Loading...
2007-04-10 Regular Meeting KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH fO),ElE ~ ~~,ll W ~ ~ PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTE]:lr\l APR 2 5 2007 l1:U REGULAR MEETING-APRIL 10,2007 MINUTES BOROUGH CLERK'S OFFICE CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Parks & Recreation Committee was called to order at 7:08 p.m. by COMMITTEE MEMBER SALTONSTALL on April 10, 2007 in the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly Chambers. ROLL CALL Committee Members Present Absent Excused Others Present Mike Sirofchuck-Chair X Duane Dvorak Hans Tschersich X Community Development Pam Foreman Teleconf. Sheila Smith Kevin Foster X Community Development Jeff Huntley X Patrick Saltonstall X Andy Schroeder X Cassandra Juenger X Lori Demi X Wavne Biessel X Chris Lynch X Ian Fulp X Roy Brown X A quorum was established. COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER MOVED TO EXCUSE COMMITTEE MEMBERS SIROFCHUCK and DEMI. It was SECONDED by COMMITTEE MEMBER JUENGER, and it CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER MOVED TO APPROVE the agenda. The motion was SECONDED by COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER, and it CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER MOVED TO APPROVE the minutes of March 27, 2007. The motion was SECONDED by COMMITTEE MEMBER TSCHERICH, and it CARRIED by voice vote. COMMITTEE MEMBERS TSCHERSICH, HUNTLEY, SALTONSTALL, SCHROEDER, and JUENGER voted aye, COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER voted nay. AUDIENCE COMMENTS AND APPEARANCE REQUESTS There were no audience comments and appearance requests. OLD BUSINESS A. Implementation of Transportation section of the Draft Borough Wide Comp Plan Discussion of roads, sidewalks, and bike/pedestrian paths, and rural and urban Kodiak. It was the consensus that everyone is happy with the Transportation section. B. Implementation of the Parks & Recreation section of the Draft Borough Wide Comp Plan During committee's discussion it was the consensus they were happy the vision statement was included, but the trail plan wasn't covered. On page 14 it talks about create a road system trails plan in Policies, but there isn't any implementation for it. 4/1 0/2007 Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes Page I of7 VICE CHAIR FOREMAN stated there were a number of people who approached her at the Comp Plan meeting requesting a trails plan be done and deal with the different user groups. She also said the Planning & Zoning Commissioners asked her if the P&R Committee could do a plan. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN also stated in Implementation there is a bullet that says "Address the following priority actions in developing and implementing a trails plan for the Borough." COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL said they need to add a bullet saying "Explore easement options with private land owners." COMMITTEE MEMBER HUNTLEY stated if we nail this down tight it will restrict our ability to move around it. He feels it leaves enough latitude to implement a trails plan that fits. We don't want to ask them to do this for us. COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER asked about on page 15 the main bullet says "Explore creation of other programs or strategies," and in the bullets below it says "Creation of some separate motorized and non- motorized trails." Do we define how or who is going to do that. The key word is "explore creation." Is that the direction P&R is going or is it two separate entities, the Comp Plan and the P&R? COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER said it is addressed on page 13 under a bullet that says "Evaluate and identify those lands under Borough ownership that would be appropriate for parks and recreation facilities, with a goal of a comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan to guide future decisions" but it also speaks ofP&R as being the committee that would amend and add to the plan. COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER expressed concern about the conflict that appears to be on the trails and the implementation of these actions that the Comp Plan talks about who is going to do that. COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER said on page 11 it says "The Parks and Recreation Committee recommend that they have input on all Borough land use decisions as they pertain to parks or trails." COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER stated the point is 3 or 4 members of our committee members are part of a non-profit that is actively pursuing taking over to do the implementation of these, according to what he read on the website. COMMITTEE MEMBER SALTON STALL stated he sees it as the Island Trails Network is a non-profit to help the Borough and other user groups because the Borough can't do a lot of these things. It can work in conjunction with this committee. COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER said he doesn't feel that Island Trails Network has any design of a trails plan takeover. He thinks they are designed to be a resource if asked, to bring more resources to the table as far as funding, and help implement the trails plan once it's in place. They're more like a trails partner organization. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN stated if there were bullets that appropriately address Island Trails Network it would be on page 15: including a volunteer program; A trail crew program; Trail fund-raising program. Those are the kinds of things the Island Trails is thinking they can help the Borough with by providing manpower to help maintain trails, getting people trained in trails maintenance and development, and being a non-profit entity they can go after different types of funding that the Borough can't due to being a government. COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER is still concerned with the Comp Plan and making policy that will benefit a non-profit that has at least half of our members involved in it. COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL reminded the committee that this committee makes policy. On page 11 it says we are the ones who work for the Borough on creating the Trails Plan. Island Trails Network will help the Borough and this committee implement the plan. They will work within the parameters of what is decided here. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN stated they will work as advocates for trails and trail users, and for trying to pick up the gap where the Borough has been unable to focus the energy and attention on trails keeping them clean, maintained, and usable. 4/1 0/2007 Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes Page 2 of7 COMMITTEE MEMBER HUNTLEY stated going back to the creation of some motorized and non- motorized trails he would like an addition to be as per majority of usage. He doesn't want to see a non- motorized trail changed to a motorized trail because two people drove a 4-wheeler down the trail when it is used mainly by pedestrians and vise versa. Dvorak explained that the committee does not make policy, it develops policy. The Assembly makes or adopts policy. This group investigates, plans, and develops policy that is eventually recommended to the legislators. P&R is an advisory committee. COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER stated the recommendations that we send forward are very clear. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN said she is leery about adding anything specific because we don't want to paint ourselves into a tight corner on telling us how we have to do that. It was the consensus not to make it so tight that they paint themselves into a corner, but they also don't want to make it too vague. COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER'S recommendation is "creation of some trails for specific uses," for horses and bicyclists. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN stated at the Comp Plan meetings the issue that came up over and over was separate trail use. Perhaps we could say "Creation of some separate trails for specific uses induding. . ." COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER MOVED TO APPROVE Chapter 9 as presented. The motion was SECONDED by COMMITTEE MEMBER TSCHERICH, and it CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN said on page 2 there should be a sub-header that clearly says it is the vision. C. Lester Lightfoot Dvorak stated these are the last copies we had in the office. We don't own the rights, and Stacy Studebaker owns the rights and she did the brochure. He would have to get approval to see about getting a reprint. It was the consensus of the committee to request permission from Stacy Studebaker, update, and reprint the Lester Lightfoot brochures. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN said Ken Warner called her asking where we were on getting the Borough to reprint the brochures because he is interested because Warner's hand them out with the sale of an A TV. Ken Warner is concerned about new transfers during the summer and wants to make sure a brochure gets into the hands of the new ATV owners and transfers. Warner indicated ifit is a financial thing that there may be assistance through the Soil, Water, and Conservation people. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN MOVED to request through the Assembly that this brochure be updated and be reprinted with the permission from the owner of the copyrights. The motion was SECONDED by COMMITTEE MEMBER HUNTLEY. Dvorak stated he thinks it did go to the Assembly for approval. That was a product that came from the A TV stakeholder group that was active at that time. Dvorak said the last time it was published it was reviewed for accuracy by each agency that has their logo on it. The question was called, and it CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. NEW BUSiNESS A. Tax Foreclosure Property Review COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER stated the one parcel that may be of concern to them is the one on Devil's Prong because it doesn't have a house on it, and it's in a neighborhood that is becoming developed. It could possibly have a pocket park or park potential. It may already have a trail on it. Dvorak clarified that because they are reviewing these properties it means the Borough already owns them and has received Clerk's deeds from the court transferring ownership to the Borough. The purpose of this 4/1 012007 Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes Page 3 of7 review is to provide an initial assessment whether or not these properties should be resold to the public or retained by the Borough for a public purpose. If you recommended a property to be withheld for a public purpose you would need to state that purpose and make that recommendation. If the Assembly agrees with that recommendation it would take that property out of contention of being redeemed by the property owner. If it's designated for a public purpose their opportunity to redeem their property is foreclosed permanently, and thereafter the Borough can do with it as it will. Dvorak brought to their attention the remote parcels, which are the Uyak Bay parcel and another one in Larsen Bay. Dvorak believes the one in Uyak is next to refuge land. In past instances the Borough had the Assembly designate properties like this for a public purpose, and then negotiated with the refuge. COMMITTEE MEMBER JUENGER clarified the only time Fish & Wildlife Service expresses interest is if they are given a list of foreclosed properties and if they express an interest then negotiations start at that point. They have not expressed an interest. COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER asked if the committee could make a recommendation that a trail easement be placed on the property before it is turned back around to the public. Dvorak stated they probably need to make a recommendation to the Borough that this property be withheld for public purposes. That closes the redemption period and it makes a statement that it is not to be resold to the public because we will withhold some or all of it for public purposes. Once that has been stated the Borough could put an easement on it. It's more complicated than it may seem. COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER MOVED to retain the Mountain View property with the intent not for reserving it all for recreational use but to buy a little at a time to try to get a trail easement to connect two communities that are currently walled off from one another. The motion was SECONDED by VICE CHAIR FOREMAN. COMMITTEE MEMBER TSCHERICH asked Dvorak if it would be possible to make a deal with a property owner if they are subdividing and sell off a piece to the Borough in order to expunge tax liabilities. Dvorak said that is a finance question, but State statutes dictates how we tax property owners and what forms of value they can give us. If this property physically connected Devil's Prong with Marmot he would see more value of retaining this property. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN asked Dvorak what would be the appropriate channels, could we say our recommendation, although we don't want to hold up this piece of property from possible sale, we do see it as a way to connect two neighborhoods, and can we make a formal request to Planning & Zoning that they start those conversations; otherwise it's going to get lost. The question was called, and it FAILED by unanimous voice vote. Dvorak asked if there is a road service area there, and if so does it include both Marmot and Devil' s Prong in the same district because if there were a trail someone would have to be responsible for maintenance and it would probably be the service district. COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL said we can do more research, and then go to the Planning & Zoning meeting. He would also like this property on the next agenda. Dvorak stated it's on the May 16th Planning & Zoning agenda. COMMITTEE MEMBER JUENGER stated the next land sale will be late fall. Dvorak said there's time in the summer to look at this and if a recommendation comes back the Assembly can be prevailed upon to reconsider their decision as long as the property hasn't been redeemed. COMMITTEE MEMBER SCHROEDER said he will take photos to provide staff so it can be reconsidered as its own trail. B. S07-013 Subdivision Case Dvorak stated the owner of Lot 2A requested from the owner of Lot IA to buy a portion of their property. The purpose of this is to sell the property owner of Lot 2A of about a 20 foot swath of property. 4/1 0/2007 Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes Page 4 of7 C. Resolution FY 2005-06 - DNR Recommendations COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL stated VICE CHAIR FOREMAN, COMMITTEE MEMBER TSCHERICH and he went to the Comp Plan meeting, and what VICE CHAIR FOREMAN and he want brought on is land use recommendations for all the parcels on the road system. People are wondering if it's for residential, industrial or what. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN and himself want to come up with recommendations for areas on the road system. If we could come up with a broad statement, and make a motion saying something like we want to keep the access to all land on the road system and would like development to occur in tight areas or something like that. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN said she isn't opposed to a broad statement. There was concern about the fact that there wasn't a lot of discussion of what's going to happen with development between Womens Bay and Chiniak. What happens if the Lesnoi land becomes available? Do we go along assuming it will never happen or should we make recommendations to maintain access areas. Dvorak said one of the biggest comments from this process was that the State planners were designating a number of well known access points and beaches as potential settlement and in the State's language settlement mean disposals; cabin sites and private ownership. Down the line you will see the proposed Kill designation indicates Rd- Recreation Dispersed, which means it is unimproved recreation lands. This only references a certain number of locations, presumably because other common locations were already referenced for Recreation dispersed. The consultants have a copy of the State's final plan and they could look at that to do some mapping that is consistent with these recreational recommendations. Dvorak can send them a copy of this letter along with a little discussion. One map he would draw the committee's attention to is the Chiniak map because it didn't have a lot of forward looking designations. It just legitimizes the existing zoning pattern with the legend of proposed land uses. The 1982 plan really only identified a narrow corridor from Thumbs Up to Roads End and that was the Chiniak planning area. The residents said "no" they want to embrace the watershed concept even though it may be privately owned Lesnoi land it is still a part of Chiniak from the standpoint of you go through Chiniak to go to it, and a lot of people in Chiniak use it as a resource. When the committee says there are unmapped areas Dvorak thinks they are talking about between Kalsin Bay and Womens Bay. Look at the Chiniak map and identify specific beaches and they are already on the map they just aren't designated for our purpose. We lost VICE CHAIR FOREMAN on the phone at 8:45 p.m. COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL stated perhaps we could say we prefer to see that area deemed recreational and we want to maintain public access to these areas and would prefer more development in areas where there is already development. COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER said it looks like the DNR is recommending Narrow Cape, Chiniak, Saltery Cove as General Use over Recreational. Do they have different definitions for the same thing that we are talking about? COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL said this is for the State plan and we are talking about zoning which the State doesn't have zoning that would be recreational. Dvorak stated the State plan use is a lot more about making resource decisions on how to use land, but they don't have zoning. Anything that hasn't been subdivided on the Chiniak map that goes to Kalsin Bay was designated Conservation. COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL said as a group we all would want that to be Conservation. We don't want to see it subdivided. Dvorak stated Conservation is a fairly intensive zone. It allows for agricultural uses, fish sites, residential, and agricultural buildings such as barns. If you are talking about Open Space recreational uses it prohibits motorized trail use. Residential zone is the bottom line, large lot and low density. Conservation zone allows for small scale lodges for up to 6 guests as a permitted use. More than 6 guests as a conditional use. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN called to teleconference the meeting again. 4/10/2007 Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes Page 5 of7 COMMITTEE MEMBER HUNTLEY said our recommendations for the State land would be the same recommendations we had for dispersing of private lands. COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL said what you are saying is what we recommended for State land we recommend for the whole area. Dvorak said they will have to look at the Chiniak map online in the Land Use chapter. COMMITTEE MEMBER SALTONSTALL asked Dvorak ifhe will convey this to the consultants. Dvorak said yes and keeping the tidelands open for public access and any existing public land adjacent also. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN asked how is most of the Lesnoi land along the Kalsin Bay area and Middle Bay area zoned currently. Dvorak stated all the Lesnoi lands are zoned for Conservation. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN asked Dvorak if he remembered the two pieces of land across the highway from Fort Abercrombie, she thought they had made a formal recommendation to the Assembly that they consider working with State Parks to purchase some of that land. If you look at the land use map it is being recommended to be put up for sale. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN said they had a couple of options, which one of the options was definitely against our recommendation. They were saying we should consider this for residential development. I don't know what the Assembly ever done with our recommendation that they consider going into negotiations with State Parks. She thought on the State Parks plan for Fort Abercrombie the park was recommending some kind of land deal. COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL said he knows they are getting the Ram site, but he doesn't know if the parcel crosses the road. Dvorak thinks it is all the same parcel. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN said there is a City parcel and a Borough parcel side by side. Dvorak said the City parcel that is side by side with the Borough parcel is part of the Ram site. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN recommends they make a very clear statement that our recommendation is that all that land including the Borough parcel be maintained as recreational. COMMITTEE MEMBER SALTONSTALL said we can add that we don't want the top parcel, which is part of the Ram site, separated. We definitely want that part to go to the park. COMMITTEE MEMBER HUNTLEY recommended we go a step further and say we want the park to become the custodian of that piece. VICE CHAIR FOREMAN told Dvorak to look at the Land Use chapter to find out which option we want to maintain. COMMITTEE MEMBER HUNTLEY said we need to find the original motion. Dvorak stated he doesn't want the committee to have the impression that the consultants were making a recommendation against the committee's recommendation. The consultants heard from other elements ofthe community and their message was they need more area to build houses and such. COMMUNICATIONS VICE CHAIR FOREMAN said she got an email from Wayne Biessell saying the Parks Board is meeting this coming Monday at 7:00 pm at Fort Abercrombie, and asked if we would like an opportunity to present any Comp Plan issues this group should be made aware of. There will be one more meeting in May before the summer hiatus until September. Let them know so they can get it on the agenda. COMMITTEE MEMBER SAL TONST ALL said we should tell them what we were just talking about. He said he will talk to Biessell about having him present it. 4/1 0/2007 Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes Page 6 of7 REPORTS A. Meeting Schedule: . April 24, 2007 P&R meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the KID SD conference room. . May 8,2007 P&R meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the KID SD conference room. COMMITTEE MEMBER SALTON STALL stated he wouldn't be able to make the May 8th meeting. B. Gravel Task Force Minutes of January 8, 2007 Dvorak reported the group has been looking into the prospect of other potential gravel sources for the community to allow for some transition away from the gravel sources in the Womens Bay community. They have been meeting for about a year now. The Gravel Task Force is going to try to investigate the Salome Creek drainage and also the piece of property next to the fairgrounds between Sargent Creek and the fairgrounds that belongs to the Coast Guard. Martin Lydick has been working on a new RFP, and we have tentative approval to go into the Coast Guard land to do our investigation. Weare working on an environmental threshold determination right now. It will probably be categorically exempt. At the last P&R meeting we talked about the Recreational Amenities Draft Ordinance and where it was at. It was just sent and in review now. We should be hearing something in the next week or two. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no audience comments. COMMITTEE MEMBERS' COMMENTS There were no comments. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE MEMBER SALTONSTALL requested a motion to adjourn. COMMITTEE MEMBER HUNTLEY MOVED TO ADJOURN the regular meeting. The motion was SECONDED by COMMITTEE MEMBER FOSTER. The meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE ATTEST By: ~P1Cb..- d-ot~ Sheila Smith, Secretary Community Development Department Di~.TE l~J>PROVED: April 24, 2007 4/1 0/2007 Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes Page7of7