After receiving extensive public commentary, both written and verbal, against an ordinance that would have rezoned property on Kachemak Drive from rural residential to the East End Mixed Use district, the Homer City Council at its Monday, March 10 meeting voted unanimously against its introduction. Ordinance 25-27 will not proceed further.

The application to rezone 4787 Kachemak Drive appeared before the Homer Planning Commission in February. The property owner’s petition was recommended for approval by the commission in a 4-1 vote on Feb. 5. A request for reconsideration was brought before the commission on Feb. 19, but reconsideration failed in a 3-2 vote.

In a March 10 memorandum to the council, City Planner Ryan Foster wrote that if the rezone was approved, the parcel would be zoned under East End Mixed Use and the production, processing, assembly and packaging of fish, shellfish and seafood products as intended by the property owner would be a permitted use. Foster also noted that following the rezoning approval, the applicant would need a zoning permit for the construction of their facility.

“On the one hand is a request to rezone to allow for a fish/seafood processing and packaging facility, helping to support the commercial fishing/marine-focused economy of Homer. On the other hand is the consideration of existing residential property owners in the vicinity of 4787 Kachemak Drive and the impact on their quality of life by this proposed rezoning,” he wrote.

By denying the rezoning of 4787 Kachemak Drive, the parcel’s zoning district remains under Rural Residential, where the seafood processing facility is not a permitted use.

Numerous community members, including Kachemak Drive residents, testified against the ordinance during the public comment period held at the beginning of Monday’s meeting, and expressed disappointment that the rezone application had made it through the planning commission for consideration by the city council. Many stated similar reasons for opposing the ordinance — largely that the parcel is part of a larger wetlands area, is an “extremely valuable” wildlife habitat, and that rezoning the parcel would set precedent for spot zoning.

“This is not a simple neighborhood issue, but rather a city and state issue of great concern all along Kachemak Drive and the steadily eroding coastal bluff below,” resident Rika Mouw said during the meeting. “This application benefits no one. The mapping already done in this area clearly shows development unsuitability to be at its worst and it sits in high value wetlands smack dab within the recognized green stormwater management infrastructure in the Homer Public Works’ published findings.”

Environmental educator Kim McNett told the council that she lives across the street from 4787 Kachemak Drive and regularly sees stormwater flooding that area.

“The wetlands across there are really important for stormwater management, and are designated in the city comprehensive plan as important green infrastructure assets,” she said. “The city has done a lot of work in trying to designate areas for green infrastructure to mitigate some of the erosion and stormwater coming from East End Road. There’s a lot of public interest in protecting those lands for either city green infrastructure or conservation purposes.”

McNett also said that a Homer Drawdown peatland project conducted in 2021 engaged 250 volunteers, including McNett, that mapped the peatlands in that area and found that the peat layer itself was between 15-28 feet deep.

“(This means) that there’s no solid ground until 15 feet below the surface there, which makes development — even at a residential level — extremely expensive,” she said. “You can see the damages that happened with fill on top of peat in the lot just to the north — that’s just horribly flooded after putting in a top layer.

“It seems to me that the East End Mixed Use designation is actually an inaccurate zoning that must have happened prior to a lot of the more recent findings about how that watershed is working. It’s a drainage way, it’s deep peatland, and it’s potentially a really great city green infrastructure asset that we’re desperately in need of as East End floods.”

Kirsten Styvar, who lives adjacent to the lot in question, “adamantly opposed” the rezone as an example of spot zoning.

“It is entirely improper, unethical and illegal to pick off lots one at a time to expand commercial zoning. This is the very definition of spot zoning,” she said. “It is a precedent-setting process that completely lacks reasoned and well-debated neighborhood planning.”

Foster defined spot zoning in the memo as occurring “when a property/properties are rezoned, typically upzoned, from a lower density and/or residential use to a higher density and/or commercial use, without having any connection/relationship to the surrounding zoning districts.” 4787 Kachemak Drive lies just east of and abuts the East End Mixed Use district; however, the lots to the north, south and east of 4787 Kachemak Drive are all zoned Rural Residential.

“The East End Mixed Use zoning district is well represented in the vicinity of 4787 Kachemak Drive, and is by far the largest zoning district west of Kachemak Drive. The proposed use of 4787 Kachemak Drive aligns with the other EEMU uses in the vicinity, with many, including the boatyard, having strong ties to the marine/fishing industries,” he wrote in the memo.

Foster also noted that “irregular borders” are not uncommon for zoning districts, and it is common for single parcels to be rezoned to move from one district to another adjacent district, “especially vacant properties for infill development projects.”

“Based on these findings, I believe that the requested zoning map amendment would not be spot zoning. While it is important to understand the concept of spot zoning, it is not one of the review criteria in Homer City Code for analysis and consideration of zoning map amendment applications,” he wrote.

Part of the rezoning review criteria includes that the zoning amendment be consistent with the comprehensive plan and is in the best interest of the public.

Former Homer Mayor Ken Castner said during the meeting that the rezoning application “never should have got through the planning commission.”

“This is black letter law in Alaska,” he said. “And when I say black letter law, it’s … in statute that you can’t give somebody who’s interested in having something, where the sole beneficiary is the applicant, the right to have it.”

Discussion among the council members aligned with testimony heard from the public.

Council member Donna Aderhold stated that she did not support the rezone, citing that while the lot backs up to the EEMU district, “everything around it is residential” and it lies adjacent to the city’s ongoing wetlands preservation project through Kachemak Sponge Green Infrastructure, which the city also intends to work towards reducing flooding on Kachemak Drive.

“As somebody who has in the past done a lot of wetland delineations, when I look at the aerial imagery of that area, and I look at this lot in particular, it is clear to me that that lot is the lowest area of the wetland, and it’s the wettest,” she said. “So that is actually where a lot of that water is draining to Kachemak Drive. I cannot support a rezone that would create additional problems for Kachemak Drive, and nobody who spoke regarding this ordinance was supportive of this, particularly the neighbors.”

Council member Caroline Venuti also opposed the ordinance, saying that the council hadn’t received a single letter or message from the public in support of the rezone. She also disagreed with moving forward with such a rezoning application while Homer is in the middle of rewriting their comprehensive plan, which currently supports wetlands preservation.

Council member Shelly Erickson also said she didn’t support the ordinance because “it looks like spot zoning, and that’s not a good spot for us to be in.”

Find Ordinance 25-27 and discussion on it during the March 10 meeting recording in full online at www.cityofhomer-ak.gov/citycouncil/city-council-regular-meeting-339.