Garcia, CDD Planner 

Cynthia Johnson, Lands-Resources Officer 

II. 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES 

11/23/99 - Regular Meeting 

MOTION - by Mr. Pusich to approve the minutes of the November 23, 1999 regular meeting as 

written. 

There were no amendments or corrections. Without objection, the minutes were approved. 

III. 

IV. 

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS - None 

RECONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS - None 

V. CONSENT AGENDA 

The chair ascertained that no one from the public wished to testify on any items on the Consent 

Agenda. 

Planning Commission 1 December 14, 1999

MOTION - by Mr. Kendziorek that the Planning Commission adopt the Consent Agenda and all 

the findings and staff recommendations for CSP99-00017, CSP99-00018, and USE99-00071 

(listed below). There being no objection, it was so ordered. 

CSP99-00017 

A REQUEST FOR AN EASEMENT TO INSTALL A FIBER OPTIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS 

CABLE ACROSS CBJ LANDS. 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Whittier & Willoughby 

WCI Cable, Inc. 

CSP99-00018 

A REQUEST FOR AN EASEMENT TO INSTALL A FIBER OPTIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS 

CABLE ACROSS CBJ LANDS. 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Twin Lakes area 

WCI Cable, Inc. 

Staff recommendation (CSP99-00017 and CSP99-00018): That the Planning Commission 

recommend to the Assembly approval of the easements for both the Twin Lakes Park and the 

Willoughby/Whittier site, with the following conditions: 

1. The area disturbed by the installation of the cable shall be restored as directed 

by CBJ staff. This will include hydroseeding, paving, and repair of any damages 

to the bike path at Twin Lakes. 

2. The scheduling of the work shall be coordinated with the Parks and Recreation 

staff. 

3. The easement shall be non-exclusive and accommodate overlapping 

easements. 

4. The easement shall include a provision for the relocation of the cable at the 

discretion of the CBJ if needed for public purposes. WCI will be responsible for 

the cost of the relocation. 

5. The cost of the easement shall be at fair market value as determined by 

appraisal. During the first year the compensation for the Twin Lakes easement 

will include paving the gravel parking lot which the cable crosses. The City 

Manager will be responsible for negotiating the compensation, including the 

paving alternative. 

USE99-00071 

A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO LOCATE A TRAVEL TRAILER ON AN INDIVIDUAL LOT 

AS A CARETAKER RESIDENCE. 

Location: 

Applicant: 

366 Village St. 

Oscar Olsen 


Staff recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt the director's analysis and 

findings and grant the requested conditional use permit to allow a travel trailer to remain on the 

subject lot with the occupant acting as a caretaker for the stated areas. Staff recommended 

approval with the following conditions: 

1. The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the foundation, sewer and water 

connection and to turn on electrical service to the trailer. 

2. Caretaker residence will remain on-site for a period of two (2) years. 

[Mr. Bruce arrived at 7:03 p.m.] 

VI. 

VII. 

CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS - None 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None 

VIII. REGULAR AGENDA 

The chair noted that the following two items were continued: 

MAP99-00002...............................................................................................................Continued 

A ZONE CHANGE FOR AIRPORT ACRES, BLOCK A, LOT 1 AND A FRACTION OF LOT 3, 

FROM D-5, SINGLE-FAMILY/DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL, TO LC, LIGHT COMMERCIAL FOR 

15,729 SQUARE FEET. 

Location: 

Applicant: 

2321 O'Day Drive 

D&M Rentals 

SUB99-00049...............................................................................................................Continued 

A STREET VACATION OF APPROXIMATELY 128 LINEAR FEET AT THE END OF O'DAY 

DRIVE. 

Location: 

Applicant: 

O'Day Drive 

D&M Rentals 

CSP99-00011 

A PROPOSED LAND DISPOSAL OF 134 ACRES OF LAND ABOVE THE DOUGLAS 

TOWNSITE TO THE ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH TRUST. 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Behind Douglas 

CBJ Lands - Cynthia Johnson 

Staff report: CBJ Lands & Resources Officer Cynthia Johnson reviewed the staff report. At its 

September 28, 1999 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the issue of conveying 134 

acres of municipal property above Douglas to the Alaska Mental Health 


Trust and forwarded the matter to the Douglas Advisory Board (DAB) and the Parks and 

Recreation Advisory Committee (PRAC) for additional public comment. The Douglas Advisory 

Committee held a public meeting on October 27, 1999. The Parks and Recreation Advisory 

Committee followed with a public meeting on November 2, 1999. The major issue raised at 

these meetings was a desire to maintain adequate easements for the Mount Jumbo, 

Snowmobile, and Gastineau Meadow Trails. It was also suggested that the wetland area 

between the ski trail and Bear Creek be included in a larger greenbelt. Subsequent discussions 

were held with the Trust about revising the reservations for easements and greenbelts. 

Staff recommendation: That the Planning Commission approve the final phase of the land 

exchange with the Alaska Mental Health Trust, subject to the concepts of reservations 1 

through 10, as follows: 

1. 50-foot-wide easements (25 feet either side of centerline) along the existing 

Mount Jumbo Trail and the Snowmobile Trail. The Trust may elect to relocate 

the trail(s) to accommodate future development, moving the trailhead(s) to the 

edge of the new development. In such instance(s), the Trust will be responsible 

for constructing new trailhead(s), including off-street parking. 

2. A new trailhead for the Mount Jumbo Trail, approximately 1/2 acre in size, 

adjacent to Linellen Heights Subdivision. At such time as the CBJ constructs the 

new trailhead, the Trust agrees to dedicate a 50-foot-wide easement from the 

new trailhead to a point intersecting the existing Mount Jumbo Trail. Under the 

circumstances described in this paragraph, relocation costs for constructing the 

new segment of trail will be borne by the CBJ. The CBJ will relinquish its 

easement over that portion of the old trail, from the old trailhead to its 

intersection with the new trail. 

3. A greenbelt for habitat protection, recreation, and public access, 200 feet wide 

on the east side of Lawson Creek. 

4. A greenbelt including Bear Creek and the wetlands known as Gastineau 

Meadows. The east boundary of the greenbelt is the west boundary of the Bear 

Creek reservoir road or 200 feet east of the east bank of Bear Creek, whichever 

is greater. The west boundary of the greenbelt is a line that runs in a southwest 

direction from the point at which the Crow Hill Drive turns north. This greenbelt 

encompasses land not considered suitable for development. 

The greenbelt easement is reserved for habitat, recreational, and public access 

purposes; this might include construction of an expanded trail system, picnic 

tables, trailhead development, off-street parking, and similar uses. 

The portion of the Bear Creek greenbelt denoted as "Area A" on the attached 

map would be a temporary easement to provide off-street, public parking for 

users of the greenbelt and trail. At such time as the CBJ constructs a permanent 

trailhead elsewhere, it shall relinquish that portion of the easement encompassed 

by "Area A." 


5. An easement for a new 10-foot-wide (finished surface dimension) bike trail within 

the Sixth Street right-of-way. 

6. Corridor for the proposed bench road above Douglas. 

7. Existing easements for utilities and drainage associated with the Bear Creek 

reservoir and its access road. 

8. Subsurface (mineral) rights. 

9. Continued public access across and casual use of the 134-acre parcel after its 

conveyance to the Trust and prior to its development. The Trust will not preclude 

the public from casual use of the unimproved land for activities such as hiking, 

skiing, berry picking, etc. Said uses will not be considered as interfering with 

future development rights of the Trust. 

10. Provision for future dedication of public access to greenbelts. In conjunction with 

its development plans, the Trust will dedicate public access easements to 

provide access to the Lawson Creek greenbelt. 

Ms. Johnson pointed out that reservations 1, 4, 9 and 10 address the specific concerns raised 

in public testimony at prior meetings. 

Mr. Kendziorek asked what staff meant by conceptual agreements with the Trust. Ms. Johnson 

explained that the Trust has reviewed and agreed to the concepts of the reservations, however, 

the language may be tweaked a bit before the City asks the Trust to sign off on them. She 

added that if there were a major deviation in a concept, the item would come back before the 

Commission or Assembly. 

Mr. Maguire confirmed for Mr. Vick that the Planning Commission would hold separate hearings 

on any development plans the Trust may have for the property in the future. Mr. Vick 

commented that that review is another mechanism to ensure that an agreement on the 

reservations is upheld. 

Mr. Pusich questioned the distinction between the terms "greenbelt" and "greenbelt easement." 

Ms. Johnson said all references should be greenbelt easement (part of the language 

tweaking), which means there will be no residential development there. 

Referring to a newspaper article about this item, Mr. Kendziorek wondered about a trail missing 

from the reservations that connects the Snowmachine Trail to the Bear Creek reservoir trail. 

Ms. Johnson said she wasn't aware of that particular connecting trail, although there are 

multiple trails in the Gastineau Meadows area that interconnect. The trails designated in the 

reservations are the trails identified in previous plans and that are recognized by the Trust as 

acceptable reservations. The expansion of the Gastineau Meadows area, with the Bear Creek 

greenbelt, will cover a multitude of trails that are outside of probable development areas. The 

Trust would be reluctant to reserve any trails that might be within the development areas 

without an opportunity to relocate them. That is why the reservations include relocation options 

for the Mount Jumbo Trail and the Snowmobile Trail. 


Mr. Bruce asked if the Treadwell Ditch Trail was completely outside the parcel earmarked for 

conveyance. Ms. Johnson said she believed so. 

Mr. Kendziorek questioned how much of the 134 acres was suitable for development. Ms. 

Johnson was able to answer this question later in the meeting by referring to a colored map that 

identified approximately 1/3 of the land as development nodes. She explained that the Trust 

has found the revised reservations acceptable because the appraisal was done with an eye to 

the Planned Unit Development (PUD) concept for the property. The reservation for the Bear 

Creek greenbelt easement will not affect the number of potential units that might be developed 

on this property and therefore does not alter the appraisal. 

Public Testimony: 

Douglas Mertz, 5th Street, Douglas, expressed disappointment that Douglas people, for the 

most part, were still unaware of the pending land transfer to the Trust. Although the Douglas 

Advisory Board and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee held meetings where the 

proposal was discussed, they were not well advertised or well attended. He stated that he 

showed CBJ Lands & Resources Manager, Steve Gilbertson, two trails that were not on the 

map but that people use -- the connector trail that goes from the reservoir trail over to the 

Snowmachine Trail, and the other that extends from the reservoir road to the reservation for the 

Lawson Creek area. He wondered why Ms. Johnson, as a Lands & Resources staff member, 

was unaware that he had spoken to Mr. Gilbertson about these trails. He thought that if people 

were aware of the pending land transfer, they might raise other concerns. He felt that CBJ staff 

had not followed the Commission's direction to seek out more public opinion. 

Mr. Kendziorek asked how Mr. Mertz heard about the DAB and PRAC meetings. Mr. Mertz said 

he never heard about the PRAC meeting, and he was informed of the DAB meeting date when 

he called Mr. Gilbertson. 

Mr. Kendziorek asked for staff's opinion if they had solicited enough public input. Ms. Johnson 

replied that based on the Planning Commission's direction at the September 28 meeting, the 

CBJ contacted the DAB and the PRAC and left messages for the Nordic Ski Club and Trail Mix. 

She added that she was out of town, however, Mr. Gilbertson attended the two public 

meetings. The meetings were advertised per the CBJ's standard procedure. She said she did 

not know anything about the connector trail from the reservoir road to the Snowmobile Trail. 

However, the connector from the berry-picker's trail to the Lawson Creek greenbelt is within one 

of the development nodes, and the Trust was unwilling to have a reservation through it where 

they want maximum flexibility to look at potential development. Nevertheless, the Trust was 

willing to accept an obligation to make a future dedication for public access to the greenbelt, 

once they had a development plan for that area. 

At Mr. Sanford's request, Ms. Johnson circulated the colored appraisal map and an aerial 

photograph that Mr. Gilbertson put together for the Douglas Advisory Board. She pointed 


out that much of the Gastineau Meadows area that is of interest to the public lies outside of the 

land conveyance, but the Trust is willing to dedicate those meadows as part of the greenbelt 

easement. 

Mr. Bruce asked what the notice requirements were for DAB and PRAC meetings. Ms. 

Easterwood said the meeting dates would be published in the newspaper; the Community 

Development Department is the only department that provides notice to property owners 

affected by a proposed CBJ action. Mr. Bruce said it would be helpful in the future for issues 

such as this if staff would provide the Commission with proof of advertisement. 

Patty Ware, 903 5th Street, Douglas, stated that, like Mr. Mertz, her main concern had to do 

with the gross lack of public information about the proposed land exchange that could 

significantly impact Douglas residents. She faulted City staff for thinking that all they needed to 

do was publish the minimum required notice for a complex land exchange involving such a 

large parcel. Her experience in talking with other Douglas people was that most were unaware 

of the CBJ's land exchange plans, so she attempted to inform her neighbors by distributing a 

flyer. She urged the Commission not to move forward on this item until it seeks more public 

input from Douglas residents. 

Mr. Kendziorek asked how she heard about the land exchange. Ms. Ware said from Mr. Mertz. 

Mr. Bruce asked how many of the neighbors she spoke with. Ms. Ware said three. 

Paula Recchia, 633 5th Street, Douglas, stated that she bought her house 1-1/2 years ago and 

thoroughly researched the vacant property uphill and to the one side of their lot. She considers 

herself pretty informed of things going on but was unaware of the pending conveyance of CBJ 

land to the Alaska Mental Health Trust. She had concerns about existing flooding and drainage 

problems on 5th Street that might worsen if development takes place on property uphill. 

In reply to Mr. Kendziorek's question about how she heard about the land transfer, Ms. Recchia 

said she received a flyer from her neighbor in her mailbox, and she saw an article in the Sunday 

newspaper reporting on the Douglas Advisory Board meeting. 

Brad Campbell, 755 5th Street, Douglas, said he received a flyer from a neighbor about this 

issue in his mailbox yesterday. He built a house recently on 5th Street and experienced 

problems with drainage and earth sliding, so he wondered what problems any development 

uphill would cause. He was also concerned about traffic from any future development and what 

the zoning of the property would be. He said he was opposed to the land transfer because he 

did not know how it would impact Douglas residents. 

Ms. Johnson stated that the City identified this land for disposal in 1994, as part of its Land 

Management Plan, and went through a year-long process that included public meetings and 

workshops -- including a workshop in Douglas that was well attended. The 


Land Management Plan was adopted in 1995. When the plan was updated in 1997, the CBJ 

identified this land as one of six parcels that the Trust could select from as a trade for 50 acres 

owned by the Trust in the Switzer Creek area that the City wanted to acquire. When the Trust 

selected the Douglas land, this information was included in the Land Management Plan that the 

Assembly adopted in 1998. 

Robert Sewell, 903 5th Street, Douglas, expressed his concerns about the following: the 

minimal public notice on the pending land transfer to the Trust; lack of public involvement; the 

potential for a huge residential development uphill from the Douglas townsite; where roads will 

be built and the increased traffic on the Douglas Highway; the low valuation of the property 

($900,000); who will pay for roads and utilities; and where the residential units will be located 

(right behind his house on 5th Street?). 

Mr. Sewell said that he heard about the land transfer from a coworker who had heard it second 

hand. He did not want to wait until a future hearing on a development permit to offer his 

comments. In closing, he suggested that CBJ actions of this magnitude be publicized by a 

mailer (complete with map) to affected residents and posters in public places. 

There was no one else who wished to speak, and public testimony was closed. 

Commission Action: 

MOTION - by Mr. Williamson that the Planning Commission recommend to the Assembly 

CSP99-00011, including the revised reservations 1-10 in the staff report. 

Mr. Vick commented that he lives on 1st Street in Douglas, and he saw the DAB meeting notice 

on the TV Community Bulletin Board. Also, the DAB has about 11 members that represent a 

good cross-section of the Douglas community. People on 1st Street knew about the land 

transfer and did not seem to have any objections. 

Mr. Kendziorek indicated that his main concern was that the public process was flawed at best. 

Major items should not be advertised the same as routine items; special notice is warranted, 

such as mailings to abutting land owners. He thought it was clear at the September meeting 

that the Commission wanted a lot of public involvement on such a big issue. 

Mr. Dybdahl asked about notice when the Assembly hears this item. Ms. Easterwood said 

notice would be published through "Your Municipality" in the newspaper. 

Mr. Williamson agreed that public notice is important, however, this item has been through the 

process more than once. The Douglas Advisory Board and the Parks and Recreation Advisory 

Board were notified, something that is not normally done. As well, the plan for disposing of the 

Douglas property went through a public process that included the Planning Commission and the 

Assembly. On top of that, there was a front-page newspaper story about the land transfer to 

the Trust. So if there has not been more public comment, that 


doesn't indicate that the process was wrong or that there was not enough opportunity for public 

input. 

Mr. Bruce said he agreed with Mr. Williamson's comments about public notice, and he 

supported the motion. The record reflects that this action has been pending since 1997. He 

commented that the public has a certain apathy about things until somebody jogs them into 

action. He recalled there was a newspaper article about this item after the Planning 

Commission meeting in late September, there were meeting notices in the newspaper, and -- 

as instructed -- staff notified the DAB and the PRAC and public meetings were held. He 

thought the public was provided reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard, and the 

process is not over. He said he sympathized with people's concerns over development plans, 

but the Commission is not addressing development at this point; the item under consideration is 

a transfer of ownership. There will be lots of meetings before any development occurs on any 

portion of the subject property. When the parcel is developed, Douglas residents will not be 

taxed for roads and utilities; in fact, it should aid taxes because more private property 

ownership will add to the CBJ tax rolls. 

Mr. Pusich stated that Mr. Bruce had some good comments, and he supported the motion. He 

too had some concern about the public process on this item between the September 28 

meeting and now. Staff did carry out the Commission's instructions, although in some cases 

maybe not as well as they could have. The action before the Commission involves a land 

transfer, not a development plan. He would like to see the two trails mentioned by Mr. Mertz 

incorporated into the land transfer reservations. 

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT - by Mr. Pusich to incorporate the two trails mentioned by Mr. Mertz 

into the land transfer reservations (connecting the reservoir to the Snowmobile Trail, and from 

the Bear Creek Meadows to the Lawson Creek greenbelt area). 

Mr. Williamson declined the amendment, saying he preferred to see it voted on separately. 

AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION - by Mr. Pusich to incorporate the two trails mentioned by Mr. 

Mertz into the land transfer reservations (connecting the reservoir road to the Snowmobile Trail, 

and the connection from the Bear Creek Meadows to the Lawson Creek greenbelt area). 

Mr. Bruce said he had no problem including the connector from the reservoir road to the 

Snowmobile Trail, but he understood that reservation #10 addressed the potential owner's 

concern over being locked in on a location. He was satisfied that by the language in 

reservation #10 the Trust will provide an access at some location. 

Mr. Pusich asked for staff's interpretation. Noting that it was Mr. Gilbertson who had the 

conversation with the Trust representative, Ms. Johnson said she understood that the Trust was 

not willing to get locked into reservations for easements in areas that had development 

potential. Therefore, reservations 9 and 10 were suggested to provide continued public access 

across the whole site until development occurs, on existing trails that are not specified in the 

other reservations. Reservation #10 provides a specific 


opportunity, when a development is proposed, to assure that the Trust dedicates public access 

to the greenbelt (with Lawson Creek in mind). 

Ms. Johnson clarified for Mr. Bruce that both the trails addressed in Mr. Pusich's amendment to 

the motion are within the potential development area. 

Mr. Williamson indicated that he intended to vote against the amendment; the Trust has made 

quite a few concessions, development is anticipated in only about one-third of the tract, and 

substantial greenbelts have been dedicated. In addition, staff has stated that the Trust is 

specifically opposed to at least one, if not both, of the trails. 

Mr. Kendziorek said he agreed that reservation #10 addressed the Lawson Creek area, 

however, he understood that the Bear Creek Trail to the Snowmobile Trail was never presented 

to the Trust. Ms. Johnson replied that she was unaware of any discussion because she wasn't 

at the meetings with the Trust. 

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT - by Mr. Kendziorek to only discuss the 

Snowmobile Trail to Bear Creek portion, and allow reservation #10 to take care of the Lawson 

Creek aspect. 

Mr. Pusich, as maker of the first amendment, accepted the friendly amendment. 

At Mr. Williamson's request, Mr. Kendziorek restated Mr. Pusich's amendment as amended: 

That the City advance a discussion to try and develop an easement to address the connection 

between the Snowmobile Trail and the Bear Creek Trail. 

Mr. Williamson said he was not opposed to the idea of the CBJ trying to negotiate an easement 

but was opposed to putting it as an absolute condition. He noted that there is still an 

opportunity to proceed in front of the Assembly. Mr. Kendziorek stated that that was the reason 

he worded the amendment "to open a discussion," because it was not clear that the connection 

between the Snowmobile Trail and the Bear Creek Trail was ever addressed. 

Mr. Pusich added that it was also his intention to get this item on the table for discussion 

between the CBJ and the Trust. The Commission heard earlier testimony that the connector 

trail was not proposed to the Trust. 

Referring to public comment, Mr. Kendziorek stated that staff made a point that this land 

disposal was brought before the public a number of times. As such, the City has an obligation 

to get information out to the public, but the public also has an obligation to stay aware of events 

that are occurring. 

Chair Dybdahl asked Mr. Pusich if he would consider withdrawing his amendment if Mr. 

Williamson would incorporate the amendment's concept into a revised motion. Mr. Pusich 

agreed; Mr. Williamson agreed if it was not a mandatory provision for a trail connection but 


just a mandatory direction to staff to negotiate for the connection. Messrs. Pusich and 

Kendziorek acknowledged that that was the idea of the amendments. 

WITHDRAWAL OF AMENDMENT - by Mr. Pusich. 

AMENDED MOTION - by Williamson that the Planning Commission recommend to the 

Assembly approval of the final phase of the land exchange with the Alaska Mental Health Trust, 

subject to reservations 1 through 10 (in the staff report), and with the addition of reservation 

#11 to direct staff to negotiate with the Trust to reserve an easement between the Bear Creek 

greenbelt easement and the Snowmobile Trail. 

Roll Call Vote 

Ayes: Bruce, Kendziorek, Pusich, Sanford, Vick, Williamson, Dybdahl 

Nays: None 

The motion carried, 7-0. 

IX. 

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - No items. 

X. OTHER BUSINESS 

Mr. Kendziorek questioned the design of the ATM (automatic teller machine) that was recently 

installed in the Sealaska Building parking lot and asked if there was some way to encourage the 

owner to make the structure fit into the Downtown Historic District. Ms. Easterwood said the 

structure received a building permit, the only permit required. The location is just across the 

street from the Historic District boundary. She added that up until recently, the structure would 

have gone through Design Review. With the Design Review Board no longer in existence, the 

building received a permit as proposed. She said the Community Development Department 

has received at least five telephone calls, and there was a letter in the newspaper yesterday, 

complaining about the structure's appearance at that particular corner. Mr. Dybdahl said he 

has asked the owner to change the color of the structure, and this may occur in the Spring. 

Responding to Mr. Kendziorek's question about how to expand the Historic District boundaries 

to encompass more of the downtown area, Ms. Easterwood said the Planning Commission 

would have to make a recommendation to the Assembly. 

Mr. Bruce suggested that staff inform callers that abolishment of design review means nothing 

can be done about the ATM structure's appearance. 

XI. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT 

Ms. Easterwood stated that earlier she was at meetings of the Assembly's Policy Planning 

Committee and the Tourism Advisory Committee. Some of the outcomes from those 

committees will be coming to the Planning Commission. 


Mr. Vick suggested holding a Planning Commission retreat in the Spring. 

A brief discussion followed about the public notice requirements. Ms. Easterwood said the CDD 

always tries to give notice above and beyond the requirements. However, budget restraints 

mean the CDD has to be creative in finding ways to reach people that do not involve spending 

money. CDD staff will be having a training session next month on how to use the media more 

effectively. 

Mr. Bruce repeated his earlier request that staff provide the Commission with proof of 

advertisement in cases such as the Douglas Island land disposal where public meetings were 

held by other committees and boards. He also mentioned notifying the radio stations which are 

widely heard and are an inexpensive way to provide notice for items of public interest. He 

added that it is easy for people testifying to say they speak for a silent majority who did not 

receive notice (because there is no one to agree or disagree). Notice of pending CBJ actions 

are published in the newspaper, and it is the duty of the public to read it and call if they have 

questions. 

Mr. Dybdahl commented that the land disposal item is an instance where people should pay 

attention to things taking place anywhere in the borough -- because they might be moving there 

some day. 

Mr. Williamson remarked that the Commission's very act of seeking input on the Douglas land 

disposal from community groups was turned against it when people complained about poor 

turnout at those meetings. 

Mr. Maguire commented that the last time he made a presentation to the Douglas Advisory 

Board there was a full house, so he surmised that notice of the meeting had gotten out. 

Mr. Williamson said the land disposal issue was more of a concern to the bordering property 

owners than to the entire Douglas community. 

Ms. Easterwood reported that there will be a special Planning Commission meeting on 

December 28, 1999 at noon in the Assembly Chambers to address the platting problem in the 

Greenwood Subdivision. 

XII. REPORT OF REGULAR AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES 

Lands Committee - Mr. Sanford reported that at the last meeting they discussed the following: 

(1) approved negotiating with all the property owners in the Greenwood Subdivision to correct 

the survey lines; (2) the fiber optic easements passed at tonight's meeting; (3) the last three 

S'it'Tuwan Subdivision lots will be sold over the counter until Spring at which time the committee 

will consider requests from low income housing groups to donate any remaining lots; and (4) 

the committee passed the remote subdivision ordinance and overlay map (TXT99-00003) and 

included the provision for pedestrian easements along the high water line, as requested by the 

Shelter Island Neighborhood Association, but which the Planning Commission declined to 

include. 


XIII. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS 

Mr. Pusich asked about an appeal of a Commission decision. Ms. Easterwood explained that 

Mr. Hurlock appealed the Commission's approval of a variance that allowed a shed on Mr. Xia's 

property. The Assembly decided to accept the appeal and appointed Mayor Egan as the 

hearing officer. 

XIV. ADJOURNMENT 

MOTION - by Mr. Vick to adjourn. There being no other business and no objection, the meeting 

adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

121499 - City and Borough of Juneau

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?