[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
HOM R -COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TECHNICAL APPENDICES PACIFIC RIM PLANNERS & ENGINEERS A DIVISION OF OLYMPIC ASSOCIATES CO. CITY OF HOMER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TECHNICAL APPENDICES 1983 COO Prepared for -31 CITY OF HOMER AND KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH By Pacific Rim Planners and Engineers a Division of Olympic Associates Company Anchorage, Alaska The preparation of this Comprehensive Plan was financed in part by funds from the Office of Coastal Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, administered by the Division of Community Planning, Department of Community and Regional Affairs. Matching funds and local administration' were provided by Kenai Peninsula Borough and the City of Homer. US Department of Commerce NOAA Coastal Services Center LilDr-aTy 2234 South Robson Avenuo Charleston, SC 29405-2413 Date: Apr. 19, 1983 Hear-ing: May 17, 1983 Vote: Unanimous Action: Enacted KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH ORDINANCE 83-26 ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF ROMER AS A PORTION OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHEREAS, the Borough Planning Commission is required to prepare and recommend to the Assembly a comprehensive plan for all areas encompassed by the Borough; and WHEREAS, the Borough Planning Commission is required by statute to review and update the Borough comprehensive plan every two years; and WHEREAS, the Homer Advisory Planning Commission passed a resolution recommending the adopcion of the proposed Homer comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Homer City Council ha-s passed a resolution adopting the Homer comprehensive plan, and recommended that the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly adopt the plan; and WHEREAS, the Borough Planning Commission, after public hearing at its regular meeting of March 28, 1983, has recommended that the proposed Homer comprehensive plan, as amenaed, be adopted b7 the Assembly; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH: Section I.. That the Assembly adopts the "Homer Comprehensive Plan," prepared by Pacific Rim Planners & Engineers as the official Borough comprehensive plan for that portion of the Borough within the boundaries of the City of Homer, subject to the deletion of the words "platting and" from Pages 7-2 and 7-3, the amended form approved by the Borough Planning Commission at its regular meeting of March 28, 1983. Section 2. That the comprehensi ve plan adopted by this ordinance shall be known as "komer Comprehensive Plan." Section 3. That this ordinance takes effect immediately upon enactment. ENACTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH-ON THIS 17th DAY OF May 1983 ATTEST: DCnaid L. MtCloud, Assemb-17 President '. @ : L @ @ 44,:: 2@ 3orough Clerk CITY OF HOMER HOMER, ALASKA RESOLUTION 83-5 A RESOLUTION OF TEE HOMER CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE COM ENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HOMER. WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough is required by statute to review and update the Borough Comprehensive Plan every two years; and,- WHEREAS, a Comprehensive Plan has been prepared for the City of Homer by Pacific Rim Planners, Inc.; and, WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Ad Hoc Committee and Pacific Rim Planners have held numerous workshop sessions, public meetings and have obtained suggestions and comments from the citizens of Homer; and, WHEREAS, the Steering Committee has recommended approval of the Draft Comprehensive Plan with certain modifications; and, WHEREAS, the Homer Advisory Planning Commission has recommended approval of the Final Draft of the Comprehensive Plan with certain modifications and revisions; and, WHEREAS, the Homer City Council has reviewd the Final Draft of the Comprehensive Plan and has recommended approval of the Homer Ccmprehensive Plan with certain modificaitons and revisions; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Homer that., Section 1: The Homer Final Draft Comprehensive Plan prepared by Pacific Rim Planners and modified by the attached list of Amendments and Corrections is hereby approved and adopted as the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Homer. Section-L-1 This plan is hereby recommended to the Kenai Peninsula Borough for adoption as the official Borough Comprehensive Plan within the Homer planning area. DATED at Homer, Alaska, this 14th day of February, 1983. CITY OF HOMER Erle Coopers::@I@yd`r ATTEST: Herold,'City Clerk TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I Page Chapter 1 Introduction a. Purpose of the Plan b. History of the Homer Area c. The Homer Environment Chapter 2 Natural Resources 2-1 a. Climate b. Topography c. Soils & Geology d. Vegetation Chapter 3 Human Resources 3-1 a. Population b. Economy c. Population Analysis PART II Chapter 4 Land Use Plan 4-1 Chapter 5 Homer Spit Plan 5-1 Chapter 6 Central Business District Plan 6-1 Chapter 7 Transportation Plan 7-1 a. Land b. Water c. Air Chapter 8 Public Utilities & Facilities Plan 8-1 a. Water b. Sewer c. Solid Waste d. Drainage Chapter 9 Parks & Recreation Plan 9-1 Chapter 10 Housing Plan 10-1 Chapter 11 Public Safety, Social & Health 11-1 Services Plan a. Fire Protection b. Law Enforcement c. Education d. Social Services e. Health Services TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page PART III Chapter 12. Economic Development Plan 12-1 Chapter 13 Local Government Plan 13-1 Chapter 14 Capital Improvement Plan 14-1 REFERENCES CITED APPENDICES A. Public Opinion Survey A-1 B. Economic Model B-1 C. Compliance with State of Alaska C-1 Coastal Management Program D. Glossary of Terms Used D-1 E. Participants E-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page 1-1 Vicinity Map 1-2 2-1 Soil Suitability 2-2 2-2 Vegetation 2-4 2-3 Elevations 2-7 2-4 Slope Analysis 2-8 3-1 Projected Population Growth Rate in Percent 3-6 Per Year -- City of Homer 3-2 @Actual and Projected Population Growth Rates, 3-9 City of Homer 3-3 Past and Projected Population, City of Homer 3-10 3-4 Recent Population Figures in Homer Area 3-12 4-1 Existing Land Use 4-2 4-2 Development Suitability 4-3 4-3 Land Use Plan 4-7 4-4 Commercial Land Use - Existing, Zoned, Planned, 4-11 and Projected 4-5 Industrial Land Use - Existing, Zoned, Planned, 4-12 and Projected 4-6 Residential Land Use - Existing, Zoned, 4-14 Planned, and Projected 4-7 Special Conditions 4-18 4-8 Existing Zoning 4-23 5-1 Important Habitat Types on East Side of Homer 5-6 Spit 5-2 Major Sediment Types, Homer Spit 5-7 5-3 Homer Spit Plan 5-9 5-4 Harbor Slope Development Concepts 5-10 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure Title Page 6-1 Commercial Nodes 6-3 6-2 Central Business District Design Concepts 6-4 6-3 Central Business District Concept Plan 6-5 7-1 Transportation Plan 7-5 8-1 Utilities 8-5 8-2 Drainage 8-14 10-1 Trends in Housing Starts by Type of Unit 10-2. 10-2 Year Round Housing, 1970 and 1977, Versus 10-4 New Units Authorized, 1977-1981, by Type of Unit LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 2-1 Homer Climate: Normals, Means and Extremes 2-6 3-1 Past Population Trends in the City of Homer 3-3 and Kenai Peninsula Borough 3-2 Current and Projected Population, Homer Area 3-8 3-3 Trends in Non Agricultural Wage and Salary 3-14 Employment Distribution 3-4 Direct Transactions in the Homer Area 3-15 Economy, 1980 3-5 Homer's Economic Base 3-18 3-6 Secondary Sales Revenues in Homer Area Economy 3-20 3-7 Economic Projections of Total Sales by Industry 3-22 3-8 Major Assumptions Underlying Economic 3-24 Projections 7-1 Vessel Trips, Passenger and Throughput 7-10 Tonnage - Homer 7-2 Historical and Projected Air Traffic - 7-13 Homer Airport 11-1 Summary of Homer Volunteer Fire Department 11-3 Activities, 1977-1981 11-2 Revenues and Expenditures of Homer Volunteer 11-5 Fire Department 11-3 Actual and Projected Cost Allocation of Homer 11-6 Volunteer Fire Department Costs Compared with Possible Allocation Methods 11-4 Fire and Emergency Medical Services Equipment 11-9 and Capital Facilities Needs 11-5 Comparison of Homer and State of Alaska Crime 11-12 Rates, Actual Offenses Reported to Police 11-6 Homer Public Library Usage 11-17 11-7 Homer Public Library Revenue Sources 11-18 LIST OF TABLES (continued) Table Title Page 13-1 City of Homer, General Governmental 13-7 Expenditures by Function 13-2 City of Homer, All Expenditures by Type 13-9 13-3 City of Homer, General Revenue by Source 13-10 13-4 City of Homer, Tax Revenues by Source 13-11 13-5 City of Homer, Property Tax Levies and 13-13 Collections 13-6 City of Homer, All Revenues by Type and Source 13-14 13-7 City of Homer, Ratio of Net General Bonded 13-16 Debt to Assessed Value and Net Bonded Debt Per Capita 13-8 City of Homer Combined Fund Equities, All 13-18 Fund Types and Account Groups 14-1 City of Homer, Historical & Projected Revenues, 14-3 Expenditures, & Capital Improvement Financing Potential 14-2 Effects of Differing Assumed Growth Rates in 14-6 State Shared Revenues & Other Capital Grants on City of Homer Capital Improvement Financing Potential 14-3 City of Homer, Six Year Capital Improvement 14-8 Schedule CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE The purpose of this comprehensive plan, is to serve as a policy direc- tive for future actions by the City. Comprehensive in nature, all of the policies and recommendations for the various elements are coordi- nated so that conflicts between policies are reduced. Designed to guide growth and development for the next decade and beyond, the plan can be used to standardize judgements a'nd rulings as the Homer Advisory Planning Commission, City Council and others implement the plan. The plan will also be used by various borough, state and federal agen- cies as an assemblage of opinions and a forecast of the needs of Homer's present and future residents. Within the plan's capital improvement program, anticipated projects are listed in the order of construction priority, along with estimated costs and funding require- ments. This not only provides a schedule of expenditures for City departments, but also informs residents, business owners and property owners of future City actions which may affect them. Therefore, prop- erty owners, for example, can be assured that, given funding, certain improvements (streets, utilities, facilities) will be completed in a certain time period. The plan is not static. Instead, it should be a working document which will be modified each year and evolve with the issues which Homer will face in the future. The plan provides information, guid- ance and ince 'ntive to federal, state and local officials, and to the residents of the City of Homer. HISTORY Horner lies in the benchlands between the eroding bluffs of the north shore of Kachemak Bay and the bluffs along Diamond Ridge on the Kenai Peninsula (Figure 1-1). The grassy meadows of the benchlands are defined by groves of spruce and birch trees, with alder and elderberry forming dense thickets. Wetlands and peat bogs form the lowlands. Dotting the landscape are scattered homes and small farms. Withi'n the City limits, the land rises to an elevation of a little over- 1,000 feet, providing a commanding view south across Kachemak Bay and on to the Kenai Mountains. From this vantage point several glaciers can be seen making their journey to the bay. Prominent in the middle ground of this scene is Homer Spit, snaking its way halfway across the bay. It was on the Spit where Homer was first settled. The first post office opened in 1886. During the next few years the community's population fluctuated, with many of its residents being drawn away by news of gold strikes elsewhere in the territory. 1-1 VICINI -ANCHORAGE IENAI K .. ......... LDOTNA . . ........ 8 RD . ......... .............. ........................ ....... .... . ............. ........................... ....... ................ ............... ................ ... ....... .. . ............ ... .................... .................... . ............. ................ 'Ilk ..... ...... ;::: - [email protected]., :: -I.. . . . " , ", @ . ...I ............... ....... . ... @_e. .. ................ *::@ .................. ............ ................. ...... .................. ........ ............... ................ ...... .......... .........I............... .... .................. ........... ........ .... ................. .......... ***''*,: ......... .......... ......... .......... ........... . ........... ... ...... -- ................. .......... ............ ......... .......... ... ............. . ...... I.............. ............... .......... ....... ............ .... .... .. .... ... .... ....... .... ......... .... .. ... .... '::G .LF::oF":'ALAS ................... . ......... ....... .............. ............. ... ................. ....... ..................... ..................... . ......... .......... . ............... ... ..... . .. ............. ..... . ..... W:q ............... . .................. KODIAK .... . ......... ........ ... .......... ... ..... . ..... .... 'KrODIAK ISLAN ... ...... .. ............. .......... ............. ........ ... ..... .. .... .. ... .... ............ .... .... .......... .. .... ..... ............I... :@l--::@::::,@::@:;,.;:::;@:::;::: @:*.,:@@:@:@j@:..: ll::@.. 1 ... .......... ..... ...... ..... ..... ............ . ....... . .. . ... ... in 1899, the Cook Inlet Coal Fields Company (CICFC) was incorporated, and.seven and a half miles of railroad and a major loading wharf were constructed on the spit. The railroad connected the shiploading facility at the end of the spit with the coal mines at Coal Creek. Homer prospered as a company town, selling coal to -local canneries and passing ships.* In 1902, due to financial difficulties, CICFC was ordered sold by the U.S.. District Court. In 1905, Congress temporar- ily withdrew from entry all public domain lands, including the Coal Creek coal fields. However, with the closing of the CICFC, Homer's fate had been sealed, and from 1902 until 1915, the community of Homer all but ceased to exist. During this time, the few remaining residents moved from the. spit to the benchlands where present day Homer is now located. During the 19201s, most of the buildings on the spit were either moved or sal- vaged for building materials by homesteaders coming into the country. Unlike the first settlers of the area, the new homesteaders did not come to the area for furs, gold or coal, but to work the land, fish and raise crops. The settlement of the community occurred gradually over the years as individuals and families made their way to the Homer area. Following the opening of the Sterling Highway in 1951, linking the Kenai Peninsula with Anchorage, Homer began to grow from its sleepy beginnings as a company town and then a fishing and farming town (Klein, 1981). Successive improvements to the highway, oil development and Anchorage's phenomenal growth all served to boost Homer's population growth rate to a point where it now approaches 10 percent per year. At Homer's average growth rate of 7 percent over the last decade, it is doubling every seven years. Homer is constantly changing. Approximately half of the people now living in Homer have arrived within the past five years. As new people move into the area, new ideas are introduced which modify and change the character of the community. Reviewing past planning efforts, some of these changes can be seen along with the City's response to outside influences. In 1954, a series of papers were prepared by committees composed of City residents. These papers out- lined existing conditions in the community and identified the apparent trends in population growth, economic development and transportation. Other subjects which were addressed included tourism, beautification, recreation and the library. Many of the recommend at ion s in the plan- ning effort have been carried out and many more are still valid today. Homer still needs additional tourist facilities, economic diversifica- tion and improved transportation systems. In 1969, the Alaska State Housing Authority prepared a comprehensive plan for the City; The document provides an overview of the condi- tions of Homer, with brief sections on utilities, transportation, housing, economy and social services. Several of the features in the proposed land use plan have been implemented, such as the bypass road. The issues important at that time reflect many of the concerns today. 1-3 They include: � Industrial development of the airport � Extension of sewer and water service. � Encourage compact commercial center � Industrial development on the spit � Need for a civic center and a city administration building The Homer 'Comprehensive Development Plan was completed in 1978. Responding to the oil and gas prospects of the region, the document set forth policy, goal and action recommendations for the future development of the City. The document presents a proposed land use plan designating the City into six use classifications. Also included is a zoning map which is the origin of the zoning ordinance adopted in September, 1982. Although growth rates and economic activity pre- dicted in the plan were optimistic, the plan made some valid state- ments concerning the need for community services and public facili- ties. Comprehensive plans have not been the only studies completed concern- ing the City of Homer. Over the past 15 years many studies, plans and reports have been written pertaining to various aspects of the City, its environment, services and conditions. Homer Spit has been the topic of many of these reports. The Homer Spit land use study, whose intent was to review and compile data related to activities, owner- ships and leases was completed in 1975. The issues identified in the study included the expansion of the boat harbor, seasonal traffic con- trol and allocation of lands for port facilities. Other reports related to Homer Spit include biological investigations, littoral drift studies and a needs assessment. These studies provided informa- tion on the dynamics of the spit, the shore processes which build, erode and reshape the spit, and the plant and animal life found in the vicinity. Other plans pertaining to Homer include the following: * Homer Park and Recreation Development Plan, 1981 * Homer Spit Campground Development Feasibility Report, 1980 * Homer Airport Land Use and Development Plan, 1978 * Master Plan for Streets and Roads, 1979 * Drainage-Management Plan, 1979 * Homer Master Water and Sewer Plans, 1982 These and other planning and design efforts all have contributed to this comprehensive plan. All of these documents have been reviewed and analyzed to determine their relevance to *the existing situation in Homer. A complete annotated bibliography has been compiled which includes all documents pertaining to the City and its environs. 1-4 CHAPTER 2 NATURAL RESOURCES Homer exists because of man's utilization of natural resources of the area. Geology, soils, vegetation, land forms, fish and wildlife all were factors in the establishment of the City. Early inhabitants of the area utilized the coal resources and fur bearing animals and later established a port on Homer Spit, taking advantage of one of the few protected harbors in the area. The character of natural resources defines the opportunities and con- straints of the community and, therefore, it is important to fully understand the various elements in planning for the future. The natural resources discussed in this chapter pertain to land development and include soils, geology, topography and vegetation. SOILS The Homer area is dominated by two soil types, both of which greatly constrain development. Delineated by topographic features, the Beluga soil series is situated on the sloping bench between Kachemak Bay and the steep bluffs north of town. The bluffs are mostly composed of the Kachemak series. The Beluga soil series is characterized by its silty/sandy composition which is underlain by a firm, slowly permeable soil layer 20" to 40" below the surface. 'Due to seepage, the soil is wet much of the year. Engineering interpretations of this soil series indicate there are severe limitations on the development of roads and streets, founda- tions for low buildings, and septic tanks and infiltration fields. The Kachemak soil series is of a silty material, 1511 to 30" deep over shale and sandstone. This soil is well drained, although due to the high organic content, slippage occurs when wet. The major problem with this soil is that it usually is associated with steep slopes. Engineering inte*rpretations of this soil series for roads and streets, foundations for low buildings, and septic tank and infiltration fields range from slight limitations through moderate, severe, and very severe limitations. Again, steep slopes seem to be the major limiting factor (Soil Conservation Service, 1971). Reviewing a map of the City of Homer which illustrates the soil suit- ability for roads, foundations and septic tank infiltration fields, very little land is even moderately suitable for development (see Figure 2-1). However, land has been developed and will continue to be built upon. The main consideration is to what standards will the land be developed in the future? Is the city responsible for the repair of subdivision roads which were originally constructed to minimal standards? Roads, foundations and septic systems can be successfully 2-1 _7r ----- -- Ilu 1r4 LEGEND Cl*'ek4lr SEVERE ow MODERATE SLIGHT LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANKS, INFILTRATION FIELDS, ROADS AND FOUNDATIONS. constructed in the poor soi'ls surrounding Homer. However, they must be constructed to specific standards or there will be problems in the future. These future problems must be dealt with today. GEOLOGY The Homer area is underlain by a fresh-water deposit of sand, silt and clay which is gently folded and several thousand feet thick. There are interbeds of thin lenses of conglomerate material, sub-bituminous and lignitic coal ranging from a few inches to 7 feet thick. Ferru- ginous material occurs in thick beds of sandstone and glacial drift covers much of the area (Soi*l Conservation Service, 1971). Homer is located in an active seismic area and lands below the 100 foot eleva- tion are in a tsunami hazard zone. Homer Spit is likely a deposit of unconsolidated sediments, a remnant of a terminal moraine and composed of silts, sands, gravels and some boulders that overlay marine clays. The combination of this geologic make-up, the poor soils and drainage all contribute to land develop- ment problems (Soil Conservation Service, 1971). VEGETATION/WILDLIFE The native vegetation in the Homer area occurs in four major zones. The zones are: � Dune and Beach Grass � Fresh-Water Marsh and Muskeg � Sitka Spruce Forest � Native Grasslands Figure 2-2 illustrates the distribution of the vegetative zones. Salt-tolerant grasses and shrubs make up the vegetati'on along the shoreline and upon Homer Spit. This cover material is important in stabilizing the shoreline and preventing erosion. The fresh-water marsh and muskeg occur on nearly level lowlands around Beluga and Lampert Lakes. Common wetland plants include cottonsedge, bog birch, draft willow, lingenberry and bog blueberry. This area is also important for small fur-bearing animals. Moose utilize the area in the winter feeding on the sedges, grasses and other aquatic plants. Sitka spruce forests are scattered throughout the area between the lowlands and the steep bluffs. Both densely forested areas and iso- lated clumps of spruce separated by grassland exist in this area. Depending on soil and light conditions, the understory vegetation varies from ferns and grasses to low-growing berries. The forest land is an important feeding and rearing ground for the bald eagle. Other birds utilizing the area include owls, hawks and spruce grouse, to mention a few. The dominant grass i n the native grasslands on the benches and steep slopes of the area is the bluejoint reedgrass. Other common plants in 2-3 AK 4olTM 'bPKJfZ 1r4 C'*4f4lr A B LEGEND this area are fescue, bluegrass, fireweed, lupine and elderberry. Sitka alder occurs on the hilltops and along the large drainage-ways while willow is common on the slopes and draws. The area provides habitat for small ground animals, birds and other wildlife (Soil Conservation Service, 1971). The vegetation of the area gives Homer part of its unique character. Residents identify the city with its stands of sitka spruce and open meadows. In the planning for new development, the saving of some of these amenities will be an important aspect of the success of the plan. CLIMATE Homer, due to the blocking effect of the Kenai Mountains, has one of the mildest climates in Southcentral Alaska. Cool summers and moder- ate winters are typical of the area. Subject to the moderating effects of the waters of -Cook Inlet and Kachemak Bay, Homer is pro- tected from the most severe outbreaks of cold air from the interior by the Alaska Range. Thus, winter temperatures rarely drop-below zero. The record high for the area is 80'F in 1953; the record low is -21OF in 1971 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1975). The Homer area receives about 24 inches of precipitation per year, much of which falls during late summer and fall. Average snowfall at Homer is 49 inches annually, although seasonal accumulation ranges from 5 to 24 inches. The: snowfall only 5 miles northwest of Homer, however, increases dramatically due to the 1,000 foot elevation increase. In the area around Diamond Ridge and higher the average annual snowfall is about 105 inches. The growing season has ranged from 82 to 157 days, a 22 year average being 107 days. The freeze-free season begins around May 30 and ends by about September 15 (Table 2-1). TOPOGRAPHY The weathering of the slopes has given Homer a unique backdrop. Over time, the downslope soil and water movements have formed gently slop- ing benchlands, steep slope escarpments and lowland lake areas. The difference in elevation and the character of the topography provides horizontal as well as vertical dimension among the homes in the city. Two maps have been prepared which an-alyze the topography and provide insight into the slope of the land as it affects development. The elevations (Figure 2-3) are mapped in intervals of 100 feet which illustrates the vert*icle dimension of the city. As shown, much of the commercial development occurs between the 100 and 200 foot elevation. Between the 200 and 300 foot elevation views across Kachemak Bay start to open up and many homes have been built within this elevation band. From the 400 foot elevation on up to the 1,0JO foot line, development is scattered due to the steepness of the topography. 2-5 TABLE 2-1 HOMER CLIMATE: NORMALS, MEANS AND EXTREMES Temperature Precipitation in Inches Extremes Water Equivalent Snow, Ice Pellets Wind -0 4- -o 4J >1 E E >1 .0 E 4-1 4.3 4-3 U 4j E U r- X r CL _n 4) (a) 34 34 42 42 42 42 9 20 J 21.4 51 1961 -18 1972 1.70 4.85 1945 0.39 1969 33.8 1962 24.0 1939 7.8 NE F 24.9 51 1954 -18 1947 1.54 5.25 1941 0.16 1950 46.0 1974 19.2 1945 7.7 NE M 27.6 53 1974 -21 1971 1.22 4.04 1976 0.21 1953 38.1 1976 15.2 1954 7.4 NE A 35.0 63 1965 -9 1944 1.09 3.49 1959 0.01 1954 17.4 1972 7.4 1972 7.3 NE M 42.3 69 1964 6 1949 0.91 2.19 1977 0.08 1974 6.6 1971 6.0 1971 7.7 SW J 48.7 80 1953 29 1950 1.06 3.37 1941 0.09 1957 T 196.3 T 1963 7.0 WSW J 52.3 78 1967 34 1959 1.70 3.79 1948 0.16 1953 0.0 -- 0.0 -- 6.8 WSW A 52.4 78 1944 31 1955 2.56 5.56 1939 0.51 1975 0.0 -- 0.0 -- 5.7 WSW S 47.0 68 196S 20 1956 2.85 5.30 1961 0.83 1969 0.5 1962 0.4 1968 6.2 NE 0 37.4 64 1954 2 1975 3.38 8.55 1969 0.91 1933 21.9 1976 6.0 1940 6.8 NE N 28.2 52 1962 -7 1963 2.76 8.59 1952 0.12 1955 37.4 1945 24.5 1945 7.5 NE D 21.4 50 1969 -1b 1964 2.29 8.01 1939 0.00 1933 44.2 1959 14.0 1968 7.1 NE JUN MAR NO V FEB NOV YR 36.5 80 1953 -21 1971 23.06 8.59 1952 0.00 1933 46.0 1974 24.5 1945 7.1 NE I I I I I I - 1 4 (a) Length of record, years, through the current year unless otherwise noted, based on January data. T Trace SOURCE: U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 1r4 C"I-4f LEGEND '94 Vt- N LEGEND C*4f4lr COAL 9 a4k 0%-7% 20% ABOVE 7%-15% 15%-20% The slope analysis (Figure 2-4) reflects the significant topographic changes which occur wi.thi'n the city. Slopes have been mapped in ranges of 0-7%, '7-15%, 15-20% and 20% and greater. 0-7% slopes are found mostly below the 200 foot elevation. However, bands and small pockets of gently sloping lands do occur between the 300 and 400 foot elevations and between 800 and 900 foot elevations. Slopes of 0-7% support a main section of town along Pioneer Avenue. The bluff terrace above Kachemak Bay and the lowlands muskeg, marsh, lake, tidal area and spit are also inclu 'ded in this slope designation. 0-7% slope itself does not limit development within the city. However, coupled with the wet soil condition, drainage in these areas can be a severe problem and may increase the development cost of the land. Lands with slopes of 7 to 15% occur mostly above the 200 foot eleva- tion. These lands have a good potential for development using only slope as a criteria. Again, soil conditions have a great impact on developability and can greatly restrict the use of land. Lands at this elevation and slope provide good views across the bay. The 15-20% slope begins to impact the cost of construction. Building upon these slopes, more land is usually required, roads and services are more expensive and modified foundations, excavation and other requirements greatly increase land development. Much of these lands occur above the 400 foot elevation. Existing development in these lands is scattered and much of it is vacant. The land with slopes of 20% or greater generally occurs above the 500 foot elevation and have very little existing development. These slopes are usually found in the city's major drainages and the steep slopes of the bluffs. Again, development on these areas is expensive and causes environmental damage not to mention the human 5afety factor. 2-9 CHAPTER 3 HUMAN RESOURCES Over a fairly short time -- spanning less than four decades -- Homer has grown from a small, agricultural and fishing village to a bustling center of fishing, tourism, services and government on the South Kenai Peninsula. This chapter describes the people and the economy of.Homer. Each sec- tion begins with a description of past trends and present conditions, and analyzes how those trends and conditions might interact in the future. Each section concludes with a projection of what future con- ditions are likely to be. This, then, provides a basis for the plans presented later in this plan. POPULATION Homer's population consists primarily of newcomers, with over half of all residents having lived five years or less in Homer. Rapid popula- tion growth, large proportions of elderly and young residents, and high levels of education are all important facets of Homer's popula- tion. Past Population Trends During Homer's first half century, the community grew little, restrained by its lack of access to other areas. Little is available in the way of population fig!ires for Homer's early years partly because Homer was not yet an incorporated city. The earliest recorded population count is 307 in 1950 for the old Public Utility District, which included a larger area than Homer's present city limits. With the completion of the Sterling Highway in 1951, linking Homer by road to Anchorage and Seward, the entire South Kenai Peninsula began to grow. By 1960, the population in the Public Utility District totaled 1,247, which indicated a growth rate of over 15 percent per year during the 1950's (Alaska Consultants, Inc., 1979). In 1964, the City of Homer was incorporated, and City officials esti- mated total City popul 'ation at 800. By 1970, the census counted 1,083, indicating that the City had grown at an average growth rate of about 5.2 percent per year. The growth accelerated during the 1970's as the king crab fishery, services and tourism expanded. From 1970 to 1972, population grew at an annual rate of 5.7 percent, by 7.8 percent per year from 1972 to 1975, and by 10.1 percent per year from 1975 to 1978 (Alaska Consultants, Inc., 1979). Following the post-pipeline recession, popu-lation growth slowed con- siderably, to about 3.7 percent per year, and the City's population was estimated at 2,209 in 1980 by the Bureau of the Census. Another estimate, completed by the City and accepted by the Alaska Department 3-1 of Labor, of the City's late 1981 population is 2,588. Finally, a special census conducted by the Borough in September, 1982, estimated 2,897 residents within the City of Homer, for an average growth rate of nearly nine percent per year from 1978 to 1982 (Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1981, 1982a and 1982b). By contrast, the Borough's popula- tion grew at an average annual rate of about six percent between 1960 and 1982. Table 3-1 summarizes these figures. Some caution should be exercised in considering these figures. Since different organizations prepared the estimates, the figures cannot be compared too closely, as different methods may have been employed. However, the figures are useful as a general indicator of the long-term trends. As the City has grown, so have surrounding areas. While exact counts of surrounding areas are not possible due to boundary changes, popula- tion figures for Borough voting precincts indicate that surrounding areas have also grown rapidly. For the area roughly bounded by the Anchor River to the north and west, and by Cook Inlet and Kachemak Bay to the east and south, total population has grown from 1,577 in 1978 to 2,069 in 1982, for an annual average increase of seven percent (Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1982a and 1982b). Population Characteristics Like other Alaskan communities,,Homer's population is relatively young, with a median age of 27.5 years-in 1978. This is considerably higher than the 22.1 year median age for Alaska in 1970, but lower than the estimated 29.7 years for the U.S. as a whole. Males outnumber females, comprising 53 percent of Homer's population. This is similar to, though not as pronounced, as the@-rest of the State, but is the opposite of the nationwide average of 49 percent males. Relatively few of Homer's residents -- less than 3 percent in 1978 -- are Native American or other types of minorities. (Kena.i Peninsula Borough, 1979, and U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1979). Only a small number (7.2 percent) are 60 years or older (Bureau of the Census, 1980). Homer's population is relatively well educated, with an average among adults of 13.1 years of schooling completed. This indicates that most adults have completed high school, and many have had some additional schooling (Hitchins, et al., 1977). Another characteristic worthy of mention is length of residence. Surveys (including the one completed for this plan) have consistently found that the majority of the population are newly arrived, with half having moved to Homer within the past five years. Homer also has a fairly stable core population which has contributed long-term contin- uity to the community, as evidenced by the fact that about one-fifth have lived in Homer 15 years or more (Hitchins, et al., 1977). 3-2 TABLE 3-1 PAST POPULATION TRENDS IN THE CITY OF HOMER AND KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 1960 to 1982 City of Homer Kenai Peninsula Borough Annual Annual Number Growth Rate Number Growth Rate 1960 NA 9,053 -- 1964 800 -- 10,582 4.0% 1968 97@ 5.1% 14,160 7.6% 1970 1,083 4% 16,586 8.3% 1972 1,243 7.1% 16,200 -1.2% 1975 1,538 [email protected]% 183,770 5.0% 1978 2,054 10.1% 25,335 10.5% 1980 2,209 3.7% 25,282 -0.1% 1981 2,588 17.2% 26,520 4.9% 1982 2,897 11.9% 32,303 21.8% Source: Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1981, 1982a and 1982b, U.S. Bureau of the Census, and Alaska Department of Labor. 3-3- Projected Population Population projections are usually prepared using one of four simple, widely used methods. The most common and simplest met.hod is to extrapolate, or continue past trends into the future. This means con- tinuing to add the same number or percent of new residents each year. Essentially, this method assumes that whatever phenomenon has been occurring will continue to occur in the future. This method is com- monly used as a first approximation, or when another of the more sophisticated methods fails to yield satisfactory results. A second method, the cohort method, examines the age and sex of an area's population, determines natural increases and decreases (i.e., births and deaths), and projects a continuation of migratory trends. It is essentially a variation of the extrapolation method, except that it yields more detailed and accurate estimates of specific groups (for example, school age children). It is especially widely used for state and national forecasts, and by agencies who are interested in particu- lar subgroups (for example, school activities). The method is not well suited for a small area where migration is very large relative to the existing population, as is the Homer area. A third method relates population growth in one area to population growth in a larger area by anaiyzing the area's share of past growth in the larger area. For exarpple, City of Homer growth could be related to another study's projections for the Kenai Borough or the south central Alaska region. This method is inappropriate, however, where the small area is different in character from the larger area; Homer's growth has differed in type and timing from other areas of the Borough recently, so this method@is somewhat less appropriate. The fourth major method, and the most widely used for Alaskan communi- ties, relates population to the size and growth of the community's economy. Like the other methods, there is some element of truth in it for Homer, but also significant drawbacks. A sizable portion of Homer's growth has come from commuter employment -- north slope oil workers, construction workers, fishermen, Anchorage office workers, and retirees -- whose livelihood comes from outside of the Homer area. Another significant part of Homer's growth has come from persons mov- ing to Homer before finding a relatively permanent means of earning a living. In a sense, then, the economic projections follow, as well as precede, the population projections. The following section reviews previous population projections prepared for Homer, summarizing the major elements of each. The final section presents preliminary population projections to be used in this plan. Previous Population Projections A number of population projections have been prepared for the City of Homer in recent years. Comparison is made difficult by the fact that 3-4. the projections covered different time periods; however, some compari- son is useful as a means of seeing the difference in approaches that can be taken, and the differences in their success. The 1969 Comprehensive Plan prepared three separate sets of projec- tions: "minimum", "most probable" and "maximum" rates of growth. The "most probable" set projected that the City's population would grow by 4 percent per year, and surrounding areas (primarily Diamond Ridge and Fritz Creek voting precincts) by 3.5 percent per year. The "most probable" projection of the City's 1980 population was 1,560 -- con- siderably lower than the Census total of 2,209 for 1980. Actual popu- lation growth from 1968 to 1980 probably averaged about _71--p-ercent per year. More recently, the advent of the Lower Cook Inlet oil lease sales pro- vided the impetus -for a series of Federal, State, Borough and City studies. At least five major sets of population projections were made which contain specific projections for the Homer area. Figure 3-1 summarizes the growth rates specified by these projections. The first was prepared by CH2M Hill in 1977 and 1978. It projected a "base" (non-Outer Continental Shelf development-related) population growth rate of seven percent per year through 1992 for the City of Homer. Three higher projections assumed that oil exploration and development occured at moderate,- success rates, with Homer capturing different shares of the OCS-related population growth. No projections were made for the areas immediately surrounding Homer. The "base case" forecast, which is most applicable to the current situation, was not linked to any specific economic forecasts. Z7 Silvers Engineering (1979) modified the CH2M Hill projections in pre- paring Homer's streets and roads plan, allowing a projected population growth range,of 7.0 to 7.5 percent per year. Like the CH2M Hill pro- jections, no specific reference was made to economic projections. Alaska Consultants, Inc. (1980) prepared Borough-wide population and economic projections. Each set was subdivided into OCS and non-OCS related components; the non-OCS projections for the City of Homer assumed a 7.5 percent annual growth rate through 1985, a 7.0 percent annual growth rate through 1990, followed by 2.8 and 2.0 percent annual rates for the 1990-1995 and 1995-2000 time periods, respec- tively. Population in the surrounding area (primarily Fritz Creek -- including Kachemak City -- and Diamond Ridge) was projected to follow the same trend, but increase by a rate about one third slower than inside the City. Environmental Services, Ltd. (1980) prepared population and employment projections for the Borough's draft coastal management program. Area- wide population increases were allocated to voting precincts based on trends in voter registration. This assumption, and differing assump- tions about the timing and effect of major industrial developments, lead to about the same total increase in Homer's projected population, but much different time and geographic patterns. Population growth 3-5 8.'0% Silvers EngineerirvnljnT 7 CH2M-Hill (1977-1,8) 4 A, L ---------- 6.0% Pacific Rim Planners & Enqineers (1982) 5.0% Environmental Services, LTD (1980) 4.0% 3.0% Alaska Consultants (1980) 2.0% U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers (1981) 1.0% 199 98 1978 198 1 2 1984 1986 1988 0 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 FIGURE3-1- PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH RATE IN PERCENT PER YEAR CITY OF HOMER was predicted to accelerate, rather than decelerate, with time, and the population of' the Diamond Ridge and Fritz Creek areas was esti- mated to increase at one and a half to two times the rate as the City of Homer. Finally, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1981) prepared population projections for the City of Homer as part of the environmental impact statement for expansion of the Homer small boat harbor. The effect of the projection was the same as a constant annual growth rate of 1.5 percent. No explanation was given for the reason why the projection was so much lower than historical growth rates and other previously published projections. Table 3-2 and Figures 3-2 and 3-3 summarize projected population for the City of Homer. Overall, the intermediate, or mid-range, projec- tions anticipate declining growth in percentage terms, but stable to increasing growth in absolute terms. The growth rate is projected to fall from the current 9 percent-plus rate to 7.5 percent through 1985, 6.5 percent through 1990 and 5.5 percent thereafter. Absolute popula- tion increases would actually rise, from the recent rate of 175 addi- tional persons per year to about 260 by the end of the 1980's, and nearly 300 per year during the early 1990's. It is much more diffi- cult to predict further than a decade or so, since many developments which will affect total population cannot yet be identified; however, projections from 1995 to 2010 , -anticipate increasing numbers of new residents but falling growth raies in percentage terms. These projections were prepared primarily by extrapolating previous population trends, but also considering possible economic development scenarios described in the next-,section. In essence, potential popu- lation growth is limited only by the capacity of possible economic activities in Homer and elsewhere. The economic activities as pro- jected thus served to limit population growth, rather than propel it as several of the previous projections described earlier have assumed. The result is higher rates of population growth than an economy- determined approach would yield, but a lower growth rate than recent trends. These growth rates are similar to, though somewhat higher than, pro- jected Borough population growth. Over the past two decades, the City of Homer has generally paralleled the Borough in population growth (Table 3-1), and exceeded the Borough's growth rate over the past decade. Hence, the intermediate projection anticipates the same trends, but allows for Homer's higher growth rates to continue. The same principle was used to develop the low and high range projections. Projected increases would raise Homer's total population to 8,100 (from the present 2,897) by 2000 for the intermediate projection. The low projection anticipates a doubling, to 5,200, while the high pro- jection predicts a quadrupling, to 13,300, by the year 2000. Few consistent data series of any type are available which would give a clue as to how the areas around Homer might grow in the future. Moreover, areas boundaries tend to change for the few data series- 3-7 TABLE 3-2 CURRENT AND PROJECTED POPULATION HOMER AREA 1978 to 2010 Other Total City of Homer Homer Areas* Homer Area Actual 1978 2,054 1,577 3,631 1980 2,209 NA NA 1981 2,588 NA NA 1982 2,897 2,069 4,966 Low Projection 1985 3,100 2,300 5,400 1990 3,900 3,000 6,900 1995 4,500 3,500 8,000 2000 5,200 4,200 9,400 2005 5,800 4,600 10,400 2010 6,400 5,100 11t500 Intermediate Projection 1985 3,400 2,800 6,200 1990 4,700 4,000 8,700 1995 6,200 5,600 11,800 2000 8,100 7,500 15,600 2005 9,400 8,,800 18,200 2010 10,900 10,400 21t3OO High Projection 1985 3,800 3t1OO 6t900 1990 6,500 5,600 12,100 1995 10,400 9,600 20,000 2000 13,300 12,600 25,900 2005 16,200 15,700 31,900 2010 19,700 19,600 39,300 Fritz Creek and Diamond Ridge election precincts. NA - Data not available. Source: Kenai Peninsula Borough 1979, 1982a and 1982b, and Pacific Rim Planners & Engineers, Olympic Associates Company 3-8 FIGURE 3-2- ACTUAL AND PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH RATES, CITY OF HOMER, 1964-2010 ACTUAL PROJECTED w w 10.1% (L z w L) w 8.2% w 7.4% 7.,5%. z 7.1% 6.5% r 0 5.4% 5.5% 5.5% 5. z 0 4.5% 4.5% < 3.7 1964 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 SOURCE; KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH, ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS, ALASKA CONSULTANTS, INC, AND.PACIFIC RIM PLANNERS AND ENGINEERS 10,000 9000 HIGH 8000 7000 INTERMEDIATE 6000 - 5000 - 4000 - Ole LOW PROJECTED 3000 - 2000 - ACTUAL 1000 1964 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Figure 3-3 Past and Projected Population, City of Homer, 1964-2000 which do exist. One possible indicator of popu lation growth is total voter registration. While voter registration might be influenced over the short term by other events (for example, political campaigns), over the longer term voter registration tends to be a fairly reliable indicator of population growth. Voter registration figures are available for borough voting precincts corresponding to the greater Homer area. Recent trends in voter reg- istration by each voting precinct indicates the Diamond Ridge and Fritz Creek areas have been growing at a rate of about one-eighth faster than the City over the last eleven years. Over the same periods, voter registration in the South Kachemak area grew only three-fifths as fast as in Homer, while the Southwest Peninsula area (Anchor Point and Ninilchik) grew at about the same rate (Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1981 and 1982).. Assuming these trends continue for the Diamond Ridge and Fritz Creek precincts and sufficient supplies of potable water are available, total other Homer area population is projected to more than triple over the next two decades, reaching a total population of 7,500 by the year 2000 under the intermediate projection. The low projection anticipates a doubling of the population, while the high projection anticipates a quadrupling of the population by the year 2000. With rapid population. growth in both Homer and other parts of the greater Homer area, the intermediate projection anticipates a tripling of current population, reaching a total Homer area population of 15,600 by the year 2000. The low projection anticipates total Homer area population of 9,400 by 2000, while the high projection antici- pates 25,900 population by 2000. As discussed in Chapter 4, the high growth scenario would result in developmen.t of up to two thirds of Homer's residentially zoned land. Table 3-2 summarizes the population projections. ECONOMY Until recently, Homer's economy has depended primarily on its fishing industry to generate its income. Fishermen's earnings and processing worker's wages brought in dollars from outside of Homer, and a small number of trade and service establishments recirculated some of the money before it left Homer as spending to-bring in goods and services from Anchorage and other outside areas. Over the past decade, however, Homer's economy has expanded greatly, but in several new and different ways. Major fisheries of the area have remained at the same level or have fallen in annual catch, but increasing prices have generally made up much of the difference. As fisheries remained stagnant or declined, many fishermen began to range further and entered some of the growing fisheries, such as salmon purse seining in Prince William Sound, salmon drift gill net- ting in Bristol Bay, and crab fishing in the Bering Sea. Homer's fish 3-11 IX Ninilchik NINILCHIK PRECINCT (470) ANCHOR POINT PRECINCT (447) FRITZ CREEK PRECINCT 411 (605) -1433@j KACHE A DIAMONDI 271) RIDCE L_ HALIBUT COVE r- HOM R' PRECINCT 1(2054) y ,NCXAetA Seldovia SELDOVIA PRECINCT English (584) PORT GRAHAM PRECINCT (230) Figure 34- Recent Population Figures In Homer Area (1978) (Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1982) processors have also shared in this. growth, instituting fish flying operations during the Bristol Bay.salmon fishing season. During the same period, many persons who moved to Homer established new services and trade businesses to provide a much broader and fuller range of choices to consumers than in years past. This economic maturation process has resulted in more recirculation of dollars in Homer, enabling more jobs to exist per dollar of income coming from outside of Homer. This broader range of goods and services has also helped to attract and retain an increased flow of tourist dollars. Whole new categories of services, such as charter fishing, have been built up as tourist spending has grown by leaps and bounds. Based on the economic data presented later in this section, tourist spending today accounts for approximately one quarter of the outside income attributable to fish- ing industries. A third major category of economic growth has been in other types of employment based outside of the Homer area. Nearly 13 percent of the nonfisherman households in Homer reported earning half or more of their income outside of Homer; major examples include oil industry employment on the North Slope, contract construction employment else- where in Alaska, and investment and retirement income from outside of Homer. About 12 percent of the households responding to the random city resident survey indicated that they are retired, while another 5 percent of households earned most of their income on the North Slope. A fourth category of economic growth has been related to government spending. Direct State spending in Homer has risen greatly in recent years, creating employment in government, construction, and indirectly creating employment through lower tax rates than would otherwise have occurred in the absence of State aid. The fifth major category of economic growth can be attributed to the prolonged real estate boom which Homer has experienced. In recent years property values have risen by millions of dollars per year. Since many of the property sales have been to outsiders moving or intending to move to Homer, additional income has accrued to the com- munity's economy. Table 3-3 on the following page summarizes trends in employment in the Homer labor area, including the City of Homer, City of Kachemak, Fritz Creek, Diamond Ridge and Anchor Point. The figures indicate that strong growth has been registered in retail and wholesale trade, ser- vices and government. Reliabl*e employment figures are not available for fishing employment, but reported totals for agriculture, mining, forestry, fishing, contract construction and manufacturing (including fish processing) indicate no appreciable overall growth for these cat- egories. Table 3-4 on the following page depicts the composition and direct flow of funds in Homer's economy. The numbers are expressed in 3-13 Table 3z3 Trends in Non Agricultural Wage and Salary Employment Distribution Homer Labor Area 1970-1977 1970-1977 Industry 1970 1977 Percent Change Number of full time jobs. Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries Mining 178 167 -0.9% Contract Construction Manufacturing (including Fish Processing) Transportation, Communica- 93. 162 74.2% tion and Public Utilities Trade 40 161 300.0% Financial, Ins. & 17 35 105.8% Real Estate Services 44 106 140.9% Miscellaneous 0 Government 45 104 131.1% TOTALS 417 735 76.3% Note: Most fishing employment and some self-employment are excluded from these totals. Source: Alaska Consultants, Inc. (1980) 3-14 TABLE 3-4 Direct Transactions in the Homer Area Econonky, 1980 (Thousands of Dollars) 1' 14 16 17 To 19 o -,I ------------------------------------- - Itllll@l t I, of rfil SiAlf 1.1111-At MORT Vill PIUMP St F I OR rMiXt r"IFF11 fv@ll I)C. tilli IFAN-, Pit ITT 1111. 111 Pit IP lil@ -@q Olt' Vil, Sii-JCS Sv A F I SIT I U.-I CON" I lk FPCIINC @Plil hrr, POPl*N Ulh- FOOD SVC SI EAT L Ill 013 U 1*1 Iq POTELS t FS t ID All Ff 1101 I'S 1;(IVl FIIYI Gov I IRS IT-11,11 ------ ------- ------- -- -- -- ---- r(RI111F.C.1111 1`1111111r, 17-,A4 1) 11 1 7M I'll '1 ?1". @;I. 7 41 Io 411 * I "..A CUNIPACI 0116111111711-111 6 S 10 1 1.114 I ISO runt [ SSING D 0 2vo A 1 .0 79 1j 1, 4"- 11 0) 4,N)45 1170 4 4 AGRIC. MINIM ; 0111 MI`G C, I III 1.@l 1 15 1 4 21 11 4, 4 5 1 PA113POR I A I I Oil I'l kq 412 17 9f. 1 168 4B& 268 14-, '&A I I'll -.7 1 41 fl-,7 lqg 149 1188 lk 1 1. 1,14,11. A CRIIIIIN 911111-11IFS 11 41 1 1 11 1 4 7 4 1 - i 4 74 74 17 11 01 1.111 7 Pit IRID [Poo Slol?[c 6" 6 5 .1 15 1) 6 0 1 f, 3 4 1. 119 Iq V 74 147 5"11 11'. 711@ 9 @@RV SUITS & 6AF.ArF-, -1-14 A -j 4 3 0 41 16 19 4-, 1 1 (to 09 12 175 A @774 7 LAI MINI, rIAM 6 11 9 2 3 1 1 1 1 5 1 IT, 011 54 444 M)", ;r 111 I,) -Pill(IIIIN3 NITURIAL, 10 "t-1 TO A 5 1 2 2 1- 4 9 '1 7r, 41, 114 09 90.4 J.,4 M I I I P IL ! Will ql. 111,11 - A' t 0111 171, '4 111) 1. 55 11 50 5 4 1 -, , 71"', PI -,Zq 720 7161 1,-15 1@7711 I., STRVII ES NPIELS M-IRS (1 114 4 0 0 0 0 11 it, "2 4" 17 282 %U . 1 11 FUD.S, PUS t Mor 76 17ki 791) 1 111 7 89 7 0 1 1 4 -.6 @il@ Ill 260b I I I 14 AIMUSUNFIll & RECR(All" 0 9 0 1 1. it 9 1 ,y) IV',) ----- ------- ---- -- ------- ------- --- --- --- IGIAI RIPPIASIS FRIM 15 HOMER AREA [MrIUYURS -9 917 31, 107 1468 18, '49 14,*, 7.14, ',044 307 .7,64 5,4611' P-74 II 59 1 A ', I 16 1 UIR(linqS UP" Pill APM 6 Sq 111@11 I @-.q 1-7 34 111-39 1455 U5 @7173 -151 1@.,/ 76,*@, 911 1304 1772 0 0 U'1911 11 TOTAL VALOOF MET I X If, 110 Y. loll,, @27 qMj ! 50f. 4311 .(10 1700 11 oil-, 676 016 11", 511M 1445 7(-IA 1704 M9 IM I I CA Ao 155,10 140 1,11 SO 18 (101 A;- WArES R SAL 1 611," 194 61,11, 181117 1 (100 117@ 7 3, 6 5 I'll, 4'41 15,11 110 1195 17 MORIMAII. WAGES !, SAU Z;, @8 J@q ".I.) it 0 k) Q Q 0 1 ! to (I . , Cl .1 it 41`PllF. IAXCS, PENT [110 P 14 4, ; I A R I 1 4-, w, T;") 15N 401 Mo 1 14-,o 261, 1 q 76 4,@ IM I 1 0 0 61., @,. 1@0 - - ------- -- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- -- ---- ------ ----- ------ 1014 ALI l"URIIIAS1`3 - ;-,I -1 2514 t F(IM1165 1: 7Y. (.114 AA.. 3-4 1 @4 197- "911 1697o 1064 P49" 1 ilq,@ I IM I X740 011,16 1 i) '05 '11144 ---------------------- - ------- I 10 146 144 it$ IIA I Source: Pacific Rim Planners Iiigineers, Olympic Associates Company thousands of dollars, and the figures are for 1980, the last year for which relatively complete information is available. The table uses input-output methods described by Miernyk (1965) and described more fully in an appendix to this report. The table summarizes all monetary transactions involving merchants in the Homer area (defined as the City of Homer, City of Kachemak, and Fritz Creek and Diamond Ridge voting precincts.) Expressed in input- output terminology, the table is called a "transactions table." A more detailed version of this table is presented in the appendix. Figures presented in the table can be read from the viewpoint of sales or sources of income by reading across the rows. For example, in the first row, commercial fishing sold $19,584,000 to Homer area fish processors, $109,000 directly to households (consumers), $1,958,000 to businesses outside of the Homer area (principally fish processors from other communities) and $109,000 to visitors (tourists). Each -column of the table, therefore, represents a separate category of customer or other source of revenue. Most categories are businesses or government agencies wit-h employment in the Homer area. Homer area employment is shown in the bottom row. The last three categories -- households (or consumers), export and visitors -- have no associated employment.* Reading down the columns, a category's purchases and earnings are shown. Entries in the first fourteen rows are purchases from Homer area employers (for example, $3,404,000 in business purchases by fish- ermen in 1980). Line 16 is purchases from other areas (for example, $6,268,000 in purchases by commercial fishermen). The remainder of each column (rows 17 through 20) summarizes "value added", or the difference between a category's revenues and purchases. This category includes wages and salaries, crew shares, owner's profits, royalties and rents. Row 17 summarizes total value added. Row 18 summarizes the component of value added going to Homer area residents as wages, salaries and crew shares, while row 19 shows the wages, salaries and crew shares received by non-residents. Row 20 is total profits, tax payments, interest payments, royalties and rent payments. Row 22 summarizes employment for each category. Overall, the table indicates estimated total direct annual receipts of $275 million in 1980. Resident households spent about $43 million (total column 16), while employers spent $132 million (total columns 1 through 14). Continuing across the bottom row of the right hand side of the table, government agencies spent $28 million, visitors spent $10 million and businesses outside of the Homer area paid Homer resi-. dents and employers $61 million. Total figures for rows 15 through 19 summarize how the receipts were spent. Purchases of all goods and services in Homer by all individu- With the possible exception of a few domestic workers, who were not counted in these figures. 3-16 als and groups totaled $133 mi Ilion (total row 15). Imports (purchases from other areas) totaled $46 million (total row 16), while value added earned by Homer's economy totaled $95 million (total row 17). The latter category includes wage and salary payments (including. crew shares) paid to residents (total row 18) and non-residents (total row 19) as well as profits, taxes, royalties and rents (total row 20). Homer's Economic Base Table 3-4 can also be used to -examine important economic relation- ships. One of the most important is the identification of Homer's economic base, defined as the combination of activities which draws income into Homer from other areas. Other economic activities, called nonbasic or secondary activities, are supported by respending. One prominent example is commercial fishing. Fishermen earn their income by selling their catch to local and nonlocal processors, resi- dents and tourists. Sales to processors and tourists are essentially basic in nature, since they draw money into Homer's economy. Sales to residents are secondary, since they do not draw any new funds into Homer's economy. Therefore, while commercial fishing is essentially basic in that most sales essentially draw funds into Homer from other areas, some of commercial fishing's revenues are derived by recycling money already in Homer's economy. Table 3@5 summarizes the Homer economy's basic sources of income. Nearly 43 percent of Homer's income is derived from Homer's fishing industry, If earnings by commercial fishermen in other areas (row 6) is included, the fishing industry brings in about 45 percent of Homer's basic income. The next largest source is. government spending, which together accounts for over one quarter (about 27 percent) of Homer's basic revenues. In 1980, over half of this was attributed directly to Federal spending; however, Federal spending has been declining while State and local government spending has risen, so proportions are probably much more equal now. The third largest source of revenues is sales to nonresidents, which accounts for nearly 13 percent of basic revenues. This category prin- cipally includes sales by Homer businesses to residents and businesses located in Anchor Point, Seldovia, English Bay, Port Graham and other nearby areas. It also includes sales to other areas, such as sales of manufactured products and services to Anchorage businesses, and receipts earned by Homer's contract construction industry in other areas. Sales to tourists and other visitors were almost as large, accounting for another 10 percent of basic revenues. While no historical figures are available with which to compare, interviews with Homer business- persons indicate that this is one of the fastest growing sources of basic revenues, and may be a somewhat low estimate. It is also 3-17 TABLE 3-5 Homer's Economic Base (Major Sources of Basic Income) Millions of 1980 Dollars Dollars Percent of Total Fishing & Fish Processing (1) $42.0 42.9% Federal Government (2) $13.7 13.0% Other Sales to Non-Residents (3) $10.7 10.9% Tourists & Other Visitors $10.5 10.7% State Government (4) $ 7.7 7.9% Household Income Earned Outside of Homer (5) $ 6.5 6.6% Local Government (6) $ 5.0 5.1% Contract Construction $ 1.9 1.9% TOTALS $98.0 100.0% NOTES: 1. Figures revised to avoid double counting. of sales revenues. 2. Direct spending by Federal agencies,including Post Office and Coast Guard. 3. Principally sales to Anchor Point, Seldovia, English Bay, Port Graham, and Hal ibut Cove residents businesses. Also includes sales to Anchorage businesses. 4. Direct spending by State agencies. 5. Primarily pensions, investments, and outside wage and salary earnings. 6. Includes spending by Borough and local spending financed by grants. Source: Paci fic Rim Planners & Engineers, Olympic Associates Co. estimates. 3-18 perhaps the most seasonal, with the majority of revenues earned during June, July and August. The last major category of basic revenues is household income earned in other areas. As noted above, this includes earnings by fishermen in other areas such as the Bristol Bay salmon and herring fisheries, and is probably a third of the 6.6 percent of basic revenues earned in this category. The remaining two-thirds is primarily Homer workers who commute to jobs in Anchorage or the North Slope, and investment and pension income earned by Homer residents. Like sales to visitors, this category appears to be growing rapidly, and the figures may be somewhat low. Secondary Sales Another important facet of Homer's economy is the extent to which basic revenues are recycled into the economy. In very small communi- ties, where few service or trade establishments exist, little or no basic revenue is respent locally. By contrast, in large cities, basic revenues are usually respent several times before leaving the area. Homer's ability to expand the goods and services it offers had enabled it to create quite a bit of economic growth merely by recycling an ever increasing fraction of basic income. This is demonstrated by the rapid growth shown in Homer's trade and service activities during the 1970's (see Table 3-3). Table 3-6 summarizes Homer's secondary revenues by sector as of 1980. If double counting of commercial fishing revenues in fish processing sales is eliminated, secondary revenues amounted to about $44 million, or about 45 percent of total basic revenues. This ratio, and the data presented in Table 3-6, indicate that much of Homer's recent growth has come from the evolution of Homer's economy. As recently as a decade ago, perhaps only 25@ of every dollar of basic revenue was respent in Homer; by contrast, in 1980 approximately 45@ of every dollar was respent. Moreover, in most categories, additional growth can occur; residents responding to the public opinion survey indicated they still purchased half or less of their clothing, appli- ances and furniture in Homer, for example. Even with only moderate population growth, Homer's trade and services businesses should con- tinue to attract greater and greater respending, reaching perhaps 75@ per dollar in 2000. Economic Forecasts This section presents economic forecasts for the Homer area. The forecasts were developed based on the findings of the economic model, review of previous economic trends in Homer and studies of possible events affecting Homer's economy, and consultation with knowledgeable business and government officials. Major assumptions underlying the projections are discussed first, followed by the actual projections. 3-19 Table 3-6 SECONDARY SALES REVENUES IN HOMER AREA ECONOMY 1980 (Millions of 1980 Dollars) Sector Amount Percent Contract Construction 1.2 2.4 Commerical Fishing & Fish Processing 2.3 4.7 Agriculture, Mining & Other Manufacturing 0.4 0.8 Transportation 9.4 19.8 Communications & Utilities 0.5 1.1 Retail Trade - Food Stores 6.1 12.8 Retail Trade - Service Stations & Garages 3.3 6.8 Retail Trade - Eat & Drink Places 1.2 2.4 Retail Trade - Building Materials 2.5 5.3 Retail & Wholesale Trade - All Other 10.8 22.6 Services Hotels & Motels 0.1 0.2 Services Personal, Business & Professional 4.2 8.9 Services Amusement & Recreation 0.1 0.3 Federal Government 3.7 7.7 State Government 0.0 0.0 Local Government 2.1 4.4 Resident Earnings Other Areas 0.0 0.0 TOTAL HOMER AREA 47.8 100.0 Source: Pacific Rim Planners & Engineers, Olympic Associates Co. (Based on data presented in Table 3-4, this chapter.) 3-20 Assumptions Underlying the Economic Forecasts Economic forecasts are essentially informed guesses developed from limited information. Historical data are collected and analyzed for trends. Historical trends are compared with possible events, identi- fied from published plans, proposals and speculation. To the extent practical, mathematical formulae are developed to explain the inter- relationships between the trends, and projections are calculated. If much uncertainty surrounds key events, several sets of projections are prepared, indicating differing possible combinations of events. A well documented projection will detail the preparer's assumptions, reasonin'g, methematical methods and estimated probability of occur- rence. Of course, probability estimates are highly subjective, but they at least give the user a better idea of the chances that the projection will*be accurate for his or her purposes. The time frame, detail and structure of the forecast depends on the purpose for which it was intended. For example,-most recent economic and population forecasts prepared for Homer have focused on the impact of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas development in Lower Cook Inlet. The forecasts devoted much detail to examining short-term impacts of a few specific activities, but did not examine longer range trends in any detail for non-OCS activities. For this comprehensive plan, the forecast concentrates on long range rather than short range, trends since the plan looks at Homer's long range development, and year to year changes are not as important. Local government expenditures are partly a function of local popula- tion and economic activity as well as transfers from State and Federal agencies. Assumed real growth rates for the low, intermediate and high scenarios (3.0%, 5.0% and 8.0%) represent the influence of State spending coupled with high population growth rates and desires for successively higher quality services. Household income earned outside of the Homer area includes salaries and crew shares, pensions and investment income. The low, intermedi- ate and. high scenarios (3.0%, 6.0% and 10.0%) reflect the assumpti'on that Homer will continue to attract more than its proportionate share of Alaska's oil workers, fishermen, retirees and other "footloose" households. Contract construction activity has been studied by Alaska Consultants, Inc. (1980) and Environmental Services Limited (1980). The low, intermediate and high scenarios (1.0%, 4.0% and 8.0%) closely parallel growth in State spending, which has fueled much construction activity recently. Projections for other activities primarily reflect growth rates pro- jected by other studies (Alaska Consultants, Inc., 1980, and Environ- mental Services Limited, 1980) for other parts of the South Kenai Pen- insula, which supplies much of the sales in this collective category. 3-21 TABLE 3-7 Economic Projections of Total Sales by Industry for 2000 by Scenario (Thousands of 1980 Dollars) Year 2000 Projection Low Scenario Intermediate Scenario High Scenarto 1980 Amount Annual % Amount AnnuaT-i- Amount Annual Change Change Change. Commercial Fishing 21,760 38,753 2.93% 55,279 4.77 89,260 7.31% Contract Construction 6,114 15,242 4.67 17,144 5.29 22,668 6.77 Fish Processing 43,500 65,013 2.03 66,671 2.16 72,463 2.58 Agr., Mining, and Other Manufacturing 424 2,174 8.52 2,922 10.13 5,199 13.35 Transportation 13,435 67,942 8.44 84,495 9.63 143,588 12.58 Cownun. & Utilities 2,513 6,197 4.62 6,497 4.86 7,540 5.65 Retail Trade -Food Stores 7,216 10,990 2.13 11,307 2.27 12,370 2.73 -Service Stations 3,974 9,251 4.32 11,347 5.39 18,322 7.94 -Eat & Drink Places 2,524 5,417 3.89 5,648 4.11 6,449 4.80 -Building Materials 3,911 8,164 3.75 9,136 4.33 11,869 5.71 Wholesale-Other 16,990 33,250 3.41 35,195 3.71 41,653 4.59 services -14otels & Motels 1,064 2,883 5.11 3,060 5.42 3,537 6.19 -Pers., Prof. & Bus. 8,492 23,669 5.26 26,698 5.89 37,260 7.67 -Amusement & Recrea. 1,400 3,510 4.70 3,510 4.70 3,510 4.70 TOTALS 133*318 292,454 4.01% 338,909 4.78% 475,687 6.57% Source: Pacific Rim Planners & Engineers, Olympic Associates Company eStimates. Low, intermediate and high projected growth rates are 1.5%, 4.5% and 12.9%, respectively. Table 3-7 on the following page presents the results of the economic projections of.the model using the assumptions described above. In general, the intermediate or mid-range projections anticipate real (adjusted for inflation) economic growth of slightly less than 5.0 percent per year. This contrasts with projected population growth for the intermediate scenario of 6.7 percent per year. The difference reflects Homer's growing population of retired and commuting house- holds, whose incomes are not reflected in this table. Another reason for the difference is Homer's historic tendency to accumulate popula- tion before, rather than after, economic growth. Over a longer time perio3-,the economic.growth would tend to catch up with the popula- tion. The projections anticipate increased reliance on tourism and other visitor' revenues. Other major sources of economic growth are Homer's expanding role as a transportation and service center for the South Kenai Peninsula, and an expanding retired and commuting population. The low projection anticipates these trends also, but with slightly less growth, at 4.0 percent per year, while the high range projection anticipates economic growth averaging 6.6 percent annually. Detailed tables projecting the low, intermediate and high range scenarios also follow. Table 3-8 details the assumptions which underlie the economic projec- tions, and describes the estimated probability of each occurring. Since the economic model presented in Table 3-7 is stated in terms of 1980 dollars, the assumptions describe projected annual changes, in 1980 dollars. The low scenario was chosen to represent a level of activity which is likely to be exceeded. Estimated chances of actual activity exceeding the low projection is 95 percent, while chances of activity being less are estimated at 5 percent. Conversely, chances of the high scenario projections being greater than actual results are about 95 percent, with about a 5 percent chance of being low. Finally, estimated chances of the intermediate scenario projections being too low or too high are the same about 50 percent. Fishing and fish processing have been examined by Alaska Consultants, Inc. (1980), Environmental Services Limited (1980) and TAMS (1980). Overall projections appear so far to have been overly optimistic for bottomfish develogment, but relatively close in projecting small growth in traditional fisheries. The low projection assumes declining catches and product values (-0.5% per year) while the intermediate projection assumes a small increase (1.5% per year). Both assume no bottomfish development. The high projection anticipates small real spending declines (-0.5% per year), while the intermediate and high projections anticipate small and moderate real growth (1.0% and 3.0% per year, respectively). 3-23 TABLE 3-8 MAJOR ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS (Annual Percentage Change in Current Dollars) Scenarios Low Intermediate Hiqh Fish & Fish Processing -0.5% 1.5% 4.0% Federal Government -0.5% 1.0% 3.0% Tourists & Vistors 2.0% 5.0% 10.0% State Government 2.0% 4.5% 8.0% Local Government 3.0% 5.0% 8.0% Household Income Earned Outside of Homer Area 3.0% 6.0% 10.0% Contract Construction 1.0% 4.0% 8.0% Other Activities. 1.5% 4.5% 12.0% Estimated Probability of Actual Outcome Exceeding Projection 95% 50% 5% Estimated Probability of Actual Outcome Less than Projection 5% 50% 95% Source: Pacific Rim Planners & Engineers, Olympic Associates Company estimates. 3-24 Tourism has been studied by Uniplan Associates (1981), Mundy-Jarvis Associates (1981) and the Kenai Peninsula Borough (1976). Past growth trends, coupled with projected statewide growth in tourism and pos- sible addition of more facilities, makes tourism potentially a fast- growing activity. The low scenario (2.0% real spending growth per year) assumes little additional encouragement. The intermediate scenario (5.0% per year) assumes moderate encouragement, such as the planned harbor improvements and spit parking areas.. The high scenario (10.0% yearly growth) assumes even greater encouragement, such as construction of additional hotel, performing arts and meeting facili- ties, and concerted promotion. State expenditures have been examined by Tussing (1979), Alaska Consultants, Inc., (1980) and Environmental Services Limited (1980'). State spending probably cannot continue its recent rapid growth exceeding 10 percent per year indefinitely; however, some additional growth can be expected. The low, intermediate and high scenarios represent the range of overall State expenditure growth rates which have been projected by other studies. 3-25 CHAPTER 4 LAND USE PLAN The development of land in Homer has occurred ever since the town moved from the Homer Spit in the early 1900's. The development in the area is low density and scattered across the landscape. This pattern has left a great deal of vacant land within the city, six acres along Pioneer Avenue alone (See Figure 4-1.) Commercial activ- ity is typically found along Pioneer Avenue and, more recently, along Ocean Drive. Industrial development occurs in several areas of town, concentrated at the end of the spit, but also occurring along Ocean Drive and along Kachemak Bay Drive, near the airport. Residential development has occurred throughout the community, although somewhat concentrated on the gently sloping lands north of Pioneer Avenue, which in many areas provides views across Kachemak Bay. This development has been restrained by poor soil conditions but is currently being infilled with homes with the extension of water and sewer into the area. Existing residential, commercial and industrial land uses are, for the most part, not segregated within the community. As the city grows, the impacts of these different uses on' each other will become more extreme and conflicts will likely begin to occur. Land use issues identified during the planning process can be traced back through earlier comprehensive planning efforts. Many have to do with the problems of development on the hillsides and poor soil conditions found in the city. Continued development of areas with extreme slopes could increase the hazard of soil slippage, landslides and flooding. Other issues reflect the issuance and enforcement of building permits, platting standards, city codes and the land control authority of the borough along with its relationship to the city. Another series of issues reflect a concern about providing adequate industrial land around the airport, the location of tourist-related businesses and the development pattern along major arterials such as Pioneer Avenue and the by-pass road. These and other issues have been addressed and responded to in this, Homer's Land Use Plan. BACKGROUND Homer's land use plan is based on natural- conditions, existing land use patterns, existing and proposed utility lines, transportation cor- ridors and public opinion. Each of these factors impact the suit- ability of the land for development. For example, a parcel of land which is vacant, has access to existing water and sewer services, is on an improved road and has a slope of 15% or less would be more eas- ily developed, and, therefore, have a higher development suitability. The development suitability map combines constraints and opportunities for development (see Figure 4-2). 4-1 . ......... 7-1 lf'4 LEGEND C"ye4f4lr COA L 9 '94 MEMO LAn ME INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL PUBLIC, QUASI -PUBLIC SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTI L I- Fill F- r-] 16 13 Sim A-4 COA L B LEGEND SLOPE 15%Ek ABOVE SEVERE TO MODERATE SOILS LIMITED DEVELOPMENT rn---i 1/4 MILE FROM ALL EXISTING WATER & SEWER LINES Utilizing this map as a guide, the plan "was developed by identifying land use categories (generally the same as is used in the Homer Zoning Ordinance) and by defining a purpose and criterion for each category. The definitions of purpose and criteria define a general system of objectively classifying and planning land use, and can be applied in future rezoning and land use decisions as conditions in the community change. The density levels for the various land use categories is based on the condition of the land and the availability of the utilities. For example, the maximum density allowed in the Rural Residential is one unit per acre if the site is not served by public sewer or water. If it is served by either water or sewer, the maximum density would be two units per acre, while for a site being served by both water and sewer, a maximum density would be four units per acre. As the Urban Residential district has all utilities, and a higher density is desirable in this area, the minimum lot size is 7500 square feet or approximately six units per acre. As the population of Homer increases and more lands are subdivided for housing, the City shoudl ensure that properties are developed in a manner which will not burden the City in the future. Roads, streets and utilities should be constructed up to standards so that the exist- ing residents will not have to subsidize new developments through capital projects. Growth can occur in the community without impacting the City monitarily if controls are established for new development to pay their own way. The following section presents the land use plan categories, describ- ing their purpose and criteria for classification. Subsequent sec- tions describe how classifications were selected, and policies devel- oped, for some of the more complicated areas of the city. Rural Residential Purpose: To provide an area for low density development in the city; to allow limited agricultural pursuits; to provide adequate lot sizes in areas not served by city water and sewer. (Source: Homer Zoning Ordinance.) Criteria: Lands included in this classification should be those which are relatively isolated From city development due to natur- al features and the lay-of -the- land, which are presently without any or all of the following: roads up to proposed city standards, city water, city sewer. Urban Residential Purpose: To provide a sound environment for medium and high density residential buildings including single family, duplex and low-rise multiple family. (Source: Homer Zoning Ordi- nance.) 4-4 Criteria: Lands included in this classification should be those which have or are adjacent to existing water and sewer utilities, which have a developed road system and which are adjacent to the commercial or industrial districts. Central Business District Purpose: To provide a centrally located area within the city for general retail shopping, personal services, restaurants and related businesses which is a focal point for the commun- ity. It is al.so intended to allow a mixture of residential and commercial uses. (Source: Homer Zoning Ordinance.) Criteria: Lands included in this classification should be those which have existing developed streets and utilities and where publ.ic investment has occurred to establish social services such as fire department, post office, library, senior citi- zen facilities, museum, public administration facilities, etc. (Source: Homer Zoning Ordinance.). General Commercial I Purpose: To provide sites for businesses that require direct motor vehicle access and may require larger land*area than would be needed in the central business district. (Source: Homer Zoning Ordinance.) Criteria: Lands included in this classification should be those which are adjacent to major arterial streets, which have either existing or planned water and sewer utilities and which have existing businesses which are oriented toward access by the automobile. General Commercial 2 Purpose: To provide sites for heavy commercial uses that will require access to major arterial streets, air transporta- tion facilities, and existing or planned sewer and water service. The district is designed to permit manufacturing, processing, assembling, packaging or treatment of products within enclosed structures, as well as warehousing and out- side storage. (Source: Homer Zoning Ordinance.) Criteria: Lands included in this classification should be adjacent to major arterial roads, existing or proposed water and sewer service and airport or other industrial areas. They should also be buffered from low density uses. Public Purpose: To provide opportunities for public facilities, recreation, education, or other public activities. 4-5 Criteria: Lands included in this classification should be those which are in public ownership and which have either existing public use activities occurring or which have definite plans for such activities. Marine Commercial Purpose: To provide adequate space for commercial needs which ser- vice and support water dependent facilities. Criteria: Lands included in this classification should be adjacent to major arterial roads, existing or proposed water and sewer service and to navigable waters in and around the city. Marine Industrial Purpose: To provide adequate space for those industrial uses that require direct marine access for their operation. Criteria: Lands included in this classification should be adjacent to the shoreline of the city, major roads and proposed or existing utility services. LAND USE PLAN The land use plan shown in Figure 4-3 applies the defined criteria to the ground, creating a proposed land use pattern. The central business district includes the area one block north of Pioneer Avenue, south across the by-pass road to Kachemak Bay and from the high school on the west to the Lakeside subdivision, east of Lake Street. Bounded by the major arterials, the area is served by water and sewer utilities and existing streets. The area has a developed commercial core with adequate vacant land for expansion. Development priority should be given to the area just south of Pioneer Avenue to maintain a clustered and defined central shopping area. The bypass road reduces the traffic loads from Pioneer Avenue. In this capacity, the bypass is very efficient. An unexpected bonus which the community received when the road was constructed was an extremely pleasing corridor through mature spruce and birch trees. The roadside beauty along the bypass brings many to the conclusion that it should be retained in its present state. Others feel that the area should be developed as part of the Central Business District. Both are valid considerations. The land north of the bypass can be developed with a sensitivity to the aesthetics of the corridor. This can be assured through the use of design standards which would address architectural style, retention and planting of native plant material and by limiting the number of veivicle access points along the bypass. These standards need not be extremely restrictive but could act as a guide to future commercial development. 4-6 fl; 7 N RE SIDEW F - q--.g w- RESIDENPAL --ast U. R. /r4 AL LEGEND p T.MA RURAL RESIDENTIAL URBAN RESIDENTIAL V1, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT GENERAL COMMERCIAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL MARINE COMMEWAL MARINE WDUSTRIAL PuBuc The Urban Residential category is found adjacent to the central busi- ness district, north of Pioneer Avenue and the Lakeside subdivision area east. This area is designated for a higher residential density because of its position in the landscape, the availability of utili- ties and the existing road and street system. The outer boundaries of this district are defined by the extent of the utility lines and the steep slopes found just outside the district. Other urban residential districts lie adjacent to Beluga Lake and Beluga Slough. General Commercial 1, a lower density, auto-oriented business dis- trict, is located along Ocean Drive. This area has utility access, is located on an arterial street and has existing development which relates to this use type. Construction of the Homer Bypass has created an area along Bishop's Beach which is relatively isolated from the rest of the community. The area consists of a mix of residential and commercial uses, and possesses good views of Kachemak Bay and Cook Inlet. The beach is subject to rapid erosion, but is considered by many to be a prime pos- sible location for resort development. Although it is relatively isolated from the rest of the commercial center, Bishop's Beach offers an opportunity to accommodate the tour- ist industry's needs in an area which would help to avoid additional congestion on the Spit and along Pioneer Avenue. It would also help keep some tourist business in the Central Business District. For this reason, Bishop's Beach is planned for Central Business District. General Commercial 2 is located on both sides of the airport and along the north and west -side of Kachemak Bay Drive. Because of the proxim- ity of residential property to this area, the designation of industry- oriented uses can cause conflicts. The bay side of the road is mostly residential, with long narrow lots stretching to the shoreline. Most of the houses are situated along the bluff to take advantage of the views across the bay. The airport side of the road is developed with industrial uses mostly associated with air commerce. This pattern is somewhat complicated by the air- port property line and the 1,500 foot clear zone around the runway. The road is seemingly the only boundary between the residential and industrial uses. Many of the residents along the road would like to see the area developed in low density residential uses. Many of the owners of -the land north of the road (airport side) visualize it as potential industrial land. The review of natural conditions in the area provides clues to its suitability. The area is poorly drained, has poor soils for septic tanks, foundations and roads. Utilities have not been extended to the area as yet but the road (Kachemak Drive) is fairly well developed. It appears, in this instance, that residential uses are not desirable because of the quality of the natural resources, the lack of views and the potential hazard and noise associated with the airport activities. 4-8 Another consideration which points toward a use classification is the public investment which has been made in the airport. The amount of private land adjacent to the airport which is available for industrial purposes is quite limited by Beluga and Lampert Lakes and their associated wetlands and by the 1,500 foot clear zone regulation around the airport runway. Only about 86 acres are available in this area, much of which is greatly restricted by natural conditions. Therefore, the proposed development plan designates the land north of Kachemak Drive as General Commercial 2 (industrial uses). To ease the conflict between the residential and industrial uses, a buffer strip should be established along the north side of Kachemak Drive. Homer's airport, owned and operated by the Alaska Department of Trans- portation and Public Facilities, Division of Aviation, is a signifi- cant asset to the community. It represents a major investment of pub-, lic funds, and is a key ingredient in much of Homer's existing and future economy. As a transportation and commercial center, there are existing traffic, noise and public safety impacts which can be expected to continue in the future. Despite State plans to relocate the terminal building to the northwest side of the runway, buildable industrially zoned land is likely to be in short supply in the coming years. Based on these considerations, the land use plan for the airport calls for public zoning of State ownership of the clear zone around the run- way, and General Commercial 11 zoning on buildable lands adjacent to, but outside of, the clear zone. The remainder of the uplands within the city limits are classified as Rural Residential. This classifiction represents a low density resi- dential use, and reflects the development pattern found in the area. For the most part, utilities are limited and streets are not highly developed in these areas. Future subdivision activity in these areas should reflect this low density character. Public lands are located throughout the city and represent areas which have either an existing or proposed public use. These lands include facilities such as parks, schools, utilities and the Homer Airport. Beluga Lake is designated a s Public in the Land Use Plan. The lake is primarily used for recreation and as a base for float planes. ' The lake is surrounded by wetlands and provides a habitat for water fowl and other animals. It is also a dominate feature in the landscape of the city and several housing and other developments front on the lake. Land Use Demands The proposed land use plan can be evaluated from the standpoint of how well it responds to projected land use demands for each of several major land use categories. This section compares the proposed land use plan with existing land use, zoning and projected land use demands for commercial, industrial and residential land uses. 4-9 Commercial Land Use Figure 4-4 on the following page summarizes existing, zoned, proposed and projected land use for commercial land uses. This category of land uses includes retail trade, wholesale trade, service, finance, insurance and real estate, and government uses. Currently commercial zoning amounts to about 480 acres within the City of Homer. This is nearly eight times existing commercial land use (70 acres), and two and a half to three times land use projections for low, intermediate and high economic projections for the year 2000. Overall, the land use plan for commercial activities includes more than four times existing use, and one third to three quarters more land area than would be utilized by the year 2000 under the three economic scenarios. Overall, the proposed land use plan appears to contain enough commer- cial acreage to accommodate virtually any foreseeable commercial development for the next two decades, with room to spare. Moreover, the projected land use demands are probably somewhat high, since they were prepared assuming that land use would expand in direct proportion to total commercial sales revenues. In practice, however, merchants would face rising land costs, and would probably expand their use of land at a somewhat lower rate. Industrial Land Use Figure 4-5 summarizes projections for industrial land use in Homer. At present, about 46 acres are used for various industrial land uses, including fishing, fish processing, transportation, mining (gravel and fill storage), contract construction and light manufacturing. The zoning ordinance contains about 1,160 acres in manufacturing categor- ies (Marine Industrial and General Commercial 2); however, only 371 of these acres are within city or pri-ovate ownership and, hence, feasible to develop. The proposed land use plan further restricts the indus- trial land by removing lands which are marginal for development (steep slopes, slide or eroding areas, wetlands, etc.), reducing industrial land to a total of 174 acres. This is the total acreage which is readily developable, not counting developable lands under state owner- ship at the Homer airport. Projected industrial land use demands indicate that space might begin to become tight by the end of the century, with projected demands ranging from 94 to 154 acres by the year 2000. Again, as with other land use activities, when space becomes more scarce, land prices will rise and businesses will begin to find ways to use less space to accomplish the same amount of sales, so the increasing scarcity might not lead to a complete lack of industrially zoned land for some time after 2000. The other possible concern with the projections is that some types of industrial development (e.g., airport industrial and OCS staging areas) tend to use large tracts of land, and. an absence of large 4-10 4 250 190 Commercial Land Use 140 70 C1 Low Int. High x C x 0 0 Year 2000 Projection W M LU ?-4 %- -J a. FIGURE 4-4 Commercial Land Use Existing, Zoned, Planned, and Projected (in acres) Source: Pacific Rim Planners & Engineers, Olympic Associates, Co. 1160 Total for all ownerships 1371t fill Total Private and City Ownership 174 V 154\\ \I 10 94 46 Existing (M "0 -0 c Low Int. High C 0 Q M Land -ZC ch a: 0 0 Use .!2 F4 0. X 0 Year 2000 Projection U.1 S- CL Figure 4-5 - Industrial Land Use - Existing, Zoned, Planned and Projected (in Acres) Source: Pacific Rim Planners Engineers, Olympic Associates Company developable tracts might tend to inhibit large industrial develop- ments. On the other hand, if large industrial developments are to be discouraged, then limiting industrially zoned land is one method to accomplish this. Residential Land Use Figure 4-6 summarizes residential land use projections. Total resi- .dential land use at present is about 450 acres, compared with 3,900 acres in rural or urban residential zones in the zoning ordinance. Marginally developable lands (steep slopes, slide areas, drainages, wetlands, etc.) are excluded, however, leaving a total residential acreage in the proposed land use plan of 3,200 acres. These figures compare well with projected residential land use, which range from 940 to 2,640 acres for the year 2000. The intermediate, or most likely, projection anticipates 1,350 acres of residential land use, assuming the existing low residential density of about one-half acre per dwelling unit continues. Since density is likely to increase somewhat, the residential land use projections are, like the commer- cial and industrial land use projections, probably somewhat high. Thus, unless particularly rapid development occurred (as described in the hi.gh economic development scenario), residential development would still only consume about a third of developable residential land by the year 2000. Special Conditions Natural conditions play an important role when designating uses for the land within the city. Steep slopes, unstable soils, wetlands, tidelands, eroding bluffs and other special conditions make develop- ment of the land difficult and expensive. Also, once developed (using normal practices), these areas often react in a negative manner, reflected in increased erosion, ponding of runoff water and slumping or failure of slopes. This not only impacts the land which is being developed, but adjacent land as well. Often, forcing development on such lands creates a public expense because in many cases the city is left to repair roads, drainage corridors and damaged lands. The fol- lowing sections discuss some of these special condition areas, along with the management approach. Wetlands Wet*lands are often thought of as areas which have little function and, if filled, are prime locations for development. However, wetlands have a very important function and contribute to the environmental health of an area. Homer has a great deal of wetlands which contrib- ute to the character of the city. Wetlands protect the downstream or offshore water resources of a com- munity from siltation and pollution. Aquatic plants change inorganic nutrients into organic material. The stems, leaves and roots of these plants slow the flow of water through a wetland, allowing silt to 4-13 3 3200 2640 1350 940 450 Existing Existing Low I nt. High Land Zoned Use Year 2000 Projection Figure 4-6 Residential Land Use - Existing, Zoned, Planned and Projected (in Acres) Source: Pacific Rim Planners 6 Engineers, Olympic Associates Company settle out. The removal of wetlands causes faster runoff of dirtier water. Wetlands act to retain water during dry periods and hold it back dur- ing floods, maintaining the water table in a relatively stable state. They also provide essential breeding, nesting, resting and feeding grounds for many fish and wildlife species. These factors have the social value of providing general environmental health; creating rec- reation sites; maintaining the economic function of trapping and fish- ing and add to the aesthetic of the community. Policies to retain the wetland resources of Homer should address the effect of the destruction of wetlands. Topography, soils, and vegeta- tion should be retained in the planning of activities proposed for wetland areas. Developments should not substantially reduce the natural retention storage capacity of the wetlands. Tidelands The tidelands are an important resource to the Homer community as they represent a great deal of the City-owned land. They are used for the gathering of food and for recreation. They also create an interface between the terrestrial and marine environment. Modification of the tidelands through the removal of material or their filling can cause severe impacts on the uplands, not to mention the destruction of marine habitat. This is especially true on the Home Spit where the uplands are limited -and any impacts from modification of the tidelands are quickly realized. Policies toward the careful use of the tidelands should address the relationship between the tidelands and the uplands. Structures, fills, and other development activities should be carefully considered prior to their implementation. Hillsides and Steep Slopes The bluffs and hillsides in and around the city are part of the Homer landscape. They give identity and character to the city. They also can cause severe environmental and property damage if developed with- out consideration of the soil stability, siltation and drainage pat- terns. Disturbance of hillsides can result in the loss of slope and soil stability as well as increased erosion. The removal of vegetation deprives the soil of the stabilizing function of rdots as well as the moderating effects on wind and water erosion of leaves and branches. Loss of soil stability increases erosion and lowers downstream water quality as a result of siltation. Development may alter the natural drainage pattern of a hillside pro- ducing increased runoff and erosion. Construction of impervious sur- faces such as roads and buildings decreases the amount of groundwater percolation and increases runoff. 4-15 The disturbance of the hillsides of Homer can destroy the community's aesthetic resources. The backdrop of hills and vegetation marks the city's boundaries and provides an attractive setting for Homer. Degradation of the bluffs, hillsides and drainages as a result of erosion, mass movement, loss of vegetation and damage to downstream areas deprives the community of its attractive and distinctive setting and potentially decreases real estate values. Policies to manage this resource should conserve the most visually significant slope banks and ridgelines in their natural state by main- taining the prominent drainages in an open space designation, and by clustering developments into neighborhoods. Grading should be mini- mized to ensure that the natural character of the hillsides are retained. Roads and streets should be designed in the hillside area to reduce cut and fill areas while providing safe vehicular and pedes- trian traffic, including emergency vehicles. Policies are also needed to provide safety against unstable slopes or slopes subject to erosion. and deterioration in order to protect human lives and property.. Woodland Conservation The woodlands in and around Homer are composed of spruce, birch.and willow. They provide a visual amenity for the community as well as habitat for wildlife. The various layers of treetops, branches, trunks, shrubs and plants provide breeding, feeding, and refuge areas for insects, birds and mammals. The diversity of the woodlands is important for the general environmental health of the area. The woodlands protect important watersheds and soils. The spruce forests in the developed areas of Homer, moderate the effects of the winds and storms. They also stabilize and enrich the soil, slow run- off and promote groundwater reserves. The forests also buffer the sights and sounds of development, allowing conflicting uses to be developed adjacent to one another. The forests moderate temperature extremes. The microclimate of the. forests, created in part by the shade of the trees and the transpiration of water from the leaves, keeps the surrounding air at an even tempera- ture. The temperatures are usually cooler in the day and warmer at night within a woodland than the more fluctuating temperatures of unforested areas. Based on these considerations, the conservation of forests is impor- tant to the environmental health of Homer. Policies recommended for woodlands conservation suggest that important woodland areas be iden- tified, studied and their susceptibility to development studied. Developers should be provided incentives to retain woodlands identi- fied as important. Streams and Creeks Streams and creeks within the City of Homer are important resources., not only to the wildlife associated with them, but to the residents of 4-16 the community. Streams affect the quality anct quantity of the community's water resources. Increased runoff and sedimentation for improper land development can cause irregular flow and cut off a stream's connection with ground- water formations, thus creating low and irregular groundwater resources. As a source for groundwater recharge, contaminated streams impact the water resource. Contributing to the overall environmental health of a community, streams and creeks act as major corridors for wildlife. They bind together diverse ecological communities such as hillsides, woodlands and wetlands with the shared resource of water. Policies should be developed to preserve the streams and creeks in the Homer area from degradation. This can be accomplished through the establishment of buffer zones on either side of a stream course where only passive activities shall take place. This buffer should be scaled to consider the slope, soil and orientation conditions in the area. Recognizing that they traverse city boundaries, drainage man- agement should be a cooperative venture of both the city and the borough. Special Conditions Recognizing the importance of certain natural features in the land- scape, the possible damage which could occur if these lands are devel- oped with normal practices and the right of property owners to use their land for specified purposes, an overlay system has been devised. The special conditions map represents lands which have extremely steep slopes, major creeks or drainages, important tidelands and wetlands or eroding bluffs (see Figure 4-7). The map represents areas where certain standards must be complied with before development can occur. These development standards will guide activities in these sensitive areas, and are applied in addition to those for the underlying land use classification. The following provides the purpose and policy of the special conditions areas. Purpose: To protect the natural and scenic resources of the area and to prevent hazardous areas from being developed in a manner which would cause human safety or property damage. Policy: Lands included in this classification should be those where natural conditions such as steep slopes, wetlands, etc., greatly restrict development due to increased costs or if developed would create a hazard or detriment to adjacent lands. Standards are placed on development based upon the specific condition which makes the land special (steep slopes, wetlands, etc). Development of the underlying classification (rural residential, etc.) would thereby be allowed if the standards were met. 4-17 ----- -- -------- - 0,1 -1*14 LEGEND &4 k EXTENT OF TSUNAMI HAZARD ZONE (approx. 10d contour) SPECIAL CONDITIONS (eroding & steep slopes, @v wetlands, habitat areas) PLANNED SOLUTIONS The followi ng section outlines goals, objectives, policies and actions which define what the land use plan is designed to accomplish, as well as how it will be accomplished, who will be responsible, and what date it will be accomplished by. GOAL - Provide a land use pattern in Homer which maintains the desir- able natural features, while allowing room for orderly community growth. OBJECTIVE COMMUNITY LAND USE MANAGEMENT Achieve a fabric of land use which clusters compatible land uses, avoids conflicts in land uses and provides adequate space for planned community growth under a low density population criteria. Policy 1 (Rural Residential Areas) - Areas planned or zoned Rural Residential shall be managed to provide a low density residential and limited agricultural environment, while protecting groundwater and other natural resources. Action 1.1 - City Council implement zoning ordinance, and Planning Commission grant rezones, variances and conditional use permits consistent with this policy. Policy 2 (Urban Residential Areas) - Areas planned or zoned Urban Residential shall be managed to provide a sound environment for medium and high density residential areas. Urban Residential areas should be adjacent to water and sewer utilities, developed roads and commercial or industrial development. Increased density shall be allowed for design improvements. Action 2.1 - City Council implement zoning ordinance, and Plan- ning Commission grant rezones, variances and conditional use permits consistent with this policy. Policy 3 (Central Business District Areas) - Areas planned or zoned Central Business District shall be managed to provide a centrally located commercial area which is a focal point for the community. A mix of commercial, public and residential activities shall be encour- aged which is consistent with the Central Business District Plan (Chapter 6). Action 3.1 - City Council implement zoning ordinance, and Plan- ning Commission grant rezones, variances and conditional use permits consistent with this policy. Policy 4 (General Commercial 1 Areas) - Areas planned or zoned General Commercial 1 shall be managed to Frovide sites for businesses that require direct motor vehicle access and larger land areas than would be needed oe available in the Central Business District. Lands included in this classification should be adjacent to arterial streets 4-19 and existing or planned water and sewer utilities, and which are oriented towards automobile access. Action 4.1 - City Council implement zoning ordinance, and Plan- ning Commission grant rezones, variances and conditional use permits consistent with'this policy. Policy 5 (General Commercial 2 Areas) - Areas planned or zoned General Commercial 2 shall be managed to provide space for heavy commercial and industrial expansion adjacent to major arterial roads, water and sewer systems, airport facilities and other heavy commercial and industrial uses. General Commercial 2 areas shall be located away from or buffered from less intense uses. Action 5.1 - City Council implement zoning ordinance, and Plan- ning Commission grant rezones, variances and conditional use permits consistent with this policy. Policy 6 (Public Lands) - Areas in public ownership shall be managed to provide for varied opportunities of public use.' i.e., recreation, education, utilities, etc. Action 6.1 - City owned lands shall be classified under a uniform system. The classification of lands to reflect their use, intended use, and/or development capability. Policy 7 - Where incompatible zones meet (such as General Commercial 2 and Urban Residential), a buffer strip which retains native vegetation shall be established and maintained. OBJECTI-VE - SPECIAL CONDITIONS MANAGEMENT Manage Homer's natural features in a manner which preserves important positive natural features while protecting human life and property from its natural hazards. Policy 8 (Tidelands) - Any development proposed within a designated tideland or intertidal zone, identified on Special Conditions Map (Figure 4-7) shall be required to present information on the impact of the action on the sediment transport system, vegetation, fish and wildlife, water quality and quantity, safety and public interest. Action 8.1 - Federal, State and local agencies will review proposals and issue permits based upon the evaluation of the proposed activity and its intended impact on the public interest. Action 8.2 - Enforce by adopting a tidelands performance standard as part of the zoning ordinance. Policy 9 (Wetlands) - Any development proposed within a designated and resource, identified on Special Conditions Map (Figure 4-7), shall be required to present information on the impact of the action 4-20 upon soi Is, vegetation, wildlife, hydrology and other elements requested by the city. Mitigating measures to eliminate or reduce the- impact of the action upon the wetland shall be mutually agreed upon by the proponent and the city prior to issuance of any permits. Developments within a designated wetland shall not disrupt the natural condition of 65% of the proposed development site and shall take measures to ensure the overall function of the wetland is not detri- mentally affected. Action 9.1 - The City shall begin to study the conditions of the wetlands, its elements and functions to further understand its relationship to adjacent areas and development activities. Policy 10 (Streams and Creeks) - A buffer zone 5hall be maintained at a minimum of 25 feet on @_1"ther side of a stream, as identified on Special Conditions Map (Figure 4-7), commencing at the edge of embank- ment of the ravine. Where the stream traverses wetlands on slopes of 20% or greater, the buffer shall include the extent of the wetland and shall extend to the ridgeline of the slope. Within this buffer, development may take place only after the impacts on the soils, water quality, quantity, vegetation, wildlife, etc., of the action are mitigated to the extent that degradation to the environment is minimal. Action 10.1 Adopt, with or without revision, Revised Drainage Management Plan (Quadra Engineers, Inc., 1982). Action 10.2 - Incorporate drainage management policies in zoning ordinance. Policy 11 Hillsides and Steep Slopes) - a. Proposal's for subdivision or development of areas designated as steep slopes or bluffs, identi- fied on Special Conditions Map (Figure 4-7), must include detailed, professionally designed and certified plans which demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer acceptable management of slope stability, drainage and runoff management, as well as providing acceptable access (consistent with City road standards) and any other conditions required by the City Engineer. Prior to issuance of permits, a contract will be drawn up between the proponent of the action and the city to ensure the plans accepted will be carried out. Consideration of adjacent properties and liability of the City shall take place during the review of proposed plans. b. The development of slopes in excess of 15% shall comply with Section 21.44.050 of the Homer Zoning Ordinance. c. Building sites shall be set back from an identified eroding bluff. Action 11.1 - City, Borough and State continue research, and identify eroding bluffs, unstable slopes and suitable development and management practices. 4-21 Action 11.2 City Council authorize, through zoning, drainage management or other ordinance, City Engineer negotiation and contractual agreement. Policy 12 (Woodlands) - The City shall study the function of vegeta- tion and the impact of its removal upon adjacent lands. Action 12.1 - City shall begin to identify important woodland areas, and their functions, indicating them on the Special Conditions Map (Figure 4-7). Action 12.2 City shall study possible methods of managing important woodland areas, and cost and legal implications of implementing such management. Action 12.3 - City shall institute a reforestation and beautifi- cation program for those areas meriting attention, notable ero- sion and woodland loss areas. Zoning The City of Homer petitioned the Kenai Peninsula Borough, in 1982, to delegate zoning powers to the city. The city adopted a zoning ordin- ance on September 18, 1982. The Homer Advisory Planning Commission. exercises zoning authority (delegated by the borough) in the following manner: � Interprets the provisions of the ordinance � Acts upon requests for PUD's, variances and conditional use permits � Prepares and recommends to the Homer City Council modifications to the Homer City Zoning Ordinance The Horner City Zoning Ordinance establishes eight districts which reg- ulate the location and use of buildings, structures and land uses for residence, commerce, trade, industry and other purposes. The zoning districts include: * Rural Residential District * Urban Residential District * Central Business District * General Commercial-1 District * General Commercial-2 District * Marine Commercial District * Marine Industrial District * Open Space - Recreational District The various zoning districts are located based upon existing land use and the 1978 Homer Comprehensive Development Plan (see Figure 4-8). The Central Business District is located in the center of the commun- ity from Pioneer Avenue south to Beluga Slough and Lake. North of 4-22 -F-1 :MEMO . .,:, @, 4, ........ .... .. @ @ Hi i i@] j: i Ml Of -WIr ---------------- .. RURAL RESIDENTIAL 14- URBAN RESIDENTIAL OPEN SPACE RECREATION CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT GENERAL COMMERCIAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL 2 MARINE COMMERCIAL MARINE INDUSTRIAL this area is the Urban Residential District. Surrounding Urban Resi- dential, to the north, east and west is Rural Residential. General Commercial-1 is located south of Beluga Lake while General Commercial- 2 surrounds the airport. Homer Spit is zoned mostly Marine Industrial with a scattering of Marine Commercial Districts. Many of the city owned parcels on the spit are in the Open Space - Recreational District. As mentioned previously, this zoning ordinance and map is based upon the 1978 comprehensive plan. The city should take steps to modify the current zoning ordinance to reflect with this planning effort. 4-24 CHAPTER 5 HOMER SPIT PLAN Homer Spit is a low, narrow strip of land which extends southeast from the City of Homer, approximately 4.5 miles into Kachemak Say. The spit is a natural dynamic system which is constantly being shaped by the deposition and erosion of sediments. The spit is sensitive to changes in the natural environment and to man's activities, both on the spit itself and in the uplands. To understand how the spit reacts to these modifications, a basic knowledge of the physical morphology and sediment transport mechanisms is necessary. BACKGROUND The spit can be divided into two sides, the exposed or west side and the sheltered or east side. The west side of the spit is exposed to the winds and waves coming off of Cook Inlet and into Kachemak Bay. The west side consists of cobbles, gravel and coarse sand. The shel- tered or east side of the spit is protected from the direct wave and wind action and is composed of silt, clay, sand and gravel. The growth, maintenance and erosion of the spit is a function of the balance between the supply of sediment to the littoral drift system and the removal of sediment by natural processes or man's activities. The sources of the sediments which enter the system are the erosion of adjacent coastlines and the sediments carried by local rivers and streams. Contributing to the sediment loads (although to a lesser extent) are sediments transported from Cook Inlet and Kachemak Bay landwards into the shore zone and sediments in suspension that settle out. Although there is no conclusive data, it is assumed that if inputs to the transport system equal the erosion losses of the spit, the spit land area will be stable. If the amount of sediment in the transport increased, the spit land area will grow and, conversely, reduction of sediment will cause the land area to erode (Dames and Moore, 1981). In a stable, natural environment, the spit is constantly in a slow migration into more sheltered waters. If more sediment material is introduced to the system, the spit will slowly grow into the deeper waters toward the west. The spit will migrate toward the east if the supply of sediment material is reduced. Therefore, if natural forces or development actions (either on the spit or in the uplands) modify the amount of sediment which reaches the system, the spit can react by moving. This movement causes many impacts on the existing and future. use of the land area of the spit. The recent erosion and washout of part of the highway along the armored portion of the spit is an exam- ple of the effects of this dynamic system. This occurance is an indi- cation that parts of the western shore of the spit have a deficit sed- iment budget, causing the slow retreat of the shoreline. Man's attempts to maintain the existing shoreline are feeble, as evidenced by the damaged seawall and rock riprap. With this basic understanding 5-1 of the natural processes in mind, the existing activities on the spit will now be reviewed. Homer Spit was settled in the 1880's. A post office was established there in 1896. As coal was an important fuel for shipping in the area, the Cook Inlet Coal Field Company laid a railroad track the length of the spit in 1899 to serve a coal export terminal. Coal- trains supplied ships along this line. The coal mining and hauling activ.ity formed the economic base of the city during the next 3 years. At that time the City of Homer was located on the end of the spit. In 1902, the Cook Inlet Coal Field Company went bankrupt and the coal fields and rail operation closed. In 1906, by executive order, all coal lands in the public domain were withdrawn from location and entry. This ended an era for Homer. The residents moved out and the spit was deserted. When people moved back into the area around 1915, they settled in the benchlands. Since this time, the economy of the area has been primarily based in fishing, with tourism developing into an important factor in the local economy. The existing land use of the spit is composed of a variety of activi- ties. These include a small boat harbor with associated boat repair facilities, deep-water ice-free port, fish processing plants, business commercial activities, tourist facilities (motels, restaurants , charter businesses) residential uses, recreational activities, and government offices. Most of these uses occur at the end of the spit. The variety of uses occurring in such a small land area with restrict- ed access causes conflicts to arise between the land owners, the City -and users of the facilities. Habitat Values of the East Side of Homer Spit In 1974, the Alaska State Legislature designated Kachemak Bay a Criti- cal Habitat Area to protect and perpetuate the fish, shellfish and wildlife which depend on the bay's habitats for their survival. The proposed expansion of the boat harbor near the end of Homer Spit in Kachemak Bay was approved by State agencies subject to certain condi- tions. Among those conditions is dedication "in perpetuity as open space" of at least 30.5 acres of intertidal and subtidal habitat fronting a quarter@mile of beach on the east side of the spit. Since the City of Homer owns most of the tidelands and a proportion of the uplands of Homer Spit, and the State of Alaska owns the subtidal land, there is a good deal of latitude in selecting the area to be dedicated as open space. This plan discusses briefly the habitat values of the east side of Homer Spit and areas which might be dedi- cated as open space to protect those values. Most of the biological information is drawn from the 1981 Dames and Moore report, Biological Investigations of the Homer Spit Coastal Area. Being protected from the direct force of waves from Cook Inlet's onshore winds, the east side of the spit has become a site for accumu- lation of fine sediments, such as gravel, sand and silt, in contrast to the larger cobbles which dominate the spit's exposed west side. 5-2 The east side has approximately 1,400 acres of intertidal and shallow (less than 20 feet below MLLW) subtidal habitat. The most sheltered area, Coal Bay at the base of the spit, has developed about 500 acres of tideflats of sand,, silt and clay. These fine-grained sediments have also accumulated subtidally in about 100 acres along the entire length of the spit's east side, at depths below the influence of wave action. There are two areas, totaling about 100 acres of lower inter- tidal and shallow subtidal sand accumulation: one area is approxi- mately halfway out the spit, and one area is just offshore of the existing boat harbor. The remaining area, about 700 acres of inter- tidal beach and shallow subtidal land is predominantly gravel and other mixed sediment types. The distribution of these sediments influences the character of the habitats along the east side of the spit, and determines which plants and animals live in these areas. The finest sediments, the silts and clays, tend to be relatively stable. They support mainly burrowing animals which consume the organic matter which accumulates in the mud. The small crustaceans and worms which live near the surface are prob- ably valuable as food for fish (notably juvenile pink salmon) at high tide. These organisms are also fed upon by shorebirds; at low tide, the mudflats support the highest density of feeding shorebirds on the Homer Spit. The sandy habitat is generally less stable, tending to gradually shift location. It is likely also to be less rich in food for smaller invertebrates, which in turn would be less productive as a food source for fish and birds. The animals which live in these areas are adapted to the unstable character of the sand. They include green sea ,urchins, starfish, and mollusks such as the basket cockle and the lyre snail, all of which adapt to the shifting sand by moving. The gravel and mixed-sediment habitat, which dominates the intertidal land on the east side provides a diversity of habitat for both burrowing and attached organisms. This habitat supports kelp and other seaweeds, larger surface dwelling invertebrates and smaller burrowing inverte- brates. In some areas, the sediments have been stabilized by blue mussels, which, joined by their byssal threads, form beds of nearly 300 acres. The mussel beds are a habitat for a diversity of larger invertebrates, -and are a productive food source for diving ducks. There has been some documentation of specific uses of these habitats by commercially valuable fish and shellfish for spawning and juvenile development. Crab and shrimp larvae and juvenile pink salmon were found in many areas of Homer Spit, but did not seem to use specific habitats in preference to any others. Spawning of forage fish, prob- ably capelin, has been documented on the west side and near the end of the spit, but not in the area of concern here. The commercially valu- able and forage species, then, do not appear to be concentrated in, or limited to, any one area of Homer Spit. 5-3 Selection of an area to be dedicated as open space, therefore, would best be based ori the habitat values of diversity and abundance of benthic invertebrates, particularly as food for fish and birds. Two general areas stand. out as being particularly valuable in this respect. The mussel beds, besides producing mussels, provide habitat for an abundance of benthic organisms and supply food for diving ducks. The mudflats of Coal Bay are particularly valuable as feeding grounds for shorebirds and probably for juvenile pink salmon as well. Both areas are about the same size, approximately 300 acres. The mussel beds are located offshore of mostly privately-owned uplands, however. If future development does threaten loss of habi- tat, it is more likely to be in t 'his area of the spit. The City-owned land in Lot 6, Section 27 is situated near these mussel beds, however, and dedicating the tidelands offshore of this lot would accomplish the aim of preserving this valuable habitat without impinging on private property. Coal Bay's mudflats have extensive counterparts elsewhere in Kachemak Bay, and the need to preserve them may, therefore, be less pressing. The Dames and Moore report did not include any data from sampling in this area at the tide levels that would likely produce crustaceans valuable for juvenile salmon food; however, data from sim- ilar habitats indicates that these mudflats could be an important area for food production. Further sampling would be necessary to document the value of that area as a food source. Coal Bay's tideflaits are City-owned, however, and might be held in reserve to be dedicated as open space if needed to mitigate the impacts of future development projects. ISSUES Major issues associated with the spit include the following: 1. The lack of parking at the end of the spit for fishermen, port traffic, tourists and residents of Homer. 2. Limited vehicular circulation throughout the spit. 3. Compatibility of the activities by the port and harbor, tour- ists, recreationists, warehousing, fishing, fish processing and camping. 4. Expansion of boat harbor and related development requiring additional land at the end of the spit and the preservation of 30 acres of tidelands as an agency condition to the harbor expansion permit. 5. Dynamics of the spit erosion and deposition. 6. Possible dangers of tidal wave action and emergency evacua- tion. Many development projects have been proposed in recent years for the spit. These proposals are in var-ious stages; some are merely in the 5-4 idea stage, while others are under construction. These proposals include the following: 1. Port and harbor development at end of spit (construction on a new fish dock already started). 2. Major hotel/tourist complex. 3. Charter boat/tourist related development at end of spit on west side. 4. Major overnight campground at base of spit on west side. (Development plan completed.) 5. Marine industrial park (center of spit on east side). 6. Restrooms, parking and other accommodations (city sponsored, under construction).' 7. Expanded boat launch facilities. 8. Day-use park at end of spit. 9. Visitor information center for Kachemak State Park. 10. Sports fishing pier and salmon rearing pond (base of spit on eastside). 11. Spit bike path and beach trail system on west side of spit. 12. Business commercial development. 13. Four-lane highway. 14. Re-establishment of the 'coal train' as a tourist attraction and to ease transportation problems. 15. Designation of the west side of the spit as open space. Homer is faced with the problem of allocating a limited land resource for a variety of uses. The solution to the problem is compounded because of a number of factors. These factors include: 1. There is a limited amount of land on the spit. 2.. What land there is, is subject to erosion and possible inunda- tion by tidal activity and seismic action. 3. Watermust be piped from the uplands. 4. Sewage disposal is currently limited to septic tanks and drain fields, and disposal directly into the bay. 5-5 19 111111 1@"@ KEY; SALT MARSH MUSSEL BEDS FIGURE 5-1 IMPORTANT HABITAT TYPES ON EAST SIDE 0-- 5000 SOURCE: DAMES a MOORE, 1981 OF HOMER SPIT ir + + + + j- 4 + 4 '++ + + 4 + 4 + 4 + + 4 + + 4 4 + + + +1 4 + 4 + 4 + + 4 4- + + + + + 00 *If, + T t e a 000 14 + 0 00 000 + + + + f ++ 4 ei 0 T 0 &**too- + 4F 0 0. 0eg. a A 7 % 0 got 00 WkLiw 0 -44 ,-IfLproject boundary KEY: SILT/CLAY FIGURE 5-2 SAND GRAVEL MAJOR SEDIMENT HOMER SPIT 0 FEET 5000 COBBLE SOURCE:DAMES a MOORE, 1981 5. The access to and from the spit is congested during the tour- ist season. 6. Existing developments and activities require a large amount of space for parking and equipment storage. 7. Filling tidelands to create more development area will destroy marine habitats, and could cause a modification of the sediment transport system which maintains the spit. 8. The spit is a tourist recreation destination of at least statewide significance. HOMER SPIT PLAN The land use plan for Homer Spit must accommodate marine industrial and marine commercial uses while providing for a clear traffic circu- lation system and parking for the boat harbor and for tourists. All this has to be done on a very limited land base which is subject to tidal action and erosion. Complicating this is the isolation of the spit. Located 4-1/2 miles from the uplands, services such as water, power, roads and potentially sewer must be delivered to the users. Building upon the previous section pertaining to the spit which described the existing land uses, the natural conditions and the prob- lems, this section will describe the land use plan and policies for its implementation. The land use plan (see Figure 5-3) includes elements of the 0 'verall Master Port Plan (prepared by TAMS Engineers), reflects existing uses, responds to the consensus of the community survey and respects the City lands currently !eased to individuals. The plan provides for marine industrial, marine commercial, and public lands designations. The marine commercial lands, whose purpose is to provide space for the commercial needs which service and support water dependent industries, is located mostly between the State highway and the boat harbor. Also included are the existing commercial activities at the end of the spit (Land's End Resort) and those on the west side of the spit, (the boardwalk charter offices and Central Charter). The amount of marine commercial area is limited and a proposal to con- struct a deck over the incline on the west side of the harbor to accommodate additional space is presented (Figure 5-4). Upon this deckl businesses would be situated which would service both industrial uses and tourist commercial uses. From discussions with area mer- chants, it was. suggested that the tourist and commercial fishing activities in the harbor and about and around the boat basin be separated to avoid con- flicts. Therefore, at approximately the centerline of the harbor (east/west), tourist oriented activities are proposed to be located on the northwest, side while commercial fishing and industrial uses be located on the southwest side. 5-8 n.. n(o[M MARINE INDUSTRIAL PUBLIC MARINE MARINE INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL MARINE COMWL MARINE I INDUSTRIAL M.C. M.C. PUBLIC (CAMPING/ 0. S.) PUBLIC (CAMPING/OPE SpACE) MARINE COMMERCIAL MARINE COMMERCIAL m M!C -!?=@ @P:UB@LIC(CA@MPING/@OS.)@@@*: lz@ LVJ R@9@ 41Z] 4E45Z U L N%.-.14M IQ:v Parking at the Small Boat Harbor Parking in the vicinity of the small boat harbor at the end of the spit is a continuing problem. The number of vehicles always seems to exceed the available space. The overriding problem is that the land base at the end of the spit is limited. However, the present land use pattern in this area wastes a great deal of land. Simply stated, the land is not being efficiently used. The total amount of land avail- able for parking on the east side of the spit., between the highway and the boat harbor is approximately 6 acres. The boat harbor presently has 398 slips. A standard of .85 parking spaces per slip is suggested for the boat harbor. This number was derived from a sampling of boat harbors in the Puget Sound area. The Seattle Zoning Ordinance requires .5 parking spaces per slip. Shilshole Marina, a large plea- sure boat facility in Seattle provides .75 spaces per slip while East Bay Marina, currently being developed by the Port of Olympia, is providing about .58 spaces per slip. Other sources ranged as high as 1 space per slip. The .85 standard seems to be a reasonable figure and might be on the high side. Using this standard, approximately 338 spaces are required for the existing boat harbor slips. However, transient moorage in the harbor adds an additional 200 vessels needing vehicle parking space.- Because of the nature of these users (many do not require parking spaces) their vehicle parking requirements is less than resident moorage users. Therefore, a parking standard of .50 is applied to the 200 transient vessels, arriving at a need for 100 parking spaces. A total parking requirement of 438 spaces is required to serve the boat har- bor. This would utilize about 5.5 acres of land based on the current city development standard for parking lots. This works out to be about 80 parking spaces per acre.. This leaves room for an additional 40 parking spaces, between the boat harbor and the highway. An addi- tional 240 spaces can be accommodated along the west side highway right-of-way. Therefore, all totaled, there is the potential for 718 parking spaces in this area. All that is necessary is for the lots to' be organized and defined. However, if some of the land presently being used for parking is developed, the total number of spaces would be reduced. Marine industrial uses are suggested for the southern end of the spit and the eastern length of the spit. Justification for this is based on existing land use patterns, the public opinion survey and the Master Port Development Plan. The purpose of this designation is to provide space for those industrial uses that require direct marine access for their operation. Development should be encouraged to con- centrate in a cluster development pattern as it has in the past at the end of the spit. This will encourage an orderly growth pattern and more complete use of existing lands. Much of the west side of the spit has been designated as public, where camping would be allowed per the existing city ordinance. Justifica- tion of this classification is again based upon the recommendations from the public opinion survey, and the review of the natural 5-11 resources and processes which place structures on the west -side of the spit in danger of wave action. Also in support of this recommendation is City Council Resolution 82-8, which adopts an agreement for recre- ation and conservation, the development of the Homer Spit Campground and the acquisition of west side spit properties by the State of Alaska. The land use plan designates a thirty acre area off the central east side of the spit as a habitat reserve in accordance with the Army Corps of Engineers permit for the small boat harbor expansion. Also set aside for possible future habitat reserve is the area within Coal Bay. During past development plans JAMS, 1980), a proposal to construct a deck over the incline of the boat harbor has been discussed and con- sidered for further study. Termed the harbor slope development, the deck is proposed to supplement the marine commercial space presently available at the end of -the. spit. Figure 5-3 indicates the location of the harbor slope development. Conceptually, the deck would be con- structed approximately 65 to '70 feet out over the incline and could range up to 1600' along the harbor. Commercial businesses oriented to the fishing and the tourist industry would be built upon the deck. Parking would be located immediately west of the deck. Figure 5-4 illustrates the harbor slope concept. The deck would feature an open pedestrian walkway on the harbor side, with passageways between build- ings. Depending on the design and density, approximately 75 to 85 percent of the deck could be covered by buildings. Preliminary cost estimates for the deck range from $44 per square foot (without design amenities such as boardwalks, plantings, etc.) to $53 per square foot (with design amenities). A full feasibility study shoul.d be undertaken to determine the engi- neering constraints of this project and to define the financial requirements, fund sources and other considerations of the project. The development of this plan is based on a variety of factors, from existing land use to natural conditions. To implement these land use designations, the following goals, objectives and policies have been proposed for adoption. Adherence to these policies will ensure that future development will reflect this plan. PLANNED SOLUTIONS In addition to the overall plan concept, specific goals, objectives, policies and actions are needed to further describe how specific activities and areas will be managed and improved. The goals and objectives describe what is to be achieved, while the policies are general guidelines which describe how specific activities will be encouraged or controlled, and areas managed. Actions describe what steps will be taken to implement those policies. 5-12 GOAL HOMER SPIT Wise land management of the Spit and its resources, accommodating its natural processes, while allowing tourist, marine commercial and industrial development, and recreational uses. OBJECTIVE - HOMER SPIT ACTIVITIES Insure public safety while achieving a balanced mix of water-dependent and related activities.on Homer Spit which recognizes and accommodates natural features and processes, while giving adequate space for marine commercial and industrial, tourist commercial, transportation, recrea- tion and open space uses. Guidelines address each major activity, either existing or potential, on the Homer Spit. The most important guidelines addressed are com- mercial fishing, fish processing, commercial transportation and park- ing, recreating, dredging and filling, marine habitat preserves, OCS service bases and staging areas, and other industrial activities. Policies addressing each of these activities follow. Commercial Fishing and Fish Processing Policy 1 - Commercial fishing and marine industrial activities (includi g fish processing and boat repair) shall be given high priority on the end of the Spit, south of the center of the boat basin, and on the east side of the boat basin as additional land areas are created by harbor development. Action 1.1 - Leases of City-owned land will emphasize long- term marine industrial uses. Policy 2 - Commercial fishing gear storage shall occur on the Spit only when there is no higher priority use for the area. Long-term gear storage shall be encouraged to locate in desig- nated industrial (General Commercial II) areas off of the Spit. The City will endeavor to develop additional gear storage and gear hauling services involving less utilized areas on the east side of Homer Spit. Action 2.1 - City, in cooperation with private businesses, develop additional gear storage and hauling services involving less utilized areas on the east side of Homer Spit and off of Spit in upland areas. Policy 3 - Short and long-term parking for commercial fishing and fish processing activities shall be given high priority on City property between the highway and the boat basin, adjoining com- mercial fishing activities in the south end of the harbor. (Long-term parking given priority only in areas where intensive use is not occurring.) 5-13 Action 3.1 - City complete, by December 1983, parking plan for boat basin and port development areas. Policy 4 - Vessel storage will be encouraged to locate away from the enU of Homer Spit, preferably in the uplands. Action 4.1 - City encourage private enterprise to develop east side of spit for boat storage yard. Commercial Activities 5-13 Policy 5 - Similar commercial activities (for example, charter officesT shall be encouraged to cluster together to minimize adverse impacts on other activities. Clustering shall be encour- aged through utility extensions, parking improvements, granting of leases on C.ity-owned property,' and granting of conditional use permits, variances and rezones. Action-5.1 - Investigate feasibility of, and if feasible construct by September 1985, a deck over the western incline of the boat basin as a platform for the development of marine commercial, tourist commercial and marine industrial activities. Policy 6 - Commercial fishing-related commercial activities (for Tx-ample, boat equipment and gear sales and services) shall be encouraged to locate near commercial fishing activities in the south end of the harbor by means of leases of City-owned land, city ordinances, conditional use permits and zoning variances. Action 6.1 - See Action 5.1, above. Policy 7 - Tourist-related commercial activities shall be encour- Tg-edto locate near tourist activities in the north end of the boat harbor, on the east side of the highway by means of leases of City-owned land, City ordinances, conditional use permits and zoning ordinances. Policy 8 - Offices shall not be allowed on the Spit unless they directly service marine-dependent commercial or industrial uses. Action 8.1 - Amend zoning ordinance to implement. Transportation Policy 9 - Transportation (including Coast Guard) activities are a high p iority use of the end of the Spit south of and including the boat basin. Long-term (greater than one month) storage of materials for trans-shipment shall not be allowed. Action 9.1 - This policy will be implemented by means of conditional use permits, leases, City parking requirements and zoning variances. 5-14 Policy 10 Traffic congestion shall. be alleviated by improving the organization of existing parking areas, and encouragement of privately provided transportation services (for example, shuttle busses) to encourage parking off of the Spit. Increases in road capacity through roadway width expansion or addition of more traffic lanes shall be avoided. Action 10.1 - Request State Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks, to include off-spit parking area develop- ment and shuttle bus operation in development of Kachemak Bay State Park. Policy 11 - The City shall predominantly develop its property between the highway and the boat basin as parking for the boat basin for users and tourists. Action 11.1 - City complete, by December 1983, 'parking plan for boat basin and port development areas. Policy 12 - Businesses shall be encouraged to cooperatively develop and maintain common parking areas. This policy will be implemented through City assistance in locating, planning and designing parking areas, granting by City of variances in parking requirements and in leases of City lands for parking. Action 12.1 - City complete, by December 1983, parking plan for boat basin and port development areas. Recreation Policy 13 - Recognizing increasing non-resident demands for camp- ing, tent and recreational vehicle camping shall be encouraged to locate on the west side of the Spit and away from commercial and industrial activities at the end of the Spit. Action 13.1 - Encourage State to construct a tent and recre- ational vehicle campground at the base of the spit. Boat launch facilities shall be located where safe to do so. Action 13.2 - City and State Department of Natural Resources investigate, design and construct, by summer 1985, addi- tional campground facilities off of Spit. Policy 14 ' - Recreational uses shall be encouraged on the west side of the Spit, from the north end of the existing harbor to the uplands. Permanent structures shall not be allowed. Action 14.1 - The city shall encourage the state to locate Kachemak Bay State Park headquarters either at the base of. the spit or off of the spit to help alleviate congestion. 5-15 Action 14.2 - This policy shall be implemented by means of a cooperat'ive management agreement between the City and the State Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks, providing for State purchase of private lands on the west side of the Spit and State financing of operation and maintenance of recreational facilities. Policy 15 - Maintain and increase public access to harbor and Fe-aches on the Spit to improve opportunities for fishing and other recreational activities. Action 15.1 - City investigate the engineering and economic feasibility of the construction of a public fishing pier. Hotell Motel and Residential Policy 16 - Residences and overnight hotel and motel accommoda- tions, other than those already existing or permitted, shall not be allowed on the Spit. Action 16.1 - This shall be implemented by means of the zon- ing ordinance and covenants in leases of City-owned prop- erty. Traditional Uses Policy 17 - Traditional uses of the beaches along the spit such as gathering coal, shellfish and others shall be maintained and protected. Dredging And Filling Policy 18 - Sediment transport along the west side of the Spit sFa-llnot be interfered with. Proponents of bulkheads, groins, breakwaters or other devices shall demonstrate that their project will not adversely disrupt sediment transport. Action 18.1 - This policy shall be implemented by means of City approval of building permits and review of State and Federal agency permit applications. Policy 19 - Sand and gravel shall not be removed from the Spit. On-site use of dredged material shall be permitted except in designated open space and marine habitat preserve areas. Action 19.1 - This policy will be enforced by means of City building permit approval, existing City ordinance, and stip- ulations placed on Federal dredge and fill permit applica- tions by City and State and Federal agencies. Marine Habitat Preserves 5-16 Policy 20 The City shall designate, with concurrence of intereste7 State and Federal agencies and other parties, tracts of City-owned tidelands to remain as marine habitat preserves in exchange for advance agency approval of long-range Spit develop- ment plans. Habitat preserve areas shall not be leased, nor shall the City allow material to be removed or other development actions affect them. Action 20.1 - Implement by inclusion in a State and Federally approved coastal management program, or by a memorandum of agreement signed by authorized representatives of the City and interested State and Federal agencies. OCS Service Bases and Staging Areas Policy 21 - OCS service bases and staging areas will be a low priority use of the Spit. Such activities will be encouraged to locate off of the Spit in General Commercial II zoned areas. Action 21.1 - Maintain enough General Commercial II zoned land to accommodate OCS staging off of Spit. Policy 22 - OCS service base activities on the Spit shall not include long-term (i.e., greater than one month) equipment stor- age or assembly. Action 22.1 - Implement by lease or conditional use (con- tract zoning) stipulations. Other Activities Policy 23 - All other activities not specifically mentioned above are low priority activities, and will be permitted only where sufficient evidence can be presented by the proponent that higher priority activities will not be adversely affected. Action 23.1 - Implement through the conditional use provi- sions of the City zoning ordinance and through granting of leases of City property. General Policies Policy 24 -Prior to further development, new activities shall be allowed only where reasonable assurance can be given by the pro- ponent that septic tanks and infiltration fields will adequately handle the wastes. Action 24.1 - City study and develop plan for Spit sewage management and implement plan by developing recommended system or limit density. Policy 25 - Leases of City lands shall be standardized in the areas of length of lease, renumeration and covenants, and shall 5-17 be enforced. Future leasing proposals shall consider design standards, and shall generally not exceed 15 years, including renewal options. However, the standard shall consider the type of business proposed. (A major fish processing facility would usually require a longer lease than a less intensive use.) The 30 acre staging area shall use shorter term leases (maximum one year) for non-structural uses, which allow ready conversions to higher uses as they develop. Action 25.1 - Implement leasing policy through Port & Harbor Commission and City Council. OBJECTIVE - HOMER SPIT AREAS Achieve a management of Homer Spit areas which recognizes varying capabilities and limitations of the Spit. End of Homer Spit (Westward end of boat harbor to Land's End Resort) Policy 26 - The City shall support and pursue, with assistance from State and Federal agencies, the long-term marine development plan outlined in the 1980 Homer Port Development Plan (TAMS Engineers) and in this plan. Facility development in the 20 acre staging area shall be non-structural until higher uses are devel- oped. Action 26.1 - City, together with State Legislature and Corps of Engineers, continue to pursue long-term development of TAMS plan, including development of parking areas and harbor slope areas. Policy 27 - Priority for use of the end of Homer Spit shall be @'@ivento marine commercial, marine industrial (fishing), indus- trial transportation, tourism and day use recreation. Proponents of other uses shall demonstrate that priority uses will not be adversely affected. Action 27.1 - City, Borough, State and Federal agencies implement through leasing, zoning, subdivision, permitting and direct development decisions. West Side of Homer Spit (End of boat basin west to base of Spit) Policy 28 - Priority for use of the west side of Homer Spit shall be for day use recreation and open space. Action 28.1 - City and *Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks implement joint management agreement, including purchase of private properties and development of campground. CHAPTER 6 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT The retail district of Homer is located along Pioneer Avenue, Lake Street and the bypass road. This area is designated as the Central Business District (CBD). This area is characterized by individual structures, some built near the street and others set back, which house single businesses. Approximately fifty businesses make up the CBD. The CBD is not densely developed. Many vacant lots exist. Some are used for parking, others await development. Parking for most busi- nesses is located between the street and the building. Identified as major problems to be dealt with in the CBD area are traffic conges- tion, the need for additional parking and the lack of sidewalks and pathways. Due to the problems mentioned above, the Central Business District is not easy to use. When shopping, one must drive to each establishment, park and walk into the store. The lack of a safe pedestrian corridor discourages people from parking and then walking between stores. Because the CBD has been developed in a strip, even with sidewalks and pathways the distance between one end of the CBD and the other would discourage pedestrian movement. An analysis of the businesses, vacant lands and amenities was conduct- ed to determine the constraints and opportunities along Pioneer Avenue. The goal was to tie the CBD together, to provide parking areas, pedestrian safety and to beautify the area. The analysis determined that approximately 7 acres were presently available adjacent to existing businesses which could be used for off- street parking. The parking problem reaches its height during the summer tourist season when many campers and motor homes crowd into Homer. However, parking is also somewhat of a problem during the winter months. This is due in part to the lack of organization of the off-street parking areas along the avenue. Most of these parking lots allow vehicles to park in any direction, restricting circulation and using more space than necessary. If the parking lots along Pioneer Avenue were organized, about a third more vehicles could be accommodated without increasing the amount of exist- ing parking areas. Applying the city parking standards for busi- nesses, these areas can accommodate about 542 vehicles. Al so complicating the parking problem is the ingress and egress from the avenue to the parking areas. At present, vehicles can pull off the street virtually anywhere. This is unsafe for pedestrians, and also utilizes space which could be used for parking. By defining the 6-1 ingress and egress points along Pioneer Avenue, the area wi I I be safer and the land area more efficiently utilized. Part of the ingress/egress problem is caused by the lack of curbs, gutters and sidewalks which would not only function as designed but would define the vehicle-oriented street from the pedestrian-oriented businesses. Also linked to these considerations is the left turns of vehicles along the avenue. Left turning vehicles slow and stop through- traffic, often creating a hazardous, although many times necessary, situation. Another result of the analysis was the identification of what can be called commercial nodes. The physical relationship between existing stores creates a cluster of businesses. Figure 6-1-illustrates these nodes. By defining these nodes, developing common parking areas and providing a pedestrian circulation system, these areas can become viable shopping complexes. When linked together by the avenue, land- scape features and, again, pedestrian pathways, the whole area can be an identifiable central business district (Figure 6-2). Figure 6-3 illustrates what this concept might look like on the ground. Concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks link the nodes along Pioneer Avenue. In several areas, parallel parking along the street is allowed, while organized and defined parking lots are established on the vacant lots. The common parking areas serve the businesses, existing vegetation is preserved and new plantings introduced to define the nodes, 'parking areas and walkways. To further link the existing businesses and encourage shoppers to walk rather than drive between businesses, a boardwalk is proposed within each commercial node. The boardwalk is shown winding its way between existing buildings, maintaining a safe distance from the traffic along Pioneer Avenue. In certain areas landscape features, benches and com- mon areas are introduced. In several areas, there exists the oppor- tunity to open up a vista toward Kachemak Bay and the Kenai Mountains beyond. This would further enhance the visual quality of the CBD. Figure 6-3 illustrates this concept. In several locations, the CBD can be extended south, just behind the existing commercial strip. Because of the topographic break in this area, these sites are anywhere from six to fifteen feet below Pioneer Avenue. This limits visual access to these sites, but also provides .an opportunity to allow a double front commercial development. Pedestrian access can be provided from the Pioneer Avenue side, while vehicle access can occur from the south side of the development. Other opportunities such as this occur in several areas along the south side of Pioneer Avenue. This type of development activity will strengthen the commercial node concept and the CBD as a whole. 6-2 BARTLETT MAIN 0) L SVENDLUND < co m C, M KACHEMAK WAY rn 0 z 7d rn 0 z 16 AA4lbL 40. -Aloe* _71 lb _A=7- Ilp I @ . @ - ...; ...I.. .,.. ... - -", 1,-,@tin,;%. .. , ".." --%.w.,i,,,%--%.. . ,_...@ @_,@,@ @%.@.", -'a,O@%'Ilu , @-@V_ ._;,*.@ , @-zggg-@ - g. [email protected].,11.. .. ....._ - .: ... g. :.....: .,.i@ .... , .Imv, ..., -,_ ... ... . .I@zt:. . ..@l... - .....-iii, @R ...,:.. :....... ,l . ....,cl.-@ii .... . .., @ .. d..... .. . . .......- ..... ...'a 1.,_-.._;..@ .....@ . .::.: .. .1 .. ._!@, .. . .. ...... I@IM .. AA@@. r...". ..,'...:*@g-.@' .@ ; .... @M W@ @:@'..",@..,.".,.,@,.,'...,.@.',.@:.:::@.:.:.@:@. .....1. . @@, .. t :@. i.%. . .. ..-:..A '-!,,... .: .@ '.@i@. @.. ,@ ....... .. . .. .,...". ., , .. . ,... .@ ...... --l. . .,M.11,1. Nl . :. .-,..'.-..:...........@ ,... @@...,F @..F,: @@7. .. @.@ .. ... ..;I..,@.; .1. @11@@. .:.: .. .. @%. @il..@ .. ,1.-... "IllI.il..m..-,.. .fy .. .@A ".1.--... . .@ .... ... ...,.I,... -I ,.@ .. a-...i.'i.`@.,.'.@,'@:@. . : -. I ,V . ... @ %@.a. @., M_ ps ... ,.-.%@i.... .:ai, .. "i .... --li.i. i.:.. :: .. .Lt*,%%-Ii.@...'.._*l i ,K,@@'..',.-. ..-. .-'. ,@.-.-mi...-...'... kl.S ,..... ... ....-.... @.% .. - ,X.V : ..: @ ..@...._M.,_ . ..., . %... .. ...@Ci-ii@;,. ... . l_:@_;t,i;..-. ti%.7.@@!,: :...,[email protected].. , @-. -W ... .. .. .. . _.... ..1 .. .. ... og @.@,'.r@@.@@.'@iii,..:. .. . .. .. ... .: :. :.l. . ..,-, ...@ .. :. . __9.-: ... @@,v@ _. ...... ...., .... I"'.. @., ... ,..:n, -1.15i,i @.%:. @.. 1. .. .. .... .--.`. 1 ,:.. OP ''... IY -.@Zll--..'@ - . .. . ..... ..I..... . . ,@@......'s.-... . .@- f@@@@,t,,.-@,.,...:@@,,@@,,@@@".". ".@. _;.3 .41.@@. .... :1 :.-.:@.... @, -"..@i. @.I. Ia, .@@ ,@..@. -..Rx .'.',- .@ I,..SA. @;...@@:.-...,"ol Rll@,@i.,e;. ..... i. ,.,i .-I _@%@ ..@,'... ...... .. .. " , :.; "'.., :.1...,"..... .... ,, .::..b.::: -,.@@, 'ASMN'l -'... .11%@..i........ . %@.,' ". . ---aWre..- -. ..::. .. .. -. t@......._. I@: @.i. @. z,--- - -.m.... @ ;. ... I @@,%@r@@_:. @, @%.,V:O.@,@ii@ri .5 _.@@ I @--. .. .. ..%.I, 1. ..@.: - ,., ..@@ @@fi;-Oi-Mmo XA'i@ -t...... .. ..;.. .:: im.: @-.. . @:-.%. ..@. @,...@@ , .0-ill - %, -. I.. .,%.1E-. 11, 5i..'v,'S @@j.,:ii:,,@ll .:.:.. .. ..: .... .:. . @.: ", %. - @"lI. .@l-... @--_ _m .-R. al, .. ;, .@r.,A.;-. ... : ......@-1 .. .-.',.@. .. b.. .. ..;,[email protected] .. .:.;!r,._.l,.W.I:%gi@,@;,-% 1.1-@. ., @,g,r-.%l.-.-. .. .1 I---- .", Ime.; g,,'4& 1--@_ ,Qlal--... ..@@,;@:,:l ..'?@,@BN,N.9 .@.!:. @;,-- -.m. . .........--@i,-:,;,; --- .. , W., I.. -.. ;lm .01@ :l_'l.._kl`_ m. IN :....... . . , ....:. -....i. .@,i@@-,,@giti,..Iqp .... ....,@,@ 1-1%,@ii.@.._.@ ..,..,., - ..:-, . ..:i, .. ...... .. .:........ i_... W',.6w.",@- @.r ... p@ -...V_ 'li @.. ,@ -..9.1 q 601, " @. ...". @_,@,.;':`.. "........ .. -@-W-,!@--`@:: ... IN 1:'....'... gi.gso;,.:@.]@::@.@.. ..-..@;,! - ::-1 .... ,:11- ..".., .. I., @V,O@is'vi.ix,11-.1 @ ,f@ 1: t: M. -.....@@.. @@.-.,[email protected]@i,, V" it .! @..@@.. :,@"I.."...... ..,%i,- @t.,--?@ .... t..@ ii_,@, '.... I,.R." M.'Vi @@ - @::@:@:j 1@ N.,-... ,,.""...@ T,-@@Ii... .. .. ...,..... ... ..-.@p ... 'S"oll e. m.....:.:....: g, "!W@' ..I.. @.." [email protected].:....,vt .1,:... 11.1 -; ll.')''@Til.l M... . ... .i 11 @i@..." ::. .. ,41. .;--.:@t: @-@. O.", lg_!@@k%,N@*&M,Isj l,'ll . @..:.,.,..i,.','.,.,.. sq, @A.', I '. I., "t@ ',@ -am .. a, ``J@@'..; ". _."IW', -_,@ ..%.:.. -.'@-.'@,.:@@_.@@....@,@ .: @:;@ ". . w.... r%l".I%@--"%.@@.5@...'@....@,."-",".-@.:. ., r.,@ ..'..@ ..--.. .0 . ., i=: li%k@,%-A,@[email protected] .., g, _M, ll',..;@-, . ., , --.. " @, @*[email protected] :@l ;, @";i`:i@ 3 'A ..I.@@;.@- @-- - @k. '. ll,lm, ",...1 ...... I---.. .,@ ft@.@,,,@`.P -.,@"'j.., ,@,a,,%.-d ". ...,.@ @Na, , @t ..... .. " @@,-- ."",mg-ii@IME @l ... It .-qi",, z,.@,V.-%.%iim...,.Fv .. .... .... "V, 1, - .. ;-.. .1ill"%IM11111-1101i, .. J@Xi;t Ii... :@ ...:,@@.:@".@'. ... tli@il.@l",t., ,,, M_.-@:.11',.. .... ..I. . ..-.. .. @.-`@',.%.'@ 'U@-.'"' .:;...,@@::::...... :. ....--@ -., , @'- !@` -l.','l%-.' .',,@.@[email protected]"",@'A@@.,..,@@,-@@@;@:,@;.@,t@". ,% ... %2g..@ @@ A,-.. ::;::. -...., pg@. .i::j?0 ... @@A,`.: .@&.- ",'....:.:." fi,@@:`:bl 1'@,@ ., .iy,,@@,-@jffl@ -%--ql.f111-.. :@%,-,,_ A;ViFl: .%:..........:.:..: ... . @,-@.'P@,,,,,t`,j,5@1;!.!@.:@:.@:@@ @ :... .. .. .."r- @.,, ,-'I. @ ... . ..Ia-@@:.: vwli:::*,,;@@:@ %.; _,@ - --'*@@,@,,,@,.,.@@i,@@'ki@@,",'@,,.,,.,t,@,@@-@...@@@@@-@,,@- -L'.@'iL.'.'C,"I@',.'@,.::!:!".@@@:@::@ .........",@I@,-@k` '..", @,.:,..,,[email protected]%,,'.. '. 1. [email protected],iil ",A-j@_@,@L';..,T@ @@:@_ .@,"fl. .. !, LA,.:1.@ .... .,.,...,..--....! ...:. ,-:.@.@@ _11@i@@.....d. . ...t; 11 :....--, .. . ...-.@@ .. ..,... .. 1. .@i@@.., -... :',@ i.'-.-%w,%@@,@Lj'@ilt..I,i @, i@@. @I@i-,@ .. .. . .@: ,i..P,.,-"L@;@,,w?, "I', I .....g',q .1 .. -1-1_ _@.%._g, @:,,i-@y t..:@.@:; @ I%- ... @11.i`l @:: @.- @,M, . . @) , ,......." iw,; .j,":-11% -"@, ,.r.1" - g @- am, ,,,.. .- ..@ "" "',[email protected]@%- I., .... .. ...I"@,...,@.,t@,@@,-@@@,,@,@@%";;..@:,.",@@ :,Yo@IIW, -&- - ""@@@.-,k,. 1@%`Ikll@@ ffi,@j@ @: @..i, @,.:,. .".", @ . ,@...,, ,,,@i@i,.@r.,, l.- .. ,, C@ .,;"-.!@@l@,.,5,'@,@ ,;'@ ., . ..... pl---.. @.,k1; :@, , @.....". .. .. ..-.:. i.." ... @... % @,, i.. ",- @"e -,.v --,.@ - ;,:.@-%, @ it 111, 1%,@!@@l@@.:@,@ b! @, .....: :....-@ ,q,--...:....:.-, ..@@vkl. @%.....I,I. ... @,@, ,- _. .@ ::::@_:1_ . IS" C'@"",:k@@@-,-F:@@@@;".E@'.'@ .% ..... .,. I.. ...... ".@.,,@-I.,Xl:. @_..,..X'g,l-,,:@:`-",;@'- ,.:r-.::... . . T .@ ,, --@ v. '@ [email protected]..: :.@l ..... .1 ... _4,.... @i'@,.,,@....@ l......l.'.....; ,% @' .@ ll,:-',..:@@ @.: ,..@@illml.@I- 1 11W ., @'IF..@ .. .: ... ',,'a@@:;,@-vb..!:@!:!.@S. ........", ,It.. I., L'i,;. -.. @. ...": ,"I'll'F,,. , "@,;",-:@' g, :1-I lkI..... ... iel ,@, 1,:,.: `@,,rA ,". .:.!. ,@ "...., @kNl.P.. @ w-,iN "' filot"ll,;@'.._11,5i,@@`%.;.,.rm," kl`@ " "I'll i.. .. . .S,... 11.1k I 111".."k, . ,_.0@, L.@s,[email protected]:@. .. 'Fill., @.: :... @@. @ 'i _.,.t. @,_I Ok' .::, .@.. "' _.. ,@. v i.":-... @ I,.. .-I: @1..@I.'-@ 1,I-@:",.. ... ,k.., .1.I...." ...: @..-.@. :.. 1. I.. ... i. 11 ...It',--,@."I' I......."... ,i.`@Av@ "&'.,:@@-:@-I ... .1 ... _... _.... .. .@. IINIL."'...... .: : i ""@,,.@l::@.,'.ii%....,:@-..,@.,A k'@`,,.i m'.. g@,@ .1 . .. :11 .0 @ :: @..:@... @ [email protected], .. gal@,@:"`.:S@l .. ,@,-: .." .: M"..'*@%%,.....k .... :.:.. -:......@.. 'o k'@'Lli Al;i2,'Al',.::@@-:@la-.:,",,. .@'..@- .. ..,....,..:..:.. _.. I... ..1.1 .. I.. I..... ', @ - ,.." ,@!@!@%.,@.I iIlk .:. @@'.'.'.'!! "', 'IV@. .IIIM 11 slo Im.k ... All -..a.,@.:@; @,@%-,i@ ',`@ k@@i,@ @ IILV@ @@II...... @.....:... F'1'1@;�@@,:.,;.. @-. -;,@,@@.,,:XA,@"..tw;.,.:,- ,;'--.d. .. -.... .. ..:..@::_::_am @.. :..: %::;. , @-..,g@@:y@-@:::-, @'.:-;:. @1@ ':. @'.! .. .. .%:0,::!' : .::-t .0 .@:: _.@ - 57M.-N ", ....... IN @_ . -I",- ..:. ....,. ,..4 ,@ ii, . " ,, ... 1, ,;.,-..-,'; .. l..:...:.. @:.: . ......:-. ..:...,. i ,@... m., .....': ,"1171 F , ..,. ... ....@. .k,%@l;:,.@@@!@....@.:.@;.@,,.@@@: I S, 1,. .,.... -.... .. ;..%::.I ,,:,@@`@m ','@,@.-WRM I.- i@,--, ".. : I ,,',@ ,@@:.::'%%@`@" ;.:..iffl,il v., .... ,,,,.,.. ,::... `@ .. .. ..b.. .i -,,@@N,@%@ _. .... @. M@ 'I@i._-.;,,A, @@,Hff,'... .... a., -@ ,.Ng .I.I [email protected],-- -%v'pu., ;-- .. .dk.......@- .. ,., o@'A@,,..*,.k.',g, ,,,, ...:.@.:.@@.::".@@:@@-A."A@,@:.@:@,@;!. @@":.-".@.'l@@.:@I'.@ .., ... L@@.. Li.:.--:-.... ,,'%-..l-ll Z.... "'..".11", W,14.-o@-ib ..... ,",;.,@,,, ,@: ;; ............ 1-1-@-Ill 'k:.L' @ . ....;. ::@ %11-111'li@. - %@ @.,@,, %_. :: @,-- @k_j,.j.., ... L@,_.:k,:%-'@@-".jj ..... ..'. @'..@".. ,.... ..,:, I.11 .... 11. I.-IN ,". .; ,..@r. @): @:.:@k LLLLL 'j, l@',@ ".".,'@I, "' ,.,i%,,,.@@I'. ,@g ....:_.:It!,:::.:- -.1,111 K's'.1 ... @ ,@ , _pj. ..." _ _,[email protected] _@`j: ".:.:i...: -.iM@I.@ ..:@,.m--g, _....IMA .IIIPII.IgQv.l@ I%`,",.,.:.%', ."I@lil@,"..@IC:@",:@@%:!:;:.@.,,',@-.:@@@: ..., - "::"L@@.',,'-@@--@@z@,!'.-.i%.",..,,,@ _i:,@..,', ..:.,..,!..:.:.. .... .. 1.." @- @l , IV@@ ...,,:,!... @;[email protected]_lllat,@.mt@@,@.@:@ .... .. --11 .. ...... .... z;,_....,'. "ki. - @:. k:.-.. . i. @: ij,.','%,' ,; .::.," I@fl'. ,"-@!,@:@:;.,@i::. @@p' , t ,%.-,@ -:..... -.. .. @ 1@,',@@`, X... ..... :,.: .,@. ,%,.,'@"I... ...I... ;@% @.. ::::@li@ @ """"'%%'@"@;'@'L'@%@"";'!"'I,1@:@:: %::ti;V..'I...,,.. *P, 1: I@ ... , "'@;@@'@L`%O.`@','@'- -@,.".@V@1'2@-@,,jl,.,@,,, ,-%@-.- 4" I... I..". ;k, L, Nk', : 1% 1.I ,:@_'. ,,.'@. @ .", 'Ll'.1I. ...'.!',,-,`,i,l%@,,,,* @@,Ilbl`ill'i I. .. I I - , I - 11-Ml,;l,. %. :. %.. vl IN@ ,I"@LM'.1-1@11 -g' ,'@ @vii,,,@@%@@:...... , I..,.--,L@,. ,-a@ @01 ."'If -.`.@_12 ,111@: .\,-,"@.',`i,l.">,' wllilll@@%@@I. ,__'. ,* .. -,..!,. ... ... '., [email protected]@@&@_'@C. &,',", I,-.T@@', @'. ,,,@ ... .. . ',,@.-J'..'s.",@'."@@::@.@,@!@@:@@@:".@,@'Y'@.@@:@.@L"@;. , .::,@.'@,,@:. ;:..@-",,mt@_": @@:@l -io%.i@. ., 1-i'.."i"i"... .:. %J,I@.@l.; i,@Ilcl.,.15A :... @ , .@,,@ .- - .., . . . t@,@.ei',t@ , ,,@... I '. 11.1-.Ill , ... IS' ,- -. .. ..... @ `6k'@i.-@@@::!.! ;!'A'@- ,@,%'sl,t, @-,,,R,.@... @.. ..,,."" :il-,., .,-,,@, ,@.,@:.. 11IJ, 1@,V'l ,I ......--@ .,.l.',:!-@;.A.k'6.1 'M'-@"-,.`,@!.,;@',@,,-, ,,@ @ @:. @.,:: i,@,',,.-.IjR,@,@\ "J. .:.:..!@@ ... _,". @.... -". [email protected]@-:@,'-..i@@. ,@@.. @, :,@I... I.",;"@.@,@l,,.-,V@""kt.".L ... . ... @,:. ;- .". .,[email protected], ..@-:":@ .. ,,I,@ - ". I. 1'@%9, im:..:.@ @,.@@,.'*R',!@,@'-..,.'q ., @... @ ..@@l,., ,P.A r. .I' "...., ... ._:@k'-@@f -@ "'. @-,,-A, @i@11111,-:...'U, ::@-,%L@'@,',." ",.@l"-.:;..".::@,@,,.'@,@@k,.,@@'@'@k, L, ,.. ....... : @@.::@ .. ,[email protected] .@2%@, .1 "I'"._@@ @ _'@,i, ?@,Mil, ;:k@... ...../ "I PRiK..1 I ,ii ,IS @@ @11111 ',"@,@-, - .@Q,R,si@lll@`,;',@',-, @M@@,' I.i @. .11 ::@,.,@!@`.@ .4 @11.M`,""',1,I.1 :.:@ ...V31,11 L-11" , @,@,,%%',',@it'-@.@,1,,,,.;@.1;@@."-"Iii@t"@,,@@i""@.zt@-,- , 1,1@@!-.- .;. .,!@.,I--@@-- @.:6.',',@@.@ ,.- '@'@llil'.16@@i@'6@11"": ,,.@,,@@N-@@,,,,-,@@i@@,!.@',@.@@tll" @ 11@1`1.1111 III-C, ;.:,",,... ... _....ll.Vl ',i,,,@%.:i@-@Illl ,I @@-`@,@,,i@,W,?@,-,, ::@-:,-.AI,,", .::. @.@::,.@O@CM",::,@:.@-: I. 1, !@.@[email protected] ,...Jll ,,@.@,"@@L'@.'@ '%.@@,".."?`. li :',I@:,%Zi,-:"@@:,@'@k@:@..,,_.,.,o,'R:i--Yig.'--l;%,!--.. 1@@ .'@ . -I..... 1. -. . .L@@,,@@ @. @'.....,4., .",.",;I@@@.:.":::@@@::.,.k@@::@@@@@:@@::@,w.zi'.%. .116 @kl A%.:,@@,i..@,,%::..:.I ,@"`::@@,.@,,@@j,',- @ ','@."@@.,. @;-@'Ci. i, "@Riit. @:@Xl@zc@ @-p -@,@i,,-@@,VO v", - " 2,", ,; "@;@@Illc@ I ."ii,,t."@'. %,W@kl, --, .I'll V.Ivi@,I.vg Li.v ,@!',kl @,',.`.',i,!i"!',",,I -&- ;.@;.!@,,,@,,,@,,%@i,@ @.l 1.@,jk,l@,,,,,@,,tt@.,.%,.@,@.1%@@,@@,,,@.@ ., \.I' @@,,@,.L@"il :;:. @; @,@. % I " ,., 10 M:@,.,E@v@@)@:@Iltllll@l,,I.@::[email protected],k,.;,:::..-X, .-@I,V ,:...@@ .-,.-li-""i"jk@ 5 ,,@@@11 't.@ .. , , .@."L".I""L""!.'@"-l'@@@@@'I @, -P :.. .:-","! ...v", ". "@il.@ ,@' -%%.,.. .Ikk.141 @.:.... ;" -@@-:@%@!;::"-,@ 1:1@X,%'@,",'@,@Zl,".%.:,.@1%.,@ ... %....., @..@:%X%o@ @@I@@@,@' 111,11;k. " @n.*@@::5:%@@:%%V .." "" , ",`:: @:@.@! .. @@_ .. @i %, ;,:.:@m..:i. @@. @@.:,@..:.@_.... - ."@-%,.kQ%mkoi%,.. ..: ho@ .. . _.. ,.lll@',,-"'% ... *@`-,,.::@@@,%,,@ @@,%.,.@,,,@@@@i.,,",-"L@.'%@,,%,4 ",.,"@ ". ?@% -11 &MMM 1@--l .:,.. " 1: , ..-., .... i@ ---,.,%@@[email protected]% i .1"I"" ...".. @ll--k@-m 'n @.. .@-@@ . @@.' ,"I@NMI'll ,,.@@j... .@ . ,, , - <-@ .... :11, @: @'@!::::@i,,,@j ., L".. @,t- I@@@::....@'.@@..;.. 'L'@,@@.@`%'S.@@:_@ @ ..',i%@ - "A ,.,,,.,,-@-@M,lo @@@L:@@::@..@%,%':@.@:@@@@.@@@'..@%..:%C%[email protected]@..@:% @%@%,,@@,,,@ ... @@A@SIN' .1 O All'.I'ik.@Iil@ .. .. .. ... --. [email protected],@,,.. ... ". ill, . @.:@0%,%r::..k.- @,;@@Ii I,@@@@,%@@@.,@-@',",'@@"%',@.,@ 'N .,@%:: IM@ .... @'-IIL' -,g,@, ., I.... - @ ..: ...... .. : .%%.!, :. .i. k:@%-,'. @ @::%@@I@ ., @--@ @%@@%@,@',.@ ,@.,..-,i- I, ..,.i,.1: @, ii%, i - w @,, @::@@@..:@@%.,g@j@ii@'@@ .... .. .. @.'_.--%.,..:,%',.',,,'@li6- @-- ',,@@@,"',',%@l.,,.@-,-@i@,,@,%,@ . -Ili I I.. ... O@-... "lj`@`@..,,@!.O@:%-@,'@ `Qoxm@@_,.@,:@:@.: ...@:::,% t:z%` i%tii,.,@ .,..,:_@:..:@@"-,@@,%@t@@k @@ i@,- 7@ @ L! @ I.: , i - @ ." @ @,' , ,:5@@: . .. .... .:.:@[email protected] I...., ,@ @@-. i @.,::@.%ti%,y ......... @:.:@. @-@- : o; .:,[email protected] , %@@.:@. .@,I i.. ,@,,@,,,@::. '.. ,@@@,%%,..@c5i:@@::@@',.@,',i.,@,i@:",.@,@.@@..:;..:@.@@ @ .:@::.@@ ,@v,,@, .,',.'k. :@ @ii, , .,,..,,,@,,%"...'@,"@.".@,',S@'.'@.".','@@;,,-@,@; @: @ -.. @. ...... . -1-11111 Z.1": t" lo.- I..-@ki*@i .:I,q" l! '. ,:,!-@%":Z@iM@:@i@ :@6c;@ I.... I%"I' " --"@ @@,,@.@,:@ :i c:@,!C@...@.., :1,@,. A 1... ... :; ... _,","..@@1k.'s... -._ ".. .'. , @ I] @K@;.,-.-,.@@: .%@@ %@.@,:%_@,: .. il . .. .. . k%, ,%,@:.,_:C,@ li -@ @i%l '... .. @@,@,ol -i@ @:.%9@:. .%:.@im:", @!.@,%",Yi!@: @%:@"%`:@ .,@. .... : .. ....-'IN.,--. .... ,-.%@, 1.11%@.:,..@1@@:.@@:@:, @ ;:: .:,:.:: .:@ :@.@:.....:..:. .. .....! @.11, .Roml.@M,@.@..... @. I., --i'. '.."'..._", '....0,1V .... . .. @@%@:@@k),L @11@11:1@ @,@ @@:.,....;'.,@,,,.-,J'q, k, ., % ::3 .:k. .%@.@:;@ Y.%: - :, [email protected] . , .RX,,@,V@@g?@.@@. :@�@:@@@#,::;@ @,kT"-:...'-..l.. ., '.. %::,. ..1, ... . , .@ @ M. @_@: :..@.'I.Lit@-,@'.I@ , @@i@@, @@ ... n,x ... q..: ,. @@.@, @. P@ @@,:_!.. :: . .-, : . . ,ctm... I` . .. .:.. :. @ N11,,@@!@@:@; ". .'. i;"@,m@":@:@ - .,."... -......-.1 ..i:.;.. .1iII"-:@.... I'g , @..... .... 11 .... W.-I. -.... :. ;:.@@..%:, All. -...- [email protected].."ll ....."I.I.i.:. V'@i: k,@-,@.,,.:::.;@: '@IXWC5',,@:.!@:.% @_@Y@i:.. m :. @: @ .....: b. @...@: .@..', .. @@@ , - 11 ",.,.q-@'. @i:..: :..@...... I, ii ., .,, 'Jill I1- '@ loj@ , "@ _'@ "I .@L"`."@'@@;:@:@::@": 'i@i@@,i@,.@.,,,@`, , ..%Ill @ @.:: , "' .il 1111111i'!"I'll, ',k,' %A,@It@--,., ,'@%@@j .,%.I @'! 4,@@: I:: :j vmll,-@,@, im:!:@:;,',,@@,'@%,.L@ @;.",::!,@ ,:: ,@@:@@..::@@.@...:.-: "I. .. ....'_.:@,-- @,;-";'N@`o`,@., '. t"'� _,. . '....., 1.@:..--... ...:,::... -1 @@%.@%@,,,,%@,,'.@i""L'@@@'.@I .2@, ""- ,,,.,.%: @.@\A@ .".. @!: i ". 5 @, ggggj . @.1 , ,, .,@ . . . . . .IL@ @,,@ @o ;, -,:: @:: ,A-&@%:I..", _@,_.,.".L,", @@, ,-,- -ix.'_@_, i;! .@,: %@@.-,,@@%-, .,: .,.@ j,'@.,,@ @@,@,,@@.. , - iy@,%Iji,ll --:e..,t#'[email protected]"l %C%: "@@.@,,,uk"" .. ,%,:@i"@I k@la",@@..", ,@ ;:'%",.'-.:@.- 't@ sm. - :@@It@'i.p@@4wt,@.,R',@ " ,, @`i,i;@,' @-.,@ iI'll. I II . ,,..@,..M -@,"II-....@ %@@.@:.:@ @ 1@ @..:,@@-,.,. ...,@@i -- -@. . lk@% :, ,.::..@ .@. @kk,@@' @: .. ..@ .,@, kI.: i@m@,',_@.@@,`,j '@,'i%@.@ @,',!.,,i.a, .M@@,L,g,i@. @!.,.:.. @;:@@_ .:.@: . e .. : @@,, `Tuiv 11@1`i 1, 2.;@', IXWO .... . .. ,11. ; :: .@@ ...:k : ... @ --. @@ @i@@%r.,i.,@@,@.-,il.,=..i.",".,,@,,@,@@@@@.@@',.I @@i @@24,1,%%.'i:. ,:Ag'k .@. _,. I I I!"l.%:%; , -., ..V"%,,":,%",," 1.IIliLIF@, :@[email protected] I.@@:.:: @ --1', ! u@ ;@f-I %.. e.:: ,:.- """"", ..".," @il:@At-lil 1. ...%..'@: %.: . ... . ....% @"....'i ,,@.. Nl ..... .. -, -, . i, ,; lfml.-11,1@ I i :7:, ,@.@,,,.,,@,.@,.-.?,r.:r@@@--,,,z%@-, 12:@ :. 11 I,.: @!: :.@. ..: C%@@W'I,;@tt@!.@ ,i@ @I1-'I. ','@.- :4,, . lg ,.,,-@,@ .,,,, , :il','%@.:[email protected] lk :., @,I@Ilti "I., 11 kitil',:74 @,.,@,,,,,%.."@@,,',E,,'i@"k"@,@@,.,.:,;,0,12'.. @:__.._ ,@PIPA@!; @IX: .. .,:@:.. ,,.,. . i@ @i@ @@ .@,',',@,@:.,:Vl',LP ,,.:@.',.@-,Y. '*114i-.W, Qf4ili '@ . .,@,',. g, ,,11'r, .... .., . L, ., A,.%",, ,@ :. :::. ii@.@% . , ". , .. " ' -- ... J`--r !L@@,@.11'1...I1.11,1@@@'@':@:@,,,@-,,,@:-".,.@@,.@,,,@,@, , .,g .. .. . .--- I %llW1.1..,-,.,,,l',: @.113 J. %.::: "'-'I@.@,,.@@: ,,@::. @. @w"'A @,@::.:.@@-@::.;@.,.:. 1.11VII-1- v--'NI@Y!',.@@:.%,@,:@`,, ,,@'_:@@ .@,%,.,,:@,L@@]': ,,,@,, @-@'@ `@,%.O,@:@,@,@ ", ...... .. @@6'11,,.1. @:,:: . ., .. ..... meftspu @@mi!N,@@,v @@::.. ",.,""@' i@ i@L@ @@!@@"' @ ' ' ." %"" @, @o . Ili i.% .-) '-..l i: ... ... I.- .....I'.. %@Iik:..i.,@- .... %,. .Y.... ll@ ,:% .% :@@ @.@ -,@,@@:@ ",,,',.,L"@.,$,.,.,@,."....',@,@@,';@@@.-,.@.::@%i@@-%!@;.,:i-@, ":.'.@.': @@ k @@C . .@ @'@!-,%' .. @%,,,.@@@%e.,@,%I',@!!'.'.@,7@,',@,,,,,, @;.. I... ;@ lkv.m . ........ : --, , , I @,A@Ll ,..d, . ,. .: . @:. . :.:: "l,: .ffi'il --:!--m,@`?.",;l@l` @,,--.,k",.,%"@@: :@! .. ,... ,@i.@"@C!-:-e @-%,!,:.@@'@@ -@I. t .: i? ...:.... .....@... .. @L,Mlq ,11.il. il. '@.Tl'_11;1@'l .@i@!.: @..`@J:-,:@a:.@@.@'. *...@@:F@@ ; @%-l it,,@I@ ,.::. '@I@i%,,@:@.M@.:,.., ,n,,@--.@.@,, I., @,.i..:... 1. . @@ ....... d :..:..@III @i' ._,@@.@@. . @. @: .. ;W,@@%@',P@%.@l :@'.. @:::.@. .. .. 1. ;. - '-@, , - - ,'@,.. @,.... 11 ...,-I...@. ... .. 1,__ ..... ,_. .. ... .-ig, @', , ;. ... ..... --,..: @ @" I.,., ,.1, ... ... .. .. . .... .. ..... .. ...:...:.: @.. :.:@.m. -@ .. 7;. .. .::; @@, ->,@.:: @@ % 1: ... I @ ..: -.. ..., 9,1..:'@;,;@i:.... ... I. .. .@... ..@... %:; . _b .y..:-%[email protected];., _... :.. 1@...:...........,:... @,,A .... F_,.: @i,.&@j @@:.;,@@..@@!@@,'..,.,,;@%@::@.::@.,:-.,_._,-.l . , :. .... ..... .. @. :@; . .%-. -@_aI.:.,@ i. :@@:@@ ,. .. .. ... @l.lli@l@ @:@-:. .:.:@.:i@@:;.l ... ;l :111i; @@:-@:-i@... . . .-..:.l,..:.. .%.:@@'@.' .. @4.@-:@%-@ :.@:,i ,..I. ...... i...:@. .: i @:.; @.-..@-.@,-'!,, @@-@: ,!...,."@'k,@,'.,,@,,@,@:@",t,II '. 1',%..,,..'@%.@@: ib@.:::b,%. . ,... d.. Eil._-tollyk@@ .. @.::.. jo W. @%: .. ......, .@.:, -;@i'.. I---..@,:. :.:.k....; @ - @ . @. . @:..: @! .::,@ ..... .,..:.:... ..... ....I .: . ,,.%:.,@.-@ @@.-@@t.,,@.@@ @ @;`@..: ... ... ..., ...@.:. .:..;IT@i' :: @. %.@ :: , ..... .I. ....... _ .,:; ,il..: @,'.-,.', @%--. @,-li-@ @.. @:...- .1 ...%.!,)l'll,ing.1 .,-::!. @:,!,, ..'. .. ". .'o-:;-..,.;,,.. o%c...:,@::-@%:!:@%@.@@I. .,@@:.:: .!:.,,@,'@:. . %..@@ @@ @,!;.@ :. . ,@.@ j,i,@.@%@@@ ,@@'. . .. - t. ... @:@ . ., .;..:. . % -. - %.... .... ,.%@k@@, ..- .. ... "Li"'ll""".... 1@,%": ..... "..@_. ,.... I',,-,-- , I il'[email protected]:-,%:i,.:li-- : % . .%@.@. ... @,,@.@,,@,:., .. . % ... .. I"'.. ::@ ...... @, @.@:.... @ -1:. %: - .: : %@wI'll : :.: @ , , @1@ -;ill,,% :@ _ @; ..::. .:.:- It %. @,@',,.-,',@'%@@,",%@,,@@@:@',@.,".,.@!@.@;:! ::@.:_:.: :, ;%ES@::..:....., ... .. ,.,. @ 'E'l .nIll .,.@ ,,..,.w ,@, -.; @.I--,,'- '. '. :::@@::,.'%,-j@@,,,, . ,.. ..:@. ,,,,,........ .. '. ,@., 8 ;.@, i:.f. 1.I '@@,41@li @@.,:@.'i.- @ :. .: .,@V,,&,,@:..@.. .. . _.@@,%%,.',@- @ @-%.,,,:..@ . @ "@@: @:'il-i"..,..@l:.__- .. . @@i",:@%-..-@@. @',.Illk 1. .:.-.:'t.. :..@:,@@,_ . ... ,:::','@ @- 'lk`NV`i'sjl@- . :.. .... .@-! !@, ,@w@:. %,@;, @V@E.;:"_Il.i@;,'. @%- llml,@V.I@,l -.1-141 :.; .- ..@ @ .:.: .. ,11,%,.`i@.,.%`.%'[email protected]`. ... ,. -.?@.@.'.'.. .. "@,",.A'.,;.,-,@,@.'.iC. @ . ... @y .@. ... @@ . ,,_ .. li ...... :' 7@tt@'-@@..'.@.@,..,.',@@,@.'@',. Z@m .@%.%@@ . .IV,...1. ... '..... % @. ....@* oli_ A, .. a . .@,;,. ...@:...:.:@:.:....@:.@;@c@'.@.."@@.,@11.1'@.%I@- i:@. .. ,.. @ 'i... .@ @.@@;.@@.-:@idm. .:...@..:..,..@%.. ....."'@-. .... I 1.2 @, !',,iii:;. ... @ .:... . In. .-N. .%.I." -...... . @,m .. . , ......, ...... @-" ,,, @!.@@!:..;::@j:,6.".. , - - . ."....:..:i..., ........ ... ... ;%.-. .....r@@,:@":.,@:,;,:@.@@.. .... ... ...... -I.. .-...........ml:: ..... -... .... .. . ....@ :........ ___wr _i-,,,t%@ . .... .. ..:.......... . .. .... .@ ....: ..i_%,.;..... .... d,-- , @i@., , . .. ..@... .::@@ 1@@ @@.' V.,-............:@V........,.... ;@;.;:..I:.-,N.......- ....-11- %.@ ,; ".k, ..@.. %...: .\ ....:,........:. -:,tf '@ J, :. [email protected].., ,.m.' ... . ....:...... .... @Ut.-.. ".., '. ...... ,: .. ,:@.-.\I'k .. .1 .L@Z@ .. ...I% L___@ .... ..--: ..,:: Ili 'l.%qjjjjEjjjx!. :... ...: :,... ... ..:%:.-'l. '@; .-il@@.:_-@ ...... ..::.!:,@:-........1. ...... ., .... '[email protected] ...I- , I ,"I.. @:. ... 1. .. . I I ... , @!' .@. ... .::. ...%@%@. ,;..,.., dt:@r%...@Iil . .- __ .....;R@ ...@ . ..- ..... :. .., , '. ...... ll.lm..,.. %t... :.. 1@ . :.. ....... ......,:..--;;.,Ll@l :: .. @'..@jyt, 1: ...: t,T@.: ... ..@:1@ t@[email protected].",aW. @ . .;@@. . ..: . . . ... . .: - -.. .rl-,., ..-.. . :... .. .: :@-.. ::_:.:@,,.. 11 ... ..... .. .. @0* ,@...,::N 771@ ..: .l.t.. .. .. ... .. .. ..-I @.... ..- . ...: ., .. ...... . :.,: - ..: ... .:-.. :: .. .,...::.... @:: : : .... .@:.%..... ..'......... .l... .... . ...... ... '... .:... @..%..I','- :. ..%\...... @.: . . .... ...... :.. : ... , .. ...@,,.. .d- ... .. :. @;.@........@.. .;:..,::-.. :............ .. . . i..." ii...L... .. -@%...- ....@ . @-: ...@... ..:- ..... %...1 --q:--.. .. ...:. .@:... .@; .. @m. ..: @_.i:::. .::...:... . ..:.... ...... ..... @. .....I.... ..:... ;.ii@ ..:...'......... ....:k ;; ;.; @;. : -@@ @! .a,@i-..,, ... _...!_..@..@- ....: ,.... :.. @. .- -.. . .:...... ..... .1... .... ... .. .. I'll :.:. ......:.@.. .... .... ...Lim,1-@@,@%jI.. ... %. I... . '.I... . .@@. Op"-::. ..-t. ...::.. I@.:,..%;.@ & @@-L. .: ..... : @W..: :%@.."Ik". . -...... .....:.... ... ._.:. ..:.. .. ... i@.@ @@@_.- :@,@. ... ... ... ,:.: ..-.el. ..-,:.: ... .,:. .....@ ... : e. f.. --@@l.@@... . ,-.@@;--.,-... ........ - ..... ..:--,:.... @@'@.,,@@:.@,@:- -.; ...-.I.; . . .......... ::::'@z::.Z -,.@. I @,... :. .; %.;. i..:..:..:.. %.::@'.:...: i;.; @ @. .. ,, ,,@,@@.:`- . .... @:Dv.;...... ;-.......: .... ..... ..... @@ .:.. .. . .@"I ......@P:;_i:.. .. .@@.-..... ... @.-!-....... ..:, ... -`-@. @: ., .. ...... ." :.: ..: .- .iiii .@...,..-.: .....--'.._-@@,... ...., ... i. :i, @@,@: ...:; : :..;,@- .:.. -11ii .@l-... . ..... . .@.. .. .... .:. @_,@.@.. :,::......:.. ..,mm LE, :i :" ,%@ . ,%@%tm- ... @@.%..... I....."... :@-..',.@`..'@@ @4@@i. , ,. @I,.:,:. . % , ,.@.. ..,.., @@..@[email protected].. ,ij,,%a@t,:@@.l ....... @,.@;,-@@,@..;., ...@ .: ...%.11, W%. o".."%-,.:t@:@.i ... @@,.:.:.!:.-.!@, ;%@,,@aA*%, e -1. I.. !@!: .!"A.. il .__- .s..@l .2.::.%...@ %,:.....b .... ..........I.. .... I...". .''.. , ... ;., .. k@ % i:..,.@. ,..r ,,,, - -@ l............sm. @@:.@- ..:::@:: @@>:- .......% -:":: I " ; @ K:.-`-,ii.:.,,ky.. .. '.. - &J@,'R ,%R_@, \ \,;@@ .ITAM . ....., . ..... --%. . :.. .l..-@ .:.. ... ... . .. %,,;@%:.g.@: - .,......%.,_....,.. -@-@ .... .. ... . .@... . . .L' ' '..% .. .. . .: I:I 177" @*...@ @.:I..I.@! V, @, .. .. ...:. ......::......I .. ....@@::. ;@ '. @ ,:.: %--@ :. . . ._ 1: ....%,... .. .. ..: ;...:... I . . ..:. @@%! ,.'.@ @. .. -@@ ... . ..I. . ;. . ..... .. : .@ @- ;.!., @ :-,%. @ .. .. .:@ @.@.%,, - - @ . .: @.. ... .. . .i ...@% . @@ .0 .. .... ... I. .N@@%.-.7%, . -W.;@ ... .. ...; ... .. .N -. ..%@t ...... @.Il. . ... . I.. .... . @@.i@.. . 1@. :.@.: : ..:: ... ..... 1. & .. . ..1 ..... @% .. .. ......;.:: @ ..1..@@ @,.@, @el %I-- --::..%-.. . ..@...'.'.. 1@ ..:.. -.@. @:@;@@'@-.. .. .. .. .... ...... ". ..:. :.v.@; ...i..@ ..... :%. -@@% .. .: .:1 @'. ;. I, .-.:.:@...@. .. .: :... .. ..__.......... I., .@@:.:: -@ -.@ ...... @.,S@ @. . ... .@. ,i@.@A. ---.@...... ... .'. )C: , [email protected]: @@. .. .@::::..... @@ ... :.: @. : ,%,"...";@,- ...... .I@il.@;,. : .. @- .:.: .. .@. ...... .... .. ... :%. . .. .-.,..,.... .":. .: ....... @.. .::..:-.T@:,,'.e.... ..i... ... .. ... I.. @ . .k ...... .. .......... ll;;@'-....-%'@..;_.. Igi .. ....@iir;i';iv: .1-.1 ....'" .. .d ..... .:i@,,,jllAl..'V ... .... .. .. .,@ @,Wv I @.`.. : @ .... ..@- .. -.'.. .. ...@@ ., , ,. ......': i,'@'%% .. ... i, i@@-: .. :@-,,,-@:. :..: @.,.. @ -..... . ."I,.I" ..,:.. .. ..... .. .. @,@, @ @-,. :...:.:. @@ . ... . ::. .. :.. t 1. @@. .'L@ ... @ ,".. .. .. 1 ... . @,@..."..@.',@l.@:,@ .@, ai@...@,@.;.:@@! .......;Oa ,@, . . . .;.. ,.;.. ..:. ....@KM .... . ..-m @:: @.:: %.@:. . ,-:- ".. ..il.@ ..,: ''. " .. ....@@ .. .. .. %,.:@"%L"@@-., ___@ @;. X. . .... ,;.... .1.-%@l - -.. @.. .10.I . ,.@ .:. :,i:m@,:,_.....@:%@i.-.;,@.:@-@ :. @.: .@..@.:..@.,.@...@ -... .. ...... I:@..Il .,.@@i, @,... ,.... @- ,,.i..@. .. @@,-` '. ....... .... @ W.... . .. . ... .. .4 . .1. .. ,@ @.;.@,.`.@@,Ll "i.... ... . ... .-,',@ . .... ..1% ... 1. 1..... .. ., llll.:"';r , 9.@I;ii,.IV :: @'..",'. @@. :@@ .@: @@ .@@! @@: .!,..:... t_ . .a%.. %. . ,... @i. .. ..... ..1, @,,, ". ...... @..... . ....@.:,". . .. . @@.@@ @ @@...... . .j,.;@ li, '. . . . @.. @'@@!.@.:..1 .... 1. ,.. . .. -"5.@. .. ,.i.1'. .; ,'..@.: .'O, @@.... .. -91@0,1,, : 't."', .. ,..@. '.. :.. @:@@,':i; ,'@@`,,',..... .. . .aii ....:.-...4-..... 0.. .@i.. ... ::... .. ..:... ... .S, - -%.:. -.. I.I. _S.- '. @...19M.'.." Id ... dt ..I, ,@,m,A-t,i'-"-` RI ..: @-:...."... ... ..,@!. ';i,f @._ ,@',..,.-.... . .... .. "I...... . -POllix!-.I..:@ .. . .:. .. .. . I.;i%I... ,.-,,@@ m.,'..:.f:...n%,, '..'liio`IC'lP - ,I .@......... ..:.:i.. 1.11 - .. .1 11@,_, t.. ,.. `.@k;:` ,@5:. ..@ I I,...j,@ 'a %., . ,@i .-%,.%, i, NIM.IT . @.!-.--.-_ _.. .. -.:...,A_'. . .... .... . .% @-,_ .. '... :. . .,@:. .@,.:..@., ... . d. .. @.:.Z.i I i.,1, 1; ... ...... I.- al .. .; ;t, '. . ... 1-11".. .. . I'll- ... k_ .,%@t`.:V.,@jl.... ... ..-@. @ ,, . ..- ,@ 1 ".... [email protected].,,.... ..... ... . , "@:I.,. @.. .:. .: W@it-".@K , . M:,- . .". La ,ed i<.n: kini, ':@:,; . I.:i...,.__::e..r ..-. .... . , a .. : .::":,:. ..:-k@t@, Pv:.. -@. . -.. I..".. .@:.. ..@,-@:m.... ..". . ... .:, . . !V% .-%"@@, _..,... .... . : . 1@..., @. ... , :... .. ... . '.. . .-__.:.:..: . . I;',.%.@.%@v , .,: @.. ,@ k'a.m. .A. A-@m.. .!k..... ....... %%",. d's,.-.b: . . ...,,. ..d - , "J@;%' '!@. -. .- ` : @,',@@!%@@,@",.!"@.,k,@,',.@,,@ '. ..@;:.: . .. .... . .. . :.. ....@-. @. ..... '. .. .:@.. @..: .. ....:.;,%;.i,.-iM-%l ......i.I I ,..,i ... ;_,..., .. F@-IIMII.'@I. @.@'@.@_.. . A,-.. ,_ @'k.@vl,@,;"AP @@! k. ... .. ..... d@@':,@Tli.%,@@',,@: . j_ .......@._i_ , -.. .. .. . @V5 ..-... * ,. .... ..rV %@.131.;. @l 1@@..,.. , M-...- @f.'i;,I. @ ... .j [email protected]..,.:.:: .@@ .. @. . ..: .. :: ,:i, -Y. .,-. IV, ... .. -.,;`@-: @%I' . 31N,':.@@%: @..., .: ;@-.. ._V'.1.131-1,@@;@@--. .... .. .,,,.".@[email protected]:iAiAtl_ -... i@ ,..:, .. . ... .@@.iijjm'.'w'-.@ ..::..: ,c I. I .: ...... %.".. -....@.:@.It-,ii.i,%...!.i..'i@5%::Ai".a',-- .I %iiio-', .. .. . W.... @..'I .. ,@ R"..".......k., f..- .. , @_: .1: .@@. .1% -, .. .. : ..:J @@. , ,. %. @,,i @..I@...@L. ...@,-, _.. @."" ;. @.'...., .. . [email protected] -,r.1. ....., .. .. J., @1 . ,.. : %@,N .1 ... , . ....,. .:: %@go,m.,5%t.,."k%%;@@. .....;.. I . . @'I .... . ::%@@Io, .. ,@ti @ , . .,%@- ,@ I.. ...@., ,F.%%;@ @*... .. v .-- : .,4t:: .. ..:-- .. , .i,@.:: :@, ',:@f,,.@ . @. ., ,,, @ ...-.. .":-;. ...... k, t:i- . . .... .... ...-- .", .. . ..:k . ... @ - ,_31,I- ,. .I ..@Ii. @ @,ql,', @%,@'%.%,'@..v,., _,a -. -@.:. :k:. ,:.,. ,,,, .@ ., ... .. ..!..- @ ... .,I Nll.,'@@-M 1.1 .:.ii..:.@. b i. ..AT.,@, I-,.-. :@.-,@_@_ .. .. J..; ... @.1... ll,@,,@i@@@ 1@,.-,.,-..,@@, ..... ... ...... f.@@ @: @:. @. ... -.. . .... ..,I!.. @:.@I- .%.. 1;,@..i %_'. ::!@"'@,@.@%',@.. . . .,.! ..,. ..." kk, 1:.,I". @.@,%@,-@.. .-S,., !@', ,@@' 'al; ....... ..... .. . @ @.t. .- .: . . :..',@%%,:@ ..... .. .. z-..!:.:. ::. :...... :. @.:Ib .: @. ..." @ .,',@..-.. .. .... ... .. ...,,.... ,@. .@.... ... .. . .@. *43'@@ .,-,-"i., i@ ..... ..,..@ @. @@ @:... :.': [email protected] -.-Im... .. -:f. . @@ , . . IF'? "..N"%......... .. ...... :%%...... . .. .. .... .. . .. '....... . ..#'@,.'. Wl@-l @k@.@ .. .. , @".V. .@F%,o.. . . ....., . . .. ,. @i::.. ..;.:. !.::@:.r..... .... M.':@Ik.... .. . .. .. , ,w.., g,-@-,%%%. -, . ... - l:-.'... i.X:.. .. .....m t. @:. . " .. .: ..ask --,tr%,!.; [email protected]@.- @:._ . ....... ....,... f.:...@I _..... .. .1.@." @ g",.@. . . I .. @,: ... I.. . .;. ..:.-',@!. :....-.i. .;:.. @... L. . ... I... .I , I-sll:_ I,"' il',... . .. @ % @@ v. .e:.@k:. . @:@ .'..@ @::.@.:...:.; Z_ -.,I,.4 -m.,k.:. ,j . @t@ ... :,,%.@_.-@% ..... ..::..:, " .: i: , @ :... @,..: @.....::....@.@.. . ..-.". . ,-: ,,....'.... .. .. ... .... J.. .. .. : '.. '.. @.:: ;@@ @@.i@ @ @-@ ,.:% . -- --.'% ." .is- .&I.. *,.- k .f :%..?,_.,m .... . .. .. ..,. .. .......... ....:i,41.@.,@@ .. . I 1. I'll... ll,,_ @ - .......,..:. :. ....@k.. . ....:....@ ...:.. IF@_-%. ,@ I 0,1""i'M@- @.:@.@-@I", .. v.@ ..: . .. ....:.:,%F,d.. %@. ...l. ,Ill.."."% ... @ @ -@iia-@,. I;@ F.1,.. . ..... @. .. @. @@:n .. r,i_j.,i, ,[email protected] %...@... I...,..., @1.. ow'%F";-,L.@ .: @..%.: % @s, .:.:; . .. ... .F-I. :.. @,,., ,....;;;;;; .. i. @%,,. .. @.,%'. %@... _i@gm,@@,,-... _bl: `:t, @%r @.,,,,@. " ,@ -. .... : .@'.i:@ 'i. .@@.. .. . -..".;@ 1 ..@..@..: @:....: .:.; :. :@ ,....: [email protected]. %@...-... . ... ..@'. . I ..@:! ,. .... .s. @:. . .....%@@@ -.,... ..: .. :... @ i.%i. - . .. ...%i@@i@,__ '..... %. @@ @@', ,.%f@%@ . . ......, . ..::..@.@...@'.... .,..,i('. '. .. . - , z...... . ......... 'I.;,tt,%i;.. . .... @.!I@t@%......" _,,. ...,,,.d . i,-'v',_ ..I, .. ... ..@%-.@... .... @.,. -; .. %. - - , ,.,@..,I.- ....: . .:.:,...'@..I' ,.,I I'@:L '1:"%.", .: ,i,,,-,l,. - .- -.. i, , ...... I., @.,...." .@ : :.:%.... :-,,@:,@M@ffi,... ... -, , ..','k @ f V.'. . @; ,:, @.-"g,@ .. .., .'. [email protected].,%: . . ....1@@ - - @ .1: @': %,::. ;.. ,il. -i: . -..-k....-mk,.s ...... .: .::. .@:,. i,!@@ .:@@:.,@j @': '. t;_@@3'1;`Xl-,@ .;. , , -.@.:.. : .%.:%.,,. ,i'r.@,.,,A,-"@..... ..--k..%:I@'S:: @@..;,...-@'.... @. : @ @ :.X ;@.'.@;%",-"..,"@@%@@,@,,',.,. lkl@@.-. @ir,-..@ ..r..:. @.:._. t;. .. . . . : . ... . ., , k%Y, -;-.@@f`.-,- .. W.v .--... V:..-..,.,.. :.,.;tli @,.: ..._.. @@-..- -.mt- -- @ . . -,%.: .. -':@; ... @;,!: :Z@'.@.,@,@-_@- ,@, -M ".... ..',.". -.-N., , .-,1.. '! :.1 ::,@,'.. @.. .i,mA'W*k - -,.,.,. .. .. ,.. ...; .....@. ..W gif : @@,,,' . .;@..=,'. :@@ @;3.v.-' Xg.-;.@ . i...@@ ig.@. _ @, " 1, ..,l%!",,ii, '. @...;. 1 ... '@ 1, ,.,il EQ; if _; -.@@[email protected] O.@:.. .; @,:;,,@ @.... ,.@; :li @.,'.! ..@.:.. . _....@ @. @ %i: .;@:: @ @: Ilk :!::; ,", _f . , ".. "'W" ""N", ;% .;--L'I , RM _'I.:'. i,-@%.@@",,,.`.RR,.. . .L. p@-, w. ., .i. MMR.1.1515 %,@ ...@.... S,-@@..,, 'Or-.. , -@,,.','@'%@I:m .11. -' ..-.@. -@ @. .:-- - @@-v; -@71 . @. @.... @ , ,:m:... @@ ",.. .. .,@.. M"ll"'.,`A @.@@.: .- *. .@.. @... R ,ig . .. . -..:@.: .:Ie-,%'@;-@@%l .. ;i@@.@. ....:. ".. @.. . 0 .,.......,. '@ @@@'@-,%y4g,, mlll.-@-,::@@.@.. " 5x@,@@@.@:-,.,: , . I.. ..-........!.. L_,@. .,if %@;@:@;@..@.@@,@@@.@@",,'!,k@,',@-:@:.I@@ .@_Il .... ., N'�..... ..'. . .,@@",..L,@,,@-.@,k,,,@@".@;@@@@. ., _ .. I. d ..::: . .:..@. . .... . .. I....., @;.@L"': ".. %-%" :@,@,'.:@. :' . . ". .. . .@l ' :@.@@'.@ .@,.',t@@,*'3,-,@... 'i @V.-I'i�%.I.R'il. @ I..,," i.. ". :.: :... .I, ..-..." t.- i, -,.,:. i @,-.gi.,,@,@,,,%,:@@ %, %@, . .. @... ;,@..-,..@@..@,,@,: ,%@ . . .. , ...'s - .. . .. . .@ .:..@.%L, .. %.. .. ,, @ @,', .., -@ --., ,,@%Z,M %;il%tlll " .,M -. , .@.;A@... f . @i, . ....:; ... :@% . , ..@@. @-:k@i@il@g@ Lo. ,@ , .@@ N,,. 11%,,.@ kii. @@ ..,@@ p, @.'i. ...., M,. 10RAM ,@ .gI@@l .@ ,.. ..,",.- -- -L., ,. , V,g'@,;I,Ilf Iii ::..'@,,@ ..Illp @.... WA ,W, '. ., .46gk,flWwpT,.,"% _, ,,, ,R..@,@c . Rki.,", , ,.. .. . v'4 ,@"..m"a" x: @. L.@,,.@.@',.,I .. "@.... ok C@@.: ::.. ,@. .::.% @,@@_Ili.,.%. . . _.4 @,@', ,@v... .I---, .: ,Z.,.. ,%,@_v -- .. I I .. . @ng kro-N':.',@ @ .% ,.1 . . ,@@i@.:: .. Y ,@ll,@,@,,@".;",@@@.@:@i@...%-",.i,:I.ql.@,@.."@ .1 ...... , ,,, "... ."R"`,&,`,iv,'@@i@@ ;@i n! .@@f;.,, g..@ al. "W"R.W..; ,, 1@.`-",@,. :.:.: 1 ':@!; @i 'IC'@,;."[email protected],'@',@i",".@"",,','i,"@@s *"." @-@'-`;'i@@ . . " "' " .: .: -,"' ' %: -. . , 401 AV 1;' @ @:@: ';'@:; @.'.'.`,@.'..:..l..l..lll,. @%l,.--%lM;.r-- . ..@@- .. :.:. ..... @,@,.,: - @.....@,@% @::O L: -@ .. - @ @ @:. ,@-.@@:@@ @: @ :.;@ 1. _,ItMi!% ,::: ol .. .,Xli....,,. _ @@%-I. . .. -@L-: I,.@ [email protected] .@,.%:,@ @ .. %@%%--- ,.. 1: .@ -@@:, ; @::@[email protected];L'1.1'.Iiil'@@.:.A:@-^ _i@. . .@.. i@ , "'...:@:::@, ........ .... :. @;@. %:. : .: @; ,.I',!. @n%y -@:,.@I;f I" I -. I@; 1-.1. . - I... M,i, ,@: @ll@ 0. ,_ V.. I'll ...@;,%.e. @. . f . %. @.: . @ @.@: :::::::::: . .,IRV: ,kiN..M.,-. ,:,;@i ..::,:%@ ..k.ms ",,"Ill., .: ..: ... .. .;. .. ; : - - .. , .. .. . .: @ @ .::.t @ :. .v.:. .I. . L" .. ....'...TF'.. @'..,%@I@ @I t,@... I.,.:. -.-:@, .@.......... .. .,,,..,I;,... , @-.' ...l...@,.A...l..l',0.. . @- . .:, ..: @:.- .: .. .@@ '.. .. ... .._'@...1.1,.. e.. W,l . . '11'1@.,..@".. .@-!_l`SVI.l'.A ': .: "I. I-.....:. .,, @.. .." ., @ M.._ . ... .. . @%..@[email protected]@:.. ", @-".- ,,.,.....I . . . ,,@% - .1 . . ,. :..:.:@.. ,'@.@m,. I I -@ ..: ..5_1'*@112 .,. .. . :@ . .,.@..%. ,:@:..%@@,ml.m ,"16:. RIM..:..,-.%-,' - ."I.2 ,'it -";._%. , ,,,.,@,i,il@'.'@ .F@ _07t@"Il .1 !A", -.@, 5tlj--,"--,@#.i, @';%M :%..f , "'..g:_.@ @:X:::@@:6@.::v.,`. .......:@@,;@... e@@;@..: .. %,.% .1. @@I@ ,_ . .". - ...::_..- -:. ... . @%@@'%,.@,,,.,. @. ,',@..%@-.. .:;A.. .- .: .@. ... . .@: : i@@`.'ZN@I'i . ...._ @ @@N-Rlli! ii-.'@@; @@ 5.@,@ : @ @ %@t.", am-@.. ..lw , ,. .. .: . ..!'@@!@'.A@p @ @_:%si'. _,,@,m. -i@ .. . .. : @- . .'f..i',.....,.j@: ...mk@. ,MKS .. ..@.!@,.V. - ... .;.. `4 i,:-@ .@ _.. ,",,= %-..-.l...i.. .@@` ` @.:;...,:%. , @S_ ....Is --:%:;'.".'@ -A,@: .11, : @@ ......'. %...@. ..@.: '. %... @ . ..: . i. .% ... ...:-i@-'%%- .@.@@.@@ ,@,.@ ;%@@.::. ., .. ..q..;!,,:@ty ...I ; @... '.-,i@. %@-%@,Ii .@',,@@ :, vg. i@` g@.,-.gtgg .;3@_: -f..:@.:@.,;,@@tl,...,@,'%'@l,'.@@@,-,.@...:@ @:- @%. '.. "-,. @, L-@ ,i @ %,'. ,@ .. ..:. @.,; @.. @: . k..;-;,@,, @id.:@l I.IVI`Als- :@:,.,...... @ ,..-_. ; dJi g,-:,At,%,S Q,@ .!:, @@ @:@@.L@ . @.. ..,I'M @Mvffl'.@@:,, . .. mi,,. .@ ol " - A.. ,,:@@::!.:.Ill .- .. -- ik %.'.@bl.,.,,--;@---,,,... 1, .: _. . @. . .., .. .. 'S." ., ...-,W@@@i,!@-.... . _1,@-" . @%, ,.....-.- . 1.% . " @ @ '. @.'R @..@. d . , 5" 1: @, :,i @.1 @. ........,@ t. % I I @-@`%@.. **..1,1.@@"Q @--.., i,giM. -i@@-',;:,-.,': @:.,@ ... .@in . ,."' ...;@..@,__@.. .... f,.,: : %.:@.:.@- _cI5...'Y -A@ .,.,.,-....., .x@ i,..:...;_ 1. 1@@.4- @. ....1@.'@ :. 1, , .@. . - -%,.:,::. :..,.,..... .i to-, .1. S,,@@ ,-@,@@-@',@.@-'.:@'.'@'; I ,... . ., ..i..9... '@:- -.@@@'._...I.. _t;:@,@@` ,@@@--.---.k!L'"'@ ,. .,.',_,i-....I.. .. .. __@, . ""..q.,. _,..... ", . @'.-.: . .. .... '.. @......-...@X.....@.....@. Z.. @@ @%,@,.,@- .. . '. ,'o 1. .:f ,.@:..,"6".I1i,,-ti,a@t . .. W!"'g....@, ...I.,n@,:1W .... %'.......... f: %, _..O!. -.@11,, ... im@@. [email protected] .. "3.. _@ .., .......@'@,' .1 ,@,Ii, 1; ",I.@. hl 'V ..:..aI .,@v @..... . .;; . @. @l%...... -i . @@..... . I-,.L ,.-. 1 1% .'e,-@@%:: -.::.,I@q.@.. ,@... -t, i'�, _. -,I@,,_.. :, I "I...I-_.:;@ ii, @. :..-,: @..:.@.@ .I. I.-. I,@; , @ @ .:... .. .. [email protected].... .11 .. :.:,....I., 06@@: ;o %.. %'.@. I@@@::"`-,@: @.`- `- -,, .1 . .... 't ;@.@:%@ @.,._...7m-@:m:.11:I.1 ... IL,;:,:@, :f.w@@,A'%o,,,,.,,O"--@ %.V@@@ - I@ I... :.. ...:,,, i.f.-i_@ - .:.. A.,'..._ I L'@A ,.'. .", :@ -@. ,a 1, _','." '.. p :@,.m-: :.: :@ :@ :@ :@ :@ :@ :@ _. .@ I.,..:,@ @.:.. .... .. :: S,.::::.:,".... ow :@.L. ODIS.I.I.:I,;-- ..... . .@ ..A @"' mg ` I @l IIt,I , I ` , @11 "' @' , "' , " , I " , I 11 ... -1 " I - %, , , ,%@@ILI)`Iklll I I I I I @1@ , . , , , I % ; I . . @ % "' , , , , "' @.11' I @.Ill ;11 I , -, ...@ , - ,.", .@,--, ....a. .. @N.-- "?- - -;----,--@,i,,-,. -, ; L, - ,,.,@@,,-.,.,..,.,,-,,,.,.,%-,,.- , - ,--,,, - ....,,_- - , .. - ,." ..,.,.,, %m- ".,,,:; - , ,-., " ., _.-,@-..,%-,,!,"-,,--,%-, ,,,,,,. ." ." -.,,,,.-,,,@,, . ....... .. ,,-,-..,---,_,,-,--- ...". ,--,_@--,,.-,,.,-.. ,....,...,,......,.,.,...,..,,,@. ..'..,_..". ..."...L.""."".., .,.".."'.., '. @--@ ...";'.."". ......... .@. ........ .. ..__.. .. . .. .. _.". ,......._ ,..,. ,, ,_". ",. "@ " , ! ., ''.....".. ..".@,- % . "..-. ,.,,'. .. .-,, , ", ,,,, ". "'..,,,@ ,...,., . ",. " ,'L.,,, . ,-. .,".-" ,.@ , ,...,",, "., ,,...-... , ., .." ".. ,.,, .. _.". @..,, , , @,...._,@ .,@, ..@ "..,,".. ,'! @ , .. , ,,.,. L.."...... . ..-- ",,. ,,,;,., @,; , ,__ '. -,,." ,_ ...,.. @ ,,@ ". ,,, , .. .. .""., ". .... .... ... . ....... .@ ".". ., '. -@- . . .. . "'.,.%L i, @@ '.@,...,_ ._ . ".,,@,, .@ , ,.@.@ ." .," . ,".. ., @.," %..,i.-. ,,. ".,.. ... ...,..., L., , .. ,, ,.,. ,,,., . .....%.'. ,,@,, ..,"..@@.@ .,@, ","..,,, .. . , ,__ , .@,.- ... .. .,,,". .. @..@"....," .''%...... ..., .. ". , '. . , ..,",,,.. , "., ,,,,.,. ".", . @,.,_ '..'. .. ,,, . @_ - .. ,- ,, ...@ .. ".... ,.@.... .. ., ,,,,,,, ,,.,@L, ., .,@ ,,, '. , '..." .-,. , , @, "..."-, - , ., ", ..... .... @ " ..., @. , ., . ".. .., .@ ...,_,_" : , The development of the CBD as described can be undertaken as a joint venture between the City and the business community. For example, the City can petition the state to supply funds to construct the curbs, gutters, sidewalks and some of the landscaped areas. The Chamber of Commerce or individual businesses can organize the parking areas, with assistance from the City, and design and construct the boardwalks. The whole development can be done in phases so the financial burden can be spread out over a several year period. The Homer CBD has the potential to become more than just a strip development. It can be a viable retail center with a shared commit- ment 'to the improvement of the shopping district. The following goals, objectives, policies and actions provide a means of realizing the CBO design concepts. CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT GOAL - Provide, through the Central Business District, a focal point for the community which provides a safe, convenient, hospitable envir- onment for residents and businesses, b 'uilds upon its positive fea-. tures, and fosters cooperation in its management between the city, the state and the private sector. OBJECTIVE - Improve pedestrian safety, convenience, business viability and provide a focal point for the community in the Central Business District. Policy I - Central Business District commercial development will be encouraged to concentrate in and near existing nodes along Pioneer and Lake Streets, as identified in the Central Business District plan, this chapter. Action 1.1 - City establish, by April, 1983, a program to encour- age more intensive development of the node areas identified in the Central Business District Concept (Figure 6-2) through use of building permits, plat plan reviews and parking requirements, and by developing public improvements and design advice which provide an incentive for private investment. Action 1.2 - City, in cooperation with other public and private agencies, develop by 1986 a civic center within the Central Bus! - - ness District incorporating cultural and performing arts, meet- ings and conventions and municipal administration functions. Action 1.3 - Develop, by the end of 1983, a plan and program to improve parking and pedestrian safety by identifying and design- ing parking areas, sidewalks and drainage improvements in public rights-of-way and private property. The plan will also include preliminary designs for sidewalks, pathways, pedestrian rest areas and malls, and street lighting. 6-6 OBJECTIVE Attract private investment into Central Business District development while retaining and enhancing the district's positive features. Policy 2 - Development of the Central B *usiness District shall be coop- eratively financed by the city, the state, property owners and mer- chants. Priority for city funds will go to projects which best achieve the objectives of the Central Business District plan and attracts other state and private investment. Action 2.1 - Use new or expanded public buildings, parks, parking lots, etc., to attract state and private investment in Central Business District. Examples include muni 'cipal administration building, library expansion, public safety building and civic center. Action 2.2 - As a part of. the State silver anniversary celebra- tion, identify viable projects connected with the CBD development and support through planning and funding. Action 2.3 - Develop advisory design information (for example, typical plans and specifications for boardwalks on private prop- erty) to supply to private investors and merchants to encourage uniformly high standards in Central Business- District improve- ment. Action 2.4 - Examine feasibility of, and if feasible implement, a program of tax breaks or other incentives to encourage merchants and property owners to accommodate public uses, such as parking and pathways, on their property. Policy 3 - Existing positive features of the Central Business District s 71- ha be maintained and enhanced to the extent feasible. Action 3.1 - In recognition of the climate moderation, noise dif- fusion, habitat and aesthetic benefits of natural vegetation, the city will encourage the retention of natural vegetation through variances in zoning and parking requirements, developer incen- tive systems. The city will also establish, by 1985, and active- ly pursue a city beautification program which identifies major stands of vegetation to be planted, managed and saved. Action 3.2 - City will request, by February, 1983, Homer Electric Association to give priority in its capital improvements program to. undergrounding its electrical lines in the Central Business District. Action 3.3 - City will adopt, by February, 1983, a zoning classi- fication which will retain the present residential character of the Glacier View and residential areas south of Pioneer Avenue, while allowing the areas to eventually develop as a townhouse and multifamily area as other areas of the Central Business District 6-7 become developed. As a par*t of this action, the city shall upgrade roads into and out of this area. Action 3.4 - City shall determine the need for providing central parking areas serving the Central Business District. .6-8 CHAPTER 7 TRANSPORTATION PLAN LAND TRANSPORTATION Background Homer shares an advantage enjoyed by relatively few Alaskan commun- ities in that it is accessible by either land, sea or air. It also shares in some of the problems experienced in other Alaskan communities related to streets, highways and roads as well, namely that con- struction and maintenance of an adequate road system is both costly and difficult. Because of the City's physical features, location and economy, however, growth and, development of the area will require an effective layout and proper maintenance of surface transportation corridors-to accommodate such growth. Also, it is necessary to review existing conditions and problem areas to define measures to improve and enhance the existing transportation network, as well as formulate standards to guide development. The 1978 Comprehensive Plan recommended that a master streets and roads plan be developed to accomplish these objectives. As such, a master plan was completed in 1979 which includes the following: 1. Review of existing traffic volumes, circulation patterns, network geometrics, laws and ordinances. 2. Projection of traffic impacts related to population growth, eco- nomic development, etc., and analysis of major traffic generators in the City. 3. Identification of problem areas in the City and measures to al- leviate such traffic problems. 4. Development of road and street standards which the City may use as guidelines for development. 5. Establishment of functional use guidelines to assist in the review and approval of proposed developments. 6. Preparation of a Master Roads and Streets Plan to designate classi- fications, provide for route continuity and act as a guideline for roads and streets development. 7. Suggested off-street parking requirements for review and incorpora- tion into City code. Elements of this plan have since been adopted by the City Council for use in guiding development and for inclusion into City code. For example, the suggestions for off-street parking requirements included in the master plan have become incorporated into Chapter 7.12 of the 7-1 City code relating to off-street parking, while road and stre-et stan- dards can be used by Public Works officials reviewing plans of devel- opers for construction of improvements. Among the elements contained within the plan, there are specific Seg- ments of Homer's road network which were identified as needing substan- tial improvements. First, the intersection of Pioneer Avenue, Lake Street and East End Road was determined to be inadequate and redesign of the intersection was suggested, creating a separate eastbound to southbound lane and channelization of the intersection. Nearby, the plan also recommended redesign of the intersection of Lake Street and Neilson Avenue to improve traffic flow around the Lakeside Center Mall by installing a left turn storage lane southbound, an acceleration lane for westbound to southbound traffic and widening and channelizing the Neilson Avenue approach. Third, the plan calls for redesign of the Main Street and Pioneer Avenue intersection by reconstruction of the approaches of Main Street, channelization, and restriction of parking along Pioneer Avenue in the vicinity of the Main Street approaches. Fourth,, the plan calls for structural improvements to improve access to the hospital by providing stop sign control on Hohe Street, a four-way stop at the intersection of Bartlett Street and Fairview Avenue and paving Bartlett Street to the hospital. Finally, the plan calls for upgrading Pioneer Avenue to relieve the problems caused by numerous left-turning movements and on-street parking by consolidating the number of access points, restricting on-street parking and creating a left-turn lane. In response to these recommendations, funding priority has now been established for each of these projects (excepting the Bartlett Street project) through their inclusion into the Kenai Borough Transportation Study recently completed. This study constitutes the basi*s upon which State funding is based for projects of such nature within the Borough. Issues and Possible Solutions The Master Plan identifies issues and other portions of the surface transportation network where additional assessment is needed, First, the Master Plan calls for the issuance of City policy guidelines on the function and use of the Spit because of the growing and diverse demands which might be placed upon this unique feature of the City. As traffic volumes are directly related to land use, guidelines should be estab- lished to govern or control the long-term use of the land along the Spit and therefore the corresponding traffic demand, the plan points out. Already, motor vehicle regulations have been established under Chapter 7.16 of the City code which define parking requirements for any "...person, partnership, firm or corporation (that) shall conduct any business, commercial or industrial enterprise on the Homer Spit..." The City could embark on a program of stricter enforcement of existing regulations, particularly during peak seasonal demand to manage traffic problems on the Spit. For further discussion of Spit land use, the reader.is referred to Chapter 5, Homer Spit Plan. 7-2 In the Streets and Roads Plan, it is suggested that future traffic vol- umes on the Spit Road might be such that the road will have to be expanded to four lanes or additional restrictions be placed to regulate or control demands. While detailed traffic studies of the Spit Road have yet to be done, economic and geotechnical constraints alone might prohibit this from occurring. Moreover, the large seasonal traffic volume created by recreational vehicles and work-related trips might be reduced by non-structural improvements such as shuttle buses from rec- reation areas to the end of the Spit. Should campground facilities be provided for at the base of the Spit, this type of service, with con- necting service to the CBD or other campground, might provide suffi- cient transportation to and from the Spit to -reduce large seasonal traffic loads. In a related manner, the Streets and Road plan also calls for formula- tion and establishment of a central business district development and access plan to preserve and enhance the character of the City. The plan recommends that the City reserve the right to allow direct access to the Bypass road only at specific predetermined locations. This effort is needed, the plan says, to preserve the function of the Bypass Road to the purpose to what it was designed and intended for: a route around the central core of the City. Limited access to the Bypass Road could be maintained, yet development allowed adjacent to the road by constructing a frontage road to provide ingress and egress. This would require City expenditures to acquire public right-of-way adjacent to the existing State right-of-way and provide utilities (eg., drainage and service road) to service abutting properties. The City could pro- mote such development in an effort to create a central core bounded by Pioneer Avenue to the north and the Bypass Road to the south, or it could encourage more concentrated development along Pioneer Avenue only by limiting access to the Bypass, or enacting zoning restrictions. Options for the CBD are evaluated more fully in the discussion of the CBD. Another aspect of the Master Street and Road plan relates to the issue of acceptance and maintenance by the City of existing and new or pro- posed roads lying within the City limits. In the plan, design stan- dards. for City roads and streets are proposed, as well as a guide list of 18 items by which the City may use in review of subdivision street plans. These items are general in nature, yet provide a starting point from which detailed evaluation can be made. Also, Chapter 11.04 of the City code contains standards for street construction which are intended to promote quality construction of new roads. For each new subdivision or street construction, then, the City could require that prior to issuance of a right-of-way construction permit (Chapter 11.16 of City Code) a developer first submit engineering plans and specifications to the City for review and approval. Alternatively, the City Advisory Planning Commission could request the Borough Planning and Zoning Commission to amend the Borough subdivision ordinance to require subdivision applicants to submit road design draw- ing.s as part of subdivision plat applications for land in Homer. Already, the City has indicated that it can accept maintenance of new 7-3 roads and streets provided that City officials are able to review plans for adequacy prior to construction. In this manner, future road con- struction can be reasonably assured to be satisfactory prior to use, so that excessive maintenance costs in the future do not occur. For roads already built within the City which are substandard and not already accepted by the City, improvements to bring such streets up to standards for grade, width, drainage, cross-section, alignment, etc., could be undertaken. However, it is likely that costs to do so would be major, although a very tangible benefit would be reduction in main- tenance required and less difficulties during spring break-up. To do so might require that the City bear all or a portion of the cost, or alternatively, that improvement districts (Title 17, City Code) be formed to bear the burden of local street improvements. Because pro- portioning costs of road improvements which are ineligible for Federal or State funding is difficult, it is important that the City institute some immediate means to insure that future construction is consistent with City standards. The Transportation Plan (Figure 7-1) designates streets as arterials and collectors, both existing and proposed. The arterial streets include the Sterling Highway, Pioneer Avenue, East-end Road, Lake Street, Fairview Avenue,, East and West Hill Road, Bypass Road, Ocean Drive, Kachemak Bay Drive, and the Homer Spit Road. These major corri- dors receive the most traffic and provide a basic circulation system for the City. Extension of the arterial system includes the link between Fairview Avenue and the West Hill Road. Collector roads are those which route the neighborhood traffic to the arterials. The major collectors are Bartlett Street, Main Street, Heath, Bayview Avenue, Fairview Avenue, and Ben Walters Lane. Exten- sions of this system would link East Hill Road to Fairview and eventu- ally West Hill Road. Other proposed extensions include the link between Main Street and Lake Street, through the Central Business District. Loop roads south of and paralleling Pioneer Avenue should be improved to encourage more commercial development near the business district and decrease traffic congestion along Pioneer Avenue. Other streets to be upgraded are the streets in the vicinity of the hospital, so that access is improved. Several intersections in the community are hazardous to both pedestri- ans and drivers. - Two of these intersections are at Lake Street and Pioneer Avenue, and Lake Street and the Bypass Road. The traffic loads at Pioneer and Lake are heavy. The intersection should have the turn lanes on Lake Street and the turning radius coming off of Pioneer to Lake should be reduced to decrease the overall size of the intersection. At Lake Street and the Bypass Road, Lake Street currently enters the Bypass on a corner, therefore creating a difficult angle for vehicles 7-4 ..... .... @7M T-1 ---------- FEN4RE I N111 .... ..... .... F-1 F-,.,- AS 1r4 C'*4f4,,, COAL 9 LEGEND ARTERIAL Iloilo PROPOSED ARTERIAL COLLECTOR .......... .. PROPOSED COLLECTOR turning right on to the Bypass from Lake Street. Also, it is difficult to judge the distances and speed of traffic coming north from Beluga Lake while at the stop sign on Lake Street due to the curve of the road and the topography. This intersection should be redesigned so that Lake Street comes into the By-Pass at a 90 degree angle. This wi I I require the moving of the intersection west along the Bypass. These improvements will greatly reduce the hazards presently contended with bythe drivers and pedestrians each day. Goals, objectives, policies and planned actions for land transportation are listed below. GOAL: TRANSPORTATION Provide opportunities for a wide range of reliable, low cost, conven- ient land, water and air transportation services. OBJECTIVE: Land Transportation Provide safe, durable and cost effective road access to all existing or planned developed areas of the city in a manner which allocates costs equitably. Policy 1 - Road extensions and improvements shall be designed to pro- mote the-objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan while pro- viding access for the greatest numbers of existing and future resi- dents. Action 1.1 - Update City Master Transportation Plan, in coopera- tion with Borough, establishing a rationale for prioritizing road improvements (through traffic counts, existing and planned land use, and recognizing pedestrian and bicycle traffic concerns). Action 1.2 - To encourage a more compact form of the Central Business District, develop a new arterial south of and parallel- ing Pioneer Avenue connecting with Heath Street. Action 1.3 - Develop an additional road link between the East, Central and West Hill neighborhoods by extending existing collec- tor roads (West Hill Road to Fairview Avenue and South Slope Road to Elderberry Drive or Kachemak Drive). Action 1.4 - Pursue and complete upgrading of existing substan- dard ci.ty streets consistent with this policy, the capital improvement program and Policy 3, this chapter. Action 1.5 - Begin program to gather additional traffic count data sufficient to carry out road improvement planning. Policy 2 - Traffic flow and safety shall be improved through consider- n of intersection and parking area design for collector and arter- ial roads. 7-6 Action 2.1 - Identify intersections that are hazardous, incorpor- ate design standards and plan improvements. Action 2.2 - Realign intersection of Lake Street and Bypass Road to a 90. degree intersection by reorienting the Lake Street approach. Policy 3 - Road standards and construction methods shall recognize the variability of local soil substrate and hydrologic conditions, while providing a cost effective solution to road transportation needs and functions., Action 3.1 - City pursue and complete with Borough, State and Federal assistance, a detailed study of geology, soils and hydrol- ogy as related to the suitability of various road construction techniques. Action 3.2 - Within six months of completion of road construction study and plan, City and Borough adopt and enforce road construc- tion standards for city and adjacent areas. Policy 4 - The bypass road shall be maintained as a limited access major erial corridor from Pioneer Avenue to Lake Street, with Main Street the principal cross-access point. Action 4.1 - Limit, through street improvements program and plat- ting standards, the number of access points to the bypass cor- ridor. Action 4.2 - Explore feasibility of frontage roads and develop- ment covenants to preserve scenic integrity and function of bypass corridor. Policy 5 - In recognition of traffic congestion and safety problems, busine owners shall be responsible for providing adequate parking for employees, customers and other visitors. Action 5.1 - Enfo rce city parking ordinance standards. Action 5.2 - Develop, by March, 1983, a joint City and business program to cooperatively develop common parking areas in commer- cial districts, utilizing design concepts shown in the Central Business District and Homer Spit chapters. City shall identify future parking areas for future development and utilization. Policy 6 - In recognition of the public support for pedestrian facili- ties, City shall support the development of a master plan for the inventory and development of trails, pathways and sidewalks. Action 6.1 - City to undertake a detailed sidewalk plan so that pedestrian needs can be met at the same time roads are improved. 7-7 Policy 7 Responsibility for financing ini tial construction, upgrad- ing and maintenance of roads shall reflect their use and function. a. Primary responsibility for highways and major arterials shall reside with the state. b. Responsibility for upgrading local service roads shall rest with benefitting property owners. c. Primary responsibility for developing collectors or other roads with mixed usage shall be shared by the city, the state, the borough, and benefitting property owners. d. The city will not accept responsibility for any street or road from either the state or private party until it meets city road stan- dards for that classification. Action 7.1 - City assume responsibility for maintenance of Pioneer Avenue, Bartlett and Lake Streets' following upgrade to city standards by state. Action 7.2 - State responsibility will continue for By-Pass Road, Ocean Drive, Homer Spit Road and Kachemak Bay Drive from Homer Spit Road to Airport, East and West Hill Roads, Sterling Highway and East End Road. WATER TRANSPORTATION Nearly all of Homer's water transportation activities are concentrated at the end of Homer Spit. There, a variety of services and facilities are available, which makes Homer the marine transportation hub of the south Kenai Peninsula. Chief among Homer's attractions are its small boat harbor and deep water pier. The boat basin occupies approximately 16.5 acres, and is designed to accommodate 398 moored vessels, but currently accommodates up to 1,000 vessels on peak summer weekends. Its waiting list for space averages about 1,300, and waiting time to acquire permanent moorage typically exceeds five years. The City pier extends out about 460 feet from shore, and has three faces which are frequently occupied. The largest face measures 410 feet long with a depth of 30 feet,' and accommodates large, ocean-going vessels such as the state ferry, MV Tustumena (which has preference for use of the dock). The northwest face is-740 feet long by 32 feet wide, with a 13 foot depth, and serves as the home base for the U.S. Coast Guard buoy tender, CGC Sedge. The southeast face measures 60 feet long by 60 feet wide, Wi@tha depth of 12 feet, and is mostly used by commercial fishing vessels. Other facilities currently available in the boat harbor include a boat launching ramp, a city fish pier, boat repair grid and fuel float. Homer's port and harbor facilities. are operated and managed as an enterprise of the City of Homer by the 7-8 City's Port and Harbor Department, under the direction of the Port and Harbor Commission and City Council. Homer's port and harbor facilities have been the subject of a number of major studies, including those by TAMS Engineers (1980), Woodward- Clyde Consultants (1980), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1981), Peter Eakland and Associates (1979) and the Alaska Department of Trans- portation and Public Facilities (1982). Though facility recommenda- tions differed, all concluded that usage of both harbor and port facilities has been growing rapidly, far exceeding current capacity, and that demand or usage would continue to grow at rates ranging from 2.5 to 10 percent per year through the turn of the century. During the period 1965 to 1977, for example, cargo shipped through Homer grew at an annual average rate of 11.2 percent per year compared with 8.5 percent annual growth for the state as a whole. Table 7-1 summarizes historical vessel, passenger and cargo volume for Homer. In the future, if adequate facilities are available, plans estimate that Homer's strategic location and year-round ice-free harbor would help it to serve as a major trans-shipment point for the Kenai Penin- sula. Homer would accommodate large volumes of inbound goods routed to Kenai, Soldotna, Anchor Point, etc., and serving as an outbound stop for fish products, logs and wood products, chemicals, and perhaps acting as a service base for minerals and oil extraction. The City's plan for water transportation, prepared by TAMS Engineers, calls for tripling the size of the boat basin to 48.7 acres, effective- ly quadrupling the harbor's moorage capacity to about 1,500 slips. Material dredged from the expanded harbor and channel would be used to create a 30.5-acre filled area which would serve as a staging area for ocean-going vessels. A multipurpose ocean berth with 1,400 feet of frontage would be constructed in two stages to accommodate general cargo, along with a roll-on, roll-off barge and ferry ramp. Other planned improvements include an expanded fish pier equipped with vacuum pumps, hoists and icemaking machines, along with a 5-acre support yard for port administration and maintenance buildings, a fish cold storage warehouse, boat repair yard and other marine and trans-shipment facilities. Other planned actions, not mentioned in the TAMS plan, include estab- lishment of additional boat launch and storage facilities for boats and gear west of the boat basin and off of the spit, and development of shuttle ferry services to Kachemak Bay State Park and south Kachemak Bay communities. A plan map of spit development, including planned port and harbor development, is shown in Figure 5-3 of the Homer Spit Plan, Chapter 5. Objectives, policies and planned actions for water transportation are summarized below. OBJECTIVE: Water Transportation Improve access to public marine transportation, moorage and boat storage facilities. 7-9 TABLE 7-1 Vessel Trips, Passengers and Throughput Tonnage - Homer Tons Year Vessels Passengers Metric ShorE- 1966 676 2,328 12,529 13,811 1968 586 3,123 15,807 17,424 1970 2,337 5,074 172,136 189,748a 1972 2,871 7,052 154,567 170,382b 1974 142 10,511 10,831 11,939 1975 1,217 11,215 35,633 39,279C 1976 138 10,869 27,906 30,761df 1977 162 9,559 .107,564 118,570ef a. 150,733 metric tons (166,200 tons) = sand, gravel and crushed rock. b. 36,903 metric tons (40,679 tons) = logs. 97,,182 metric tons (107,126 tons) = rafted logs. C. 21,452 metric tons (23,647 tons) = gasoline. d. 13,564 metric tons (14,952 tons) = nitrogenous chemical fertilizer.* e. 52,009 metric tons (57,331 tons) = nitrogenous chemical fertilizer:* 26,922 metric tons (29,677 tons) = kerosene; 10,587 metric tons (11,760 tons) = logs., f. Chemical fertilizer, although included in totals for Homer, originated at Nikiski. Homer is listed because it was the last port-of-call before a vessel sailed to a foreign port. The fertilizer did not actually pass over Homer facilities but was loaded at Nikiski for delivery to a foreign port. Source: Reprinted from Peter Eakland and Associates, 1979. 7-10 Policy 8 The City shall encourage the Alaska State Legislature and Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Division -of Harbors, in conjunction with the city, federal agencies and the private sector, to pursue and complete development of the end of Homer Spi't for marine transportation uses as specified in the Homer Port Development Plan JAMS Engineers, 1980) and in this plan. (See Homer Spit Plan, Chapter 5.) Action 8.1 - City Council continue to request, by resolution, funding from Legislature to continue harbor development consis- tent with plan. Action 8.2 - City plan and implement those portions of the port project which can be developed without further Legislative assistance (such as parking and harbor slope areas which can be leased to private operators). Action 8.3 - City shall designate boat-trailer parking areas where convenient to boat launching facilities, but where it will not usurp more intensive uses. Action 8.4 - City shall request Chevron U.S.A. to relocate fuel storage tanks north of the end of the Spit. Policy 9 - The City shall encourage the development of boat storage areas off of the end of Homer Spit as a means of reducing boat harbor congestion. Action 9.1 - Identify areas on east side of Homer Spit and on uplands which are suitable for development as boat storage areas. Action 9.2 - Where City-owned l.ands are identified as potential boat storage areas with no higher use, negotiate ground leases with covenants to private developers. Policy 10 - City shall encourage the State to provide frequent shuttle ferry service to Kachemak Bay State Park and south Kachemak Bay facil- ities, provided that parking needs are accommodated in a manner which is compatible with the plan. Action 10.1 - City Council pass and submit to Department of Trans- portation and Public Facil-lities, Division of Marine Highways a resolution endorsing plan to provide daily car and passenger ferry service between Homer and Seldovia, Halibut Cove, Jakolof Say, English Bay, Port Graham, etc., coupled with expanded park- ing facilities in Homer. Action 10.2 - City Council pass and submit to Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks, a resolution supporting daily passenger ferry service to Kachemak Bay State Park coupled with expanded off-spit parking and shuttle bus service during summer visitor season. 7-11 Policy 11 - City shall advertise and contact major industries to use the Port of Homer. Determine with major sea carriers what tonnage and other requirements are needed to make it feasible for vessels to stop at Homer from Seattle or Portland. AIR TRANSPORTATION Homer's air transportation activities have grown rapidly as the com- munity and south Kenai Peninsula region has developed. Homer is endowed with good aviation facilities, owned and operated by the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOTPF). The Homer Airport has two separate runways. The primary runway is a paved, 7,400 by 150 foot runway capable of accommodating all but the largest commercial jet aircraft. The runway has a number of electron- ic and visual navigational aids, but lacks the most sophisticated aids, such as glide slope navigational equipment, which would permit instrument-controlled landing approaches. The second runway is a 3,000 by 600 foot designated- area of Beluga Lake, which accommodates float and ski plane operations, -and has limited navigational equipment (ADOTPF, 1979). Spurred by deregulation of the commercial air passenger industry and the community's rapid growth in aviation activities, Homer has ample scheduled commuter air service, currently 16 flights per day to Kodiak,, Kenai, Seward and Anchorage, from three separate air carriers, Alaska Aeronautical Industries, Southcentral Airlines and Valdez Air- lines. In addition, seven Homer-based air taxi operators offer wheeled, float or ski charter service to outlying communities (ADOTPF, 1979). The airport's principal deficiencies are its layout and facilities. Air carrier, air taxi, air cargo and general aviation activities are crowded together at the southwest corner of the main runway. Parking, aircraft tiedown, apron, taxiway, and terminal space are all inade- quate and/or too close to the runway (according to Federal Aviation Administration standards) (ADOTPF, 1979). Since Kachemak Drive limits southerly expansion of these uses, the state's five year plan for Homer airport calls for relocation of the passenger terminal to an area northwest of the paved runway. A new, larger road, apron and parking areas would be constructed, and air taxi and general aviation uses would be allowed to expand into the current passenger terminal area. These improvements are considered necessary to accommodate future growth in air traffic, estimated at about 7.4 percent per year from 1977 to 1998 (see Table 7-2) (ADOTPF, 1979). Issues, Possible and Planned Solutions The major air transportation issues which have been identified are related to the need for airport expansion. Terminal relocation and associated improvements are the highest priority, and are spelled out in the-state's plan for Homer Airport. Funding of the improvements is 7-12 TABLE 7-2 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED AIR TRAFFIC HOMER AIRPORT Total Aircraft Operations Annual Historical Amount Growth Rate 1968 $ 13,900 -- 1970 17,000* 10.6% 1975 26,000* 8.9% 1977 36,600 18.6% Projected 1978 $ 40,000 9.'3% 1983 65,600 10.4% 1988 102,300 9.3% 1993 135,600 5.8% 1998 164,700 4.0% Estimated from graphs. Source: Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, 1979. 7-13 currently included in the 1983 Voter's Request (ADOTPF, 1982) but the City needs to take a strong role in urging that the improvements pro- ceed. Another area of concern lies in acquisition, leasing and disposal policies for state land. Here again, City action could be helpful in encouraging the State to acquire lands within the building restriction and clear zones, and to lease its properties for commercial develop- ment consistent with the comprehensive plan. Disposal of State-owned wetlands should probably go the the City, since the areas are best left undeveloped. The final area of concern lies in airport expansion. Since the State plan did not call for extending the runway length the additional 2,000 to 3,000 feet needed to accommodate the largest commercial jet air- craft, but mentioned this as a possibility, steps should be taken to ensure that private lands off of the east end of the runway are not extensively developed. Since the State plan stopped short of recom- mending acquisition, this City plan calls for appropriate zoning measures limiting height and development, or for purchase options, purchase of partial development rights, or outright purchase with leaseback for lands which may ultimately be needed for runway exten- sion. Objectives, policies and planned actions for air transportation are listed below. OBJECTIVE - Maintain and improve air transportation facilities and services to provide convenient, reliable, low cost air transportation services. Policy 12 - Lands needed for existing and future airport runways, clear zones, terminals and other airport facilities should be owned by the State, and leased to private operators wherever feasible and desirable. Action 12.1 - City Council request Alaska Department of Transpor- tation and Public Facilities, Division o@ Aviation (ADOTPF/DOA) to complete purchase of private land in existing airport building restriction and clear zone (see Figure 7-1). Action 12.2 - City Council request ADOTPF/DOA to continue leasing lands to private operators considering plans for future airport activities. Action 12.3 City Council request ADOTPF/DOA to examine and implement means of reserving lands for runway extension. Action 12.4 - Ci.ty Council request ADOTPF/DOA to improve the existing runway and plan to extend the runway in the future to handle larger type aircraft. 7-14 Policy 13 - The City shall encourage ADOTPF to implement its plans to improv irport facilities and services, as well as minimize conges- tion and conflicts in activities. Action 13.1 - City Council request, by resolution, ADOTPF/DOA to carry out its plans for upgrading Homer Airport, including relo- cation of passenger and charter airline terminals to north of.the runway, and navigational aids and equipment. Action 13.2 - City designate Beluga Lake as a low activity area giving priority to float planes. Action 13.3 - City shall request ADOTPF/DOA to improve float plane facilities, i.e., expansion of tie-down area, fuel servic- ing, fire protection, improved road connecting the lake and the main airport runway. 7-15 CHAPTER 8 PUBLIC UTILITIES PLAN Public utilities are among the most frequently used of public services. Water, sewage, solid waste and drainage management services must func- tion continuously, without fail, and are used daily by virtually every resident and visitor. Utilities are expensive to build and operate, however, and must be carefully planned in order to produce a quality service in a cost effective manner. This chapter outlines the plan for Homer's water, sewage, solid waste and drainage management services, presenting background, issues, pos- sible solutions, goals, objectives, policies and planned actions for public utilities'. Other, more detailed plans have been prepared-for each of these topics, and the reader should refer to them for addi- tional information. The overall goal for public utilities is shown below, followed by the plan elements for each of the four utilities. GOAL: PUBLIC UTILITIES Provide good quality, cost effective, environmentally acceptable water, sewer, solid waste and drainage management services in Homer. WATER SUPPLY Background The City provides a treated water supply for most, but not all, of the area within the incorporated City limits. The source of Homer's water is a reservoir created by a dam on Bridge Creek, a mile north of Homer. Water is pumped from this 145 million gallon (mg) storage reservoir to a water treatment plant that chemically treats, filters and disinfects the water prior to distribution. Additional storage of treated water i s prov i ded by . a 0. 5 mg storage tank located at the end of the sp i t , and a 0.25 mg tank located near the hospital. Three main transmission 'lines serve the City. Two of these connect with the network of pipelines s@erving the central City, while the third transmits water to the distal end of the spit. Pressure reducing valves are required throughout the system to prevent excessively high pressure caused by the great difference in elevation between source and consumer. Water service is also available via tanker truck sales for residents not within economical distance of existing lines at a slightly higher cost. Also, many non-residents haul City water for their residential needs. Recent expansion of the water treatment plant has increased the capac- ity of the plant to 2.0 million gallons per day (MGD), probably suffi- cient to meet anticipated peak demands to the period 1985-1987. 8-1 Changes in industrial and commercial usage (such as expanded local seafood processing or emergence of lower Cook Inlet oil activity) could hasten the need for additional facilities, however, and need to be con- sidered. In 1977, a Comprehensive Water Plan was prepared to evaluate existing and future supplies and demands, evaluate distribution system alterna- tives and prepare recommendations for timing and need for selected improvements to the City's water system. Criteria used to assess the needs for improved water service were based on the City's 1969 Compre- hensive Development Plan, and assumed greater land use intensities than are called for in this plan (see Land Use Plan, Chapter 4). Nonetheless, the 1977 water plan pointed out areas of the municipal water system which were in-need of upgrading, and based upon these pri- oritized recommendations, the City proceeded to construct some of these improvements. For example, expansion of the treatment plant was car- ried out to increase plant capacity, as mentioned above. Additional treated water storage was constructed at the end of the spit, and other improvements, such as pressure-reducing valves, were installed. An important additional conclusion was that existing service areas were adequate to serve projected study populations, and as a result, the 1978 Comprehensive Plan called for,higher density development in areas already served by the water utility. The 1977 water plan also reported that the existing capacity of the Bridge Creek reservoir was probably not sufficient to meet future demands 20 years hence. As a result, further studies have been per- formed to assess possible future sources of water and comment upon options the City may pursue in developing an additional supply of water. One report, prepared in late 1980, provides a list of possible surface water sources which are located south of the Anchor River (CH2M Hi115 1980). Estimates of yields, water quality and order-of-magnitude costs for alternative system improvements were presented and a course of action suggested. Previous Objectives and Policy Recommendations In the 1978 Comprehensive Development Plan, the overall objectives for utility delivery, including City water service were: 1. Provide Homer area residents with the highest quality of ser- vice at least cost to taxpayers; and 2. Encourage private enterprise to provide services whenever feasible. From these overall objectives, specific policy recommendations were prepared, which included the fo.llowing: 1. Require municipal notification by concerned parties if a sig- nificant increase in water consumption is expected. 8-2 2. Encourage higher density development in areas al-ready generally served by the water utility. 3. Where feasible, introduce water service concurrently with sewer service. 4. Review the 1977 Comprehensive Water Plan to assure compatibi 1- ity with future land use plans. Issues, Possible Solutions and Planned Actions Major issues facing Homer regarding water supplies are related to pro- vision of adequate quantities of supplies as well as increased level of service to City residents. As such, the City is currently engaged in a revision and updating of the earlier 1977 Comprehensive Water Plan, as well as embarking on a new evaluation of future water supplies. Below are brief summaries of work being conducted within each study. The 1982 Comprehensive Water Plan determines and records expansion of the water system which has occurred since 1977, and also develops a revised set of improvements and expansions to the water system deemed necessary to serve anticipated service area and population to the year 1992. In order to accomplish this, planning criteria relating to popu- lation growth, land use, and the like are utilized from this Comprehen- sive Plan update. Future water demands in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors are projected, as well as design and operational criteria for improvements based upon future service area, housing unit densities and incremental development. From this, the capability of the existing water system to supply such growth is evaluated, and necessary improvements to the existing distribution system are pro- posed. An analysis of the financial operation of the water utility, its viability and capacity to finance needed distribution system improvements are also evaluated. The City has also initiated work to determine the timing, need and source of additional water supplies to meet future requirements deter- mined in the 1982 Water Plan update. Previous projections (CH2M Hill, 1980) suggest that the existing Bridge Creek reservoir will be fully exploited within the next six to ten years, after which time average daily demand will exceed reservoir capacity. Since the ultimate capac- ity of the reservoir is limited to available stream flows, it will be necessary to develop alternative sources of water. This study, there- fore, evaluates the use of other surface or subsurface sources of sup- ply and proposes development of a preferred alternative to Bridge Creek supplies. The study also evaluates the potential needs of customers outside the City limits, particularly those to the east of Homer, since potential future supply sources such as Fritz Creek lie in that direc- tion. (Should such an alternative prove desirable, it could be that Homer would be asked to jointly participate in development of that sup- ply source. It would then be necessary for the City to determine at what level and under what arrangements could the City participate with other entities in a project of this nature.) The result of this study is planning and design criteria to be employed in developing a future- 8-3 source of supply, and a description of the timing needed by the City to carry out such a project in an orderly fashion. Also developed will be the preliminary plans for constructing needed improvements and financ- ing mechanisms the City may use to finance such a project. Associated with this study are assessments of land impacts and proced- ures the City will need to follow in the event that another surface impoundment and a reservoir is required. As noted in the 1978 Compre- hensive Development Plan, protection of current and future watersheds is of great importance to the City. The plan notes that the State and Borough have the authority necessary to protect such watersheds, as Alaska statutes give general law cities authority to protect their water supplies outside of their municipal boundaries. The Borough, however, must grant approval before Homer can exercise this authority. The 1978 plan notes that neither the Borough, the State nor the City has adopted policies or regulations to protect Homer's existing water- shed, but such efforts will likely be needed to minimize potential con- flicts between development and public uses. The Borough has undertaken water resources inventories to develop data which will help support steps taken or regulations made to protect Homer's supply of water, and must cooperate if Homer's future water supplies are to be protected. Objectives, policies and planned actions for water supply are listed below. OBJECTIVE - WATER SUPPLY Maintain sufficient water supply to serve domestic, commercial and fire protection needs. Policy 1 - Water supply improvement needs will be addressed prior to the time they are required. Action 1.1 - Investigate and develop future water sources. Policy 2 - Water service will be extended first to areas of higher existing or potential population density and industrial areas where it is feasible to operate and maintain the system, where water service can be extended concurrently with sewer service (see Figure 8-1). Action 2.1 - Adopt, with or without revision, 1982 Water Plan update. Action 2.2 - Implement priority water distribution system improve- ments. Policy 3 - City adopt and enforce uniform construction standards for roads and utility improvements. Action 3.1 - Subdividers will be required to provide a minimum of a ten foot (10') section of waterline onto each lot, to reduce problems with other utilities when the water connection is made. 8-4 L4 M., jam r P-6, lo If-4 C*444,t COAL 8 LEGEND 1141- El EXISTING WATER El FUTURE WATER EXISTING SEWER FUTURE SEWER SEWAGE COLLECTION, TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL Background Homer's initial sewer system became operational in 1972, and several recent additions since that time have expanded the initial service area boundaries. The sewage collection system, comprised of collectors and trunk sewers, now covers several miles from east of the elementary school to just west of Homer High School. The majority of on-line sewers serve the central commercial district and the residential areas to the north and east of the central core. Other areas currently served include Ocean Drive and the Homer Airport. Sewage collected from these areas is routed primarily by gravity flow to the City sewage treatment plant located on the north side of Beluga .Slough. (Sewer District No. 2, serving Ocean Drive and the airport, has a lift station located near the Beluga Lake outfall on Lake Street to convey sewage from the district to the treatment works.) The 0.277 MGD sewage treatment plant began operation in 1972 and con- sists of an influent pump station, two aerated lagoons, a chlorine con- tact chamber, an effluent holding pond with inoperative tide gates, a sludge holding pond and a marine outfall. The plant has a design capacity to serve a sewered population of between 2,000 and 2,500 depending upon per capita wasteload, and is currently undergoing plant modification to increase capacity. Due to Homer's low population density and linear arrangement, many areas of the City are not presently served by sewers. Typically, sep- tic tanks and drain fields have been employed to provide on-site treat- ment and disposal for residences and commercial establishments. Many of these individual septic tank and drain field systems have failed or caused problems throughout the City (excepting the northwestern por- tions within City limits). These problems have been attributed to the fact that soil conditions are not especially suitable for operation of such systems, although improper drainfield location, construction tech- niques, maintenance and review and inspection practices lead to fail- ures as well. Presently, sewage generated out on Homer Spit is also disposed of by means of septic tanks. Guidelines for on-site sewage disposal are provided in Chapter 14.04 of the City code,*which states: All septic tanks now in use or hereafter constructed within the City shall meet the specifications of the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, and no septic tank shall be hereinafter constructed without obtaining a written permit from the Department's Area Sanitarian for the Kenai Peninsula. Vaults, privies, and cesspools shall not be considered adequate sanitary facilities. (Section 14.14.020c) 8-6 Previous Recommendations In 1977, a Comprehensive Sewer Plan was developed by the City to guide the orderly expansion of Homer's sewer system, 'identifying sewer improvements that might be required within a ten year period. In addi- tion, cost estimates for all improvements, a financial plan and time schedule for such improvements were prepared at that time. Also included was an evaluation of existing and future treatment facilities for the purpose of developing cost estimates of treatment plant improvements. Detailed engineering work on those plant improvements have since been initiated, as described earlier. The sewer plan as prepared was based on the City's 1969 Comprehensive Plan, associated future land use plan and zoning at the time. The land use plan contained assumptions regarding population density and future development which have since been revised through the updating of the City's Comprehensive Plan in 1978. Further, the sewer plan considered the impact of oil-related activities in lower Cook Inlet on sewer ser- vice in the City, and prepared alternate plans based upon that poten- tial. As a result, a review of the earlier sewer plan has been initi- ated by the City such that the plan can be updated to reflect new popu- lation, economic development and flow projections. Although as of this writing the plan is currently being updated, some of the conclusions and recommendations from the previous sewer plan are still valid. They include: 1. Following the policy recommended in the adopted comprehensive development plan of encouraging concentrated residential and com- mercial development will result in greater utilization of existing sewer utilities and minimize the total investment required to expand the system. 2. Do not make large investment in sewerage facilities in antici- pation of growth until requirements can be more firmly established than they are presently. This is especially true for the spit. (Although the 1977 sewer plan called for immediate construction of sewerage improvements on the spit, the Homer Spit Sewerage Facil- ities Plan later recommended the maintenance of existing septic tank systems on the spit until a later date when development activities had increased.) Once this has been completed, however, more realistic assessment of sewerage facilities can be developed. 3. On-site treatment and disposal systems will continue to be needed in outlying areas of the City for some time. The City should review policies and guidelines that -govern installation of such systems within the City. 4. The feasibility of constructing conventional gravity sewers in rural areas of the City with low ultimate population densities is doubtful due to a very high cost per individual service (e.g., along Kachemak Drive). Should septic tank - soil absorption 8-7 systems fail, however, it may be necessary to consider other sew- age disposal methods (in the 1977 sewer plan alternative collector sewers were identified). The 1977 sewer plan also recommended that population growth be accommo- dated within sparsely populated land previously served by sewers such that no additional sewers would be needed until Homer's total popula- tion reached at least 2,700 (1982 population). However, subsequent to this recommendation, additional trunk sewer construction was completed. Sewer service has now been extended to the eastern portion of the City beyond the elementary school and in other portions of the City. In some cases, the installation of these sewers can lead to surcharging or overloading of the sewer system and the treatment plant, particularly when long lines serve distant, sparsely populated areas. This can be attributed to shallow ground water conditions within the City and the fact that infiltration of ground water can result in excessive sewer flows. Of course, this problem becomes magnified as sewer connections increase with further development. It may be, therefore, that the existing sewer service area is now more than adequate to provide for future sewered parcels for growth beyond a total population of 2,700, and this question should be resolved during the update of the 1977 sewer plan. Issues, Possible and Planned Solutions The City's 1978 Comprehensive Plan noted that there was an increased desire for residential sewer service by municipal residents. It also noted that subdivision activities at that time were resulting in fewer and fewer parcels that could be developed with conventional on-site sewage disposal systems (i.e.,__ septic tank - drain field systems). This continues to be the case. However, with residential development continuing to occur in a dispersed pattern, the cost of expanding ser- vices to provide sewer service will continue to be very high per cus- tomer. Therefore, it might be advantageous for the City to encourage the adoption of other means by which to provide sewage disposal service in outlying areas, other than conventional septic tank or gravity sewer systems. Within the last several years, alternative on-site sewage treatment and disposal systems have been developed to provide relatively low-cost service to rural areas and small communities. Some of these systems include the use of septic tanks as pre-treatment, but employ different methods of ultimate disposal. Examples include mound, sand filter and overland flow systems, or combinations thereof. Alternatively, small- diameter pressure sewer systems have been built and operated success- fully for clusters of homes or subdivisions to reduce the cost of con- struction, the cost of materials and reduce the size of sewers needed. A third possibility, waterless, recycling or low-toilet systems with water conservation household fixtures and appliances, have been util- ized in some areas to reduce or even eliminate wastewater flows. These include such items as compost toilets, recycling chemical or water toilets, total household wastewater recycling systems (e.g., Pure-Cycle system), bathing and faucet flow restrictors, and the like. 8-8 Within this range of possible treatment and disposal options, it is possible that lower-cost systems and household modifications can be developed to provide sewage disposal for service areas within the City that remain at a low population density. The City could encourage and promote the use of such alternative disposal methods, as such alterna- tives have been listed as "potentially acceptable" by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation as substitutes for gravity sewers or septic tanks. However, installation and operation of many of these alternatives would likely require either increased involvement by the State or Borough to regulate such systems, or would require increased management by a local government entity with appropriate authority, such as the City Public Works Department. Rather than promoting low-density development by providing increased opportunities for on-site disposal, the City could take the opposite approach. That is, the City might discourage large subdivision development outside sewered areas by restricting issuance of building permits to only those areas already within existing service areas. This is strong action, and is not among the planned actions for sewage management. Another issue 'to be addressed concerns provision for sewage treatment facilities on the Spit. Previous studies concluded that existing sep- tic tank systems on the Spit were adequate until such time as develop- ment became more concentrated. Should land use on the Spit become more concentrated, then, it is possible that other means of sewage treatment and disposal will be necessary. This question is addressed in the Comprehensive Sewer Plan update. A final consideration involves septage (septic tank pumpings) treatment and disposal. Since a significant portion of Homer's population is not served by the City's sewer system, septage wastes from Homer are con- siderable. Recent estimates calculate an unsewered 1982 population of 1,082 (CH2M Hill, 1981). Some planning has already been done to assess the feasibility of constructing a septage treatment and disposal facil- ity to handle Homer's septage wastes, since the City's existing waste treatment facilities are not able to handle those wastes, and septage haulers must now haul to a Borough controlled site near Kenai for ulti- mate disposal. Some options have been identified, such as a treatment of locally generated wastes at Homer by the City via a number of proce- dures. Costs are quite high, however, and no facilities have yet been considered. Alternatively, the Borough has investigated possible techniques by which it can accept and treat these wastes near Homer, although the Borough has not yet assumed septage responsibility (Bambard, 1981). This issue is not included in the Comprehensive Sewer Plan update, but needs to be addressed as increased use of septic tank systems in Homer is likely. Objectives, policies and planned actions for sewage management are listed on the following page. 8-9 OBJECTIVE SEWAGE COLLECTION AND TREATMENT Provide environmentally acceptable, cost effective treatment for all sewage in Homer. Policy 4 - City adopt and enforce uniform construction standards for roads and utility improvements. Action 4.1 - Sewer service will be extended where population density is high enough to make it feasible to construct, operate and maintain the system, where the extension can be concurrent with extension of water service, and in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (see Figure 8-1, Utilities). Action 4.2 - Adopt, with or without revision, 1982 Sewer Plan update. Policy 5 - On-site sewage treatment, or alternative systems, shall be encouraged in areas where sewage collection systems are infeasible. Action 5.1 - City pursue, with Borough, State and Federal assist- ance, a detai led study of soil suitability for infiltration fields and other on-site sewage treatment processes, as possible permanent alternatives to city sewer for lower density developed areas of the city. Action 5.2 - City, together with Borough, provide facilities in or near Homer to treat and dispose of holding tank wastes. Action 5.3 - City study suitability of combined fish processing plant wastes outfall, in combination with other treatment alter- natives, on Homer Spit, and implement recommendations. Policy 6 - Subdividers will be required to provide a minimum of a 10 To-ot section of sewer line to each lot to reduce problems in future utility connections. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Background Solid waste disposal is one of several powers which the Kenai Penin- sula Borough retains rather than the City of Homer. As such, the Borough provides for disposal of Homer's solid waste stream via a series of designated landfill sites located throughout the Borough. Typical municipal solid wastes (all wastes except any hazardous or septage wastes) are landfilled at a Borough facility located approxi- mately four miles west of Homer. Septage wastes are required to be handled separately and routed to another landfill located near Kenai for ultimate disposal. 8-10 Wastes that are generated within Homer are handled by contract -haulers who work under contract with the Borough as well as City residents. Also, presently the City'has allocated a small portion of its operat- ing budget to contract hauling services. The present Homer landfill, opened by the Borough in July, 1979, is comprised of two parcels of land. One is currently owned by the Borough, and the other is owned by the State and operated by the Borough by means of a Special Use permit. According to recent reports (Bambard, 1981) the Borough has selected this second parcel as part of its authorized selections of State lands, and is attempting to have transfer of ownership of the land completed before the permit expires in 1984. With the combination of these two parcels of land, the site of the Homer landfill comprises approximately 48 acres. Based upon projec- tions made in a recent study (Bambard, 1981), only 15 acres are usable as a landfill under the Borough's present method of landfill opera- tions. The anticipated remaining useful life of the Homer landfill using con- ventional disposal methods is six years, although the projections assumed a slower rate of population growth (and, thus, waste quanti- ties produced) than are used in this plan. The Borough's recent installation of a baler operation will probably extend the life of the landfill another 10 years. Nonetheless, a new landfill site will need to be developed within the next decade or decade and a half. Earlier studies also addressed alternative means by which septage (septic tank pumpage) could be handled by the Borough. This waste qualifies as a solid waste although it is currently not the responsi- bility of the Borough to handle such waste. The Borough has, however, investigated means by which septage wastes could be handled locally in the Homer area' in place of direct haul to the Sterling special waste site in the Kenai area. The City has also conducted independent stud- ies of septage disposal alternatives, although no clear solution to the problem of septage disposal has yet been formulated by either the City or the Borough. Issues, Previous Recommendations and Options A Borough report, Consolidated Wastes on the Kenai Peninsula (Sambard, 1981) prepared a summary of recommendations regarding existing and future solid waste management operations affecting Homer. These recommendations are concerned primarily with improved operation of the existing Homer landfill, future management of typical municipal solid wastes generated in the Homer area, and possibilities for a Borough- controlled septage disposal facility. Below are a summary of pertin- ent recommendations: 1. Maintain the *existing landfill concept near Homer and upgrade contract documents as needed to ensure proper landfill operation until site is used up. 8-11 2. Locate, design, permit and construct a transfer site to faci I- it'ate residents east of Homer. 3. In three to five years, begin planning for a replacement site for Homer landfill. New site to go into operation when existing landfill's life is used up. 4. Coincineration of septage and Homer's solid wastes is only marginally feasible at this time and, therefore, the Borough should proceed with an evaluation of all other potential septage management alternatives. 5. Given all the facts, make the determination of whether the Borough should acquire septage responsibility or not. Of particular note to these recommendations is the fact that prelimin- ary evaluations of potential landfill sites have already been conduct- ed (U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1980) which concluded that an economically 'feasible replacement site for the existing landfill does not exist. As such, the Borough decided to purchase and operate a baler to extend the life of the present site. As the site nears capa- city, the City could, as an option, encourage Borough development of -some form of waste coincineration with heat recovery to handle septage as well as locally generated solid wastes. Estimated capital costs for alternative septage disposal facilities for the City (CH2M Hill, 1981) are on the same order of magnitude as for projected Borough coincineration facilities (Bambard, 1981). Under these conditions, more detailed planning would need to be given to the concept of an incineration system to assess technical and economic feasibility, as well as management and administration of such a facility. As an alternative, the City might encourage the Borough to continue existing solid waste disposal practice and assume septage responsibility in order for the Borough to provide a closer septage disposal facility to serve Homer. Such alternatives might consist of a land treatment or lagoon system situated near Homer where septage from the entire southern Peninsula could be handled by the Borough. A third concern of solid waste management is the location of transfer stations and collection sites. Currently, the transfer station is located outside of Homer, on the East End Road, away from the concen- tration of population and businesses. Planned actions are for the Borough to improve transfer station and collection site locations, taking into consideration population and disposal site location. Objectives, policies and actions for solid waste management are shown below. OBJECTIVE - SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Provide safe, effective and convenient disposal of all solid wastes and sewage sludge. 8-12 Policy 7 - The Borough shall continue to be responsible for solid waste management in the Homer area. Action 7.1 - Borough secure future disposal sites. Action 7.2 - City and Borough cooperate to develop and operate facilities to dispose of sewage sludge and septic tank septage. Action 7.3 - Borough strategically locate transfer stations and collection sites, taking into consideration population and dis- posal site location. DRAINAGE-MANAGEMENT Historically, the City of Homer has not experienced severe flooding or severe drainage management problems. Small areas along streams have flooded when ice forms on channel bottoms, thus filling natural drain- age ways, but these events are relatively small and isolated nuisances as compared to hazardous flooding experience in other areas. More- over, most of the peak storm events causing large volumes of surface runoff are conveyed through the city by means of natural drainage channels to Beluga Lake and Kachemak Say, which have not as yet been disturbed. Figure 8-2 illustrates the major drainage ways in Homer. Flood damage, however, can increase greatly if damagable facilities are constructed in areas subject to flooding, or if artificial stream crossings through these drainage ways restrict the movement of water. Future flood conditions in the City, therefore, will be affected sig- nificantly by population growth, future land use and the extent to which development encroaches upon or alters natural drainage ways. Background The need for an adequate system of drainage ways within Homer and sur- rounding areas has long been recognized by residents and local offi- cials. Several studies of drainage management and flood potential have been prepared, including: Homer, Alaska, History of Flooding, Aufeis (Glaciation), Erosion and Sedimentation. Sandra Stringer, The Scotia Group, Fairbanks, Alaska, 197-. Potential Flooding, City of Homer, Kenai Peninsula Borough, U.S.D.A., Soil Conservation Service (SCS), Anchorage, Alaska, 1978. Drainage Management Plan, Homer, Alaska, CH2M-Hill, Anchorage, Alaska, 1979. Homer Drainage Study, Homer, Alaska, Quadra Engineering, Inc., Anchorage, Alaska, 1981. Revised Drainage Management Plan, Homer, Alaska, Quadra Engineer- ing, Inc., Anchorage, Alaska, 1982. 8-13 S..L A7 @0111- W- "r4 CO'A'L. B LEGEND '94 Wm To briefly summarize, these studies have evaluated existing conditions which affect drainage within the City, and have prepared means by which to maintain and improve drainage as development of the area pro- ceeds Increasing reluctance on the part of lenders to approve hous- ing loans in flood-prone areas of Homer provided much of the impetus for conducting these studies. The lenders (principally the Federal Housing Administration) wanted assurance that drainage needs would be addressed as additional housing and roads were built. Drainage management was also addressed by the City's 1978 Comprehen- sive Plan. The plan noted that, if left uncontrolled and unmonitored, development activities such as grading, removal of vegetation, distur- bance of the soil layer and disruption of natural drainageways would lead to increased soil erosion and glaciation. The plan's recommendations for drainage management included: 1. Prepare and adopt a City drainage management plan. 2. Consider responsibility for erosion and sedimentation control before approval by the Planning Commission of any proposed subdivision. The proposed methods for alleviating erosion and sedimentation control problems should be reflected in the developmental design specifications, where ap*plicable. 3. Include stringent control measures stipulating responsibility for erosion and sediment control during foundation excava- tions with the issuance of building permits. 4. Require that developers submit drawings including proposed drainage problems during actual construction periods, as well as permanent drainage plans. Temporary structural measures for erosion and sediment control should be required as neces- sary (diversion berms, interceptor swales, energy dissi- pators, channel lining, crushed aggregate, mulching, etc.). 5. Require that developers and/or subdividers submit drawings indicating those areas most likely to be subject to glaci- ation as a result of construction', development, or inter- ruption of natural drainage patterns, together with proposed methods for elimination, amelioration, or control of same. Such regulations should be applicable to any adjoining properties or other areas subject to such effects, as well as the subject property itself., Subsequent work related to these recommendations includes development of a comprehensive. drainage management plan for the entire City. Conducted in two parts, the plan details current problem areas and existing conditions; expected future system requirements in light of expected land use changes and local hydrologic conditions; alternative approaches to drainage control; a proposed drainage system including culverts, channels, ditches and natural drainage ways; and recommenda- tions for implementation of the drainage plan. 8-15 Detailed engineering design and construction specifications for drain- age improvements have also been prepared for the core area of Homer, that being the area approximately bounded by Bayview Avenue on the north, Lake Street to the east, the Bypass road to the south and the high school to the west. Drainage and erosion control guidelines have been developed incorporating proven engineering principles to give developers and others constructing portions of the City's drainage system a set of standard criteria from which to design and build such improvements. Finally, draft drainage management ordinances have been prepared for the City which would give the City power to control development of the drainage system and document the City's policy and procedures for maintenance and expansion of the system. Although such plans and alternative implementation measures have been developed and are available for City staff to use, neither the drainage management plans nor either of the two ordinances mandating City drainage stan- dards have yet been adopted by the City Council. Existing regulations regarding road construction and drainage are con- tained in the City code and Borough subdivision ordinances. City code requirements related to drainage are contained in Articles 4 and 5. Article 4, concerning driveway and right-of-way construction permits (Section 14-400g), requires permit applications to be accompanied by a plan showing complete details on drainage. The code states: "All driveways and buffer areas should be constructed so as not to impair the drainage within the street or road right-of-way nor alter the stability of the roadway subgrade and at the same time not impair or materially alter drainage of the adjacent areas. All culverts, catch basins, drainage channels, and other drainage structures required within the buffer area and under driveways as the result of the property being developed, shall be installed' in accordance with the standards set by the city, said standard being available at City Hall." Article 5 of the code contains the following standards for street con- struction (Section 14-500.4.): "A. Cross Culverts 1. Shall be sized for stream flow based on a 25-year flood. 2. Shall be 18-inch minimum inside diameter. B. Driveway Culverts 1. Shall be 18-inch minimum diameter. 2. Minimum length shall be 21 feet - maximum length 35 feet. a. Special conditions requiring longer culvert lengths will be subject to' the approval of the Public Works Director. 3. Driveway elevation at road ditch line shall be 0.1 foot below the elevation of the edge of shoulder. 4. Driveway ditches shall be constructed in such a manner so that no scour will occur to road ditch." 8@16 The Borough's subdivision ordinance is administered by the Borough Planning Commission for areas both within and outside the Homer bound- aries. Applications for subdivision approval are submitted to the Plat Committee of the Borough Planning Commission. Subdivision appli- cations for areas within the City are referred by the Plat Committee to the City's Advisory Planning Commission for review and comment. Decisions of the Plat Committee can be appealed to the Borough Plan- ning Commission as a whole, with subsequent appeal to the Borough Assembly. The subdivision ordinance requires only that limited information on topography, soil conditions, or drainage patterns be submitted with the plat application. These information requirements are listed below (from Subdivision Ordinance, Section 20.12.060). 1. A vicinity map showing natural and manmade features, such as shorelines and streams. 2. Approximate locations of areas subject to inundation, flood- ing or stormwater overflow; when adjacent to lakes or non- tidal streams, the line of ordinary high water; wetlands. 3. Contours at suitable intervals when any roads are to be ded- icated, unless the Planning Director or Commission finds evi- dence that road grades will not exceed 6 percent on arterial streets, 10 percent on other streets. 4. Approximate locations of slopes over 20 percent in grade." Possible and Planned Solutions Drainage management plans developed by the City through independent consultants are comprehensive in scope as they identify a complete trunk drainage system for the central core of the City, describe pro- cedures for developers and others to follow in constructing improve- ments to the system, and recommend procedures for the City to follow in implementing drainage management. Although maintenance of the status quo is an alternative, i.e., using this information already developed without the City assuming drainage regulatory powers, this is not desirable because drainage problems in the City will probably continue to increase absent some action. The need for a legal mechanism to implement drainage management lies in the fact that much of the City's drainage system will be designed and constructed by private developers, who assume no long-term respon- sibilities. If all drainage system components were to be constructed and maintained by the City, the City could use the drainage management plan as an internal document for the design of the system. However, as Homer grows, road, sewer, water, and drainage services will have to be provided. Connection of all these utilities to the existing city systems should be accomplished by the developers in accordance wjth standard design specifications and accepted guidelines. Various 8-17 alternative legal mechanisms are available to implement a Drainage Management Plan and are described below. Adoption of the Revised Plan by Resolution At. a minimum the City Council could adopt this report by resolution and use its recommendations as general guidelines. At the present time, the Public Works Department can use the existing plans as a basis for reviewing developers' plans. This approach would be the easiest form of implementation but might not be very effective in guiding ultimate development of the drainage system, since developers and subdividers would not be legally compelled to follow it. it would, however, provide at least a stronger policy statement for staff and officials to fol low when negotiating with developers. This is considered a minimum first step in the plan. Drainage Control Ordinance The next level of implementation is to develop a new ordinance that would require that certain drainage control measures be accomplished. To be effective, the ordinance would provide for the orderly develop- ment of the 'City's drainage system and provide for control powers to be extended to areas in the Borough which physically drain into the City. Borough consent would also be necessary for the City to exer- cise regulatory powers outside Homer's corporate limits. The extent of a drainage ordinance is to document the City's policy and procedures for maintaining and expanding the drainage system. For the most part, the ordinance i -s designed to provide guidelines for future development. The City will, of course, have to also continue the policy of obtaining desired easements for portions of the existing drainage system which go through developed private property, and initiate and finance a capital improvements program to upgrade the existing system. Already, recommendations for a draft ordinance and two draft ordi- nances have been prepared to address drainage control within'Homer and the surrounding area contributing to Homer's drainage system. The most recent draft ordinance, prepared by Quadra Engineering, includes the following features: 1. Requirement for developers to submit drainage plans as part of application for subdivision approval, building permits, zone changes, conditional use and other such applications.. 2. Specifications for the content of a drainage plan. 3. Performance standards to minimize downstream damage and ero- sion, to guide construction practices, and to protect water quality. 8-18 4. Procedures for review, approval , and appeals processes and standards for granting variances. 5. Requirements for easements for all drainage system compon- ents. 6. Bond and liability insurance requirements, inspection and acceptance procedures, enforcement and maintenance responsi- bilities, etc. The provisions of this draft ordinance could be accepted by the Council, or could be modified to streamline requirements suggested for developers, review procedures of the City, etc. Adoption of a drain- age ordinance is a high priority action in the drainage plan. Alternatively, the drainage and erosion control requirements could be adopted as amendments to existing ordinances. Either- or both the subdivision ordinance and zoning ordinance could be revised to include drainage requirements. In any event, if the ordinance is to be suc- cessful, the City must spend additional funds both to enforce the ordinance as well as to advise developers about proper building prac- tices. Borough Subdivision Ordinance The existing Borough subdivision ordinance requires only that limited information on topography, soil conditions, or drainage patterns be submitted with the plat application. The ordinance does not require runoff calculations, a drainage system plan, or drainage easements. As currently written, the ordinance offers few tools for evaluating or solving drainage problems. Making changes to the Borough subdivision ordinance would be more dif- ficult than passing a citywide drainage ordinance since it requires approval by both the Borough Planning Commission and Assembly. How- ever, it may be worthwhile to recommend such changes since the subdiv- ision ordinance is one of the few mechanisms currently available to address drainage problems related to development outside the city's boundaries. Possible additions to the subdivision ordinance are detailed in the 1979 Drainage Management Plan prepared by CH2M-Hi-11, and include the following: 1. More specific requirements for information on drainage, topo- graphy, and soils to be included with the preliminary plat application. (Add to Section 20.12.060.) 2. Requirements for the dedication of drainageway easements. (Add to Section 20.20.040.) 3. Setback and other design standards for lots within a sub- division that abut or include a natural or manmade drainage channel. (Add to Section 20.20.230.) 8-19 4. -Provisions for review of the subdivision plat by the borough engineer or another certified engineer. That review process would include an assessment of drainage data and recommenda- tions to alleviate potential drainage problems. (Add to Section 20.12.080.) 5. Procedural changes whereby the city advisory planning commis- sion would be permitted to review and comment on applications for subdivisions "in areas which are tributary to the city. This procedure could be initiated through a change in the ordinance itself or possibly through an intergovernmental agreement between the City and the Borough. As an alternative, the 1979 plan points out that the City may be able to utilize Section 20.16.060 of the current subdivision ordinance to achieve its objectives. That section prohibits the Borough from giving final approval to a plat until there is a compliance with all city-required improvements. The section reads as follows: "Improvements--Installation agreement required. No final plat of a subdivision located within a first class or home rule city shall be recorded prior to compliance with any city ordinances concerning the installation of improvements. Evidence of such compliance shall be provided by the subdivider in the form of a written statement from the appropriate city official that im- provements required by city ordinance are or will be installed. Such evidence of compliance shall be a part of the final plat submission and the time for action by the Commission as required by 20.16.170 shall not commence until said evidence is sub- mitted." If drainage improvements are required through a City of Homer ordi- nance, the City may then refuse to sign-off on the subdivision until the developer posts a bond or otherwise guarantees to the City's sat- isfaction that the drainage improvements will be constructed. Imple- mentation of City drainage standards in unincorporated areas draining into the City of Homer (with cooperation of the Borough) is another key feature of this plan. Zoning Ordinance Another opportunity for enacting drainage regulations is through the city's zoning ordinance. Possible options identified in the 1979 drainage plan include the following: 1. The zoning map could be revised to include a ' drainageway overlay zone. Within this zone, special regulations and design standards relating to drainage could be imposed. 2. All critical drainageways could be included in the government reserve district. This would involve purchasing the land outright, or acquiring easements. The City could then keep the land in its natural state or develop it as park land. 8-20 3. Drainage regulations and data requirements could be added to existing zoning district regulations (residential, commer- cial, industrial). These requirements might include (a) a site plan showing drainage, topography, and proposed location of structures; (b) runoff data; and (c) a minimum setback for structures from drainage channels. These regulations could also be cross -referenced to the City drainage plan or ordi- nance if adopted. The first recommendation, a drainageway overlay district in the zoning ordinance, is included in the Land Use Plan (Chapter 4). The second recommendation is also included in the Land Use Plan, modified that subdividers be required to dedicate drainage easements as a condition of city plat approvals. The Land Use Plan calls for retention of drainage easements in a natural state unless better drainage is pro- vided. The third re(fommendation has not been implemented; planned actions for drainage management, however, include adoption of a drain- age management ordinance by the City. In addition to legal implementation, the 1979 and 1982 plans also identify several other steps which should be taken to ensure proper management of the drainage system. These include: Management and Administration - At a minimum, the public works direc- tor, or designated representative, could review all improvements to the existing drainage system and the proposed addition of any new drainage system components. Inspection of drainage-related construc- tion activities would also be desirable and should be accomplished by a building (construction) inspector in conjunction with other con- struction inspection duties. Standard Design Criteria - An adequate set of standard design criteria for drainage improvements needs to be developed. Standard drawings and specifications could be adjusted by the public works director to meet the particular requirements of the City. These design standards should be available to developers at the public works department and city hall. These would supplement and elaborate any standards refer- enced in a City drainage ordinance. Staff should be trained in explaining and inspecting for proper practices. Easements - In order to maintain, repair, and replace drainage system components, easements for all such components not within City rights- of-way should be obtained. Acquisition of easements for newly devel- oped property would be spelled out in a drainage ordinance adopted by the City. For areas currently developed and subdivided, drainage easements would be acquired as part of any capital improvement program and elsewhere on an as-needed basis. Objectives, policies. and planned actions for drainage management are summarized below. 8-21 OBJECTIVE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT Provide adequate drainage of Homer's watersheds, without increasing erosion or danger of slope failure, in a cost effective, environmen- tally sound manner. Policy 8 - Subdivisions and construction activities shall acceptably accommodate drainage flows with no adverse downstream impacts. Action 8.1 - Adopt, with or without revision, the 1982 Revise d Drainage Management Plan. Action 8.2 - City encourage the Borough to complete technical studies to identify major drainages and provide for drainage man- agement consistent with City drainage management plans. Action 8.3 - City adopt, and Borough approve, a drainage manage- ment ordinance to provide drainage and soil erosion guidelines for all watersheds draining through the City, covering both incorporated and unincorporated areas. This would involve a City Advisory Planning Co'mmission review of all plats for compliance with the drainage guidelines. Action 8.4 - City and Borough planning commissions recognize and accommodate downslope drainage and soil erosion concerns when reviewing and approving subdivision plats. Action 8.5 - City construct key improvements in downtown drainage system identified in Capital Improvements Plan (Chapter 14). Action 8.6 - City Engineer (or designated representative) review and approve all improvements to drainage system, and inspect construction activities. Action 8.7 - City Engineer and planning director develop standard design criteria for drainage improvements to make available to developers. Action 8.8 - City and Borough Planning Commissions acquire drain- age easements from subdividers during platting process, and request or purchase easements for key drainages from private property owners. 8-22 CHAPTER 9 PARKS AND RECREATION Park and recreation facilities and programs are often neglected in smaller communities due to their expense and the need for other more basic services. Homer has grown rapidly the past ten years. As the community grows, so does the demand for recreation opportunity. Homer has not neglected this need. The city recognizes the therapeutic value of recreation and has an active parks and recreation advisory commission and has been allocating funds for the development of several park facilities. During the course of this planning effort several issues were identi- fied which addressed the subject of parks and recreation. The overall issue was that additional facilities be made available to the resi- dents of the community. Also, there is some concern that access to open space and traditional recreational areas is diminishing. The results of the community survey indicated that park and recreation development was important to the residents and one of the highest demands was that a public fishing pier be established on the spit. In December of 1981, the Homer Parks and Recreation Development Plan was completed. This report included an extensive survey effort of the residents and the tourists, an inventory of existing parks and recrea- tion opportunities and a suggested development plan. Some 50 pro- posals were identified for future parks, trails, campgrounds, play- fields and other facilities. During the-development of the Comprehensive Plan, these proposals were reviewed by the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission. The follow- ing priority list of the top five projects which would benefit mostly residents and a list of those projects which would benefit mostly tourists was assembled. Projects Benefiting Mostly Residents 1. Bayview Avenue Park 2. Senior League Field 3.* High School Softball Field 4. Beluga Lake Park 5. -Day Use Park at end of Spit Projects Benefiting Mostly Tourists 1. Homer Spit Campground (at base of Spit) 2. Tourist/Roadside Park on Bypass 3. Visitor Information Center 4. Cliff Area Campground 5. Boat Launching Facilities 9-1 A more extensive list of possible projects is found in the 1981 Park and Recreation Development Plan. This plan, because of its recent completion, should be relied upon as a part of the comprehensive plan. The Development Plan includes sections on existing park and recreation resources, an analysis of needs, recommendations and a proposed devel- opment plan.. Utilizing this information, recommendations and analysis from this plan, the following goals, objectives and actions are presented. GOAL 1 - Park and recreation opportunities for the residents of the community are to be made available. OBJECTIVE I - Improve existing park and recreation facilities and points of interest to the community to meet the recreation needs of the resident population. Action 1.1 - City shall 'do a sidewalk, bike path and trail master plan. Action 1.2 - Public access and circulation shall be encouraged in wet- I and_s,__Jr_a in ages and other waterfront and scenic areas by acquisition of pedestrian easements and construction of pathways and sidewalks. Action 1.3 - Public access to beaches shall be maintained by the City continuing its ownership of tidelands and acquiring or maintaining key upland access points. Action 1.4 - Secure park and recreation lands in advance of need. W F@ or with the Borough to reclassify and possibly acquire Borough lands forfuture public use. Action 1.5 - Recognize the therapeutic value of recreation programs by cont.inuing support of the recreation director position and community school program. Action 1.6 - Obtain lands, plan and construct facilities per the Homer Park and Recreation Development Plan. Action 1.7 - The scenic integrity of the bypass road shall be main- tained by the purchase of property or easements along the south side of the bypass and development standards on the north side of the road. Action 1.8 - Identify bird habitats, eagle nesting and roosting areas, wetlands and wildlife habitat for future preservation. Action 1.9 - Review large tracts of land outside the city in state or borough control to determine their value for winter sports and exten- sive recreational uses. Seek classification to protect these values. 9-2 GOAL 2 - The needs of the tourists for park and recreation opportunity shall be recognized and endeavored to be met. OBJECTIVE 2 - Improve the park and recreation facilities in Homer and the region to meet the needs of visitors and tourists. Action 2.1 - Costs of recreation facilities which mainly benefit non- residents (such as the Homer Spit) shall be the responsibility of the State and/or Borough. Action 2.2 - Encourage development of Kachemak Bay State Park by state, provided that the state also takes responsibility for mitigat- ing impacts (such as parking, public transportation and overnight accomodations, solid waste, and sewage disposal) on Homer. Action 2.3 - The City shall work with the State of Alaska to finalize and impTe-ment the agreement to purchase, maintain and manage private properties on the west side of Homer Spit and to maintain and manage City properties on the west side of the Spit. Action 2.4 - The City shall encourage the State and Borough to develop, operate and maintain recreation sites in the vicinity of Horner, especially out East End Road. 9-3 CHAPTER 10 HOUSING INTRODUCTION One of the most important assets of any community is its housing. Provision of affordable, adequate shelter is a high priority, and is the subject of much public and private effort throughout Alaska. Homer's housing is generally good in comparison with other Alaskan communities. Contractors,. lenders and residents have been quite active in recent years, building at least 500 units in the past six years alone (based on City building permit records).. Census data show a total of 635 dwelling units were added between 1970 an.d 1980. Because of the generally young age, Homer's housing is not plagued with many of the serious deficiencies which usually accompany older housing, such as poor energy efficiency and a high rate of structural defects. Stil.1, significant problems remain in several areas, and need to be addressed. Among the issues are: (1) The need for improvement in the quality and affordability of the housing of low income and senior citizens. (2) The effect of building and zoning codes on the cost and feas- ibility of housing construction. (3) Suitability of mobile homes or other factory-built housing in Homer's neighborhoods. (4) Location and suitability of multifamily and other higher density housing. (5) The need for temporary housing for seasonal workers and others. ( 6) The need for low cost mechanisms to finance housing during construction. ( 7) The need to provide low cost roads, water and sewer service to additional housing sites. BACKGROUND Traditionally, most of Homer's housing has been single family homes built on individual lots. With the predominance of seasonal occupa- tions in fishing, tourism, education and farming, many residents have had a hand in building most or all of their houses. Moreover, many residents supplement their incomes by working their off-season in con- struction. As a result, Homer has a large pool of skilled labor available, and has a high rate of new housing construction. Figure 10-1 summarizes these trends. 10-1 128 117 Legend: MULTI FAMILY UNITS MOBILE HOMES 92 13-SINGLE FAMILY UNITS F1 ALL TYPES COMBINED. 29 (79 60 55 21 -'(9) 14) 46 3S f 51 (2) 17 (33) (68) (42 (40) *(29) 39 12 13 39) 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 IS71-1978-1979 1980 1981 Figure 10- 1 - Trends in Housing Starts by Type of Unit, 1970-1981 (Source: Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1981 and 1982) The rate of new housing construction has not been even, however. The first half of the 1970's, for example, appeared to have a fairly low rate of new construction, averaging about 18 permits issued by the City each year from 1971 to 1975. Beginning in 1976, the rate explod- ed, reaching a peak of 128 units authorized in 1979.' The annual aver- age was 90 units authorized from 1976 to 1980, or a rate about five times as great as for the first half of the decade. Several factors would appear to explain this. One is that City records have been spotty, but improving. Building permit compliance was fairly low, and the number of units started probably was quite a bit higher. (Census counts indicate that the actual number of units added was about one third higher than the number of permitted units.) The other major factor in the spectacular growth in housing starts was the combination of rapid population and economic growth, and growth in State-subsidized lending programs which occurred at the time. Another interesting trend is the composition of new housing starts. Figure 10-1 shows that the peak growth years of 1977 through 1979 were characterized by large proportions of multiple family housing and mobile homes. This reflects some of the speculation surrounding the Lower Cook Inlet oil lease sale@ and oil exploration, since multiple family and mobile housing are less expensive and more quickly con- structed, and tend to show up in boom periods. By contrast, single family housing starts have tended to remain much more stable -- rang- ing from 33 to 68 over the period 1976 to 1981 -- than multifamily or mobile home housing. This tends to validate at least the more recent housing start figures. The composition figures also point to a more fundamental change in Homer's housing: an increasing emphasis on multifamily, as opposed to all types of single family (factory and site built) housing. Figure 10-2 compares the proportions of Homer's housing in 1977 which were single family, mobile home and multifamily with building permits authorized from 1977 to 1981. The comparisons show declines in the proportion of single family and factory built housing, but a very large increase in multifamily units. While the boom in multifamily housing appears to have been spurred on by the prospect of rapid growth, the Homer area has now grown to a size where rising land costs make multifamily units increasingly attractive. Rising land costs may also be responsible for the rela- tively smaller number of mobile homes authorized over the past several years, as land values tend to make it more expensive to develop lots for mobile homes. In the future, therefore, it is likely that town- houses, apartments and mobile home parks, all featuring increased housing densities, will become increasingly common. POSSIBLE AND PLANNED SOLUTIONS Of the seven issues listed earlier, most require some involvement of public and private organizations to make any significant improvements. 10-3 Multifamily 36% (ML Types) 11% 7% Mobile Homes 31% (Single Family) 14% 1 Single Family 85% Site-Built 58% Housing 50% _j _j Total Total Units Authorized Year Round Year Round 1977-1981 Units Units 1970 1977 Fiqure 10-2 - Year Round City of Homer Housing, 1970 and 1977, versus New Units Authorized, 1977-1981, by Type of Unit .Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census and Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1981 and 1982. The first issue, need for improvement in housing quality and afford- ability, is currently addressed by State and a few Federal programs which provide loan subsidies and operate subsidized housing units. A private group is developing a senior citizen's housing project with State assistance. Short of direct participation in financing these programs, the City and local private groups can assist the process by acquiring or designating housing sites which are serviced by roads, water and sewer, and are easily accessible to commercial areas. Accessibility is particularly important for senior citizen housing. Development standards can also play a part. Although the City's zon- ing and subdivision standards are not very restrictive, some changes, for example more liberal allowance of mobile home parks, would have a beneficial effect on cost of housing. Unfortunately, they tend to have a negative effect on single family neighborhood property values. Weighing these considerations, planned actions to address the first issue include working to designate mobile home park sites and perform- ance standards, and working with the State and private groups to assure acquisition of housing sites which meet accessibility, road and utility criteria. Planned solutions for the second issue, effect of building and zoning codes on the cost and feasibility of housing construction, are simi- lar. While the building and zoning codes are generally not excessive, a possible solution is to review Homer's zoning and subdivision stan- dards, analyzing the effect of each standard on housing cost, and identify unnecessary or excessive provisions. Revisions can then be drafted. The plan also calls for code enforcement to assure that new housing construction results in safe, durable dwellings. The third issue, suitability of mobile homes in residential'areas, was addressed above and in the land use plan. Planned actions related to this issue are simply to identify suitable areas and development stan- dards, with consistent enforcement of them, along with possible incen- tives to encourage good development practices. Location and suitability of multifamily and other higher density hous- ing can be addressed by planning and constructing utility and road extensions. Higher density housing will be encouraged to locate in urban residential areas. Over the next several years the Planning Commission should monitor to make sure that enough developable land is available for higher density housing, and review development standards to make sure that neighborhood integrity will be protected. Temporary housing for seasonal worke *rs and others, identified in the fifth issue, can be addressed by any of a number of actions. The City can develop housing directly, or -develop tent and trailer pads with utilities, leasing them to employers and seasonal workers who could install temporary or permanent units. Alternatively, the City could lease undeveloped land, and let employers complete site improvements (water, sewer, restrooms, showers, etc.). A third possibility is to identify and post sites where camping will be allowed, and provide showers and restrooms nearby. Planned solutions for this issue are 10-5 for identification and posting of camping sites, along with encourag- i'ng employers to lease City or State land for temporary housing, and City operation of centralized public showers and restrooms on the Spit. The sixth issue, need for low cost mechanisms to finance housing dur- ing construction, cannot be addressed directly unless the City were to reverse a long standing policy and decide to begin direct lending to builders. An alternative action is to encourage the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation to begin this type of lending activity. The latter is the planned solution. The final issue, the need to provide low cost roads and utilities to housing sites, can be best addressed by following coordinated water, sewer, roads and capital improvements plans. Since these plans empha- size priority for serving higher density areas, costs can be spread out over more households, and costly duplication of improvements (e.g., wel-Is and septic tanks) can be avo.ided. Planned goals, objec- tives, policies and actions for housing are summarized on the follow- ing pages. GOAL - HOUSING Safe, comfortable, affordable housing for all residents which expresses individual tastes while respecting neighborhood standards. OBJECTIVE Safe, comfortable housing for all residents. Policy 1 The City shall encourage the State and private groups to provide low income and senio r citizens with opportunities for afford- able housing. Action 1.1 - City work with State and private groups to locate and acquire sites for subsidized housing which have existing or planned roads and water and sewer service. Action 1.2 - City identify sites for mobile home parks, amend zoning to permit in these locations. Action 1.3 - City carry out capital improvements program to pro- vide public services to planned housing areas. Policy 2 - The City will enforce building standards, with enforcement of plumbing, fire and electrical standards the responsibility of the State. Action 2.1 - City research and adopt a building ordinance, hire a building inspector to enforce the ordinance. Action 2.2 - City Council, by resolution, request State to provide inspection and enforcement of State fire, plumbing and electrical codes. 10-6 Action 2.3 - Planning Commission review zoning and subdivision standards for unnecessary or excessive standards, and recommend appropriate modifications to City Council. Policy 3 - Businesses hiring temporary or seasonal workers will con- T'inueto be encouraged to provide suitable housing for their workers. Action 3.1 - City review possible housing sites, negotiate ground lease with employers. Action 3.2 - City identify and post sites where tents or other seasonal housing will be allowed. Policy 4 - Multi-family and other higher density housing will be encouraged to locate in urban residential areas. Action 4.1 - Implement by completing utility extensions, road upgrades and other public improvements in urban residential areas (also, see Action 1.2, this chapter). Policy 5 - The City will encourge the Alaska Housing Finance Corpora- tion to begin a program to provide low cost construction financing for rural housing. Action 5.1 - City Council resolution to Alaska Housing Finance Corporation or legislature. OBJECTIVE - Afforable housing for all residents which reflects indi- vidual tastes and neighborhood integrity. Policy 6 - The Capital Improvements Plan will be utilized to encourage new housing construction in areas planned for residential development. Action 6.1 - City Council adopt Capital Improvements Plan and implement as part of annual capital improvements budget. 10-7 CHAPTER 11 PUBLIC SAFETY, SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES PLAN FIRE PROTECTION Homer's fire protection-is provided by an independent, non-profit cor- poration, the Homer Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. (HVFD). The HVFD has a long tradition, having been formed in 1954, ten years prior to the incorporation of the City of Homer. As an independent organiza- tion, the HVFD serves the greater Homer area, deriving its funding from service contracts with the cities of Homer and Kachemak; other revenues come from reimbursements and grants from state agencies, and from donations, interest, earnings and miscellaneous sources. As an independent organization, the HVFD represents a means of provid- ing essential services over the entire greater Homer area, and of attempting to keep costs at a minimum while spreading them among the groups who are served. This section examines some of the major advan- tages and disadvantages of the HVFD approach, examining alternatives and outlining a plan for the future. Background The HVFD operates under articles of incorporation and bylaws adopted by its members. According to the bylaws, direction of HVFD is pro- vided by a Board of Trustees elected by members. New membership, and eligibility to vote for Board members, is open only to persons active- ly participating in the HVFD and accepted in two different votes of the membership. Opposition by three or more members on either of the two votes results in rejection or expulsion. There is no formalized provision for citizen or voter overview of the HVFD. Thus, for example, if an official of the HVFD was opposed by the community but was acceptable to the membership, there is currently no procedure for resolving the grievance unless one of the cities withholds operating funding, endangering the HVFD's ability to con- tinue providing needed services. Similarly, the Board of Trustees can incur liabilities in any amount it chooses, without oversight of either voters or officials of either city (HVFD, 1982). The HVFD provides a variety of services, including fire protection, rescue and emergency medical service, and maintains a strong commit- ment to training of both its own members and the general public in fire prevention and emergency medical treatment. HVFD records for 1979 through 1981 show. a rapidly increasing amount of effort, as measured by service calls and personnel hours, devoted to these func- tions. Over the period 1979 to 1981, total hours rose from 5,000 to over 8,900, or an average annual rate of increase of 33 percent (not including maintenance hours). 11-1 A large part of the increase came from increased training, as total personnel hours involved in fire or rescue calls increased at an aver- age annual Fa-te of 24 percent. The total number of fire and rescue calls increased at a rate of only 14 perce-rTt- -for 1979 through 1981, and 16 percent for 1977 through 1981. By contrast, average total personnel hours devoted. to training and meeting activities increased at a rate of over 38 percent per year from 1979 to 1981, reflecting a stronger emphasis on training and the need to train an increasing mem- bership. Table 11-1 summarizes these figures.- Of course while these figures do not cover a sufficiently long time period to definitively establish any trends, several observations can be made. One observation is that quality of service, and independent ratings of that service, have shown significant improvement. Homer's fire ratings for 1982 have improved from 7 to 5 for homes and commer- cial buildings served by water hydrants, and from 9 to 8 for. off- hydrant residential (commercial off-hydrant was unchanged). (Fire insurance ratings are determined by an independent inspection agency, the Insurance Service Office, which considers availability and train- ing of personnel, and availability and capacity of water service and fire fighting equipment in making its ratings. The ratings are on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the best. By way of comparison, Homer's on-hydrant residential rating of 5 is the same as ratings for Kodiak, Kenai and Seward, and better than ratings for Soldotna, Cordova, Palmer, Wasilla, Dillingham and Seldovia.) The effect of the improvement in fire ratings is a reduction in fire insurance premiums ranging from 9 to 37 percent for on-hydrant homeowners and 10 to 25 percent for on-hydrant commercial establishments (HVFD, 1982). Another indicator of service quality, average time taken to respond to calls has also improved dramatically. Following completion of the new fire station at Pioneer Avenue and Lake Street, a residency program was instituted wherein several HVFD members live at the station full time, enabling equipment to be brought to the scene of a fire or acci- dent much more quickly. As a result, average time taken to respond to a call dropped 63 percent, from 3.46 to 1.28 minutes (HVFD, 1982). Another observation is that the rate of increase in the number of ser- vice calls, which averaged 16 percent from 1977 to 1981, increased much faster than population, which grew at about seven percent. Total personnel hours spent on calls, and total recorded personnel hours on all activities, increased at much faster rates, averaging 24 and 34 percent per year, respectively. Table 11-1 summarizes these and other figures on the HVFD's operations. Several factors contributed to the rapid recorded increases in calls and personnel hours. One factor is that record keeping has improved with the recent addition of a paid manager, resulting in more-consis- tent and complete recording of service calls and personnel hours. A second factor is that the HVFD has invested a great deal of effort in advertising its services, responding to calls and in training. As 11-2 Table 11-1 SUMMARY,OF HOMER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ACTIVITIES 1977 - 1981 Total Personnel Hours and Annual Service Incidents by Activity Average Change Activity 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 M Ffre Calls No. of Calls 40 39 62 45 103 26.7% Hrs. on Calls NA NA 725 792 1,539 90.3 Rescue Calls No. of Calls 153 187 205 184 245 12.5 Hrs. on Calls NA NA 1,062 940 1,222 7.3 Fire & Rescue Calls Combined No. of Calls 193 226 267 229 348 15.9 Hrs. on Calls NA NA 1,787 1,732 2,761 24.3 Training & Meetings Hrs. Fire Training NA NA 1,625 2,107 1,930 13.9 Hrs. Resc. Training NA NA 778 2,719 3,217 103.4 Total Training NA NA 2,403 4,826 5,147 46.4 Total Meeting Hours NA NA 810 939 1,011 11.7 z Total Training & NA NA 3,213 5,765 6,158 38.4 Meeting Hours Total Recorded Hours NA NA 5,001 7,499 8,919 33.6 NA = Not Available Source: Homer Volunteer Fire Department, 1982 11-3 the quality of service has improved, residents may have had a greater inclination to report small fires (such as chimney fires) and acci- dents, raising the total number of calls and hours on calls. Unfor- tunately, no data are available to objectively measure changes in the average severity of calls. A third, more serious, possibility is that fire danger has increased. State fire codes are only lightly enforced, and the HVFD believes that dangerous conditions have proliferated. A prominent example is improperly installed wood stoves and other heaters (HVFD, 1982). Profile of Services The HVFD has a total membership of 58 members, plus a single paid staff member who serves as a station manager. The Department current- ly operates nine pumper and tanker trucks ranging in age from 9 to 38 years old, an ambulance and two utility trucks (HVFD, 1982). Most of the HVFDIs revenues -- typically about 80 percent of total funds and in-kind services received -- originate from the City of Homer. The remainder comes from a service contract with Kachemak City (about six percent of revenues) and miscellaneous grants, donations and reimbursements from State agencies for ambulance and wildfire fighting services in unincorporated areas (the reimbursements are based on labor and equipment hours expended). Moreover, the City of Homer's contribution has been growing at the rate of nearly 16 percent per year, compared with total annual revenue growth of 14 percent, indicating that an increasing share of the cost is being paid by the City of -Homer. Fire protection and emergency medical service expenditures are growing even more rapidly, averaging 21 percent per year for total expenditures, and 30 percent annually for operating expenditures alone. Table 11-2 summarizes revenue and expenditure data for the HVFD. Little is available in the way of information on how costs of service are incurred. Generally, the City of Homer requires a fairly high level of service due to its relatively large property values, and much of the cost of providing service is relatively fixed. Equipment and staff must be available no matter how frequently or infrequently it is used. Three possible methods (or a combination of them) can be used to allocate the costs. One is to allocate costs based only on the geographic distribution of service calls. Using this method, the City of Homer's share of total annual costs in 1981-1982 would be 86 per- cent, while Kachemak's share would be 1 percent. Fritz Creek and Diamond Ridge's share would be 4 percent, and the State of Alaska's share would be 10 percent. Table 11-3 summarizes cost allocation under different methods. A second method would consider only the value of property to be pro- tected in allocating service costs. This method assumes some rather difficult measurement problems can be solved (for example, measuring and allocating costs of protecting boats which do not remain in Homer's small boat harbor year round, thereby avoiding assessment). 11-4 Table 11-2 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES OF HOMER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Fiscal Years Ending 1981 to 1983 Annual FY 1980/81 FY 1981/82 FY 1982/83 Change (Actual) (Projected) (Budgeted) (Percent) REVENUES (by source) City of Homer $106,462 $140,652 $142,244 15.6% City of Kachemak 9,000 9,000 -- Other 17,174 23,538 8,650 -29.0_ .Total Funds $123,636 $173,190. $159,894 13.7% EXPENDITURES Operating Expend. Personal Services $ 22,289 $ 29,742 $ 42,274 37.7% Office Supplies 1,745 1,000 1,000 -24.3 Operating Supplies 25,195 36,500 38,200 23.1 Other Services and Charges 39,806 4711504 689870 31.5 Total Oper. Exp. $ 89,035 $114,746 $150,344 30.0% Capital Outlay 23,241 34,555 13,550 23.6% Total Expenditures $112,276 $149,301 $163,894 20.8% SURPLUS (Deficit) $ 11,360 $ 23,889 $ 4,000 Source: City of Homer Budget, Fiscal Year 1982-1983 11-5 Table 11-3 ACTUAL AND PROJECTED COST ALLOCATION OF HOMER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT COSTS COMPARED WITH POSSIBLE ALLOCATION METHODS Avg. Percentage Share of Total Cost. of Cost Borne If Based Upon FY's 1980/81, Service 81/82 & 82/83 Calls Population City of Homer 85% 86% 61% City of Kachemak 4% 1% 8% Fritz Creek & 0* 4% 31% Diamond Ridge State Facilities 10% 0% (harbor, Sterling Highway, airport, etc.) Some reimbursements paid by State Forestry for wildland fires Source: Pacific Rim Planners and nEngineers, Olympic Associates Co. 114 In 1981, Homer's total assessed valuation was $118.6 million, compared to Kachemak City's $9.4 million. Nearby unincorporated areas are not reported separately, but unincorporated areas of the South Peninsula Hospital Service Area (including Ninilchik, Anchor Point, Diamond Ridge, Fritz Creek and Halibut Cove) have total 1981 assessed valua- tion of $61.5 million. Using this method, Homer's share would be about 12.6 times Kachemak City's; however, for Fiscal Year 1982/1983 Homer's share is about 15.8 times that of Kachemak City's. Without more detailed data, the comparison cannot be made for unincorporated areas. Costs could also be allocated based upon population. Homer's share of total population in Homer, Kachemak City, Fritz Creek and Diamond Ridge precincts in 1978 was 61 percent, compared to 8 percent for Kachemak City and 31 percent for Diamond Ridge and Fritz Creek voting precincts. Overall, then, if population is used as a basis for allocating costs, the City of Homer is paying too large a share relative to other. areas, particularly unincorporated areas, whose only contribution to revenues are reimbursements for wildland fires. If the service call method is used, Homer's current share of costs is about right, while Kachemak's share is too large and unincorporated area's share is again too small. No firm conclusions can be drawn about cost allocation using the assessed valuation method without additional data, except that Homer's share is probably too large relative to Kachemak City's. Issues Problems and issues identified to date relating to fire protection and emergency services in Homer can be grouped into two major categories. One is the type of fire protection and emergency services needs likely to be faced in the future. The second relates to how the response is organized. Issues include: 1. Increased potential for fire and explosion on the Homer Spit created by harbor expansion and new industrial and commercial activities and by the existing tank farm (HVFD, 1982). 2. Increased fire protection needs for large new commercial and public buildings (for example, need for sprinkler systems, fire code enforcement, and fire protection capabilities for buildings higher than the 35 foot height which current equipment can serve, should the City's 35 foot height limitation incorporated in the zoning ordinance be relaxed). 3. Inability to respond to fires over unimproved roads during wet or icy conditions. Problem roads mentioned by the HVFD include East Hill, West Hill, Main Street, Kachemak Way, and unpaved segments of East End Road. Also, Sterling Highway from Pioneer Avenue to Baycrest Hill is a problem during icy road conditions. 11-7 4. Water system improvements continue to be needed, particular- ly "looping" to assure that water lines can be supplied fy@om either end of a pipe, effectively doubling its fire flow capa- city. 5. Organization and financing of the Homer Volunteer Fire Department continues to be an issue. Facets include the Depart- ment's autonomy from voters and government officials, cost allo- cation and financing of service provided to unincorporated areas. 6. Fire and emergency service building and equipment needs also continue to be an issue, including Spit fire stations, emergency communication systems, and new fire, rescue and emergency medical service equipment. 7. Staffing of the HVFD is a potential problem. As the Homer area grows, fire protection needs may begin to overly tax the mostly volunteer staff, as technical skills, training require- ments and service calls all increase. Policy Alternatives Most of the policy questions to be decided relate to the level of service to be provided and to the organization and financing of the service. The HVFD has identified specific service, equipment and capital improvement needs in order to provide what it considers acceptable fire and emergency medical services. Most of the items constitute improvements in service, although some involve replacement of worn equipment or expansion to keep up with growing service needs. These improvements are summarized in Table 11-4. The Insurance Service Office (ISO) has fire service standards for on- and off-hydrant service. ISO ratings have noted four areas of deficiency: lack of full time fire department staff, inadequate pump- ing and water storage capacity, outmoded equipment and poor fire hydrant distribution. Most of these concerns are being addressed, as reflected by the recent improvement in fire ratings. As improvements continue to be made, Homer's fire ratings will also probably improve at least another point. The central policy question in this area is what level of service should be provided, and whether the increases are desired by Homer's residents. The public opinion survey of city residents indicated strong support for City funding of fire protection services, whi le a quarter of those city residents polled, and nearly 40 percent of non- residents, indicated that their neighborhood has fire hazard problems. Thus, residents appear to support some improvements in fire service. The other key policy question is the organization and financing of fire and emergency medical services. The current organization -- the HVFD -- is able to offer good service at a fairly low cost, 'but is not directly accountable to residents and businesses through an electoral process, and lacks the power to compel those who use. the service to pay their fair share. 11-8 Table 11-4 FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE EQUIPOMENT AND CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS Item Justification 1. Quick Response pumper truck Replace aging pumper, also with 44 or 6x6 drive train add better capabilities. 2. Quick Response tanker Improve pumping capabilities.' 3. Personnel carrier Improve crew carrying capabilities. 4. Aerial ladder truck Improve capabilities; needed if buildings built over 35' high. 5. Modular ambulance Improve capabilities. 6. Heavy rescue truck Improve capabilities. 7. Station 1 improvements Improve capabilities. (paving, telephone and intercom improvements) 8. Construct new Station 2 on Improve capabilities, Homer Spit (2 bay with handle growing needs. living quarters) 9. Construct dry standpipe Improve capabilities. system and mini fire stations at small boat harbor 10. Area-wide communication Improve capabilities. system with backup power source 11. Fire fighting training Provide improved facility training opportunities. Source: Homer Volunteer Fire Department, 1982, and Insurance Service Office 11-9 Other areas of the Borough have chosen to organize service districts, which may levy a limited property tax in unincorporated areas. The service district would essentially be a creature of the Borough, oper- ated by Borough staff and regulated by the Borough Assembly. Account- ability to voters would be improved, and revenues would be both sta- bilized and raised perhaps more equitably. Also, with a larger tax base, a service district would have greater financial capability to borrow money to acquire major buildings and capital improvements. Under this alternative, the service district could contract with other cities to consolidate services and save a number of fixed costs (for example, shared administration). However, once a special district has been created, there is no legal impetus to force it to consolidate with other agencies. The chapter on local government summarizes some of the problems inherent with overlapping special purpose agencies. While, ultimately, fire services might best be provided by a single general purpose government organization, this prospect does not appear feasible at present. The Kenai Peninsula Borough may choose to assume fire protection powers, but both the assembly and voters have consis- tently chosen not to assume additional powers. Alternatively, either of the two cit'ies could annex additional areas or extend the service under the extraterritorial powers specified in Title '29 of Alaska Statutes. The former appears impractical until more areawide services can be feasibly provided; the latter alternative could be used, but taxing powers might not apply. A final area which will be addressed in the coming years is staffing. Assuming that an areawide approach continues to be used, additional paid staff positions will need to be added in training and administra- tion as burdens on the current volunteer staff increase. Over the next five years, planned additions include paid fire and emergency medical chiefs and an assistant station manager. Other possible staff additions might include a Homer Spit station manager and a training coordinator. LAW ENFORCEMENT Like other public services, Homer's law enforcement efforts have faced rising demands as Homer has grown. For example, Alaska Consultants, Inc. (1979) reported an eight-fold increase in service 'calls handled each year between 1970 and 1978, or an average yearly growth rate exceeding 30 percent. Law enforcement needs are related to much more than simply resident population, however. Tourists, seasonal workers and transients com- bine to swell summertime service calls to twice the level of winter- time calls, and transients probably had a great deal to do with the jump in law enforcement problems which occurred in 1976 through 1978, at the time of the first oil lease sales. Thus, for example, the City's total of 74 arrests in 1980 is far less than the 93 and 144 reported in 1977 and 1978, respectively (Alaska Consultants, Inc., 1979 and Alaska Department of Law, 1981). 11-10 Even though the severe- law enforcement problems associated with the oil lease sales have not fully materialized as previous studies have predicted (Alaska Consultants, Inc., 1979), the underlying trend in Homer's crime rates has been to grow to a point where they now meet or exceed the State average for virtually every category (Table 11-5). While there are some difficulties with comparing overall rates (due to possible under-reporting of crimes in the lightly patrolled rural areas of the State), Table 11-5 shows substantially higher crime rates in all categories except criminal homicide and robbery. Homer's police station was constructed in 1978. With total floor space of 3,000 square feet, it accommodates five offices and a jail with four ce-lls. Two of the offices are leased to the Alaska State Patrol and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Staff of -the City Public Safety Department includes six police officers, an animal con- trol officer and five dispatchers. In addition, the harbormaster and harbor staff are commissioned with police powers. Issues, Possible Solutions and Planned Actions Relatively few issues have been identified which relate to law enforcement. The few issues include: � A need for increased expertise and capabilities for conducting criminal investigations (especially property crimes). � A need to discourage criminal activity. � A need for expanded facilities to keep up with growing space and equipment needs. Financing of police services provided to unincorporated areas is not as serious an issue as for many other services (such as fire protec- tion and library services), since the State of Alaska has increased its law enforcement coverage by three State Patrol officers. Hence, the City is not called upon to provide services to unincorporated areas as frequently as it is for other services. Over the coming years, however, law enforcement needs in unincorpo- rated areas will grow to a point where higher quality, regionally coordinated services will be needed. At that time, a better form of regionalized services, perhaps involving service districts, annexa- tion, contracting or borough assumption of areawide or non-areawide powers will be needed.. Objectives, policies and planned actions for public safety are listed below. OBJECTIVE - PUBLIC SAFETY Provide a high, improving level of protection of life and property in a cost effective manner. 11-11 Table 11-5 COMPARISON OF HOMER AND STATE OF ALASKA CRIME RATES ACTUAL OFFENSES REPORTED TO POLICE (Rates per 1,000 Residents) HOMER ALASKA No./1-000 Percen:F No./lOOO Percent VIOLENT CRIMES Criminal Homicide 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.1% Forcible Rape 1.4 1.3 0.7 1.1 Aggravated Assault 10.4 9.9 2.9 4.8 Robbery 0.0 0.0 0.9 -1.5 Total Violent Crimes 11.8 11.2% 4.6 7.5% PROPERTY CRIMES Burglary 21.7 20.7% 14.1 23.0% Larceny 62.9 59.9 36.7 .59.7 motor Vehicle Theft 8.6 8.2 6.0 -9.8 Total Property Crimes 93.2 88.8% 56.8 92.5% TOTAL OFFENSES 105.0 100.0% 61.4 100.0% Source: Alaska Department of Law, Criminal Justice Planning Agency, 1981 11-12 Policy 1 - The City, the Borough, the Homer Volunteer Fire Department a F_ n other agencies will work together, coordinating resources and activities to continue to improve public safety. Action 1.1 - Establish a Homer area public safety coordinating committee, consisting of representatives of City and State law enforcement agencies, the Homer Volunteer Fire Department, the Coast Guard and the South Central Hospital District, among others. Action 1.2 - Coordinating committee, with Borough and State assistance, develop a public safety and emergency management plan (including Homer Spit evacuation plan), including recommended means of coordinating financial and physical resources. (See also Local Government Plan, Chapter 13.) Action 1.3 - Complete capital improvements and continue personnel training programs to improve service capabilities. Action 1.4 - Pursue a means of integrating physical and financial resources of Homer area public service providers. Action 1.5 - Conduct a major effort to reduce all types of crime in Homer to less than the State average. Action 1.6 - Continue attempts to lower fire rating in Homer. EDUCATION Along with other public -services, Homer's education needs have grown rapidly. Over the 13 year period from fall, 1968 to fall, 1981, enrollment in Homer's public schools have grown by an average of 4.8 percent per year. The October, 1981 total enrollment of 917 students was nearly 84 percent higher than the October, 1968 total of 499. If the total enrollment associated with Homer's Christian school (which opened during this period) is included, Homer's student population probably doubled over the past decade. Homer's public schools include the East Homer Elementary School, and the Homer Junior-Senior High School, with October, 1981 enrollments of 388 and 529 students, respectively. The elementary school serves the Homer area alone, while the junior-senior high school serves Homer, Anchor Point and the Old Believers community at Nikolaevsk. Both schools are operated by the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District. The elementary school has a total of 14 general classrooms, a media center, library, a multi-use room for art and music, another multi-use room for physical education and cafeteria, and administrative offices. The staff includes an administrator and 18 teachers along with a hand- ful of support staff. The junior-senior high school, occupying a three building complex on the west end of Homer, has 19 general class- rooms (nine of which were built in 1979), a vocational education shop, business education and home economics classrooms, offices, a swimming 11-13 pool, a gymnasium, an athletic field, a track and a hock@y rink. The staff includes two administrators, 28 teachers and six to eight sup- port' staff. The junior-senior high school also supports a community schools program. Both schools have experienced growing pains, and will need substantial upgrading or replacement. A new high school has been designed and construction is scheduled to begin in 1983. With this expansion, the high school could accommodate at least another decade of growth, and the existing junior-senior high school would have sufficient size to serve as a middle school. The elementary school would still need expansion and replacement of temporary structures. Beyond building needs, continuing adult education should be expanded and improved with the continuing assistance of Kenai Community College. Objectives, policies and planned actions for educ.ation are listed below. OBJECTIVE - EDUCATION High quality, diverse elementary, secondary and adu-lt educational opportunities for all residents. Policy 1 - The City and Borough shall work closely together to ensure that itional classroom and support facilities are provided to keep pace with growing space needs. Action 1.1 - Homer Advisory School Board, City Planning Commis- sion, City Council and Borough work closely together in selecting sites for new school facilities, working to ensure that the fol- lowing criteria are met: a. Sites should be serviced by existing or planned water and sewer lines (as per the City's adopted water and sewer plans). b. Sites should be on a main existing or planned arterial road (as per the City's adopted Streets and Roads Plan). c. Pedestrian access by students and visitors shall be con- sidered and accommodated. Policy 2 - Improvement of continuing and adult education opportunities wilT-be encouraged. Action 2.1 - City and Borough -work together to promote the exten- sion of Kenai Community College to provide additional continuing education opportunities. Action 2.2 - City and Borough work together to promote coordina- tion of community schools, public schools and the Kenai Community College. 11-14 HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES Homer's health services are provided by a combination of public and private agencies. The South Peninsula Hospital is owned by the Kenai Peninsula Borough and operated by a private, non-profit group, South Peninsula Hospital, Inc. A portion of the hospital's revenues come from property tax levies for the South Peninsula Service District, which includes Homer, Anchor Point, Kachemak City, Ninilchik, and Diamond Ridge. The hospital is a 17 bed facility, first completed in 1956 and expanded in 1977, with specialized rooms for surgery, delivery, nur- sery, emergency, x-ray, laboratory and outpatient services. Emergency medical transportation is provided by the Homer Volunteer Fire Depart- ment . Staff available to the hospital includes four resident physi- cians. At the time the hospital was first opened, it had low occupancy rates, averaging between 30 and 40 percent, allowing considerable room for growth. And growth has occurred. The 1977 level of 1,981 patient days (including outpatients) has grown to 2,668 in 1981, a one third increase, and an average annual growth rate of 76.7 percent (Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1982 and Alaska Consultants, Inc., 1979). As the hospital's patient load continues to move toward, and eventu- ally exceeds, 50 percent average occupancy, expansion will again need to be considered. Future improvements will need to focus on special- ized services, such as trauma care and diagnostic facilities. A 3.5 million dollar bond issue was approved for expanded diagnostic facili- ties and additional, unfinished space; construction is to begin in spring, 1983. Further investments will be needed to finish this space. The Alaska Department of Health and Social Services funds a public health center in a small building located in the Central Business Dis- trict. Services provided there include public health nursing, social work and mental health counseling. Like the hospital, it faces rapid increases in service demands; the mental health caseload more than doubled from 56 to 113, in the two years from 1979 to 1981. (Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1982). Two other private groups provide social services in Homer. The Cook Inlet Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse offers eduction, information and intervention programs in alcohol and drug abuse primarily with state aid, supplemented by private contributions. The Kachemak Women's Resource Center offers emergency housing for battered women, as well as counseling, support groups and educational programs for women. It is funded primarily by State aid and private contributions, supplemented by a limited amount of City funds. Objectives, policies and planned actions for health and social ser- vic@s are listed below. 11-15 OBJECTIVE SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES Provide high quality, improving social and health services to all Homer area residents and visitors. Policy 1 - The City will work closely with the South Central Hospital District, private groups and the State to ensure that additional social and health services and facilities are provided to keep pace with growing demands and space needs. Action 1.1 - Investigate and utilize Federal, State and private funding sources. Action 1.2 - Organize a means of equitably distributing costs for services rendered. LIBRARY The Homer Public Library, by ordinance, is a department of the City. However, in many ways it is a community public service project. Although funded by the city government, many of the services, mater- ials and assistance it provides could not be maintained if it were not for the community support and the volunteer hours which are given throughout the year. The library's policy states, "The Homer Public Library is established to provide books and other library materials as a source of informa- tion, entertainment, intellectual development and enrichment of the community. It is the aim of the library to help the community grow and develop its potential through the benefits of effective library service." The community is represented by the seven member Homer Public Library Advisory Board. Also actively involved with the library is the non- profit corporation, Friends of the Homer Public Library. This group is organized for charitable and educational purposes connected with the library. The Homer library currently has three full-time paid staff positions. These positions are: librarian, library assistant, and library aide. The library is currently on a 5-day per week schedule; thus the full- time staff must be and is supplemented by volunteers to cover the number of hours the facility is open per week. The staffing at this level is not sufficient in terms of back-up for allotted annual leave, sick leave and unexpected emergencies. The sporadic nature of volunteer service in terms of both numbers par- ticipating and number of hours contributed prevents efficient use of this supplemental service. To illustrate: in fiscal year 1980-1981 (July I - June 30) a total of 1,329.75 hours were contributed by 82 different persons. The entire contributed hours was less than that of 11-16 three quarters of a full-time employee. For the fiscal year 1981-1982 (July I - June 30) the number of volunteers declined to 46 persons, and the number of hours to 953.80, which is less than half of a full-- time employee. Given the numbers above, i-t is evident that a great deal of time must be spent by the librarian and library assistant in training, assigning tasks, coordinating and supervising volunteers. Although the contri- butions of time are useful, there is a loss in effectiveness and effi- cient use of paid staff who must oversee the services provided. The amount of use the library receives is reflected in the circulation and attendance figures which are kept by the library staff. Table 11-6 shows the usage in the fiscal years ending June 30, 1980, through June 30, 1982. Table 11-6 HOMER PUBLIC LIBRARY USAGE Fiscal Years 1980, 1981 and 1982 Avg. Annual 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 % Increase Circulation Adult 10,876 14,014 18,435 30.1% Juvenile 9,097 10$098 12,931 19.2% Total @9,973 24,112 31,366 25.3% Attendance Adult 8,335 11,474 15,529 36.5% Juvenile 1,987 3,569 4,782 55.1% Total 10,322 15,043 20,311 40.2% Source: Homer Public Library Table 11-6 indicates that there has been an increase in circulation over the past three years of about 25 percent per year. During this same period, the population increased by about 8 percent per year, or on a per resident basis, the net gain was nearly 17 percent per year. The library is at a point now where the facility is not sufficient to handle the current users' demands, and decisions must be made as to the City's commitment to the library. The current need is to expand the parking lot to accommodate more vehicles, to expand the building, and to provide more collection and storage space. The primary source of funding for the library is from the general fund of the City of Homer. Table 11-7 shows library revenues and number of books added by year for the past three fiscal years. 11-17 Table 11-7 HOMER PUBLIC LIBRARY REVENUE SOURCES Avg. Annual 1979/80 1980/81 1981/82 % Increase General Fund Operating Budget $60,000.00 $75,049.00 $15751344.00 62% Revenues from Sources Other Than Genera-7Fund Cards, Lost Damaged, Books Overdue 2,227.29 3,109.90 3,284.24 21.4% Donations 1,518.63 475.40 385.81 -49.6% Gift Fund 400.77 1,304.20 1,376.77 85.4% State Grants, Library 2,000.00 1,000.00 101000.00 123.6% TOTAL $ 6,146.69 5,889.50 15,046.82 56.46% Source: Homer Public Library 11-18 Other sources of revenue besides the City's general fund are grants from the Alaska State Library, charges for photocopying, lost or dam- aged books and other materials, overdue charges for audiovisual equip- ment and non-resident borrowers' cards. Anyone living outside the city limits of Homer is charged $5.00 for a library card which is good for three years. The approved budget for fiscal year 1982/83 is $137,207, which corres- ponds to a 32% average annual percent increase. This relates fairly well to the increase of services, circulation and attendance. The library not only serves the City residents, but also residents of Anchor Point, Kachemak City and unincorporated areas around the City of Homer. These users do not contribute to the operation of the lib- rary except through token library card fees and through sales taxes. However, since the majority of the library's General Fund support is from property taxes and State per-capita revenue sharing, non- residents pay proportionately much less than City residents. There- fore, the-City is providing services with little compensation. In the recent community survey, one question asked if library services should be supported by the City and/or supplemented by other funding. The .survey revealed that 15% of those responding did not want the City to support the library and 27% did want the City to support the library. Another 52% wanted the City to partially support the library but would like to see the state or borough governments contribute to the cost of service. From these figures, there appears to be strong support of the library services. It also appears that the library is seen by the residents as a regional facility and that funding support should come from more than just the residents of Homer. Therefore, avenues of funding support should be investigated to supplement the City's con- tribution. At a minimum, the feasibility of increasing the $5.00 non- resident fee for library cards should be evaluated. As previously stated, the demand for expanded facilities is evident by the use and circulation figures. The City has taken steps to expand the facility by purchasing property adjacent to the library. This property is large enough to accommodate an expansion of the existing building and to provide much needed parking for patrons. Although the property is being purchased by the City, funding for the expansion has not presently been secured. The existing library building (3,500 sq. ft.) was constructed in 1978 at a cost of $370,000 (60% of this was derived from a grant from the Alaska State Library). Based on figures obtained from the city librarian, an additional 5,500 square feet of space is currently needed. Rough estimates for the expansion of the library run approxi- mately $825,000. Summary The City of Homer has a library facility and staff which is a credit to. the community. Areas which need to be addressed in the near future are the equitable sharing of the costs of providing services to non- 11-19 resident users, and the funding of capital improvements to the exist- ing faculty. Currently, the Kenai Peninsula Borough does not have library powers. Such powers can be granted on either an areawide or non-areawide basis by a vote of approval from those borough residents who would be affected by the levying of taxes for such a purpose. For Homer, a feasible option would be to encourage the borough to create non- areawide library powers, which would then enable the Borough to support library service outside cities. This would also enable Homer to retain its autonomous library program, while seeking funds from the borough to support that percentage of service and resources. that benefit library users living outside the City. This option is explored further in Chapter 13 of this document. The availability of funds for expansion of the library should be investi- gated through the State. The following policies and actions pertaining to the library are pre- sented below. OBJECTIVE - LIBRARY Provide high quality, improving library services to all Homer area residents and visitors. Policy 1 - City and support groups for library, museum, cultural center and other interested groups will work together to develop secure financing for library, museum and related arts services. Action 1.1 - Investigate and utilize Federal, State and private funding sources. Action 1.2 - Organize a method to equitably spread costs among all users of services. Policy 2 - City and other groups will work together to support desir- able improvements in library services. Action 2.1 - Pursue, with State and Borough assistance, construc- tion of library expansion. 11-20 CHAPTER 12 ECONOMY Homer's economy has grown by diversifying into a range of activities. While fishing and government remain the cornerstone of Homer's econ- omy, the community has grown by adding new economic roles. Retail trade and services have been added to recycle a greater share of earn- ings in Homer and surrounding areas. Homer's fishing fleet has expanded by entering new fisheries and product areas. Residents have created or obtained new jobs for themselves by selling services to customers outside of Homer. Overall, Homer's greatest economic resource is its residents, who have combined their talents to create many new and innovative enterprises. New small businesses have been responsible for a large part of recent employment growth and diversification of Homer's economy. ISSUES Five economic development issues have been identified and addressed in this plan and in previous planning efforts. The major issue is the lack of overall stability and strength in Homer's economy. The community depends on the fishing industry for nearly half of its economic base, and with continuing weaknesses faced for at least the short-term in important fisheries, diversification is needed. A related issue is the health and expansion of the local fishing industry. Previous studies have identified approaches which Homer can take to strengthen its fishing industry, and actions should be out- lined to implement those approaches which continue to be feasible. A third issue is the need to establish agricultural and small busi- nesses. Previous plans have identified several areas in which prog- ress can be made., but again specific actions and responsibilities need to be spelled out and followed. Fourth, the oil and gas industry has been an issue. Previous city plans called for development of nearby natural gas fields for local use; establishment of marine service base or terminal functions for possible outer continental shelf oil and gas development was an issue, but specific actions to encourage or discourage this type of activity were not spelled out. The fifth issue was the development of other industries which might provide some of the strength and diversification desired. Other pos- sibilities need to be identified, along with actions and responsibili- ties to develop the industries which are desired. 12-1 The following sections describe possible solutions for these issues, and present goals, objectives, policies and planned actions for eco- nomic development. BACKGROUND AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS Major economic development decisions (for example, decisions by large firms about where to locate new plants) tend to be based on the avail- ability of and cost of a large number of factors (Fernstrom, 1973): � Raw materials � Cost of transportation � Markets or customers � Competent labor � Financing, including government subsidies � Low cost, reliable energy � Water supply and wastewater disposal � Suitable building sites Many published sources are available which describe in detail how to approach and carry out economic development. Fernstrom (1973) is one of the best. Approaching Homer's economic development, however, requires an understanding of the kinds of economic development that are possible and the conditions which would need to be met. This section identifies particular economic activities for which it is possible for Homer to participate, and describes what the community must do to be able to take part. Fisheries Industries Long the cornerstone of Homer's economy, the fortunes of some important fisheries industries have declined in recent years as both prices and harvests of key species plunged. The effect has been particularly dramatic for crab and shrimp. Salmon harvests have been relatively healthy, but prices have been poor. As the Kachemak Bay and Cook Inlet fisheries have declined, increasing numbers of Homer's fishermen have begun to range further from Homer. A large number now fish the Bering Sea for crab, Prince William Sound for salmon, herring and shrimp, and Bristol Bay for salmon and herring. Increasingly in recent years, fishing effort and prospects have begun to center on the deep water fisheries of the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea. With extension of U.S. jurisdiction out to 200 miles and reduced foreign harvests, stocks of many lower valued fish have become increasingly strong. Although the previously anticipated boom in bottom-fishing and processing has for the large part failed to materi- alize, the physical potential exists and could still be developed under better market and technological conditions. 12-2 Numerous studies have been completed of the potential for fisheries development in Homer and elsewhere in Alaska which identify Homer's potential as a fisheries center. Two which studied Homer's potential in some detail are TAMS Engineers (1980) and Woodward-Clyde (1980). Both concluded that Homer could expand its share of fishing, fish processing and support activities in existing fisheries, particularly salmon. Over the next decade, the primary hope for expansion in Homer's fish- eries will be in salmon and@ some of the higher valued bottomfish species. One activity which has grown into a substantial business over the past half decade is transporting, processing and shipping Bristol Bay sal- mon. This activity will probably continue at present levels or even increase, as shoreside processing capacity is limited in Bristol Bay. Key ingredients in building this activity are the planned expansion of aprons at the Homer airport (to allow cargo planes to be based out of Homer), along with planned expansion of processing capacity, cold storage and shipping capacity. Bottomfishing activities which are likely to increase in coming years, and in which Homer could participate, are joint venture fishing (larger American boats fishing for foreign processors), and halibut and black cod fisheries. The joint venture fisheries involve primar- ily larger crab boats who have sought alternative means of earning income to compensate for poor crab fishing. Black cod and scallop fishing with shoreside processing are beginning to emerge. And hali- but, though overfished for decades, is likely to enter some form of limited entry management, which may improve catches in the manner sal- mon catches have improved. Cook Inlet salmon harvests have not responded as strongly to limited entry as in other parts of Alaska, but prospects appear fairly good for improvement. The Cook Inlet Regional Salmon Plan, recently released by the Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association, the regional non- profit salmon aquaculture group, projects year 2000 harvests will be two and a half times the average harvest level of 1970 through 1980 by a combination of improved management and aquaculture activities. Crab and shrimp are perhaps the only areas of Homer's fisheries -- existing and potential -- for which other studies have not projected any future increases. If the poor harvests which these fisheries have produced in the past half decade continue, it is likely that Homer's fleet will continue to diversify in both its range and species. In light of these prospects, Homer's fishing industry must become more diversified. It must operate in a variety of fisheries and geographic areas, and at all times of the year. Specific actions that can be taken to help Homer's fishing industry reach its potential are, for the most part, already underway. Actions already underway include harbor expansion, completion of the new fish 12-3 dock, and expansion of the north harbor area for fish processing and port activities. Other actions which are not yet underway but should be undertaken, include establishment of convenient gear storage and boat repair -areas and services, and establishment of additional processing plants. Some communities also utilize financial incentives (such as lower moorage, land lease and tax rates), but availability of services and amenities, as well as location with respect to fishing grounds, are much more important. Hence, priority for funds ought to go to devel- oping needed facilities and services. Tourism Homer's tourism trade has grown with virtually no substantial effort or investment by the community. Relatively few important services, such as campgrounds and resort hotels, are available, and those that are have in the past been accorded low priority in community develop- ment decisions. Yet despite this lack of attention, tourism has grown into a ten mil- lion dollar per year business. Homer is adjacent to some of the best scenic and fishing attractions in Alaska, and each year thousands of visitors travel to Homer for those attractions. The Homer Spit is itself one of the most heavily utilized recreational areas of the state, and about half of the harbor moorage is rented by out-of- towners for recreational boats. Most tourism in Homer is weekend recreational vehicle camping and fishing by Anchorage area residents. This type of tourism has the least economic impact on Homer per visitor, however, since recrea- tional vehicle campers spend little for meals, lodging and other services. In addition, the trade is highly seasonal, mostly occurring between late May and the end of August. Over the past few years, another variety of tourism has begun to emerge. This also involves predominantly Anchorage area residents, but out-of-state visitors are also involved. This variety of tourist comes to stay for a week or more, but does not bring his or her own lodging, vehicles and boats. Instead, they rely on local lodging, restaurants, charter fishing and guide services for a full range of desired services. Economic impact is much greater, since the tourists spend more per day and stay longer. A good illustration of how this type of tourism is growing and chang- ing Homer is the charter fishing business. Until the mid-1970's, charter fishing was virtually non-existent in Homer. Yet as many as 35 charter fishing boats operated out of Homer's harbor at one time or another during the summer of 1982, with gross receipts in the millions of dollars. Other illustrations of the types of services affected include the private lodges near Chinapoot Bay and near the head of Kachemak Bay. 12-4 Recent reports indicate that tourism in the Homer area will increase at somewhere between four and 12 percent per year, depending on the extent to which it is encouraged by communities such as Homer. Road access improvements, such as construction of the proposed Turnagain Arm crossing, will boost the growth rate even further. Key actions which must be taken to encourage tourism in Homer fall into three categories: increasing Homer's tourist facilities, managing Homer's existing facilities and attractions, and marketing Homer as a visitor destination. Increasing tourist-oriented facilities involves the greatest number of actions. Key facilities needed include additional full service hotel and motel space (with adjoining restaurants) with good views of the water', a meetings and convention center, camper parks,and campgrounds, and attractive, pedestrian-oriented shopping areas and visitor attrac- tions. Since the Homer Spit Plan (Chapter 5) calls for no more new motels and hotels on the Spit, efforts could concentrate on upgrading the Land's End Resort, and on constructing another motel or hotel complex in another area, such as the Central Business District or Bishop's Beach. Other areas of potential tourist development include package tours, development of winter sports facilities, wild bird sanctuary viewing, cruise ships and a base for charter flights to nearby recreational areas. The package tour business can be developed by retaining staff members to work with travel agencies and tour companies, and by adver- tising campaigns. The Homer Convention and Visitors Bureau would need to be revitalized to accomplish this. Attraction of cruise ship business has been addressed by Woodward Clyde (1981). Only limi.ted traffic is forecast to travel as far as Cook Inlet; however, smaller cruise ship tours within Kachemak Bay and Cook Inlet may continue to increase. Improved facilities, ground transportation and attractions would be needed, particularly at the end of the Spit, to take advantage of this fairly limited business. Charter flying already originates from the Homer Airport for wheeled planes and from Beluga Lake for float planes. Improvement of this business can be aided by implemented planned airport improvements. Campgrounds could be constructed by the State at the base of Homer Spit, and in other areas of Homer, as described in the Parks and Recreation Plan (Chapter 9'). The meetings and convention center should ideally be located within close distance of hotels and motels, such as at the FAA site within the Central Business District. And attractive, pedestrian-oriented shopping areas could be' developed adjacent to the boat harbor (see Chapter 5) and in the Central Busi- ness District (see Chapter 6). Managing Homer's tourist facilities requires implementing the agree- ment between the City and the State Division of Parks regarding man- agement of the west side of Homer Spit. Public access to other water-, front areas also needs to be secured. 12-5 The final area, marketing of Homer as a tourist destination, has begun with establishment of the Homer Convention and Visitor's Bureau. How- ever, continuing funding needs to be secured to enable the Bureau to carry out the consistent, quality advertising and coordinating role that is needed. Oil, Gas and Other Minerals Since the closing of local coal mining operations at the turn of the century, mining has been of only marginal importance to Homer. The community is near deposits of a variety of important minerals (including coal, oil, natural gas and chromite), but none of the deposits are of sufficient quality and concentration to warrant large scale commercial development (Woodward Clyde, 1980). Still, mining has been of some importance recently to Homer, and could be of much greater importance in the future if certain events, only a few of which can be controlled by Homer, occur. Oil and gas has had the greatest impact on Homer, and continues to have the greatest potential. Beginning with the development of the Upper Cook Inlet oil and gas fields in the late 1960's, Homer has served a limited capacity in supplying first exploration, then devel- opment and finally servicing Upper Cook Inlet. The impact, both eco- nomic and environmental, was extremely limited. Beginning in 1977, the Lower Cook Inlet oil and gas lease sales had a significant effect. Although no marine service bases were established in Homer (existing bases near Kenai were used), the community was an important supplier of water and served as a transshipment point for crews, food and materials to exploratory drilling rigs. To date, drilling results from the Lower Cook Inlet sale have not shown commercially promising quantities of oil or gas, but potential still exists for both the Lower Cook Inlet area as well as lease sales in Shelikof Strait and the Northern Gulf of Alaska. Should oil prices begin to climb rapidly again, these areas will look much more commer- cially promising, and Homer may again find interest in the community being a marine service base. Other minerals are also a possibility. Over the summer of 1981, Anaconda, Inc., actively explored Red Mountain, site of a chromite mine operated during World Wars I and II. Chromite is a strategic mineral, and the U.S. heavily depends on unstable foreign sources for nearly all of its chromite. Results showed the ore to be of lower grade than presently needed to commercially develop the mine. Like oil and gas, however, should prices begin to rise rapidly again, or if a disruption should occur in the supply of chromite, the mine may be redeveloped and Homer would find strong interest in its acting as a service base. Other minerals have been explored or mined in the past, including local coal fields and limestone deposits on the west side of Cook 12-6 Inlet; however, none of these are commercially feasible to mine under present or foreseeable market conditions (Woodward Clyde, 1980). Until commercial prospects for these mineral deposits improve, Homer will likely continue to play a role as a staging center for limited exploration efforts, mostly involving air shipments. For this role to continue, planned airport improvements are needed to provide greater space for offices, warehouses, equipment, supplies and aircraft. Should one or more of the mineral prospects move to a development stage, the need for improvements will shift to Homer's water transpor- tation facilities. Docks and water supplies will be heavily used, and a large amount of land area will be needed for storage of supplies, equipment and for offices, warehouses and worker housing. Since the need for most of these fac.ilities is presently speculative, community actions should concentrate on making sure space is available which suits community priorities (i.e., location of storage and office areas off of the Spit, and preferably at the airport) and constructing facilities which ' would have other uses (such as the planned port facilities). Land control regulations (such as the zoning ordinance) must also provide clear, effective implementation of this comprehen- sive plan. Forest Products Homer is also located near stands of commercially valuable timber. In the past, timber harvest has primarily centered on export markets (most notably Japan) and has been dictated by U.S. Forest Service logging and processing rules. In recent years, however, this situation has begun to change. Native corporations have gained title to much commercial -grade timber, and as export market conditions have waned, increasing attention has begun to focus on markets for dimensional, kiln-dried lumber in Anchorage and Fairbanks. On the Kenai Peninsula, sawmills have been established at Anchor Point and elsewhere to begin serving this market. While the economics of Southcentral timber are and will probably remain marginal for some time to come (due to a high rate of defect in the timber and high labor, energy and transportation costs), it is quite possible that Homer could participate. As planing, kiln drying and sorting operations become established, Homer might serve as a center for these types of operations. To participate, Homer will need one or more low cost industrial sites with at least water service, and low cost, reliable energy sources. Because of the noise, traffic and visual impacts of wood products operations, careful consideration will need to be given to siting of such faci lities. Performance standards may be needed to offset some to the impacts. Overall, however, it is more likely that Homer's higher land prices alone will divert most new forest products opera- tions to sites outside of Homer. 12-7 Services and Trade As indicated in Chapter 3, services and trade activities have been the fastest growing segments of Homer's economy. While some of the growth has been due to tourism, the majority has come from Homer's expanding role as a trade center for the south Kenai Peninsula. Small businesses have been at the heart of this growth. Many have been started by newly arrived residents seeking a means to earn a liv- ing. This motivation has been important, for it served to establish a number of businesses which were, initially, only marginally feasible. Much growth tan still occur. While the public opinion survey found that a large percentage of food and other convenience goods and ser- vices purchased by Homer residents are now bought in Homer, larger items such as furniture and appliances still are not, and could be sold in Homer. Increasing population and income in Homer and other south peninsula communities will also provide opportunities for fur- ther growth. The major types of actions which can be taken to improve Homer's trade center business are continued improvement of centralized, convenient shopping centers, such as the Central Business District improvements described in Chapter 6. These will help to open up areas of land which would provide more centralized locations for new businesses for less cost. Completion of planned port and harbor improvements,. upgrading of trucking services and roads, and even extension of a spur rail line of the Alaska Railroad from Moose Pass to Homer, could decrease the cost of goods mov.i.ng into Homer, and could even allow Homer to serve as a port of entry for products moving into other parts of Alaska. Reduc- ing Homer's costs relative to other communities would improve the com- petitiveness of Homer's retail businesses, and establishing a port of entry function would enhance another component of Homer's economic base. Also, the Bradley Lake hydroelectric project will help all aspects of Homer's economy by holding down future electric power cost .increases, in addition to the direct boost its construction will con- tribute to Homer's economy. Other Activities Among the other activities that can contribute to the economic devel- opment of Homer are transportation, government, light manufacturing, and attracting retired and commuter households. Transportation, an important activity in Homer already, will increase as improvements are made to Homer's transportation facilities. Air- port and port improvements, particularly increasing the capacity of the port to handle ocean-going vessels, will be particularly impor- tant. With tHis, it may be possible for Homer to expand its role to serve all of Kenai Peninsula, although Seward must be considered a competing port. 12-8 Government could also help spur economic growth. Besides the City of Homer and the Southcentral Peninsula Hospital, the Borough will increase school employment in response to growth in enrollment. Fur- ther, State employment may begin to grow even more as the south Kenai Peninsula develops. State employment has become more decentralized, and several agencies have already established field offices in Homer or have upgraded their existing Homer offices. These include the Department of Fish & Game, State Troopers, and a road maintenance operation of the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. The latter two agencies would probably continue upgrading their Homer offices, and others could begin to follow suit; possibilities include the Marine Highway System (if ferry routes are expanded with Homer as a base port), Kenai Community College -and Department of Natural Resources (particularly if Kachemak Bay State Park or mineral explora- tion and development of State lands accelerates). Federal agencies, such as the Coast Guard, could also expand if their service roles or demands grow. While decisions about expanding Borough, State and Federal employment will mostly be outside of the community's control, some assistance can be provided by making sure that undeveloped land and developed offices are available. City policies regarding office locations should also be clearly spelled out. Light manufacturing, including arts and crafts and manufacture of specialty products, has apparently grown also in recent years. Homer artists are gaining in reputation, and marketing channels are improv- ing. The primary type of assistance which could assist these types of enterprises is to help develop low cost working and marketing spaces. Some communities have redeveloped warehouses into low cost artist studios, complete with shops for display and sale of wares. Similar approaches could be used for some light manufacturing activities. Retired and commuting households are attracted to Homer by its quality of life and accessibility. Homer can encourage this type of growth by carrying out the proposed improvements in this plan, as well as con- tinuing to enforce City codes designed to preserve Homer's rural char- acter. The Homer Convention and Visitors Bureau could include these items in its advertising and sales campaigns. Retired and commuting households offer great potential for stabilizing Homer's economy. PLANNED SOLUTIONS Goals, objectives, policies and planned actions for Homer's economic development are listed below. GOAL - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT A diversified, growing economy, with year-round job opportunities for residents in businesses which are fulfilling and compatible with the community. 12-9 OBJECTIVE EMPLOYMENT Develop new year-round job opportunities. Policy 1 - The City and Chamber of Commerce will participate in and encourage development of a year-round visitor industry. Action 1.1 - City, in cooperation with other Homer public and private groups, develop a center for meetings, cultural events, conventions and other gatherings which is located near to lodg- ing, restaurants and bars. Action 1.2 - City, Chamber of Commerce and other groups conduct a market study of visitor industry, decide which types are desir- able, and develop a unified marketing effort to attract them. The market study should collect market data, and develop indices to measure program effectiveness. Policy 2 - The City will develop benefits, tax structure, amenities and the like to attract desirable businesses to Homer. Action 2.1 - City Manager review and report to City Council Homer'@ attractiveness and competitiveness with other similar communities in terms of taxes, amenities, land availability, port facilities, etc., along with recommendations for improvement. Action 2.2 - City study possibility of piping natural gas from nearby natural gas wells and seek implementation, if feasible. Policy 3 - The City will continue to pursue strengthening and diversi- fication of the commercial fishing industry. Action 3.1 - City and State complete planned harbor expansion. Action 3.2 - City plan, secure, make available, and market sites for processing, boat and equipment repair, gear storage and vehicle parking. Policy 4 - The City will continue to pursue development of a deep water freight and passenger ship port. Action 4.1 - City and State complete construction of dock, mar- shalling yard and related facilities. Action 4.2 - City promote movement of freight through the Port of Homer. Policy 5 - The City will support the continued development of Homer as a retail and service center for the south Kenai Peninsula. Action 5.1 - City and private businesses implement Central Business District plan to improve attractiveness of shopping areas to out-of-town customers. 12-10 Policy 6 The City will encourage the continued development of arts and-c-r-a7ts and light manufacturing businesses in Homer. Action 6.1 - City continue to allow home occupations in residen- tially zoned areas, provided traffic, noise, smoke and other impacts are kept within acceptable bounds. City Manager, Plan- ning Commission review zoning code and'recommend improvements to City Council every two years. OBJECTIVE - Expand Homer's economy in a manner which is compatible with the community and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 7 - The City. shall encourage commuting workers to come to Homer, and to continue to live in Homer. Action 7.1 - Implement Comprehensive Plan to continue to maintain and improve Homer's public services and attractiveness as a place to live. Policy 8 - Mining and oil-related development (service bases, staging areas, service and supply businesses, processing plants, etc.) will be encouraged to locate in areas of Homer where their adverse effects on the community (noise, traffic, etc.) will be controlled and minimized. Action 8.1 - City Planning Commission continue to monitor loca- tion and availability of industrially zoned sites in areas suit- able for oil or mining-related development, and encourage poten- tially impacted activities (for example, residential and retail trade) to locate in other areas. Action 8.2 - City Planning Commission and City Council research and implement incentives for oil and mining-related developments to control adverse impacts. Policy 9 - Research and educational institutions will be encouraged to locate in Homer if their activities are compatible with the community and consistent with the comprehensive plan. Action 9.1 - Implement comprehensive plan to continue to maintain and improve Homer's attractiveness as a research and educational center. Policy 10 - City shall encourage the Federal and State governments to construct a railroad spur line to Homer to utilize Homer as a port of entry for trade goods. Action 10.1 - City request Federal and State governments to study the feasibility of construction of a railroad spur line from Moose Pass to Homer. 12-11 CHAPTER 13 LOCAL GOVERNMENT Organization and financing of Homer's public services have been stead- ily growing in importance, and will be even more vital in the future. Homer continues to attract residents whose primary motivation for mov- ing to Homer is quality of life, rather than economic opportunity. The newly arriving residents, and many long time residents, want a wide variety of high quality services. As seen in earlier chapters, increasing amounts of money have been spent to upgrade nearly every service, with particularly dramatic effects in areas such as fire pro- tection, library and parks and recreation services, which had previ- ously received little funding. While much of the funds have come from the state, equally large increases have come from local sources, such as taxes and service fees. From this, and from the findings of the May, 1982 public opinion survey conducted for this plan (see Appendix A), it is apparent that the organization and financing of Homer's local government needs to be addressed in this plan. This chapter presents an analysis and plan of the financing and organi- zation of Homer's local government. Organization is addressed first, followed by public finance. Goals, objectives, policies and planned actions are presented for each topic. ORGANIZATION Homer's public services are provided by a variety of organizations. Each derives its operating authority from a specific grant of powers from the State of Alaska; how the authority is used has been estab- lished by State laws and decisions made by local residents and elected officials. The purpose of this section is to discuss how the variety of public and private agencies serving Homer cooperate and interact. It examines the services each provides, as well as the costs of providing the services, and methods of financing them. Lastly, the paper looks at how well these organizations work together in providing the services that resi- dents, visitors and businesses want, and what options will be available to implement the services called for in this comprehensive plan. Background Local public services can be provided by any one of the following organizations: - Cities - Boroughs - State agencies - Federal agencies - Service districts 13-1 - Non-profit public service organizations and cooperatives (such as Homer Electric Association or the Homer Chamber of Commerce) - Private enterprise (such as Glacier State Telephone Company) Generally, State (and Federal) law defines what powers these organiza- tions may exercise, and stipulates the steps they must take to organize and to carry out their functions. In the Homer area, a large number of these organizations provide public services. State agencies are particularly active. The Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, for example, operates the Homer Airport, the ferry system, and constructs and maintains the major arterials in and around Homer. The Division of Parks (Department of Natural Resources) is responsible for operating many State parks, and has agreed to assume responsibility for the west side of the spit. The Department of Environmental Conservation is responsible for inspecting and approving on-site sewage disposal systems. The Department of Fish and Game regulates fishing and hunting activities. The Kenai Peninsula Borough is organized as a second class borough under State law, and may choose to assume a wide range of responsibili- ties. Generally speaking, it has chosen to exercise only the minimum responsibilities required of it by law: education, solid waste dis- posal, and planning, platting, and zoning. (It has delegated zoning to cities who desire to assume the power and the City of Homer has requested and received this authority for its incorporated areas from the Borough). It also assesses properties and collects property and sales taxes for other local governments. The Borough has chosen not to assume responsibility for other services such as ports and harbors, roads, fire protection and law enforcement, but may be compelled to by an initiative process and election. In such an election, the Borough could be compelled to provide areawide services to incorporated and unincorporated areas, usurping the City services, or the Borough could be mandated to assume non-areawide powers, covering only unincorporated areas. In the latter case, the Borough would be free to choose to contract with cities such as Homer to provide mandated services, or the Borough could provide a separate service. One result of the Borough's choice to avoid providing other services is increased service burdens on cities, state agencies, and a prolifera- tion of service districts. Cities such as Homer provide a fuller range of services than unincorporated areas, but find many of their services used by residents of unincorporated areas who do not pay many of the taxes and fees to support the services. This increases the financial burden on City residents. In Homer, the City and other public organizations provide a wide range of services, many of which are used, to a greater or lesser degree, by persons who do not reside within Homer's city limits. EEE.%amples of ser- vices used by non-residents include the City's port and harbor facil- ity, the library, the museum, water supply, and sewage treatment, 13-2 hospital service, law enforcement, parks facilities, recreation programs and fire protection. The City is also contemplating providing a cultural and performing arts center which would also receive use by non-residents. Possible Solutions One response to the lack of areawide services has been the formation of areawide special service districts. Such districts have been formed to provide hospitals (as Homer's Southcentral Hospital District is), roads and fire protection. The districts are heavily dependent on assess- ments of real property within their boundaries, however, and generally lack the ability and flexibility to obtain funding from other sources, such as State and Borough grants and revenue sharing, that full-service municipalities do. Further compounding the problem is the fact that the Borough's tax base is not evenly distributed geographically. Districts in areas with oil and gas facilities, plants or other major economic activity are able to obtain needed funds at a much lower tax rate than relatively undeveloped areas. The south Kenai Peninsula area around Homer, for example, lacks oil and gas facilities, hence the property tax base is relatively low. Lacking a strong tax base, and facing the need to levy a relatively high property tax rate to provide services.,most unincorporated areas outside of Homer have been hesitant to organize special purpose districts. As a result, the City is often called upon to provide services to persons who do not fully support the cost. Other responses are possible. One is for the City to finance areawide services from sources other than property taxes. Sales taxes and high users fees are the two most frequently used approaches. It is diffi- cult, however, to raise sufficient funds from this approach without creating other serious problems. High sales taxes and users fees impact lower income persons much more severely than property taxes, and tend to deny the service to those who may use it most. High taxes also discourage economic development, as businesses may choose to locate outside of the City in order to lower their cost of doing business.- Sales taxes also tend to fall rapidly during economic recessions, and tax city residents who are already paying for services through o -ther means. Another possible solution is to annex additional areas to the City. State law provides that cities may initiate annexation actions with or without the approval of the affected property owners, subject to the approval of the State Local Boundary Commission and the Legislature. The Commission and Legislature generally view proposed annexations favorably so long.as the area to be annexed will receive services in proportion to the taxes it pays. Consequently, a number of annexations approved in recent years have included stipulations that the property tax rate be lower until full services can be provided to the area. Another possibility is for the City to provide services unde.r a service contract with service districts or individual residents. Rates would need to reflect the full cost of providing the service, i-ncluding 13-3 capital cost and general administration costs. In most cases, however, service can be provided for a lower unit cost if spread over a larger number of persons. In times of rapid growth, the City could also con- tract with private service providers, as it does with the Homer Volun- teer Fire Department for fire protection services, to avoid assuming additional debt. Homer is legally organized as a first class city. Under Alaskan law, it may choose to provide virtually any of a wide range of public serv- ices, with powers granted to it by the State. Some cities have chosen to go one step further and reclassify to home rule status, essentially giving the community much greater control over how the government is organized and what functions it chooses to perform. Rather than exer- cising only those powers granted by State law, the City can exercise any power not denied it by State 1'aw. The difference is greatest for setting tax rates and fees, for choosing how its government is organ- ized, and for excepting the City from some legal requirements imposed by the State. If regional services are desired, and the Borough continues to choose not to provide such services, difficult choices must be made. If the City continues to provide increasing regional services without a stable tax base or other form of support, its financial strength will be drained, and it will increasingly need to turn to higher user charges and sales taxes to finance the services. Besides their negative effects on lower income residents, user fees are sometimes not a reli- able source of financial support. Special purpose districts can also be expected to increase in number and scope. Besides the present hospital district, additional districts may be formed to provide roads, fire and police protection, water sup- ply, sewage disposal and even recreation. While this would alleviate many of the pressures likely to be faced by the City of Homer, coordin- ation would become an increasingly difficult problem. Service costs probably would also be higher than if provided by a single, general purpose government, as administrative and other services would be dup- licated. Eventually, some form of a regional government should emerge in the greater Homer area, probaby involving consolidations of service dis- tricts with Homer and/or other cities. Annexation of unincorporated areas might also take place. Planned Solutions The City must preserve its viability by addressing major problems: 1. The City must decide what services it will provide to different areas of the City and surrounding areas. 2. Stable, reliable tax or other financial means must *be estab- lished to pay for services which equitably spread the costs among those who use it. 13-4 3. Means must be found to enable the City to survive loss of sig- nificant reductions in Federal, State and Borough grants and revenue sharing. 4. Some type of regional method of providing services to unincor- porated areas must be found. Goals, objectives, policies and planned actions for local government organizations are listed below. GOAL - LOCAL GOVERNMENT Establish strong, well organized, self-sufficient local government which is responsive to community wants and needs. OBJECTIVE - LOCAL GOVERNMENT VIABILITY AND REGIONAL SERVICES Maintain a strong local government which provides services desired by Homer area residents, and equitably allocates their costs among those who receive or benefit from the services. Policy 1 - a. The City, Borough and other local agencies will seek and implement a means of extending public services (now provided by the City in incorporated areas) to unincorporated areas, on the condition that costs, resources and decision-making are equitably shared between incorporated and unincorporated areas. b. Until a regional cost and decision-sharing approach is established, City utility (water, sewer, and drainage) and road services will be extended only to incorporated areas of the City of Homer. Action 1.1 - City and Borough examine feasibility of alternative methods of providing services to unincorporated areas which are likely to request public services now provided or financed by the City. The study should examine annexation, areawide and non- areawide Borough service mandates, incorporation, service dis- tricts and contracting options, and be completed by September, 1983, or as soon thereafter as funding is available. Action 1.2 - Implement findings of Homer areawide public service study. 13-5 PUBLIC FINANCE Homer's public services are paid for by a variety of financing sources. Some are strict&ly local in origin, whi le others originate outside of Homer. This section examines the financing of Homer's public services, describing trends in revenues, expenditures and fund balances, and assessing the community's likely ability to pay for services and capi- tal improvements in the future. Most of Homer's public services are provided by the City of Homer. Services currently provided by the City include: police protection, water service (most areas of the City), sewage collection, treatment and disposal (some areas of the City), parks and recreation activities, port and harbor facilities, library, animal control, zoning, streets and roads, and other general governmental services (elections, etc.). The City also provides partial funding for public services provided by other public agencies including: fire protection, museum, mental health and alcoholism treatment, and senior citizen's services. Other services are provided by a variety of organizations; major exam- ples include: highway, port and airport facilities and marine trans- portation by the State Department of Transportation and Public Facili- ties; electrical service by Homer Electric Association; telephone ser- vice by Glacier State Telephone Company; hospital care by Southcentral Hospital Service Area; and solid waste disposal, education, planning and platting by Kenai Peninsula Borough. The City's finances are summarized annually in audited financial reports prepared by outside accounting firms. The most recent report, covering the fiscal years ending June 30, 1980, and June 30, 1981, contains summaries of the City's financial operations which are in accordance with recently adopted national standards for governmental accounting, auditing and financial reporting. The report also contains a statistical appendix which summarizes trends in the City's finances from the fiscal years ending June 30, 1972, through the fiscal year ended June 30, 1981. Six of the following tables are reprints from that appendix, with figures summarizing average annual percentage change added for purposes of analysis. Expenditures Table 13-1 summarizes the City's general governmental expenditures by function for the period. From 1972 through 1982, total general govern- mental expenditures increased more than eight times, or by an average of nearly 27 percent per year. The rate of increase is boosted some- what by the large increase in debt service during the most recent year (caused by a large expenditure to effectively pay off debts early by placing future debt service payments in a trust, two previous bond issues. Overall expenditures increased by about 26 percent per year, or about three times the rate of inflation. 13-6 Table 13-1 CITY OF HOMER, ALASKA GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Fiscal Year Ended Gen.eral Public Public Parks and Debt June 30, Government Safety Works Recreation Library Other Service Total 1972 $ 52,150 $ 82.506 $.78.944 $ 3,623 $ 500 $66.001 $ 35,002 $ 320,726 1973 52,040 88,441 31,526 6.139 1,265 75.469 29.923 284.803 1974 78,415 91.036 48,280 12,113 1,000 129.864 30,502 391,210 1975 78,438 129.640 69,946 10,100 1.000 210.542 39,823 539.489 1976 94,451 175,093 69,571 14,817 105,960 39,209 499,101 1977 157,291 250,902 125,664 9,156 204.951 112,439 860,403 1978 200,268 326,316 167,687 10.226 514,985 190,885 1,410.367 w 1979 278.482 426,934 200.477 15,069 8,550 705.715 145,813 1.781,040 1980 306,962 575,589 277,147 37,313 60.117 385,293 148.947 1.791,368 1981 427,598 631,811 307,321 81,291 75,049 193.942 999,569 2.716.581 Annual Average Chanqe 1971-1981 26.3% 25.4% 16.3% 41.3% 74.5% 12.4% 45.1% 26.8% 1976-1981 35.3% 29.3% 34.6% 40.6% --- 12.9% 91.1% 40.3% Source: City of Homer Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year July 1, J980 - June 30, 1981 The largest increases went to library services and parks and recrea- tion, but these two categories previously had relatively low levels of expenditures. Table 13-1 also indicates a fairly dramatic speedup in the rate of total expenditure between 1976 and 1977, when the Lower Cook Inlet oil lease sales were occurring and the City's population growth rate jumped. Impact funds helped the City pay for a rapid build-up in its public service capabilities to meet rapid increases in service demands. As the potential for oil development waned, however, population growth continued and State funds became available to finance further improve- ments in services. Table 13-2 provides additional detail on expenditures for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1981 (FY 1981). The table breaks expenditures into more detailed service categories, and also divides the expendi- tures into operating and capital expenditures for the City's enter- prise, special revenue and debt service funds. In FY 1981, the City spent about $3.3 million on operating public ser- vices and payments to other public service providers, and an additional $0.6 million on capital improvements. Much of the capital improvements were financed by grants from State and Federal agencies. The largest single category of expenditures was the port and harbor enterprise, which alone accounted for about a quarter of total expendi- tures. With no expenditures listed for capital improvements, the port and harbor enterprise accounted for nearly one third of operating expenditures. Police and fire protection amounted to about 21 percent of all expenditures, or one quarter of all public service expenditures, but only a sixth of operating expenditures. Other large categories of expenditures were general, public works and water service functions. Debt service, including defeasance, amounted to about $1.0 million dur- ing FY 1981. About $150,000 of this was annual debt service, however. The remainder was defeasance, or advance paymeA to a trust fund, of future debt service. As a result, the City's burden of long term debt is relatively low, as will be seen later.- Revenues Table 13-3 summarizes trends in the City's general revenues by source from 1973 through 1982. Total revenues, excluding enterprise revenues, increased steadily by about 27 percent per year over the period of 1972 to 1981. The long range increase generally matched. the increases in expenditures, but did not match the short range increase in expendi- tures of about 40 percent per year from 1976 to 1981. Major "own" sources of revenue for the City are the property tax (75 percent of tax revenue in FY 1982) and the sales tax (25 percent of tax revenue in FY 1982) (see Table 13-4). Tax revenues generally matched the general rate of increase in total revenues throughout the period. 13-8 TABLE 13-2 CITY OF HOMER, ALASKA ALL EXPENDITURES BY TYPE (Includes Enterprises) Operating Capital Total Percent General Admin. S 393,903 $ 30,045 $ 423,948 8.4% Police Protection 478,834 37,719 516,553 10.3 Animal Control 35,329 -- 35,329 0.7 Fire Protection 104,842 463,010 567,852 11.3 Public Works 295,147 111,715 406,862 8.1 Planning 32,707 -- 32,707 0.7 Parks & Rec. 51,707 45,328 97,035 1.9 Library 70,344 4,705 75,049 1.5 Commissions 7,652 -- 7,652 0.2 CETA Program 15,467 15,467 0.3 Cemetery 1,125 1,125 -- Museum 35,808 35,808 0.7 Health & Alcoholism 10,804 10,804 0.2 Legal & Judicial 16,957 16,957 0.3 Water Service 375,584 375,584 7.5 Sewer Service 176,470 176,470 3.5 Port & Harbor 1,227,749 -- 1,227,749 24.4 Totals $3,330,429 $592,522 $4,022,951 80.1% Debt Service Annual 146,987 2.9 Bond Defeasance 852,584 17.0 Total $ 999,571 19.9% GRAND TOTAL $5,022,522 100.0% Source: Price Waterhouse, 1982. 13-9 Table 13-3 CITY OF HOMER ALASKA GENERAL REVENUES BY SOURCE LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Fiscal Year Licenses Intergovernmental Ended and Public Shared State Special June 30 Taxes Permits Safety Revenue Grants Revenue Other Total 1973 $ 147,007 $ 970 $ 3,754 $ 72,266 $ 44,575 29,522 $ 11,346 309,440 1974 227,960 1,039 5,429 78,686 31,034 28,730 26,367 39,99245 1975 324,726 29852 6,759 105,086 72,725 29,11.6 559083 596,347 1976 443,158 16,122 39320 1219572 82,518 34,745 199383 7209818 1977 665,168 15,801 9,546 145,735 115,782 70,156 22,022 1,1044.210 1978 882,098 14,013 25,660 190,510 113,013 237,548 569814 19519,656 1979 19191,638 20,415 419504 187,505 96,467 491,410 79,354 2,1089293 1980 1,2369064 23,536 39,257 2199608 77,647 331,805 65,702 1,993,619 1981 1,484,536 6,013 104,382 5519067 30,325 102,064 130,315 2,408,702 1982 1,290,085 20,635 86,506 923,470 13,377 1,057,337 35,022 3,4269432 Avg. Annual Change W 1973-1982 27.3% 40.4% 41.7% 32.7% -12.5% 48.8% 13.3% 30.6% 1977-1982 14.2% 5.5% 55.4% 44.7% 21.0% 72.0% 9.7% 26.8% Source: Arthur Young & Company, 1983 TABLE 13-4 CITY OF HOMER, ALASKA TAX REVENUES BY SOURCE LAST TEN FIXCAL YEARS Year Ending Total Property Sales June 30 Taxes Taxes Tax 1973 $ 147,007 $ 147,007 1974 227,960 213,096 $ 14,864 1975 324,726 230,290 94,436 1976 443,158 326,428 116,730 1977 665,168 418,689 246,479 1978 882,098 500,758 381,340 1979 1,191,638 751,812 439,826 1980 1,236,064 894,557 341,507 1981 1,484,536 1,178,956 305,580 1982 1,326,010 990,565 335,445 Avg. Annual Change 1973-1982 27.7% 23.6% -- 1977-1982 14.8% 18.8% 6.4% Source: Arthur Young & Company, 1983. 13-11 Table 13-5 summarizes the City's property tax levy over the nine year period ending with FY 1982. Several characteristics are worth noting for their implications for future revenues. First, it should be noted that assessed valuation rose at a far greater rate than the rate of inflation, and the difference was much greater than might be expected in any but a rapidly growing area. The difference was particularly noticeable during the boom years from 1976 through 1981, when the difference between the rate of increase in assessed valuation and the rate of inflation exceeded 25 percentage points. Another important factor is the effect of general economic conditions on property tax delinquencies. For example, the years following com- pletion of the Trans Alaska Pipel.ine, in whfch Alaska suffered from a prolonged recession, saw a marked decline in tax revenues as a percent of current levy (Table 13-5), dropping to as low as 92.1 percent in 1979. Thus, property tax revenues might be sensitive to general economic conditions in Homer's economy, and high delinquencies could return during future recessions. The third feature of the property tax relates to Borough assessment practices. Homer property values generally are reassessed only every third year, leading to a stepwise sort of pattern of assessed valuation increases. Homer was reassessed for FY 1981, so the next large increase probably will not occur until FY 1984.* Intergovernmental revenues have also increased, but fundamental changes have occurred in their structure. For example, Federal revenue sharing provided the bulk of "shared revenues" through 1980, but declined pre- cipitously in FY 1981, to be replaced by shared State revenues. State grants actually declined beginning with 1978, but reimbursements for services performed by the City at State facilities (e.g., longshoring at the dock) and State revenue sharing rose dramatically. Other reven- ues also increased greatly, as State revenues increased enough to off- set the disappearance of Federal revenues. Table 13-6 summarizes the City's revenues by type and sources of funds for FY 1980 and 1981. Total revenues from all sources (excluding pro- ceeds from new borrowing) soared more than 40 percent between the two years, rising from $3.6 million in FY 1980 to nearly $5.1 million in FY 1981. A critical measure of any local government's self-sufficiency is the control it has over its sources of revenues. Increased dependence on State and Federal funds, for example, limits the City's flexibility in the short run, and can lead to painful choices in the long run when the support declines. Fortunately, the City's overall level of support directly attributable to intergovernmental funds has remained at a relatively small level -- about 20 percent or one fifth of total reven- ues. However, direct grants from the State constituted nearly all of this figure in FY 1981, and may reach as high as one third of total revenues if State contributions to service charges (e.g., for airport security) and enterprise revenues (e.g., for longshoring of State ferries) is included. 13-12 Table 13-5 CITY OF HOMER, ALASKA PROPERTY TAX LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Total Real and Fiscal Year Total Total Revenue as a Personal Property Ended Tax Tax Percent of Assessed Value June 30 Mills Levy Revenue Current Levy (Millions $) 1973 12 $ 164,228 $ 147,007 90 13.69 1974 12 231,878 213,096 92 19.32 1975 12 251,975 230,290 92 21.00 1976 14 320,389 326,428 101.88 22.88 1977 12 421,282 418,689 99.38 35.11 1978 12 507,660 500,758 98.64 42.31 1979 12 816,292 751,812 92.10 68.02 1980 12 882,307 894,557 101.39 73.53 1981 10 1,131,518 1,178,956 104.19 113.15 1982 8 1,003,331 990,565 98.73 125.41 Avg. Annual Change 1973-1982 22.3% 23.6% 27.9% 1977-1982 19.0% 18.8% 29.0% Source: Arthur Young & Company, 1983 TABLE 13-6 CITY OF HOMER, ALASKA ALL REVENUES BY TYPE AND SOURCE Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 1980 and 1981 Year Ended June 30 1980 1981 Revenue Type and Source Amount % Amount % Own Source Funds Unrestricted Funds Taxes Property Taxes $ 894,557 24.8% $1,178,956 23.2% Hotel-Motel Tax 29,925 0.6 3 _74- Subtotal Taxes S 894-557 .8 $1,208,881 23.8 Service Charges 54,105 1.5 115,500 2.3 Interest on Deposits 167,967 4.7 291,025 5.7 Fees, Permits & Misc. 39 495 1.1 49,344 1.0 Subtotal Unrestr. Funds $1,156,T 4 _52_.O $1,664,750 32.8 Restricted Funds Sales Tax* 341,507 9.5 305,580 6.0 Water Enterprise 249,722 6.9 348,342 6.9 Sewer Enterprise 135,328 3.7 147,844 2.9 Port & Harbor Enter. 987,077 27.3 1,577,469 31.1 Subtotal Restr. Funds $1,713,634 475 T-2,379,235 46.8 SUBTOTAL OWN SOURCE FUNDS $2,869,758 79.5% $4,043,985 79.6% Intergovernmental Funds Federal 211,954 5.9 109,047 2.1 State 5279471 14.6 925,290 18.2 Subtotal Intergov. Funds $ 739,-425 Tf-,-034,3r, 767. -4 TOTAL ALL FUNDS $3,609,183 100.0% $5,078,322 100.0% *Sales tax proceeds are dedicated to pay for several general obligation bond issues. Source: Price Waterhouse, 1982. 13-14 Another important measure of a City's financial health is. the trend in revenues it generates of its own accord and on which no special restrictions apply. They are listed as unrestricted own source funds in Table 13-6. They are important since they indicate the degree of flexibility the City has in managing its funds, and how quickly the City can reallocate its funds in the event of changing needs. For example, this would indicate how quickly the City could shift funds to repair damages from a severe storm or earthquake. In this important category, the percentage actually i ncreased, from 32.0 percent in FY 1980 to 32.8 percent in FY 1981. The increase was strongest in all but property taxes, a small reduction in the City's dependence on a single, potentially volatile, revenue source. Interest earnings on the City's rising fund balances have become more important than fees, permits, service charges and miscellaneous revenue combined. Service charges alone also grew in relative importance, but a large part of the increase can be traced to charges paid by State agencies. The remainder of the City's revenues -- nearly half in both periods -- was comprised of locally generated revenues whose use is subject to restrictions. Most of these revenues were receipts of the City's water, sewer, and port and harbor enterprises, which are generally operated as separate businesses. City policy and legal covenants with creditors (bondholders) generally limit the use of enterprise revenues to the purposes of the enterprise. While enterprise fund accounting is useful to ensure that user-fee financed services pay their own way, flexibility to respond to changed financial condition is compromised if too large a fraction of revenues becomes subject to such restrictions. Bonded Debt Table 13-7 summarizes trends in the City's bonded, or long term, debt over the nine year period ending in FY 1982. Although gross bonded debt rose over the period, the increases were overshadowed by rapid increases in the assessable value of the tax base, and by rapid retire- ment of outstanding debt.* As a result, the ratio of the City's net bonded debt to assessed valu- ation fell by over half through the period, standing at just 1.5 per- cent at June 30, 1981. This is well below levels of municipal debt generally accepted by lenders (which range from 5 to 10 percent of assessed valuation). Total scheduled debt service as of the end of FY 1981 was approximately $334,000 per year, or about 06.6 percent of annual revenues, again well within generally accepted levels. *More accurately, the debt has been set aside through defeasement, in which funds to pay future debt service have been placed in a trust fund, earning the City net interest over the remaining life of the debt. 13-15 Table 13-7 CITY OF HOMER, ALASKA RATIO OF NET GENERAL BONDED DEBT TO ASSESSED VALUE AND NET BONDED DEBT PER CAPITA LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Fiscal Year Gross Less Debt Net Ratio of Net Net Bonded Ended Assessed Bonded Service Bonded Bonded Debt to Debt per June 30 Population Value Debt Funds Debt Assessed Value Capita 1973 1,243 13,685,666 443,000 $ 12,100 430,900 3.1% $347 1974 1,243 19,323,167 431,000 9,577 421,423 2.2 339 1975 1,538 20,997,917 1,518,000 179,012 1,338,988 6.3 871 1976 1,538 22,884,928 1,505,000 290,162 1,214,838 5.3 790 1977 1,802 35,106,833 1,892,000 517,384 1,374,616 3.9 763 1978 2,055 42,305,000 1,838,000 719,875 1,118,125 2.6 544 1979 2,205 68,024,337 1,784,000 1,118,258 665,742 .98 302 1980 2,209 73,525,583 1,724,000 1,468,696 255,304 .35 115 1981 2,209 113,151,816 1,983,000 328,948 1,654,052 1.5 749 1982 2,588 125,413,808 2,367,000 518,309 1,848,691 1.5 714 Avg. Annual Change 1973-1982 8.5% 27.9% 20.5% 17.6% 8.3% 1977-1982 7.5% 29.0% 4.6% 6.1% -1.3% Source: Art Young & Company, 1983. Fund Equities A final measure of the City's financial health is the amount readily available in the form of fund equities to cover unexpected financial needs. Table 13-8 summarizes fund equities (differences between assets and liabilities of each fund) as of the end of Fiscal Years 1981 and 1982 for the City of Homer. Total equities of all funds combined increased by more than $9 million during that one year period alone, with nearly $1.7 million -- about one-third of gross annual revenues from all sources -- available in unreserved, undesignated categories to meet unexpected shortfalls or emergencies. Policy Considerations Following on the heels of a decade or more of uninterrupted growth in revenues and services, it is important to carefully consider policy issues as they impact the City's financial health. The City has sub- stantially upgraded its budgeting, accounting and auditing systems to track current performance and provide advance warning of developing problems, which also complies with current government accounting, auditing and financial reporting requirements. Significant development is still needed in the financial accounting system to keep pace with future growth. Additional factors should be considered, however. One is financial performance criteria; strong financial management is better achieved if officials are given guidelines to strive for. Policies for this plan are: (1) A policy on use of debt. Generally, long-term debt should not be used for current expenses, and short-term debt cannot exceed more than 80 percent of current revenues. (2) Policies should be set for enterprise revenue rates, specify- ing what percent of full (direct and indirect) costs should be borne by the utility's customers. Generally, 100 percent of the costs borne by revenues is a rule of thumb, but some exceptions can be made if regional benefits are provided (for example, port and harbor benefits). (3) Emergency reserve-s should be maintained at some minimum per- centage of annual locally generated revenues. Ten percent is the planned minimum level. (4) Maximum levels of net general obligation debt should be specified as a percentage of financial resources. One ru le of thumb is that net general obligation debt should not exceed 8 or 10 percent of property value. Another is that total net general obligation debt should not exceed a certain percentage of the total annual locally generated, non- enterprise operating revenue. A third possibility is that annual general obligation debt service should not exceed a 13-17 TABLE 13-8 CITY OF HOMER COMBINED FUND EQUITIES ALL FUND TYPES AND ACCOUNT GROUPS JUNE 30, 1982 AND JUNE 30, 1982 Fund Equities June 30, 1982 June 30, 1981 Contributed Capital $20,069,665 $12,799,572 Investment in General Fixed Assets 3,090,648 2,295,188 Retained Earnings Reserved for Bond Redemption 109,160 89,752 Reserved for Construction 704,056 178,975 Unreserved 544,322 639,153 Fund Balances Reserved for Debt Service 518,309 328,948 Reserved for Long Term Receivable 1,800 3,600 Unreserved Designated for subsequent year's expenditure 605,684 683,563 Undesignated 1,688,801 11045,157 TOTAL FUND EQUITIES $27,332,445 S18,063,1100 Source: Arthur Young & Company, 1983. 13-18 certain percentage of total locally generated, non-enterprise operating revenue. All of these measures are used. (5) Other financial policies address capital improvements. Policies include adoption of a capital improvements program and annual capital budget as part of the annual budgeting process, and a requirement that associated annual operating expenditures be estimated and provided for prior to funding any capital improvement. In addition, policies als 'o address selection of financing method; i.e., pay-as-you-go versus accumulated capital funds (a type of savings account) versus long-term debt financing. (6) A final area of financial policy is financing of services provided to non-residents. Policies specify that service costs be financed by users, or that only a certain fraction of costs be financed by users. Goals, objectives, policies and planned actions for Homer's public finance are shown below. OBJECTIVE - SELF SUFFICIENCY Maintain the ability of local government agencies to continue provid- ing essential services in the event of an interruption in financial assistance from other levels of government. Policy 2 - Essential services, those being defined as services safe- guarding the health and safety of local residents, will be given high- est priority in policy making decisions affecting cuts in services. Policy 3 (Debt) - a. Long term debt should not be used 'for current expenses. b. Net general obligation debt should not exceed eight percent of total assessed property value. c. Annual general obligation debt service should not exceed 25 percent of total locally generated, non-enterprise operating revenue. Action 3.1 - City Financial Director and City Council review pro- posed capital improvements plan, bond issues and other borrowings to assure consistency with debt policy. Policy 4 (Intergovernmental Operating Assistance) - The City shall reduce its reliance on intergovernmental assistance to finance its operations, such that no more than 35 percent of aggregate non- enterprise operating budgets are financed by intergovernmental grant revenues. Action 4.1 - City Finance Director monitor and report to City Manager and City Council on status annually during budget prepar- ation. 13-19 Policy 5 (Enterprise Funds) - Enterprises should be managed so that their operations are self-supporting; i.e., require no grants or General Fund contributions to balance revenues and operating expendi- tures. Action 5.1 - City Finance Director monitor and report to City Manager and City Council on status annually during budget prepar- ation. Policy 6 (Fund Balances) - To maintain an ability to finance essential services in the event of an emergency, each City fund should maintain year-end fund balances equaling at least 10 percent of annual operat- ing expenditures. Action 6.1 - City Finance Director monitor and report to City Manager and City Council on status annually during budget prepar- ation. OBJECTIVE - RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Provide responsible management of physical and financial resources. Policy 7 - a. A short and long range capital improvements plan will be _@'s_tablished and maintained which is consistent with City financial policies and comprehensive plan to act as a guide for all capital expenditures. b. The plan should identify operating budget effects of each proposed improvement. Action 7.1 - Finance Director and City Manager prepare update annually, in consultation with City Council Capital Improvements Committee, and adopt by City Council. Action 7.2 - Finance Director and City Manager prepare, and City Council adopt, a Capital Budget as part of annual budget specify- ing planned financing of each item. Polity 8 - Cooperation of local governments and other agencies having an interest in Homer will be sought by the City. Action 8.1 - Adopt, with or without revision, all City plans by City Council and Borough Assembly. Policy 9 - City-owned lands will be managed to be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Action 9.1 - City Manager report annually to City Council on City land status and recommended actions -- acquisition, leasing, retention or disposal. 13-20 OBJECTIVE - ALLOCATING COSTS OF PUBLIC SERVICES Establish equitable methods of allocat ing costs among those who bene- fit from local public services. Policy 10 - a. The City, Borough and other local agencies shall seek a means of equitable sharing of costs, resources and decision making of regional services (such as fire protection, emergency medical, law enforcement, libraries, and road maintenance). b. Utility services shall be extended only to incorporated areas. Action 10.1 - City examine the feasibility (benefits versus costs) of annexing unincorporated areas bordering city limits which are likely to request city services. If feasible, initiate annexation, and extend services following annexation, or assess charges to provide services. 13-21 CHAPTER 14 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Continuation of Homer's rapid growth implies that the City will con- tinue to face increased demands for services, even as it struggles to maintain and improve its existing facilities. At the same time, means must be found to build and operate several of the large new facilities (principally the port) which are needed to attract and retain key industries. This chapter presents the City's plan for capital improvements over the next six years and beyond; proposed projects are identified and costs presented. Funding priorities are establ*ished by department, and capital improvements are scheduled in the years that funds are expected to be available. The following sections describe first capital improvement needs by category, followed by an analysis of the City's financing capabili- ties, and finally a tentative schedule of planned projects. It should be emphasized that the schedule is heavily dependent upon State and Federal funding decisions which are beyond the direct control of the City. Hence, the projections are conservative, assuming that these sources grow at rates which are considerably less than in recent years. In addition, the schedules of projected construction or pur- chase of capital improvements could probably be accelerated if revenue sources keep up their rapid growth of recent years; however, the pro- jections are intended to provide a baseline, so to speak, of a sched- ule which has a good chance of being met. It should also be emphasized that these projections are tentative only, and could be altered as funding levels, needs and grant require- ments become better defined. The plan does represent the best cur- rently available indication of the City's capital improvement plans for the next six years. FINANCIAL RESOURCES Homer has benefited from rapid growth in operating revenues over the past decade. Much of the growth is due to the'development of busi- nesses and residences, increasing assessed valuation and retail sales tax collections. The other major component has -come from State aid, in the form of grants, contracts and revenue sharing. State aid has become by far the most sizable component of Homer's revenues. Much of the State revenues originated from oil revenues, which have leveled off and declined in the past year or so. As oil revenues have declined, further large increases in State aid to Homer seem unlikely; hence, Homer's likely financial resources must be projected conserva- tively. 14-1 Tables 14-1 and 14-2 summarize Homer's projected financial resources and capital spending potential through the fiscal year 1987-1988. Own source revenues (principally property taxes, sales taxes and service charges) are projected to continue to increase, but at a rate of 10 percent rather than the 20 percent increases of recent years. This lower rate is used to provide a conservative outlook on the City's finances, and in expectation of a lower rate of economic growth for the next few years. Intergovernmental revenues are projected to grow at somewhat different rates. Federal revenues are projected to fall to a fraction of their previous levels, reflecting a cutback in the types of revenue sharing and grant assistance the City received in prior years. State grants and revenue sharing, aside from port and harbor grants, are projected to rise at the rate of 12 percent per year, about half the rate of recent years. Port and harbor grants are projected as presently pro- grammed by the State Department of Transportation and Public Facili- ties. Borough grants are projected to continue, but at a low level only slightly higher than in 1981-1982. Other financing sources are proceeds from General Obligation, Revenue and Special Assessment bonds issued by the City. Since Homer's cur- rent debt is low compared with generally accepted debt standards, the City has a great deal of latitude in issuing new debt. The projec- tions a5sume that new bonds are issued in proportion to planned capi- tal projects. Operating expenditures are projected to grow no faster than own source revenues. In other words, costs of operating and maintaining public services are limited to growing at the rate that the City's revenues from property taxes, sales taxes and service charges grow, or about 10 percent per year for the forecast period. This is much lower than the recent rate of growth in operating expenditures, and would represent a policy of relating changes in operating expenditures to the City's .ability to pay for them out of locally generated revenues rather than "soft" State or Federal grants. The projections anticipate that both flown source" revenues and operating expenditures increase at about half a million dollars per year for the period. Debt service projections include scheduled payments on existing debts as well as anticipated additions to the City's debts. Even with sub- V4Ce to stantial increases in bonded debt, the ratio of debt ser I total own source revenue (a key measure of financial health) is projected to rise from the present 13 percent to 23 percent by FY 1987-1988, still well within generally accepted bounds. Capital project expenditures are based upon several considerations. First, they are based upon projected needs for capital projects in different areas of Homer. These were balanced against, and adjusted for, funds projected to be available from grants, bond proceeds, existing fund balances and operating surpluses. Based upon these considerations, total expenditure levels for capital improvements were established. These were allotted among projected capital improvement needs, as described in the following section. 14-2 TABLE 14-1 CITY OF HOMER - HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FINANCING POTENTIAL FISCAL YEARS ENDING JUNE 30, 1981 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1988 37/88 80181 al is" 82 '83 8 518 4 3 4 / 8 5 85/86 86 8 7 -------- -------- -------- -------- - ------ -------- -------- -------- REVENUES OWN SOURCE-GENERAL TAXES PROPERTY TAXES 1173977 979988 1077q87 1135785 1304364 1434800 1578280 1736109 I 1@ .) 11 1 , /119 PENALTIES I& INTEREST 4979 10577 116,715 12798 14079 15486 17034 18713A HOTEL110TEL TAX 29925 -150925 0 0 SALES TAX 305580 '135445 368990 405888 446477 491125 540238 5941^61 SERVICE CHARGES 115500 106794 117473 129221 1421431 1561357 1111M 189192 INTEREST ON DEPOSITS 2496334 469658 296624 326286 358915 374806 434287 4717716 FEES, PERMITS & MISC 47377 75369 38906 427/96 470716 51784 56962 62658 -------- -------- -- 7----- -------- --------- -------- -------- -------- SUBTOTAL 1973672 1701906 1911614 2102776 23117,1053 '454417,58 2793794 131078674 WATER ENTERPRISE 239000 291000 320100 352110 387ri.1 426053 468658 515524 SEWER ENTERPRISE 72000 74000 81400 89540 98494 10K43, 119178 M096 PORT I HARBOR ENTERPRISE 1391000 829000 911900 1003090 1103399 121,3739 1170411171 1468624 -- ----- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUBTOTAL 17014000 1194000 1313400 1444740 1589214 1748135 lK.2949 2115244 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --- ---- -------- SUBTOTAL OWN SOURCE '4895906 3225014 71547516 3902267 42?2494 4721747J 5193717 INTERGOVERNMENTAL FEDERAL 109047 155537 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 510000 STATE-PORT & HARBOR 0 500000 9000000 10000000 6000000 6000000 10000000 6000000 STATE-OTHER 925290 1818803 2037059 2281506 25551181' 16861K.2 3205352 31589995 BOROUGH 0 2201 10000 12000 12000 12000 114,000 114,000 -------- ----- -- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUBTOTAL 10,714-07i'l 24701541 11097059 12'.343506 8617237 991.392-1 131267-5@' 9651990 . " - 14 J -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL ALL REVENUES 4710009 5317/1.447 14322073 15891022 1251?554 13216415 17999095 14845912 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES BOND PROCEEDS A GENERAL OBLIGATION 1650000 400000 0 Z000000 @500000 4Z00000 7000000 REVENUE & SPECIAL ASSESS 0 0 1200000 5000000 1500000 1500000 1500000 OTHER SOURCES 1) 0 1) 0 0 0 0 0 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --- SUBTOTAL 1650000 400000 0 4200000 9500000 5800000 9500000 '1500000 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL FINANCIAL RESOURCES 6360009 571712447 14322011311 20091022 4110195544 19016415 416489095 .22'j45912 14-3 TA.9LE 1471 (CONTINUED) 80/81 81182 81419", 83f84 84/85 80ji86 36187 371/88 EXPENDITURES -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- OPERATING GENERAL GOVERNMENT 469945 516940 5686", 6 2 5 4 ? 7 688046 756851 8325311@ POLICE PROTECTION 491640 5713889 631.278 0'94406 767846 340231 ?242554 1016679 75-)q ANIMAL CONTROL % JL 468834 51571 56728 62401 68641 7/5.506 83056 FIRE PROTECTION 104842 1171034 1.18737 141611 155772 171349 188484 2073,33) PUBLIC WORKS 3106488 48880i 537/688 5914516 650602 715662 787229 865951 STREET LIGHTING 0 1942 8736 9610 10571 116418 127191 14070 P A LANNING 1@707/ 10933, 34026 IT7429 4111712 452189 49818 54800 PARKS & RECREATION 81291 101508 118259 !30080j 1430K 15740AI 1731410 190457 LIBRARY 7101, ' '775 33870, 427584 47042 517'76 569114 626025 . i .@ / 35,j" i j Ic j/ COMMISSIONS 7652 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 CETA PROGRAM 115467 7053 7758 3534 9388 10326 11359 114495 CEMETERY 11.25 16521 18173 199?0 21989 24188 .16607 Iql6a CONTRIB TO LOCAL AGENCIES 443192 115552 127107 139818 153800 169180 186098 204707 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 341013 2142313 235656 259222 '185144 313659 3450144 '479527 OTHER GEN GOVT EXPEND 16957 4278 4706 5176 5694 6263 6890 757/9 WATER UTILITY 234092 285'J68 313905 345295 379825 417807 459588 505547 SEWER UTILITY 95801 12,62517 13470 148246 16,3070 179377 197315 217046 FORT @ HARBOR ENTERPRISE 11439740 844419 928861 10217 47 1123722 1236314 1359945 1495940 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDTRS 3110710 3906257 4196987) 4605571 5066128 5372741 6130015 6743016 DEBT SERVICE GENERAL OBLIGATION ANNUAL-EXISTING DEBT PRINCIPAL RETIREMENT 61000 16000 77000 931000 94000 99000 110000 120000 INTEREST t FISCAL CHGS 84367 1LO6257 192961 186410 178998 170541 161465 151323) ANNUAL-NEW DEBT SERVICE 0 0 0 0 3145000 747/500 1242000 20471000 DEFEASANCE 852584 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -------- -------- -------- -------- ---- --- -------- -------- -------- SUBTOTAL 9979.501 222257 269961 269410 617998 1017041 15134601 2318323 REVENUE & SPEC ASSESSMENT ANNUAL-EXISTING DEBT PRINCIPAL RETIREMENT 211000 52000 77000 71@100 19000 _9000 39000 79000 INTEREST & FISCAL CHGS ql?lq 90042 '81?4 86734 34"a' 8261, 80716 @ m 1. . . 0 1 QL L 1. 1 MANNUAL-NEW DEBT SERVICE 0 0 0 0 138000 7117,000 885500 10548000 DEFEASANCE 0 0 0 0 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUBTOTAL 1189149 142042 145154 1237084 261526 8174621. 1005,116 1175012 -- ----- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 1116880 364299 395155 392794 879524 1851663 41518681 3494135 ======::= ======== ======= ======== ======== Z==z==== ======== ======= TOTAL ALL EXPENDITURES 42.17590 41710556 4582033 49987465 5945632 7424404 8648676 10237151 CURRENT SURPLUS fDEFICIT) BEFORE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 21,3124197 160IS91 9740036 15092651' 15077,902 11592012 17940400 12108761 14-4 TABLE 14-1 (CONTINUED) 80 is 1 8 1182 8 2 18 3 8", /8 4 84/85 85/86 86/87 at""as CAPITAL PROJECT FINANCING -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- POTENTIAL: INITIAL COMB FUND BALANCES 4083,6712 5611,050 0160265 5686021 5 71 9130 5574710 4671873 5513991 CURRENT SURPLUS (DEFICIT) 2132419 1601891 9740036 15092657 150717)'702 115921012 171840400 12108761 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -- ----- -------- -------- NET AVAILABLE 61,16091 7213941 15900301 1,0778678 20793082 17166722 22512277 17622752 LESS CAPITAL PROJECTS 604041 1053677 102,14280 15059498 15218372, 11,494844 169981496 121999117 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ENDING COMB FUND BALANCES 5612050 61601164 56860141 5719180 55714710 4671878 551J7991 461.46,715 ASSUMPTIONS: OWN SOURCE REVENUE RATE OF GROWTH (PERCENT) 10.00 FEDERAL GRANTS REVENUE RATE OF GROWTH (PERCENT) (FALLING TO $50,0000R, CONSTANT THEREAFTER) STATE GRANTS RATE OF GROWTH (PERCENT) 12,00 BOROUGH GRANTS RATE OF GROWTH (PERCENT) 20.00 BOND PROCEEDS PER YEAR GENERAL OBLIGATION 500000 REVENUE & SPECIAL ASSESS 200000 OPERATING EXPENDITURE RATE OF GROWTH (PERCENT) 10.00 NEW DEBT SERVICE TERMS TERM OF FINANCING (YRS) 310,00 NET INTEREST RATE (Z) 11.00 CAPITAL PROJECTS EXPEND PERCENT OF AVAILABLE FUND BALANCES PLUS BOND PROCEEDS & GRANTS 25,1110 tNOTE: ALL OPERATIONS AND ENTERPRISES COMBINED. 14-5 Table 14-2 EFFECT OF DIFFERING ASSUMED GROWTH RATES IN STATE SHARED REVENUES AND OTHER CAPITAL GRANTS ON CITY OF HOMER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FINANCING POTENTIAL, FISCAL YEARS 1981/1982 THROUGH 1987/1988 Estimated Total Amount Annual Growth Rate in State Available to Finance Capital Shared Revenues and Other Projects and Equipment Capital Grants (in millions) -12% $53.5 0% 56.4 12% 60.8 22% 66.0 29% 78.0 Source: Pacific Rim Planners and Engineers, Olympic Associates Co. 14-6 CAPITAL PROJECTS During the later stages of preparing this comprehensive plan, capital improvement suggestions were collected from interested residents, bus- iness owners, City staff and elected officials. Each City department submitted lists of. suggested projects, along with cost, project description and project need information where available. For all projects, cost estimates were prepared or updated from previous esti- mates where possible. As the capital project lists were compiled, a list of evaluation criteria was prepared for use by each department in prioritizing from among the possible projects. The criteria recognized the immediacy of need, numbers of users to be served, cost effectiveness, and the degree to which the project was compatible with adopted plans and pol- icies, including this comprehensive plan. Department heads used the criteria to assign high, medium or low priorities to the projects, and the priorities became the key consideration in preparing the tentative schedule of capital improvement projects shown in Table 14-3. Besides the priorities, the other factor used to develop the tentative sched- ule was the overall cost of the project in relation to the City's capacity to finance design and construction, considering other large projects. Thus, for example, some large projects were timed to avoid overly large bond financing requirements in a single year. Overall, a total of about $175 million of capital improvement projects (stated in December 1982 prices) are included in the list. Due to inflation in construction and purchase prices expected over the next half decade (assumed to be eight percent per year) and the limits in the City's financing ability, less than half of the projects can be expected to be completed within the next six fiscal years. The first section of Table 14-3 includes parks and recreation proj- ects. A total of $10.4 million for projects is listed; however, the largest project, the proposed base of Homer Spit campground, is expected to be fully funded and constructed by the State Division of Parks, and is not scheduled in the table. Similarly, the second larg- est expenditure, purchase of land on the west side of Homer Spit for $3.0 million, is also projected to be undertaken by the State. Most of the remaining $1.4 million of projects are projected to be com- pleted within the first five years of the program, and many are now close to being constructed. One medium priority project (construction of an equestrian park) and the clive low priority projects were not scheduled for the six year period. The second category on Table 14-3 is the port and harbor department.. This is the largest single category of construction projects, with December 1982 estimated costs amounting to $92.3 million. The major- ity of this amount is involved with expansion of the small boat basin and construction of two deep water ocean berths. Nearly all of the amounts to construct port and harbor projects are expected to come 14-7 TABLE 14-3 CITY OF HOMER SIX YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SCHEDULE FISCAL YEARS ENDING JUNE 30, 1983 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1988 COST BEYOND ESTIMATED PROJECTED CONSTRUCTION COST BY YEAR SCHEDULED PROGRAM AR DEC.' Ll 'DIX YEA PERIOD PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY COSTS 82 18 3 831/84 34/85 851"86 86i87/ 87188 TOTAL (88'89 V .i h i --------------------------------------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- PARKS A NO RECREATION: BAYVIEW MAYENUE PARK HIGH 18000 18000 118000 SENIOR LEAGUE FIELD HIGH 310000 J0000 30000 HIGH SCHOOL SOFTBALL FIELD HIGH 100100 10000 10000 KACHEMAK DR REC MAREA DESIGN HIGH 7)00(1 1@000 3000 BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAM HIGH 10000 10000 10000 SIDEWALKIBIKE PATH PLAN HIGH 15000 15000 115000 BELUGHA LANE PARK HIGH 140000 151200 151200 SIGN AGE PROGRAM HIGH 5000 OJ400 5400 DAY USE PARK END OF SPIT HIGH 10000 10600 10800 SITE DEV, HILLSIDE HIGH 540076 629945 629945 SEWER & WTER HLLS. MEDIUM 105000 1224 7/2 122472 SR LEAGUE BLFLD HILLSIDE PARK MEDIUM 115000 144867 144967 CONST. CORE AREA HLLS. MEDIUM 78000 98258 CONST. CAMPSTE. HLLS. MEDIUM 47000 63943 6394" CONST. EXTRA PRKING MEDIUM 15000 20407 20407 WEST SIDE SPIT LAND PURCHASE MEDIUM 7.000000 0 @BASE SPIT CAMPGROUND MEDIUM 6000000 0 CONST. EQUEST. PARK MEDIUM 200000 0 317375 BISHOP'S BEACH ACCESS LOW -?.! ,1,000 0 50780' LIBRARY PARK LOW 7 BAYCREST CLIFF AREA LOW ? EASTSIDE PARK LOW WEST HILL PARK LOW TOTALS PARKS 4 REC 1037307/6 86000 167400 715.14 17 2 43 1 4 8 4 Z55 0 1 Z '1 9 1 '168155 PORT AND HARBOR: ;ISH DOCK 9000000 3000000 HARBOR SLOPE DEY, HIGH 35c)(1000 4082400 4082400 STEEL GRID MODIFICATION HIGH 500000 5LT2100 1523200 PUBLIC FISH PIER HIGH 2000000 @=oo SMALL BOAT HARBOR EXPANSION HIGH 27030.1000 9"12,080 9814801. 5979480 6017157111 42791,85 DECKING SMALL BOAT HARBOR HIGH 11684000 3651552 3651554 OCEAN BERTH NO. I MEDIUM .23790000 0 3717517140 OCEAN BERTH NO. 2 LOW '48304000 0 44914891 PORT DEV. PORT OFFICE LOW 300000 408147 408147 PROCESSOR 4ASTE LINE LOW 7 TOTALS PORT 4 HARBOR 92Z80000 8932080 9914802 10@45080 175'1 104711"284 14-8 TABLE 14-3 (CONTINUED) COST BEYOND ESTIMATED PROJECTED CONSTRUCTION COST BY YEAR SCHEDULED PROGRAM DEC '82 SIX YEAR PERIOD PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY COSTS 8,31"34 84/35 8 cs!" 8 6 86/37 87/88 TOTAL (88/.S? --------------------------------------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- PUBLIC SAFETY: POLICE DEPT- ANIMAL SHELTER HIGH m 80000 30000 30000 LAND MCQUISITION HIGH 423,1000 456840 456840 POLICE STATION ADDITION HIGH 240000 3 0 2 Z-,@ I @01111 41w IAII ,JM L ADDITION MEDIUM 111,5000 1170 0 6 1 11,10061 BLACK TOP PARKING LOT LOW 715000 0 55541 ------- ------- ------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- SUBTOTALS 903000 90000 456840 0 302331 170061 0 10092324 55541 FIRE DEPT- HOMER SPIT FIRE STATION MEDIUM 1000000 0 1586a74 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- SUBTOTALS 1000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1586874 TOTALS PUBLIC SAFETY 190,11000 80000 456840 0 302331 1710061 0 1009232 1642415 PUBLIC WORKS: WATER & SEWER- DANVIEW WATER LINE HIGH 4213100 42300 42300 MAJOR DITCHING PROGRAM HIGH 152100 lict.100 1512100 COOPER SUBDIV. SEWER LINE HIGH 275600 1475600 2715600 KACHEMAK BAY DR WTR @ SWR LINE HIGH 14889100 3120223 31202,18 W HILL ROAD WATER & SEWER LINE HIGH 2552050 2976711 2976711 RANGEVIEW WATER LINE MEDIUM 45000 56687 56687 PENNOCK WATER LINE MEDIUM 40000 54420 54420 FRITZ CR WTR LN, BAN & TR PLNT MEDIUM 25400000 0 40"106608 STORM SEWER ON L. MAIN MEDIUM 198400 249Q')7 249927 SPIT SEWER LINE MEDIUM 1981400 249599'@ 2495993 NEW SPIT WATER LINE MEDIUM 5400000 '673,320 '1961186 7640506 STERLING HWY OATER LINE MEDIUM lissi(h) HOMER SPIT SEWAGE FACILITIES MEDIUM 7/60000 111,16689 11116689 BINOCULAR BLUFF WTR k SWR LINE MEDIUM 1700000 99914", 9@9141) 1618612 SEWAGE TRTMNT PLANT EXPANSION LOW 5000000 I ml m 0 1934372 MUNSON SUBDIV WTR & SEWER LINE LOW 537600 0 93,2447 BENSON SUBDIV WTR & SEWER LINE LOW 861100 0 1366457 MATTOX WATER AND SEWER LINE LOW 1,14,5000 0 198339 CITY VIEW WATER LINE LOW 31200 0 49510 FAIRVIEW WTR LINE EXTENSION LOW 409200 0 649349 WATER TREATMENT PLNT EXPANSION LOW '1840000 0 6093597 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- SUBTOTALS 53008150 0 '1202.23 29767111 2.20246011 5344137 408-Ale 203267101 59149%2 14-9 TABLE 14-3 (CONTINUED) COST BEYOND ESTIMATED PROJECTED CONSTRUCTION COST BY YEAR SCHEDULED PROGRAM DEC '82 SIX YEAR PERIOD al 18T PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY COSTS @j ') 83184 84/85 85186 86/871 all/88 TOTAL (88189 fl --------------------------------------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ROADS & STREETS- PAVE MAIN STREET HIGH 191500 191500 191500 UPGRADE LOWER MAIN ST. HIGH 754600 '477300 407484 784784 UPGRADE GLACIER VIEW SUB R04MDS MEDIUM 646800 698544 698544 UPGRADE DANVIEW AVE. MEDIUM @77'200 439966 439966 UPGRADE SOUNDVIEW AVE. MEDIUM 2.46400 287401 2S"7401 UPGRADE FAIRVIEW AVE. MEDIUM 2318600 4 40768 2920716B UPGRADE B"aYVIEW AVE. MEDIUM 392,700 5342&4 534264 EXTEND FAIRVIEW TO HEATH ST. LOW '1766000 528987 528987 644239 CBD PARKING LOTS AND SIDEWALKS LOW 498600 586086 586086 158243% UPGRADE CITYVIEW AVE. LOW 69300 0 109970 UPGRADE ROADS IN COOPER SUB. LOW 5771500 0 916420 PUT IN STREET SIGNS LOW 15000 0 23803 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- - ---- ------- ------- SUBTOTALS 6192400 568800 110602B 71217367 2920768 534264 1115073 6972300 802482 OTHER PUBLIC WORKS- CONST. BARTLETT ST. SIDEWALKS HIGH IL3900 23900 q7 00 239 LAND FOR DISPOSAL OF SLUDGE HIGH 100000 108000 108000 SAND STORAGE FACILITY MEDIUM 15000 17496 171496 EXPANSION SHOP PHASE I MEDIUM 60000 75583 7558Z3 LAND ACgUIS (EgUIP & STORAGE) LOW 60000 al.l.29 01629 COLD AND HOT PATCH STORAGE LOW 2000 1.721 2721 RECORDS STORAGE CENTER LOW 4408 4408 EXPANSION SHOP PHASE Il LOW 50000 0 79344 FENCING PUBLIC WKS. FAC. LOW 5000 0 7934 ------- ------- -- ---- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- SUBTOTALS 263900 23900 108000 17496 '15587) 84350 4408 313737 0 TOTALS PUBLIC 4ORKS 59464450 592700 433,14256 7721574 5798958 59627151 J21024?9 2,7612739 iOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES: CONSTRUCTION NEW HIGH SCHOOL HIGH t 0 TOTALS SOCIAL i' HEALTH SRVCS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GENERAL GOVERNMENT: FINANCE- FINANCIAL IGMT REPORTNG SYSTEM HIGH 30000 32400 -32400 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- TOTALS FINANCE 40000 0 32400 0 0 0 32400 0 14-10 TABLE 14-3 (CONTINUED) COST BEYOND ESTIMATED PROJECTED CONSTRUCTION COST BY YEAR SCHEDULED PROGRAM DEC 1 82& SIX YEAR PERIOD PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY COSTS ILI 11 33184 84/801 - 85/86 86/37 allisa TOTAL (88189 fl - --------------------------------------- --------- --------- ------ -- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ARTS & CULTURE- LIBRARY PARKING LOT HIGH 40000 43200 LIBRARY EXPANSION HIGH 7115000 1050570 1050570 CULTURAL COMMUNITY CE14TER LOW 000000 .0 9521246 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- SUBTOTALS 6755000 0 41)200 1) 0 0 1050570 1093770 95411246 OTHER GENERAL GOVERNMENT- CITY HALL MEDIUM 1189,71000 45716675 4576075 12315540 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- SUBTOTALS 7@893000 0 0 0 0 0 45716075 4576075 1235540 TOTALS GENERAL GOVERNMENT 10679000 0 7'6C)O 0 0 0 5626645 5702245 10756786 EQUIPMENT: FOUR WHEEL DRIVE VEHICLE (PS) HIGH 6000 6000 6000 CASH REGISTERS (F) HIGH 16000 161,100 16000 1500 GPM 4WD PUMPER (FD) HIGH 160000 171 00 11121800 AMBULANCE (FD), HIGH 60000 69984 49984 TANKER 3 CHASSIS (FD) HIGH 95234 95234 STEAMER TRUCK @PW) MEDIUM 35000 3,7got) 37800 COMPRESSOR/JACKHAMMER (PW) MEDIUM 1500 1500 1500 NEW OFFICE FURNITURE (PW) MEDIUM 20000 20000 20000 UPGRADE SYSTEM '44 (F) MEDIUM 10000 10000 10000 UTILITY INQUIRY TERMINAL (F) MEDIUM 2135 2490 2490 OFFICE EQUIPMENT (PW) MEDIUM 3000 3499 3499 VHF RADIOS (PW) MEDIUM 10000 11664 11664 REFURNISH FINANCE DEPT. (F) MEDIUM 10000 11664 11664 PRINTER-HARBOR (F) MEDIUM '4500 3149 3149 BULLDOZER W/EXCAVATOR (PW) MEDIUM 70JO00 94478 94478 TWO ECON. PICK-UPS (PW) MEDIUM 128000 35272 7115 2 7 4' RECORDS COMPUTER (PS) MEDIUM 12000 l16312 176311 SERVICE TRUCK FOR FIELD (PW) MEDIUM 80000 117546 117546 HEAVY RESCUE TRUCK (FD) MEDIUM 60000 111) 95212 UTILITY TRUCK (FD) MEDIUM 18000 0 28564 TELEPHONE INTERCOM SYSTEM PW) 'LOW 5000 774-7 "47 -0c JEHICLE ;,*PW) LOW 1 (.)000 DITCHING MACHINE (Pw) LOW 8000 11j55 Il755 COMPUTER SYSTEM @PW) LOW 10000 14693 1469", MICROGRAPHICS EQUIPMENT (PW) 7 15000 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- SUBTOTALS 127135 53500 2110600 993101 1 ?112900 108839 1639713 77411711 1475571? GRAND TOTALS ALL PROJECTS 1714798526 97144280 15059499 15218372 12494844 16999296 12999117 71451=97 95581566 tNOTE; PROVIDED BY OTHER AGENCIES. MLL IN171AL CAPITAL COSTS INFLATED AT 3 PERCENT PER. YEAR. 14-11 from annual appropriations by the State Legislature, and the project schedule reflects current budget recommendations by the State Depart- ment of Transportation and Public Facilities. Actual construction will follow annual appropriations, with completion of the fish pier project first, followed by expansion of the small boat basin. Other projects will follow in the later years of the program. The third major category of capital improvements in Table 14-3 is public safety projects, including those of the Homer Police Department and the Homer Volunteer Fire Department. Current costs for these projects total $1.9 million, exclusive of equipment needs discussed below. Most projects are scheduled for the six year period, the sole exception being the Homer Spit fire station. The fourth category, public works, has the largest number of projects, subdivided into water and sewer, roads and streets, and other proj- ects. Current costs for all public works projects total nearly $60 million, although the bulk of the costs are concentrated in the water and sewer projects. About two thirds of the projects, including virtually all of the high and medium priority projects, are scheduled for the six year period. The sole exception is the Fritz Creek water project, whose estimated current cost of $25.4 million is beyond the City's projected financing ability (or more accurately, would preclude many other projects under projected financing conditions). Scheduled projects include approximately $20.3 million for water and sewer projects, $7.0 million of road projects and $2.8 million of other projects. The social and health services category, fifth on the list in Table 14-3, includes only construction of a new high school in Homer. Although this is considered a high priority, education is the respon- sibility of the Kenai Peninsula Borough, and is currently fully financed and scheduled to be completed in the next several years. General government projects include administrative, finance and arts and culture projects. Current costs for all of these projects total about $10.7 million, the majority of which is encompassed in the cultural community center ($6.0 million) and a new city hall ($3.9 million). Other, smaller projects which are rated equally or higher are scheduled for the six year period, while the community center and city hall building are not scheduled due to their lower priorities and high costs. The final category is that of equipment for all City departments. These are listed separately from the larger construction projects, since they usually serve internal needs and have a much shorter service life. As such, they are listed and evaluated on their own, separate from the much larger, user oriented, construction projects reviewed above. Current costs for equipment needs total about $727,000; about half of this amount is for fire department equipment. Nearly all of the equipment is scheduled for purchase during the next six years. 14-12 In total, about $75 million is scheduled to be spent during the next six years, with about $96 million (in 1987-1988 prices) remaining to be spent at the end of the period. While this is a tentative sched- ule, it should be updated periodically and used for preparing a separ- ate capital improvements budget in conjunction with an operating budget each year. In this way, progress on the program can be tracked and the schedule can be adjusted if needed. 14-13 REFERENCES CITED Alaska Consultants, Inc. Baseline Conditions and Non-OCS Forecast, Cook Inlet Socioeconomic Systems, Lower Cook Inlet Impact Analysis. Tech. #LCI-17. July, 1979. Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Kenai Peninsula Borough Regional Transportation Study (KRTS), Phase III. 702. April, 9 Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. Homer Airport Land Use and Development Plan. December, 1978.- Alaska Departmen t of Transportation and Public Facilities. Kenai Peninsula Borough Regional Transportation Study (KRTS, Phase II. T9-T8 -. Alaska State Housing Authority. Homer Comprehensive Development Plan. HUD Project No. Alaska P-27. Spring, 1969. Bambard, Nowland D. Consolidated Wastes on the Kenai Peninsula. 1981. CH2M-Hill. Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Homer, Alaska. May, 1977. CH2M-Hill. Drainage Management Plan, Homer, Alaska. August, 1979. CH2M-Hill. Homer Septage Disposal Facility. April, 1981. Criminal Justice Planning Agency, Dept. of Law. Crime in Alaska. 1980. Eakland, Peter and Associates. Lower Cook Inlet Transportation Systems M Impact Analysis. November, 979. Environmental Services, Ltd. Kenai Peninsula Borough Draft Coastal. Development Program, Part I - Background Report, Inventory and Analysis. Environmental Services, Ltd. Kenai Peninsula Borough Draft Coastal Development Program, Part II - Technical Report Program, Plans and Recommendations. September, 1980. Fernstrom, John R. 1973. "Bringing in the Sheaves, Effective Community Industrial Develo-pment Programs, Oregon State University Extension Service, Corvallis, Oregon. Homer, City of. City of Homer Budget, Fiscal Year 1982-1983. Homer Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. Five Year Plan. 1982. Kenai Peninsula Borough. Profile of Five Kenai Peninsula Towns. 1977. Kenai Peninsula Borough Economic Development Office. Situation and Prospects, Kenai Peninsula Borough. June 1, 1981. Kenai Peninsula Borough Economic Development Office. Situation -and Prospects, Kenai Peninsula Borough. April, 1982.- Kenai Peninsula Borough Growth Monitoring Committee Advisory Committee. Kenai Peninsula Borough Special Census of the Population. March, T9_F9 _. Kenai Peninsula OEDP Committee Kenai Peninsula Overall Economic Development Program. Sepiember, 1976. Klein, Janet. A History of Kachemak Bay, the Country and Communities. 1981. Miernyk, William H. The Elements of Input-Output Analysis. 1965. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 1975. Referenced in City of Homer, Homer Alaska Comprehensive Develop- ment Plan, 1978. Price Waterhouse. City of Homer Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year July 1, 1980 - June 30, 1981. Quadra Engineering, Inc. Revised Drainage Management Plan, Homer, Alaska. February, 1982. Rice, Ronald D. Solid Waste Disposal in the Homer Area. TAMS Engineers. Engineering Study and Preliminary Design for Port of Homer Development. June, 1980. Trans-Alaska Engineering/URS Company, Kenai Peninsula Borough Solid Waste Management Plan. September, r9-8-O. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the U.S. 1979. U.S. Bureau of the Census and Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1981. U.S. Bureau.of the Census and Kenai Peninsula Borough, 1982. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Potential Flooding, City of Homer, Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska. June, 19/8. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey,- Homer-Ninilchik Area, Alaska. July, 1971. Woodward-Clyde Consultants, and Soros Associates. Kenai Peninsula Borough, Port and Harbor Demand and Feasibilit7 -Project. April, 1980. Young, Arthur & Company. 1983. City of Homer Annual Financial Statements, Years Ended June 30, D-8-2 and 1981, with Report of Certified Public Accountant. Appendix A PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY RESULTS During the month of May 1982, an intensive public opinion survey was conducted of Homer residents, including persons living outside of the Homer city limits. The survey addressed many of the issues identified by the Steering Committee, the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission, and by residents contacted informally and at public work- shops. A total of 439 surveys were completed during the three-week survey period. For comparison purposes, the surveys were completed in two separate groups. The first group consisted only of city resident households, selected at random, and contacted personally by city repre- sentatives. A total of 263 households were selected using the Homer Electric Association's customer files, and a total of 179 completed surveys were obtained from this group. This represents approximately 16.5 percent of the households in the city. The remaining 84 house- holds either were not home during the several times representatives attempted to contact them, or did not complete the survey after being recontacted several times. Most of the sur'veying was co-nducted during the five-day period from Thursday, May 13 to Monday, May 17, 1982. On Thursday, May 20, 1982, the same survey document was included as an insert to a regular edition of the Homer News. The newspaper has a circulation of approximately 2,600 _@_er 1 Tss u eand is widely read throughout the south Kenai Peninsula. Residents and non-residents alike were encouraged to respond. Since the sample was not statisti- cally controlled, there was no way of assuring that individuals did not complete more than one survey, or that special interest groups respond more than other members of the general public. However, the survey was intended to provide a means to involve members of the public who may not otherwise have taken the opportunity to participate in the plan, so considerations of maximizing involvement were considered more important than attempting to duplicate a statistically unbiased sample. A total of 254 surveys were returned, 134 of which were from city residents and 120 from non-residents. The random sample provided an unbiased benchmark against which to judge the results of the volunteer, newspaper survey. In this way the survey results provide decision-makers with a fair, unbiased indiction of how city residents feel. The volunteer survey provided a conduit for all residents and non-residents to express their opinions and ideas. The attached tables summarize the results of the survey for the random sample of city residents, the volunteer sample of city residents, all city residents combined and the volunteer sample of non-residents. These results are discussed in the following sections, with emphasis placed on the random sample results. A-1 RANDOM SAMPLING THEORY A brief note is in order at this point to explain what statistical theories have to say about the accuracy and validity of the survey results. The first point concerns the fairness of the survey ques- tions. To accurately sample opinion, the questions must be as neutral as possible with respect to the views expressed. A question which begins with "would you agree that . . . " tends to lead the respondent towards one position, leads to biased results. A better way to begin the question is to say, "which of the following satements do you agree with . . . ." While it is virtually impossible to eliminate all poten- tial bias in the survey, it was thoroughly reviewed, tested, critiqued and revised prior to being used, and at least the mo.st obvious problems with biased and confusing questions were corrected. The other point concerns sampling. If all residents were to fill out one and only one survey compeltely, and the survey questions are clearly and fairly stated, then of course the results are a fair indi- cation of what Homer's residents feel. The problem, however, is that travel, limited time, apathy and a host of other reasons typically limit the number of persons who would respond to the survey to a small fraction of Homer's residents. For example, typically a mail-out or newspaper survey will be returned by 5 to 15 percent of all households, depending on the quality and general interest in the content of the survey. However, it is difficult to say whether a mail-out or news- paper survey fairly reflects all of the community, since special inter- est groups tend to be more likely to respond than persons without any special stake in the survey results. If a survey is to treat all groups equally, then each resident must have an equal chance of being included. Door-to-door or telephone surveys of randomly selected households are among the best means of accomplishing this. In a community the size of Homer, sampling all or nearly all households is prohibitively expensive, so a small fraction is usually chosen for intensive, careful sampling. Statistical theory is utilized to determine how accurate the results are (again assuming that there was no significant bias in the survey). For the random surveys the sample size of 179 implies that we can be 95 percent confident that any given figure is within 7 percent of the "true" figure (i.e., the number that would be obtained if all residents had been surveyed). For example, if 56 percent of the random sample respondents checked "attracting year-round jobs" as one of the three most important ways of improving the quality of life in Homer (Question #1), statistical theory says that we can be 95 percent confident that the true figure is between 52 and 60 percent. Unless all adult resi- dents are surveyed, we can never be completely sure of any of the figures obtained in the random sample. However, statistical theory does provide a basis on which to gauge how accurate each of the figures are without the much greater cost of surveying all residents. A-2 The random sample was limited to adults within the household, and limited to one survey per household. There was no such restriction for the newspaper survey. Thus, the two different methods of sampling could provide very different groups of respondents, and statistical theories cannot be applied due to the possibility of bias; special interest groups may be over- or under-represented in the totals, so the figures must be carefully interpreted. As wi 11 be seen, however, the results do not really differ greatly between the groups. SURVEY RESULTS The attached tables summarize the survey results for four separate combinations of respondents. The left hand column repeats the question as it actually appeared in the survey. Moving to the right, the second column reports figures for the random survey of city residents, followed by the volunteer survey of city residents, all city residents (random and volunteer samples combined), and finally the volunteer survey of non-residents. For each question, the results show the percentage of the total group with a particular answer, excluding those who did not answer the ques- tion or who skipped the question because of a previous response. The total sample size ("n") is shown at the top of the column, and can be used to estimate the actual number of responses for any category. The actual numbers of respondents not answering or skipping the question are also shown, in parentheses. In the discussion which follows, percentages are shown only for the random survey of city residents, since these are the most reliable indicators of.Homer public opinion. Results are also discussed for the volunteer groups, but no figures are shown in the text. Ways of Improving Homer The first question dealt with general areas of improvements which would most greatly increase the quality of life within the City. Among al I groups, attracting year-round jobs (56%) and orderly development of growth in commercial and residential areas (54%) rated among the two or three highest. City beautification (36%), utility services (29%) and recreation development (28%) were the next three. On the other side, keep i ng the popu 1 at i on sma 11 to ret a i n the sma 11 -town atmos phe re was among the least frequently chosen (21%). The volunteer respondents showed a distinctly different orientation. Attraction of year-round jobs fell to third place-for the city resident volunteer sample, and to fourth place for the non-resident volunteers. Orderly development, city beautification, parks and recreation develop- ment and protection of the environment were chosen more frequently. It is interesting to contract this result with the 1977 Anchorage Urban Observatory survey which found that half of Homer's residents wanted ,A-3 Homer to stay the same size or be smal ler than the 1977 estimated popu - lation of 1,500. Apparently Homer's rapid growth of the past decade has persuaded many residents that growth does not necessarily harm Homer's small-town atmosphere, while new residents who have moved in since the last survey was taken may not have missed the smaller town features, and their opinions may have served to dilute those of older residents. In any event, this question is significant in that keeping Horner's population small no longer seems to be as high a priority, while secure economic development with orderly control are much higher priorities. Central Business District The second through fifth questions deal with the subject of the Central Business District, attempting to find out how important it is and what should be done with it. Question #2 dealt with the importance of establishing a strong Central Business District. Opinion was about evenly divided between very important (32%), somewhat important (40%), and not important (32%). From another point of view, a majority of respondents (72%) indicated it was either somewhat or very important to them, demonstrating a fairly high level of support for a strong central business district. Overall results were similar for the volunteer groups, but with somewhat less importance attached to the CBD by non-resident volunteers. Question #3 asked persons who indicated establishment of a strong CBD was either somewhat or very important to them to say whether they favored or opposed certain types of actions that could be taken to strengthen Homer's CBD. Of the four categories, providing improvements such as public parking, sidewalks and lighting, partly at public expense, was overwhelmingly favored (92%). Concentrating future com- mercial development in the CBD was also heavily favored (84%). More restrictive zoning standards outside of the CBD were favored by a small majority (54%) over those opposed (20%) and undecided (26%). Limiting vehicle access to the Homer Bypass was opposed (52%), but a large fraction were uncertain (28%). Other suggestions included keeping a greenbelt in the CBD, relocating industrial activities to other areas, and making use of Homer's unique features (history, seafood, scenery, artisans, etc.). Results forn the two volunteer groups were approxi- mately the same. Question #4 asked about other actions to improve the appearance and traffic flow in the Central Business District. Strong support was indicated for constructing sidewalks and pathways (89%), increasing off-street parking (79%), and instituting a beautification program (68%). Opinion was more evenly divided on, but still favored (52%) widening the roadway to provide a turn lane. Residents opposed provid- ing central parking areas (41% favoring) and unifying appearance of commercial buildings through common design programs (37% favoring). Opinion was similar among the volunteer groups, although generally less favorable towards the possible actions among the non-residents. Other suggestions included shuttle buses, parking regulation enforcement, upgrading secondary street approaches to Pioneer Avenue, and greater provisions for pedestrian access, comfort and safety. A-4 Question #5 asked for preferences as to where commercial growth should occur in the future. Strongest support was voiced for having future commercial growth occur in the existing Central Business District (50% listed it as first or second choice), and eventually expanding towards the Homer Bypass area (47% listed the area between Pioneer and the Bypass a first or second choice). After development of Pioneer Avenue and the area between Pioneer and the Bypass, Ocean Drive was the third choice (37% listing it either first or second), followed by the Bypass (29% choosing it first or second). The Homer Spit and the airport area were chosen much less frequently (6% and 9% choosing first or second, respectively). The volunteer surveys had similar results, but with an even stronger emphasis on development of Pioneer Avenue and the area between Pioneer and the Bypass. Land Development The next several questions addressed the question of how far the City should go in regulating land development and related activities. The sixth question attempted to find out whether respondents wished to see the city use its regulatory powers to restrict or ban land development in hazardous areas. For the random survey, the answers were almost evenly divided between yes (42%) and no (38%), with nearly one out of five respondents (19%) uncertain. There was stronger support for city regulation among the volunteer groups, particularly among the non-residents. The seventh question dealt with whether property owners should be compensated for regulatory actions which reduce a property owner's ability to develop his property. A larger percentage (38%) favored compensation over no compensation (27%), but over a quarter of the respondents (27%) were undecided, so none of the choices received a plurality. No monetary compensation was favored by a larger percentage among the volunteer respondents, with a smaller fraction undecided. Again, none of the choices was clearly favored (by more than half of all respondents). Opinion will probably vary by the situation, tending to favor the owner more as the owner's ability to develop is restricted. This pattern is also continued in the eighth question relating to whether or not the city should enforce building, fire, plumbing and electrical codes in buildings, although fewer persons were uncertain (10%) and the "Yes" answer received a slim majority (51% in favor versus 39% opposed). The results were the same, with a smal ler difference between those favoring and those opposed. It appears, then, that in all three of these questions, opinion was closely divided between those who favor expanded use of regulatory powers to promote the public health and welfare, and those who favor leaving individuals alone, with a large number of persons uncertain. A-5 Overall Lev@els of Taxation and Public Services The ninth question related to the level of taxation of property. For all three groups, a large percentage (41%) checked one of the two answers involving increased levels of taxation to either maintain, or improve and expand services now offered by the city. Another large fraction (44%) wished to hold the line on taxes by cutting back on less important services if necessary, while only a small percentage (5%) chose the option of decreasing taxes by major cuts in services if necessary. Another 10 percent checked the "other" category, with sug- gestions ranging from ways to cut costs or increase revenues, and a number of suggestions relating to a need to carefully scrutinize Homer's local government revenues and spending patterns. The figures were quite similar for the two volunteer groups. The most surprising aspect of the answers to this question was that such a large percentage of the respondents chose one of the two options involving increasing taxes to either maintain or expand services. Apparently, large numbers of residents moved to Homer because of a desire for a high quality of life, and are willing to increase their tax burden if necessary to obtain high quality public services. Homer Spit The next three questions related to land uses on the Homer Spit, and attempted to find out what priorities should be attached to each of these uses. Question #10 related to the end of the Spit, and in almost all cases respondents had fairly strong opinions. Highest priority for the end of the Spit was assigned to, in decreasing order, marine indus- trial (80%), parking for commercial fishermen (77%), open space recre- ation and public access (76%), staging areas for commercial traffic '(66%), day park (55%), parking for tourists (51%), overnight camping (48%) and parking for retail businesses (47%). Uses which were primar- ily rated low priority included motels and hotels (48%), retail commer- cial (45%), charter and government offices (46%), staging areas for natural resource development (25%), fishing gear storage (28%), and Kachemak Bay State Park headquarters (22%). Uses which should be excluded altogether are non-marine industrial (75%) and motorcycle raceways (82%). Patterns were the same for the volunteer respondents, with slightly greater priority assigned to recreational uses of the Spit and less priority to commercial uses. Overall, it appeared that residents and non-residents alike appears to prefer that land uses on .the end of the Spit be restricted to those which depend on that loca- tioh. Uses which could be located elsewhere generally received lower priority. Question #11 related to land use priorities for the east side of the Spit. In general, the results reflect approximately the same rankings as for the end of the Spit, but the differences were much less pro- nounced. Highest priorities were assinged to marine industrial (68%), open space recreation (55%), day park (52%), parking for commercial fishing (51%), parking for tourists (49%) and staging areas for commer- cial traffic (48%). Lower priority was assigned to most other activi- ties, including retail commercial (30%), offices (34%), overnight A-6 camping (29%), fishing gear storage (31%), parking for retail busines- ses (38%), and Kachemak Bay State Park headquarters (27%). Uses which would be excluded are motels and hotels (46%), non-marine industrial (68%), staging areas for natural resource development (40%), and motor- cycle raceways (65%). On the west side of the Spit, respondents gave much higher priority to recreational and open space uses, and less priority to commercial and industrial uses. Uses rated as high priority included overnight camp- ing (70%), day park (64%), open space recreation (64%) and parking for tourists (53%). Uses for which opinion generally held should be excluded were: motorcycle raceways (86%), non-marine industrial (77%), staging areas for natural resource development (74%), fishing gear storage (69%), motels and hotels (59%) and marine industrial (54%). As with the other Spit land use questions, the volunteer groups followed the same pattern, with even more pronounced support for open space and recreation, and less support for commercial and industrial uses. Generally, the answers to this question appear to support the City's stand of restricting development on the west side of the Spit and attempting to place the west side into some sort of open-space recre- ational status. Questions #13 and #14 related to traffic congestion on the Spit. Mos.t respondents (79%) felt that traffic congestion on the Spit is a problem in the summertime. The volunteer groups felt similarly, although by not as large a fraction. For those who felt congestion to be a problem, the most favored solu- tions were to provide more campground facilities off of the Spit (88%), expansion of existing parking areas (81%), enforcement of existing traffic and parking regulations (75%), seasonal traffic and parking controls (64%) and providing more informational signs (56%). Respon- dents opposed expanding the road to four lanes (55%), restriction of vehicle access '(76%) and restriction of vehicle access while providing shuttle bus service (61%). Results from the two volunteer groups followed the same trends. Comments received indicated some respondents favored providing shuttle bus service alone. Question #15 asked whether the City should provide all or partial funding for fifteen of the most controversial- existing or proposed services. A majority of the respondents opposed the City providing funding for low-cost housing (62%) and seasonal housing for cannery workers (59%). Sizable opposition was also shown to the City providing all funding for the cultural center (28%), civic center' (28%), and women's resource center (40%). Strong support was indicated for providing all funds necessary for fire protection (45'/10), a visitor information center (46%), public restrooms and showers on the Spit (39%), and drainage utilities (37%). For other services, respondents chose options involving the City providing some funds with the remain- ing costs paid for by different types of funding sources. For example, over 40% chose a comb'ination of City funds and user fees for public campgrounds, and nearly a third (32%) supported the City providing funds plus some user fees to support public restrooms and showers on A-7 the Spit. State and Borough contributions were heavily favored (48%) for funding the senior citizen's center, and service districts were frequently proposed to provide funds for fire proection (14%) and emergency medical (12%). Little support was indicated for increased sales tax to fund any of. the services, while a combination of sources was often suggested for park and recreation facilities and programs (17%) and the museum (14%). Questions #16 and #17 addressed Homer's residentail or secondary streets and roads. Since many of the secondary streets do not meet the City's standards for grade, width, paving, and drainage, Question #16 asked whether the substandard streets should be brought up to City standards in the near future. Most respondents (90%) indicated that the streets should be brought up to standards. The preferences were the same, but not quite as strong, for the volunteer respondents, particularly the non-residents. Question #17 asked how road improvements should be financed if State and federal funds are not available. Most respondents (73%) thought that the improvements should proceed, with opinion about evenly divided between City taxpayers paying alone (30%) and City taxpayers and bene- Jiting property owners sharing in the cost (33%). A much smaller percentage (10%) thought that the benefiting property owners should pay for the improvements alone. The same patterns held for the volunteer groups. The answers to these two questions seem to indicate that most City residents want their streets improved, would like to see the City pick up all or part of the cost, and would encourage some effort to spread some of the cost between benefiting property owners. Questions #18 through #24 dealt with the adequacy of water and waste- water disposal service to households. The majority of City households (83%) have City water service, while most non-residents (55%) are on private wells. Most respondents (81%) rated water quality as satis- factory, with 15% of City residents rating their service unsatisfac- tory. These patterns were also true for the volunteer groups. Service was rated satisfactory most frequently in the central inside neighbor- hood, with the least frequent satisfactory ratings given for the area in the Central Business District, as can be seen on the summary table attached, labeled Page 31. In terms of quantity, an even larger percentage (89%) rated their service as satisfactory. Only a small number (8%) rated their water quantity as unsatisfactory, with the west and east neighborhoods averaging the highest percentage rating services unsatisfactory, about 10%. Page 33 (attached) summarizes ratings by neighborhod for this question. Question #21 asked about sewage disposal, with about two-thirds of the residents (67%) indicating that. they have City sewer service. About 24% have septic tanks, and 5% use outhouses. The percentages using septic tanks and outhouses rises quite a bit, 54% and 41%, for non- residents. A-8 Question #22 asked if the resident had a septic tank, if the resident' was experiencing recurring problems with it. Most (66%) said that they were not having problems, the remainder having some problems or severe problems. About one in ten (9%) indicated that the problems were severe. The percentage indicating problems was less (13%) for non- residents. All of the persons indicating that they had severe problems with septic tanks were in the east inside city neighborhoods. High water table was the major source of the problem for the west and east sides, constituting nearly one-half of the problems reported. Lack of capacity and poor installation were the major problems in the Homer Spit and Central Business District neighborhoods. However, very few respondents answered this question, so it is difficult to assign much weight to' these answers. Question #24 asked how water and sewer extensions should be paid for if State and federal funds are not available. A large percentage of the respondents (65%) indicated that benefiting property owners should pay part or all of the cost, while a small percentage (16%) indicated that the City should pay for it alone. A minority (12%) indicated that no action should be taken until State or federal funds are available. Hence, there is a strong interest in having the cost spread between benefiting property owners, with only some of the cost paid for by the City. The. patterns for all these water and sewer questions were the same for the volunteer groups. Question #25 simply asked respondents to i'ndicate where they lived. About a third (28%) of the random survey respondents lived on the east side of town, another third (29%) lived in the central area, about one-fifth (18%) lived on the west side of town and another fifth (20%) lived in the Central Business District. A very small percentage (4%) lived on the Homer Spit. The City resident volunteers followed the same pattern. Question #26 asked whether there were certain problems with residents' neighborhoods. Most (82%) indicated there were either limited or severe problems with streets needing repair. Unsafe conditions for pedestrians were also considered a problem (57%) with about half of those (28%) considering the problems severe. Limited problems were also indicated for drainage (39%), trash and litter (38%) and noise '(26%). Question #27 asked the respondents how long they had lived in Homer or the Homer area. Half of the respondents (50%) had lived in Homer for five years or less. The percentage was similar for the volunteer group. This is almost an identical percentage to those who answered the 1977 Anchorage Urban Observatory survey. This is not surprising, since Homer's current population growth rate of about ten percent results in the population doubling approximately every seven years. With the tremendous influx of new residents, half of the residents at any given time have lived in the City for less than five years. Question #28 asked what kind of housing unit the respondent lived in. Most (56%) lived in single family units, while 16% lived in apartments, A-9 20% in mobile homes, 4% in duplexes, and 3% in other types of units. The percentages of single family housing increased quite a bit for the volunteer groups, especially outside of the City limits. These figures are fairly consistent with census results. Question #29 asked about household size. Nearly half of the respon- dents (49%) lived in one- or two-person households; median household size was 2.58 persons. The City resident volunteer group closely followed this pattern, while the non-resident volunteers lived in much smaller households, on the average. Question #30 asked whether the respondent owned or rented his house. About three-quarters (73%) owned their house, with the remaining quarter renting or having some other arrangement. This is consistent also with census figures,.and the volunteer groups followed the same pattern. Question #31 asked about the occupation of the primary wage earner of the household, and if there are other wage earners in the household, what their occupations are also. One out of three r6spondents (30%) had a primary occupation which involved either professional or mana- gerial ownership positions. Only 10% of the random survey respondents had a primary wage earner who either worked on a fishing boat or in a cannery. When the 10% of the respondents whose primary occupation was technical was added into the professional and managerial, nearly four out of ten respondents had a primary wage earner with a professional, managerial or technical occupation, or about two and a half times the frequency of fishing industry employment. The percentage of fishing occupations rose when secondary wage-earners' occupations were con- sidered. The percentage who were retired was also high, at about twelve percent for the random suvery of City residents. This increased slightly from the 11% in the 1977 survey, and is two percentage points higher than the 1977 Borough City average of 10% (Hitchins, 1977). Hence, this question seems to indicate that retirement and profes- sional, managerial and technical occupations are growing in relative importance in Homer's economy, while fishing remains at about the same level. The non-resident volunteers had more emphasis on professional and crafts occupations, with fewer retired persons. Question #32 asked the percent of the household's income earned by the primary wage earner. The average was 87 percent for the randomly selected residents, and slightly lower for the volunteer groups. Question #33 asked what percent of the household's income was earned outside of the Homer area. Excluding those who didn't answer the question, 21% earned between three-fourths and all of their income out- side of Homer. The percentages were nearly the same for the volunteer groups. Question #34 asked the respondent to list locations and activities if more than 5 percent of the household's income was earned outside of the Homer area. The North Slope and southwest Alaska accounted for almost half (43%) of the locations. Kenai-Cook Inlet and Anchorage accounted A-10 for another third. Among activities, fishing was most important (36%), followed by investments (17%), equipment and construction (14%) an'd oil-related (10%). The volunteer groups followed similar patterns. Question #35 asked how much of the respondent's household purchases of different goods and services were made in Homer. Highest average proportions were in groceries (89%) and gasoline and car maintenance (89%), followed by medical services (79%), personal services (74%), entertainment (74%), and insurance and financial services (70%). Relatively low average proportions were recorded in small appliances (46%), furniture (44%), clothing (43%), and large appliances (41%). Similar patterns were reported by the volunteer groups. Question #36 asked about approximate total annual household income. Interpolating the median total annual household income for City resi- dent households in the random survey was approximately $27,600 per year. Median was only slightly larger for newspaper survey respon- dents, at $27,900. This is somewhat less than medians for the Anchorage area. Question #37 asked for the respondent's age. Nearly half (45%) were 34 years old or less, underscoring the relative youth of Homer's adult population. The median age of respondents was 36.2 years. Similar patterns held for the volunteer respondents, except that the average was lower (33.4 years) for non-residents. The final question, #38, asked the sex of the respondent. More males (54%) responded than females (46%). The percentages were quite similar for all three respondent groups, with between 53 and 55 percent males responding for all three groups. This is slightly more than recent census and survey data, averaging 51% males, but the difference is not great enough to be significant. A-11 @,Uk- CA-" lZeSIPfuA-[S \jO1-t*lltEv- Sta"Ll OF 1. b"'. 6.99-1.d syfi of i.P16W.9 H-1, Fi-. look .9 4h. list @nd ..1-6 th... 11-4 Y.. 1-1 ...ad -I J.P-.. art .4-fil.V of life in ah. 61y. Atl,@Imq yacia, r..,.d jobs 41% 411 31 lk -wi hppi'.q 7A 14 20 13 City I,' tifi"t- Z@I` 44-41- 33, 34 ..it cl.-I.p-l 37 -!@t . 4 5 28 Z3 43 -t- Of th. VA 7-1 20 40 pcipul.aw,; -.11 to -.11 t.- w,o.ph... Ai-1.1 @.a a'.9 G..I-i 2), 24 20 Old-ly cl-l.@-i I 9-w4l. i. -d 5.1 s-A 4z 26 Z7 2. A. Id.f.-a a"- Of Pi.-41 A--. L.k. St ... 1, -d 51-11 mp-&-l a Y.U! 314% 10% 40 39 -0@- -dz 31 L-P-I-t a. 27 37 4--- 2 2 (@Ao &) YOia X.S-44 Y.6, It Is Imp"t.01 to b.. st-ld this b. Achl....11 F-f bee- u-A- (t6 KV4.-4) Favor OEpose Undec. divt C...... if e- Favor oppose LLffl IU& ... ...... CIA 13" lit --*82% 10% ga, d-tof-:.a, j. this 4r S_i ..... . at" 64 23 13 (7@) ---1,41 29 22 di'l'ick - -I;, -@A 2-0 U.'afing V.hi.1 . ...... t. kh. by-p..& liti-9t, s. at a 41 37 t4 23 -P- 56 21 mp---is -n P.blm P-ki.q. id..Ak. ..d 7 11 16 7 JI)J4 lighti.9, @qni,mq 11W M* city W) bA) ... ld p,V p-t .1 Ih. lz N-) ks@ - Ott- (pl.... i.t.) t2 12 6 KwMr& 16qV'\1Ej OF S,4"F-Y axF %ibLutATEf-tZ :Wr\jF'Y of C What .1-1d I. do.. to Ill. -I.dicomm-W ii- i-q CA" CtT'j R-ESIPeOTS tl\@201N) "O'A eESIMAATS js,@Izo'@ P-'_ A-1- ..'j Ilk. 511-4 to imp,... I" pp-, l I IF 'a . aI., tit -d..y 1. p-idc so I.- favor Oppose Undec. #4. "of oftcua- 411.&AC Vt. R-%. F-or Opjoo@d undec.__O-N. 48% 29% 2 4 it 31% 45% 24% .11 W-1 Tl 13 (2-) -1b 10 1 z ,.nq - 77 6 17 -LA @) 55 21 24 L to P-id. -tf.i pla-king 41 43 29 29 A 2. 3ca z-7 1a) 39 31 30 113) I- P-id, fito'"I &I-:, to."hois. ..d .10- ..Mii.6 IA it 74 11 15 13 It- OAI 75 t5 10 6 6 01 -@-q -(- (P 60) -17 17 6 buiid-gs mrough -ch programi, It ho 4 b.ilding d-ig. .Vt.. Lard. J. 42 46 12 ti.) 4o -i S IS- L4 S-) 43 42 15 s'g- -.t,.i iardi-c., I.. oil- fps.... st.k.) 95 5 1,--) -z -c' oo Li2A W 2- L A 5, L-2-HY, I.- ...ad Yma Ilk. to #.a.,. th -, ) Pa.'. . -V bo 1-& .1 ya- (if.1 Ch.- -a I. front .( yo., -cutx4 Oar a-SA,- ta 2-4 01* Clo", Ist 2nd tUal 41% 1311 36% @3% 14% Spit 2 6 92 4 q 7 4 3 94 By 10 9 a 83 14 1 1 S 1 5 83 A-.d Ih. -I-, 11C.Ch.m.k Dr...) Z 7 7 11 . a 3 j b 6 10 10 80 1J.- ... A-1- ..d M. by-F... E 7-1- 17 22 59 21- 27- 55 25 57 As-,, 06- L.k. 4. Spill 12 23 65 z S 1,3 24 68 Oil- fps..- '15 7 2 90 3 3 2 96 .ad lb. City ... I. -QW".'y P..- --i) i" or I'la" '"g.M., 6.4 d ... tup"-t in u.,a+. tj@ iW4 yes No Unc.a-L. A. t@ (4 rA. Y.5 No uncert. t4o [email protected]' .hilla -Uld @.. . di-4. ..oc-pa.bi. th-i a. b JA lFor Lia.oliaq or I-iii-al 51% 41% at 56% 33% 11 th. Spit d- 9. aid,$ ti,a.oo pcal.ntl J) .III.. -ldi 1. b. Ilk.. .1,11h -ull, a. i-.6 01 th:'pro -ly .1,1111y 1. d-l.p W. a P h., p-p-ty. h do Y.. ."..k m. APP-Pi-ik. .9 't-to bf? M.".%-y -pn ... I,- for U. .J-tau. m -Ju. 35% Y. 3 2 F, -ju mubck-y 1. '-d@d as 1-9 .6 al.. 631- IP@1-424 4) @!5 (14. tv@ O...r has S... P-1-ty t','4-0 -091- 6 9 Don't W.W. 14 21 a. T::. City a- Jupl@d ..O-m 1,1. wd., -yul.1-,.i X-S t4o (J""A A. k-4. Yes No Uncert. IA. 1,,4 jeb IAQ 43ftRA. O-f@s Yes No UnEert. jk, 1@,,! -0di, fi".. plumbi"q &.a sy".m. u. I) b@ihj- 42% 41% 10% IN 43% 4 7 is 101L 6@4 t- '.6111 "" go,oo 119. 1. -1 .... jhs@ ..d.,. It th. o.l. it I. P-id. this 0. You 'hi.1' it,. C"Y ').Uia 'j-"d ..-Y to '.I.f.. 1". C f-vo' -P- S. k"oh trin., ie.k.. it ..1y li"d 1., 10-1 yu.- -k Rws)ofA tA-L e-ITY p-tasipf44-fs 'jawtATG-r-c sklv-.46Y OF 6% I...& h."olf r.isiriq it. ill rail. or lh-.,Jh I.- ... s -4@ Th., p-bliio, 1--it 1@6 9--oie.il ith 4.611-1 @ Doe, it I-- ii, -, b.1k .11 *-i- I -Id 11L. you, Which lit the t.0 4.4 ........ I, bell descrite, @h,j you think Ha,ecr City '--t 0-14 . ..... I-Q. -911 to oop'- ..a ..P.-I 19% 17@ p-4-.. or JI., -t p-id.d by 1-11 46---l ol the imay 6. the 23 25 20 Jr.. 11.- city .r. ... 9.4-9 tiold "'. 14- .. l.... by be,$, t. -1".k 35 �1- h.l. k-P-9 -r@i- they .14 g..., Jy -kmq 1-9. Cut, .. .-y .9 It.. so- 7 10 .ic.. offered by No.., city Oil- [email protected]) 12 (4) 10@ What -Jorily st-id Iku; lallo,u,q clivitles b, yi-l' Ur .1. ..d .1 Ill. $pit! For ..Ch ..1-ty 11-14 .11. bli-16-y 1-1. 04.1- 1. the ..P W-) f- UV-fAr kja k%4-. Loj Uc teu W- U"@ A. 4- 'a,, piloti@s Q(;36@ dILSA. T-tv, h,4-44b) pAstAn ptiat 14.1ji'l ......... ill 1-11 -4 44% 411 .10% 6111. 41t (io -@V A-1 L-) 11% 23 44 28 5 so 3S7 Emo Of SPIT _33 4L- 1-1 A 38 45 12 6 LT) 35 I-A I 1 5 p'@l -I Z %0 2 2 (5) Wy ...k 10 9 Is) 0--ight C-pi 59 21 43 32 22 3 -@a Ei I he _y cqu'p. replil) 3 20 70 7 Open 'p.C "'d f-bl" .. C..* 84 12 2 2 .."W 1-44. 21 -1 L6) 68 a 2) 1 2c, 5L 33 -o" y 4. 22 33 37 a LI) f Wd"Y 'j- I-!). -@D- 22L L jt 21 36 39 5 1-1) 41- i-SA -@-2 16 1 -L 55i 35 6 4 1-7 -a--i 13 3 47 43 6 5 L-5) -1-1L -Lo- --A- LLD 16 1 70 21 6 3 j L @.y St. VAI 12 ( ic) 39 27 27 a LS 7A _@I- _10 47 33 L --.y 2 a 89- 2 FWPC*A f-a-4ey Orr VOWAIew SUV_,jF-,f of: P-IL Cal giaslm"Ts voLiUAIEW- 10a'4EY Gi= 'Cl-tv V-eskVW15 (hzil,0 CJT@j gesimtlTs (.@130 EAST SIDE OF SNT 11. what priority h..Id the ftili-nq Clivili.6 be Q.- W .0 an &be _1 i.d, .1 the Spitl For each activity check one 1-41. JR.(" to the E"-L& iA L4.J fig"Ae FIN 114) -ml 221 Al Ill. 7*1 W) 3 1'/. 211, 21 27 _A'S !'I 2_2 -2.'L _4A Olfic.s lch.,I-. 9-VI.) 0@ -n- __I@ _Zp_ _17 (I all) Z -L 3 1,1 ma,iria (fish zl) _L I proc.s.mit W.1 gpr) Al _LL LU) I-qj _L7 19 _iL _L_ __L i!] Day park ?1- -15- Lt I-J AL LIA) -.5-h -it It- L '71 _ff- -A- I-L4 Overnight ...Ppi.9 43, 2A A _zI -m- J7 -2-L 2,L -a- L24) 4-1 _u_ i-d.641141 (heavy equ P. i repair AL IS -4--& A_ LW 17- IJ- IA C. za 73 1 op.. spc. _-w. end public 4,c..s 71 foublic h.,O -as _ZA_ 13 __t W) pi Zs _A_ 7 -61 SI A -14 S lit) 55 zo - s Sg.9i.9 a,-. I.r co.- sa,rcial traffic J..rq. ferry k,.Ific) 2@ 20 -!L -,JL _Al I-s 1_0 -3- (ZI) _.L3_ aL AA- 16 60 stagi.q..,eas Ior riat- ural .-.rc. d ... W .ent 4atining. litr M Z5 J-0 2-1 2. or It d'"brig quip. - - -10 -At. Fishing 9- 1 ... 9. 11- _.jL -Zt- -4 LUQ -IL- 2A _L,_ Z- It) -I& aL -2-a --I Ll -AL -Li- _11 I., A_'L ZL Ah- -A L 40 _@aL 3&_ i C. M -L!L 14 (i@l At AIL Parking f., .t.11 bww- 3S 3'o 20 -IL 36 21 nas.., - - - -3- ( I0 AL Ae- 10`1 1 AL. _@a (int) Parking $or commerciol S-1 _N 1 -5 2 .13 5-4 -@C, L2.21 SL zb 10 t. (t) 14) __L (23 - L_ _& __tL X..f...k Bay St. flart- 24 11 A. I LI JS 2.0 J.+ a. 10 IIJ headqua,t.rs I-L M.I.rcy.l. r.c-y i__1 I I A22 L b _0 j J- -to- _L A�) J-1- ID _3z Ll sl __L IL \FA 'T SWE Of- 1LjR--4G4 OF 40"MiTEM 5,3v"JEI of- tAL C-%-N r-ESIQU-ITS 4U-iYATVF-Q L11P-4E) OF j7Y iku-@JDFAT@s lw-A) C'01,kBirAED 10@31N) WEST SIDE OF Sply 12. What priority should lhe'follo,inq activities be given for U"U- 4. U us. on:he ,,, dd,, of the Spit? For each Activity check 61. -Q.,, U,;m t-404L fniahF%4 &b pl.,it level. (Rate, 1. the Map Wv.. I Lfit6b Rated --iiii Z81. 21-t 4cq. 0. (1'.) 27-1- ZZY 561 1*/. (a) Z71 ZS1 45*t 3-1 (10 I ... If bu,iri.s ... I AA.W/h.9.06 14 21 ISM 4P (14) 17 '1 k LO 4 77 16 75 Offices (charter. 9-1) zo A 4j. ip 16) Ig zi SS 1 (11) It Z6 SI 4 10 Zb A4410.0 i-Just1j.1 111I.It Z-L zo 54 S, (2-1) 1!; M I.S zo 59 4 (St) 1.5 1 L 00) repair ( ZI.) 74 17 'A Day Park** 61 it 1,4 4 (14) 4.1 Overnight "inping 7b 10, 13 Z (14) 11- 14 3 L& H. III 1 (2-0 1.1 it 17 (to) N.-is-ins, irid-triM 3. 13 -17 (1, Z 2 I'L 61 4 L I 'JO 1 60) jh-vy equip. riiebl, I Op.n.iip co ii-eximin ;nd public access W Rp 17 4 13 5 w K IS' 4 12.) 7L Public t.,f) Staging .,-% I., com, marcs"ll traffic (CA14o t+ 12. 14 70 L& 10 16 75 2 v.11s, .1 ry traffic) Staging areas for ..I- -A resource develop maerit f.ininq, 61-bitr 13 74 4 L 0 14 0 IS -A 4 5 7 Z. or it drilling eq.ip.) 1-1 61 2 L It 70 14 7& fishing 9a.r storage 9.1 S3 23. It -4 5a 'Lei ji 55 1-1 Ick 4S 30 Z-5 P.,kiriq go, retail b-k- 2-7 31 1% A 111-) 25 2A 4L (&I Lt. lo 4o .4 (2A) Z3 31 410 - I-) 35 2-5 37 14@ ZIP 215 1 W 3,0 7.1 Sia 3 2-1) Z Z .31 45 3 1) fisharaten Kiich.io,k Z5 16 4s 14 S3 16 44 6 (t) ?'1 16 44 11 35 1 k- 4S S h.4dq.4,wfi 4 5 6t 4 is -S-1 SIDE IF P"41;kwA Isks"El Orr 6%jeAE'l OF' C-fry ",AV-%VA> k4e, wk" _t1A 0- Y-- think 1,aliw Conljostwn on she Spit is p,obj@ Irl IA -/- 16Y 51 S-1. 2q 5 (it) 77Y. 1 th? (1) Liu Fk4Q- &Mk u sollow'"Q Possible ""i- Iii traffic corbq-fi@ on the Spit A. tf,,XgL 6ft'WE tIMMAPIED htA&AEdi`i It y- h-@ @Ihcr "q-tions, pl-" list at-q.. f"ASIL GPJVt ut4mkvw W."wizif ii"P,: f.p..d p.,kirig I-$ I k L Ut 177 T1 (7 )J is) (20 6v Lt. *1. Z57 10 1. (0 (14)! --i-91-9 41-th- &.4 parking 13, is (oi) 14 It) (zj) 61 IE-P--d the -d 9. 1-, Jan., 10-Pi- r-end.m.: S5 IL (.1-111 17 0 (7) (10 24 Lo 16 (20) (50 1-) -11 17 co hit. pro- 716 1 114) 44) 1-1 73 11 0%) 15 -74 (2,%) 167 1 z co LI (n) Z6 Lz. .id-Q ptiic sh.tile b.6 se-ict im) V 17- v-)i (SI) n IP 5-nal 11-111- and P-1kirig convol G4 is 11 (17) (A) 7b 11 7 (J) (3-) 1.1 Zj 10 (LL) (9A) 66 ZZ Is signs SI. 14 2.6 (LS) 1-) 73 Is 13 1.7 (BoAl (st) LL Zz Is 66) d I,cilig,., to, .(I G( the Spit ID 47) Be, 14 16 61 10 1 43 5 z other Ipl..?. 1,611 IOD I oo - - (3o) WO (SR) 100 - 1) (13:. 16. M..y I H-0, -id..60 I.-ndry I st,-, do oat .-k the dy'. sla.d.rfl, for 9-0., idin, p-mg A.d .q.. ACI.Idi.q 1. the 61y 1.0 .. ..... da,y sa-1, &N.ld he.. . right-l-ay at least 60 feet id.. . P.Va or Q-.Ia .idth .1 &1 least 14 sees, and a grad. -1 ..C..d,.q 10 p., - c..I. Do y.. I..I It.9 s.bstand.,d 61 ... is filuiuld be b-qM up 1. City sia.d.,d, in she near Nw-! V.,. ithin'tive ...I fl- years 5, yet. ithi. the 0..4 Is. wka's 31 N. Und-aded 7. 4 7. -4 7. -'A. h.,_-er CAI (4) ! 7. :n pa,k years, .9,1* and ".1.1 N.d* h- been vAil - 01. or 1".1 r"d In the 1.1-s. that. 1-" ..y or ..y not t. A.S.stints state a.d federal J.nds in.y .I I- &-i1jibi. I., road i.p ...... nis I., e-1-- d-ti.1 .1-11. -t,. It's. f-14 pay I., the co.tl All City $..pay.,$ 27 B...fsjmq uroprly It City is. payers ..d b-fill.9 p-perly ---rs 40 3671. 1-11. None .1 ski. t.- Wail I., stage &,@dj- federal I-As 'Lo 'I. 1 (.7. 1. a..il.bi .. .... It it -1 delay. No pmwn L I'SCOE4 of: YOL-U@41EEZ SW@@IEY OF It" 144@14 9eWV"4-F.S Y- p,i-ry -M. .1 ..1- 1 ply n- 's 140. -id y- .I* th. q..nIIiy at y..r p,i.&,y @Ao i-t-C. I , S.Inf.cc-v all. U."ti.t..1-Y 167. 14 "a pl.w. 47. 47. IT ft) Z. 11. W0.4 typ. .1 d4g,-Sal d. y.. h.-I City Stpil, s..k. Z4 541 oult.... 4 Vif. rb 11. it Y.. h... ..Ptic %..it. a'. you. p'"LI-6 vvith It) -.- probi... pfctbl_@, z Y H. ts [I..'& 5) %PaLjm4TVjM JjV,,jrkj OF NLA- CATI V-ESWIE-AIS L'Ar-St" CW M,4001A. SIJV-'IF-l OF (,\ @ 134) CZVIAE@MIAVP (6- 17,11) aTj "-Pekl" 13. It yox@ ...... ed yes, pi.... Id. .11ty pr,-.,y prubl... 2 z hiqh at.,- table 24% 1 1 5.11fing.1 the Sysi- 111. zo - k I!, Sy.9- Nck. dq--i. "PaClItY 10 '1 z 2 to'/. Poor t-k of V-*I know Other 1. peal yeam. end I.O.r.1 f..ds h- L-- -11' &J,j. I., water and ...er 1. the I.Ire these ,.na, ..y or ..y not L.. a-il.blt. Als..i-g &tat. and led -I I-CIS .y -9 be a-ll.bl. to, -9-1 end i-, who then sh..Id pay Ir the @Stl All City taxpayers -8 ... fil'.0 property ...!rs 417- city taxpayers and tmnctilinq properly owners should 37-J. III-* Ille cost z SY N.n. of lhe j__ Wall go, stele -dw led.-I N.d. to be@- a.-H.bl. at it dei.y. 77- No Pm- (4) AL CAI-i 99-SlIDEA-91 W\ za) wrsT shot ca. 11 &.sT 1.06 TAAL A.M. '$Too PEIG.box"Dous om9A sr.. pi-S. finel yo.r tivissistiorhood an the map Above And Chock the .0 ... cl locali.a. H-., Spit 4 7. Ctni-l 1oU6&n*Lb district (bounded by high schc@l. South of P.n&., A.... -It of L.ke Stratt. north 61 fly-Passl West sid. of I.... inside .1 City limits jo,est Do high z scr-1) . East side of inside City limit. 1-69 of Lk. Sllacl) O.Wd. .0 Is---- city limits H-r .,-. Anchor ftit. K.Gh.-k Cily. #,*.d of bay) OLt.ld. of 111-I f."'oss it. bay. wd_io, 64-lib-s Co..., P-1 Cr.haas. English On6wo-ity dia,416111N.1th f PionarrmAvo., nl, West of "k. SI'vell. #A- tw--se, 26 -1,,. _y .1 it- Wkn,irit @.Mwos p,.-t 1. y,-, S'.iopL L;.@ii 044% eu Severe Limited Not a H- Kot t4o, Severe Limited Not & tA. ,.,qhb-t..d I VbV- PVA- t-_oif Vrob. Frob. Pr.b.! twl@ VnVA4-6 P'4A-* bOV-- #-.kf i u prob. Prob. Prob. t-&-,Ar i it .-ding r"-i 1 51% 31% '18% 37% 38% 25% fire he ... 4 zi (21) 5 19 76 20 1.1@ (41) 9 10 61 tat) is It - ; 11N) it, Ib 46 3.0 14 21 65 T-h And Bill., it%) 23 37 40 m 73) 14 15 71 (10 7 14 -16 1-0 7 14 79 Ict At-.d .. d .61-tur" I'S 5 - - Od., and air plkstk@ 10 3 9 89 (40) 1 5 14 O-inaq. pr-bl.,!.* 31 30 39 31 Z5 40 .36 0-5) 10 26 56 114) N.J.. j.Ahiii.. - to 7A. (.S 12,L) 10 36 54 116) to _Ic. w ( w 4 13 83 Urn.l. -diskin$ I., Pedestrian zt, 7.11 43 ( 1!.) 37 30 34 32. 2'1 3`1 os) 26 16 58 1pl__ U&tl 64.1), 116 14 wts) 30 40 30 27. H.. king h.v. yoo lived in 1-6-or of the Homer 6rea? yr. or less lit 8% 1-5 yrs 3-17. 341. 35 367 6-10 yr*. 24 30 *1. zl@ 4a 7. 10 yrs. Z7 257. 1-6 26 Y. 5.4, IA. r---( (st) 10 Random Survey of Volunteer Survey of All city Residents Volunteer Survey of city Residents (n=179) city Residents(n=139) Comened (n=393) Non-Residents (n=120) 28. What Type of housing do you live in? Single family 56% 69% 62% 86% Duplex 4% 6% 5% 2% Apartemnt/multiple-units 16% 8% 12% 1% Mobile homes 20% 12% 16% 8% Other (please specify) 3% 6% 5% 3% No Resident (2) (2) (5) (1) 29. How many persons currently live in your house? One 12% 11% 12% 17% Two 37 37 37 40 Three 19 24 20 18 Four 19 21 20 15 Five 8 5 7 6 Six 4 3 4 1 Seven or more 2 2 2 8 2.58 2.60 2.59 1.82 (10) (4) (14) (5) 30. Do you own or rent your home? Own 75% 77% 78% 29% Rent 26% 19 22% 38 Other 1% 1 1% 3 Other 1% 3 2% 3 (4) (2) (6) (1) 31. What is your occupation of the primany your household? Please first column. If there are other of the Professional Primary Secondary Primary Secondary Primary Secondary Primary Secondary Mangers and Owners 16% 7% 23% 20% 19% 14% 21% 21% Techincal 14 8 22 27 17 12 6 6 Clercial and 10 6 7 9 3 7 7 Crafts 8 27 2 25 5 26 15 15 Crafts 5 1 7 2 6 1 10 10 Equipment operator 1 1 3 3 1 2 8 8 Laborar 4 1 4 4 1 Service workers 7 4 3 2 4 3 4 4 2 10 3 3 1 8 6 6 v0A jj Ave jLh.400'A SuiL"F-Ir OF -JoLAjrATrf* twit-jr-1 Of C-All Re-mm;WS V0LA3t4-rEEjZ :5,4wel OF @,w V..4."U Go,';-lA 4,@ @,o C411 CA-N ft@,IPPO-" CzAtw4ED ii%=3a) f4art rix.At@m Jnhi.q bo@il p ... I-, C-1 it 17 14 %A*I. 12 2 3 01h., 0 4 .A. 05) W" -Z5 Is 2W Ab 50 ji"CiLIS Z6 Es -%b -14- 76 It, 1`1 r"G-v 4 L 601 5b Z5 it.,flo-tv I i. so tuat-t 7 1. 7 1-0 '1@ rr"@v 1b -%I V&rca--X 10 zfi'/. lei. 6%) CIO A 1) 11 y_ .... . .. U1 Va., Ii.1 lb, I-&lion And Cli@lly; I.' --PI-. 1,.r.q in b6stol eay. It Va. .&,..d I.&$ th.. 5% .9 y.., sh. Iri-, . ..... 1.4- In.$ cl-sl- 24-1. (P 20 V"@" uvt TdLLAr Iak z IbisAi, I I I vot-uATEEZ iuizjF-l aF cA" 94F-SIPEA75 %jot-tvA Tew- su"Ej OF 34. .5,JLJLY OF CA" CA-" 32 F 4%1 P-5 31.7. top 14 7 4 0A VQAPUA 10 Z. L 4 10 2.1 -JOL.A*A-Jej@e [email protected] 43F -jowtATOE-9 5,3P,116@1 OF F'-'pVOA Wit.4el OF SLl- C-111 MAPFITO U-N Lu"MA-V!@ CITY & R q items to b-ghs IrWs H--' A: A. .1 the 9.410.a. at I - 4 *Al. (1P 0. the t'sj P-co"t .4 V.- I.-hald's I.;IRY A:Vi1-`1Y t@ 1, 0) S1 41. 101. m,/. tat till A it za ik-1) +j .q 6 11, Z,,. 115) j 2-1 26 1 Z 1 31 (4A$ FO 15 .41 44 S-11 Ppl ...... is Ilk S M. AL. 27 U I b 6 2.7 2L, 17 11 5 3Z- Al if R%) A4 2-2 I'll S ZI 13 121) L-q. ppb-.6 3-1 to jt@ 2 34 41 (At.) 44 15 10 4 NO A I - 3 3Z 1-1 (45) 41 14 1 1 ZS 1Z ( 25) ..by lr@ ha.9) IS It U2 74 (3s) - I 1 16 2.1 CS I 1 11 it, SS -13 (41) 5 1 1 to it, 491 LL 111) G-h.. And cA, am.ml ... ace 3 1 ee. bi (so) I 1 3 t 9-1 I'A (10 L 1 7 SS aq Otl 5 N -Z@ I -AS 92- (14@ 43 A I It. 5 35 44 (41) 3161 11, ig -1 At 41 Oc@ M it If- 6 34 "3 1 zz z ln--. And 3 1 b 5 0 10 (51) 1 is & 9`1 (-% ( 11) 1 1 4 17 $- I.% vt (41) " I I -I 1 54 (.0 (1,., M.di'Al ... @ic.s '- I 1 6 74 In (41) 6 3 1 t. -76 t-L 01) 4 9 to 6 it, Bo CiSl j 7 10 5 10 '14 ( IL oil- V. ......I [email protected]' hswcws. t.P.6,6, .1c. 4 It iz a " m (4z) 3 6 1 U 14 1(te 41 t IZ 111 Ib 7(. (L.4) to 1 17 z Q (.1% (it. 36. who& is V..' ml- Los$ the. 610, 000 7. 7. 234 31% $39,999 2 9/. ;3 1 Y. 297. $10,000 4. $19.999 S 40. DUO - 151. 137.- 251. 35 37. wn.. .0. Y..' I..& in'thdy I than 25 yrs. 61k 2% 25-34 yis. 37 SS 51 3t,-44 yr@. LlY 27 2S 23 45-54 yrs. 10. 11 14 9 55-64 yru. 6 1 Mort th.n 64 yru. 11 4 M*A@;'- (71 0 Wh.k is V..r - I'mal. 4VI. 49% -4 1/. 42% M.10 . 54-1, 517. S a Iff zf /a 41 -'I @,L7201 Ll DIP RANDOM SURVEY COMMENTS TIF3. How should the establishment of a strong central business district (defined as the area of Pioneer Avenue, Lake Street, and Main Street) .be achieved? Keep a green beZt in the downtown area (Bypass). Do a compLete deveZopment pZan for area for roads, streets_, water and sewer., eZectricity, teZephones, etc. Make an an atmosphere to attract more businesses (trees, boardwaZk or pathways). Make it unique, such as Victoria B.C. Homer has artisans, seafood, spectacuZar scenery. Make use of ZocaZ residents for work projects, zoning with backbone. No industriaZ type work in CED, sing board Limitation (no neon). I wouZd a'Zso approve orderZy div. of Bypass. To retain a certain historic reZationship as to what and where the city was. T#14. What should be done to the retail/commercial area along Pioneer Avenue and Lake Street to improve its appearance and traffic flow? If streets and sidewaZks are provided, aZZow access at aZZ necessary crossings and areas for the handicapped. Put back the trees Upgrade approaches to above streets ShuttZe buses Leave modernization for the big city Enforce present parking hours 3-way stop sign at Pioneer Lake and East Road; wooden sidewaZks shouLd be constructed. I think that from a safety standpoint that Lines on paved roads be kept up and pedestrian ways of some kind shouLd be buiLt. EZiminate one way street on BartZett. Discourage other commerciaZ strip zoning; underground power Lines, pave east and west roads; sweep streets; no on-street parking3 instaZZ curbs and gutter. More trash cans for pubZic use; no neon signs; more trees and Landscaping; pass an ordinance against junk and debris in downtown area; business shouZd have paved parking Lots; don't inhibit growth by poor buiLding design, etc.; Sign controZ ordinance; keep roads cZean and.shouZders graded; traffic signaZ at Lake and Pioneer. #9. (continued) Spend money on more worthwhile projects sewerage jf'irst, roads second The sales tax should be considered as a means of money for projects. Get more value for services we are now paying for (i.e., what are we paying an animal control officer for, he isn't doing anything. Decrease city employees by 30% EnZarge city limits -- how many people are being served or are using city services without paying for them? CurtaiZmant of irresponsible and incompetent spending practices of city council. Taxes in Homer are already the highest around. The city needs to stop doing what the public can and should do for itself. OnZy expand public services when economically justified. User fees and taxes pay for what you use; aZot of people are already doing road work, for example, during break-up that we pay in taxes for but does not get done by Homer city government. Why pay for something that does not get done? Get rid of dead wood and cut the ridiculously high wages. Go to 5% sales tax and no property tax Hold taxes, cut waste and inefficiency in government. Manage what they get better Develop sources of revenues other than taxes Pare down police, it is inflated for summer density all year long. Raise taxes slightly and change for sure city services, parks and recreation programs., use of city school recleducationaZ facilities. #14. What possible solutions to traffic congestion on the Spit do you favor? Keep some of the natural aspects; Fill in lower areas for parking and camping; parking compounded by no plan for commercial development WaZkway only an end of spit Residence and commercial fishermen should have special parking privileges. The shuttle bus is the best idea. It should be from downtown to east of spit. Parking should be no problem then. Improve existing parking. Provide off spit parking for commercial fishermen. Keep tourists off spit; parking fee Deplete overnight camping. Too many rapes and beatings go on out there in the summer. =Y OF HOMER MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS (Random Survey) Suggest development of Bishop's Beach as day park area. The area is presently deteriorating.rapidZy due to unsupervised use and campers. ProbZems include fire, no waste disposal, trash and Litter, damage to trees and other vegetation. If park not feasible, ordinance should be passed to restrict camping on private property to those with written permission of owners (city wide) --- should be patrolled. Day park would be of great benefit to community residents. Homer city airs council meetings and prints decisions made in paper; however, it does not advertise how citizens may comment and be heard on Local issues before these decisions are made. Dear Survey, My wife and I both work at the hospital and Live close to work in the central section. our roads could stand to be paved and sidewalks instaZZed, especially where most Lots are owned or developed. We earn our money here-, and we generally spend it here. I don't really want a big expensive city government, just a small responsive one. PoZice and fire seem to be adequate., while not imposing. I feel the Spit should be utilized, but in a controlled manner. Hotels and tourist related business at the end of the spit, the east side should be developed for port and harbor, commercial fish, sport fishing, and supportive enterprises. The west side should be mostly open camping, day parks, and Limited time camping. I would Like to see a bus or shuttle from town to the spit and back, and parking done at the base of the Spit, or aZong Lake Street. I Like a compact central Location for most business, and a Loose restriction used on the style and type of buildings and signs. Altogether, we Like Living here, and the taxes are so far acceptable. I don't Like people moving here without jobs and being on weZfare or aid, but cannery housing should be done by the cannery, and not supported by us. Outhouses are needed on the Spit, but should be in day park or small developed areas. I hope it all works out for you. We need a civic center of small size, but one that is flexible, with a good staff. It should be optimized and put on an expansive program when needed, or possibly joined with the Library and museum. I would Like some watchdog action on the price and quality of food goods and possibly an open market for fish, shrimp, crab and vegetables. Appendix B ECONOMIC MODEL The primary objective of analyzing or developing a model of an area's economy is to obtain information which will help the local decision makers better understand the economic structure of the area and what makes it work. Hopefully, with insight into the area's economic makeup, projects and programs can be better evaluated in terms of their economic contribution to the community. An economic study should be able to answer the following types of questions: What are the sources of current income and employment for the area? What are the impacts on the regional economy of various eco- nomic development alternatives? The purpose of this appendix is to give a brief description of the two major types of economic models employed, and explain the origins of the economic figures presented in Chapter 3. TYPES OF ECONOMIC MODELS Two major types of economic models are developed to describe community or regional economies. An economic base model identifies the basic sources of employment and income in a community. By the term basic sources or sectors, reference is made to those eco- nomic sectors whose sales are primarily generated outside the area. Sectors whose income sources originate mostly from local sales are considered as local or secondary sectors. The growth potential of a region is assumed to depend on its basic-local ratio. The greater the proportion of local goods and services exported out of the area, the greater is its potential for growth. One of the more important concepts derived from economic base studies is the idea of the regional multiplier. The multiplier can use either employment or income figures as a unit of measure. Suppose that the analyst wanted to estimate the impact of increased production in a basic sector--for example, the impacts of increased recreational/ tourism activity occurring in the region. To derive the total income generated within the area, the analyst would take the multiplier derived for the tourism sector and multiply it by the revenue resulting from the increase in anticipated recreational/tourism activity. TOTAL ECONOMIC CHANGE IN ECONOMIC BASE CHANGE IN BASIC SALE x MULTIPLIER OF REGIONAL ECONOMY OF SECTOR i SECTOR i B-1 Estimating the total impact by using the basic sector's regional multi- pliers, one can compare the relative total economic benefits occurring in the area from various economic development alternatives. An input-output model breaks down the components of the economic base study's basic-local sectors. Instead of using the total proportion of export sales to local sales in determining whether a sector is to be considered as being basic or local to the area, an input-output model looks at each sector of the economy in terms of its purchases and sales to the other sectors both locally and from outside of the area. Using this information, the regional input-output multipliers are developed. Where the economic base multiplier yields the total increase in income resulti.ng from an increase in any one of its sectors, the multipliers developed from an input-output model are able to break down the total income effect among all the sectors of the economy. TOTAL ECONOMIC SUMMATION OF CHANGES IN INPUT-OUTPUT CHANGE IN ECONOMIC CHANGES EXPORT SALES x MULTIPLIER OF REGIONAL ECONOMY IN ALL SECTORS OF SECTOR i SECTOR i The most apparent divergence between the two models is the level of aggregation, or grouping together, in describing the impacts of a change occurring in any one of the economic sectors. HOMER ECONOMIC MODEL The economic model utilized in Chapter 3 is an input-output model which was primarily derived. by direct surveys of Homer businesses and resi- dents, along with some secondary (previously published)'information. The major source of information for the model was a series of economic surveys filled out by businesses representing well over half of the employment in Homer. 'The survey asked businesses to indicate the type of business they were engaged in (to help match their response with published data sources), along with recent employment and the distribu- tion of their revenues and expenditures among other major categories of business. A sample of the survey form used for non-fishing businesses is attached as Figure B-1, while Figure B-2 lists the categories of employment used to compile the figures. Names of individual businesses who responded to the survey cannot be released since their answers were given under the premise that their identify be kept confidential. Total value of output for each sector of the Homer economy was obtained from the Alaska Department of Revenue for all sectors other than fish- eries, and by interview and other documents for the fishing and fish processing sectors. Where State revenue figures were not available for the current year, Borough retail sales tax data and other data were used to develop current estimates. B-2 All of these sources were used to develop a detailed 22 row, 22 column transactions table, or input-output model, of the Homer economy. The table was then condensed, by combining certain rows and columns of the table, to a 14 row, 14 column table presented in Chapter 3. Employment figures were obtained for non-fishing businesses directly from the Alaska Department of Labor, and fishing employment was estimated based on crew share estimates obtained in the employer survey. Once the transactions table (shown in Table 3-4) was finalized, direct and indirect coefficients (dollar multipliers specific to each combina- tion of selling and purchasing business category) were calculated and used to translate the economic growth assumptions (Table 3-8) into economic projections for the Homer economy (Table 3-7). The calcula- tions were made utilizing the methods of Miernyk (1965). The direct and indirect coefficients utilized for the calculations are shown in Table B-1. B-3 FIGURE B-1 HOMER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EMPLOYER'S SURVEY Please answer as many of the questions below as you'can, and return your completed survey in the envelope provided. If you have any questions about any parts of this questionnaire, please call Marlene Helminiak at the Comprehensive Plan office (235-6368) or leave the question blank. if you fill in your name and telephone number, we will contact you @shortly @o complete the questionnaire. ALL ANSWERS TO THIS SURVEY ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND WILL BE USED FOR STAT- ISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. YOUR COOPERATION IS STRICTLY VOLUNTARY. 1. First, what is the name of your business or agency? 2. What is your name and telephone number where we may reach you, in case we have anyquestions about your survey? Name: Telephone: 3. What type or types of business are you engaged in? 4. Over the last two and a half years, on the average how many fulltime employees or crew members (including yoursel,f and family members) worked for your organization during each of the following periods? Use fractions if necessary. 1979 1980 1981 a) Winter (January-March) b) Spring (April-June) c) Summer (July-September) d) Autumn (October-December) B-4 5. Please consider your sales or other revenues over the past year. Without giving actual dollar figures, approximately what eir-cen-tage of your operating revenues came from the following sources. Please note, the total percentages should equal 100 percent.) We recognize that this information may not be readily available to some employers, but please give your best estimate if possible. a. What percent of your sales or revenue can be attributed to Homer area businesses? (This would include all areas from Diamond Ridge to. Head of the Bay and the City of Homer, but not Seldovia, Port Graham, Halibut Cove, English Bay, McDonald Spit, Jakalof Bay, or communities north of Anchor Point.) b. What percent of your sales or revenues can be attributed to businesses outside of the Homer area? % c. What percent of your sales were to year round or part time residents of the Homer area? % d. What percent of your sales or revenues were from tourists? J e. What percent of your sales or revenues were from Federal oovernmentagencies? f. What percent of your sales or revenues were from State agencies? % g. What percent of your sales or revenues were from Borough, City or other local public agencies? % h. What percent of your sales or revenues were from residents of other Kenai Peninsula towns outside of the Homer area (Seldovia, Pori Graham, Halibut Cove, English, Kenai, Soldotna, etc.) (Note: The total should equal 100%) TOTAL B-5 6. Now, please consider your expenditures, and where your business purchases its supplies and services. Indicate how your purchases are distributed among organizations within the Homer area and orga,ni- zations located outside of the Homer area. What percent of your expenditures went to the following categories? a. Wages, salaries, owner's draw, crew shares, etc. % b. Property and sales taxes. % c. Other taxes % d. Purchases from organizations or individuals located within the Homer area. % e. Purchases from organizations or individuals located outside of the Homer area. (Note: Total should equal 100%) TOTAL 7. Of the wages, salaries, owner's draw, crew shares, etc. estimated in 6(a) above, what percentage was paid to year round residents, seasonal residents and non-residents of the Homer area? a. Year round residents % b. Seasonal *residents % c. Non-residents _% (Note: Total should equal lob%) TOTAL % 8. Of the Homer area organizations included in 6(d) above, what percentages were purchases from the two largest suppliers? a. Our largest Homer area supplier was and we purchasec % of the total percentage listed in 6(d). b. Our second largest Homer area supplier was and we purchased @ of the total percentage listed in 6(d).- 9. (Optional) What was your organization's total revenue during the last year? Thank you for your assistance. Please return this questionnaire in the envelope provided or to City Hall or call Marlene Helminiak at 235-6368 if you have any questions. B-6 Table B-1 DIRECT AND INDIRECT COEF, HOMER ECONOMY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 1.0001 2E-04 .4503 I.E-04 0 0 .0125 2 2.8E-03 1.0802 2.5E-03 .0184 1.2E-03 3.6E-03 IAE-03 1.7E 3 2E-04 4E-04 1.0001 3E-04 0 0 .0278 4 2.6E-03 .0217 1.6E-03 1.0247 2.7E-03 3E-04 1.7E-03 2E 5 .079 .0862. .109 .0544 1.0753 .0735 .0768 .0 6 1.2E-03 3.8E-03 1.5E-03 2.6E-03 1.1E-03 1.0009 1.1E-03 1.1E 7 2.9E-03 1E-04 2.2E-03 1E-04 4E-04 0 1.0022 8 .0436 .0157 .0217 9.1E-03 .0277 3AE-03 2.9E-03 1.0 9 4E-04 2.4E-03 4E-04 4.9E-03 3E-04 5E-04 2E-04 3E 10 7E-04 .0463 6E-04 .0105 5E-04 6E-04 4E-04 6E 11 .0297 7.4E-03 .016 .0126 1.9E-03 I.AE-03 8.3E-03 3E 12 0 9.5E-03 1E-04 2E-04 0 0 0 13 .0105 .0197 .0111 .0183 7.5E-03 .0178 5.2E-03 5.7E 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note: Final table to be printed with accompanying row and column titles and wi Figure B-2 BUSINESS CATEGORIES SIC* Category 01, 07 Agriculture 09 Commercial Fishing 10-14 Mining 15-17 Contract Construction 20 Manufacturing, Food & Kindred Products 24 Lumber & Wood-Products 27 Printing & Publishing 33 Fabricated Metal Products 16-19, 21-23, 25, 26, 28-32, 34-39 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 41 Local, Suburban, Interurban Transit 42 Motor Freight, Warehousing 43 Air Transportation 40, 44-47 *Other Transportation 48 Communications 49 Electric, Gas, Sanitary Services 50 Wholesale Trade 52, 53, 59 Retail, Durable Goods, General Merchandise, Misc. 54 Retail Trade, Food Stores 55 Auto, Service Stations 56, 57 Retail Apparel, Accessories, Furniture & Home. Furnishings 58 Retail Eat & Drink Places 60-79 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate 70 Hotels, Rooms, Other Lodging 72, 73 Personal & Business Services 75, 76 Auto & Misc. Repair Services 78, 79 Motion Pictures, Amusement & Recreation 80-89 Health, Legal, Educational & Misc. Services 91 Federal Government 92 State Government 93 Local Government Households, Local Households, Non-local Imports from Other Areas *Standard Industrial Classification utilized by U.S. Government (Office of Management and Budget, 1972). B-7 Appendix C COMPLIANCE WITH STATE OF ALASKA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Based on the regulations and guidelines of the Alaska Coastal Manage- ment Program, the Homer Comprehensive Plan substantially complies with many of the provisions of the Alaska Coastal Management Act of 1977. Compliance with specific guidelines and provisions of the Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP) is shown below. Meets Part or All of Guidelines ACMP Guideline Yes No Comments 6 AAC 85.020 X See Chapters 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, Statement of Needs, 10, 11 and Objectives Objectives, Goals 6 AAC 85.030 X Description of the Program Organization for Coastal Management 6 AAC 85.040 X Map of Boundaries of the Coastal Area Within the City Subject to the Program 6 AAC 85.050 Resource Inventory of Habitats Offshore Areas X Estuari-es X Wetlands & Tidelands X Rocky Islands/Sea-Cliffs X Barrier Isl. & Lagoons X High Energy Costs X Rivers, Lakes, Streams X See Chap. 2 - Natural Resources Important Upland Habitats X See Chap. 2 - Natural Resources Major Cultural Resources X See Chap. 3 - Human Resources and Chap. 11 Public Safety, & Health Services Plan Land & Resources Manage- X See Chap. 4 - Land Use Plan ment Responsibilities Historic/Arch. Resources X C-1 Appendix C (continued) Meets Part or All of Guidelines ACMP Guideline Yes No Comments 6 AAC 85.060 X Partially satisfied Resource Analysis See Chap. 2 - Natur. Resources Which Describes: Chap. 4 - Land Use Plan Significant changes in Chap. 5 - Homer Spit Plan the resources inven- Chap. 9 - Parks & Recreation toried, evaluation of Plan environmental capa- bility & sensitivity of resources and habitats, assessment of present and antici- pated needs & demands for coastal habitats & resources 6 ACC 85.700 Description of Land and Water Uses Subject to the Program, Including: Coastal Development X See Chap. 4 - Land Use Plan Geophysical Hazard Areas X See Chap. 4 - Land Use Plan Recreation X See Chap. 9 - Parks & Re@c Plan Energy Facilities X Transportation & Utilities X See Chapters 7 and 8 Fish & Seafood Processing X See Chapters 4, 5, and 12 Timber Harvest & Processing X See Chapters 4, 5, and 12 Mining & Mineral Processing X See Chapters 4, 5, and 12 Subsistence X See Chapters 4, 5, and 9 6 ACC 85.080 X See Chapters 4 and 5 Description of Uses & Activities Which Will Bee Considered Proper & Improper Within the Coastal Area C-2 Appendix C (continued) Meets Part or All of Guidelines ACMP Guideline Yes No Comments 6 AAC 85.090 Summary of Policies See Chapters 4 and 5 That Will Be applied to the Land & Water Uses & Activities Subject to the Program Coastal Development X See Chapters 4 and 5 Geophysical Hazard Areas X See Chapter 4 Recreation X See Chap. 9 - Parks & Rec.Plan Energy Facilities X See Chapters 4 and 5 Transportation & Utilities X See Chap. 8 - Public Utilities and Facilities Plan Fish/Seafood Processing X See Chapters 4, 5 and 12 Timber Harvest/ Processing X See Chapters 4, 5 and 12 Mining/Mineral Processing X See Chapters 4, 5 and 12 Subsistence X See Chapters 4, 5 and 12 Habitats X See Chapters 4 and 5 Air/Land/Water Quality X Historic/Arch. Resources X 6 ACC 85.020 X Statement of the City's Needs, Objectives or Goals, or the Comprehensive Land and Resource Use Plan C-3 Appendix D GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED Action. An officially adopted course of operation to attain an objective. (Example: Secure site and design treatment plant.) Budqet. A plan to allot certain resources for defined items. (Example: One-half million dollars is appropriated to complete Project "All) Criterion. Any established rule for testing or judgment. (Example: If grade of slope exceeds 25 percent, a site is considered unsuitable for home building.) Fund. A governmental account to which specific revenues are deposited, and from which only certain types of expenditures may be made. (Example: General Fund.) Goal. A desired level of achievement which reflects values. (Example: Adequate housing for all people.) Issue. A point, matter, or dispute, the resolution of which is of special or public importance. (Example: Lack of rental housing.) Liberty. Implies choice. The minimum amount of development adequate for survival is not satisfactory. There must be diversity in the environment so that people, within the limits of their personal resources, can make their own selections of where to live, work, shop, play, worship, learn and travel. Life. An adequate supply of various items necessary for health and safety. To maximize our value of preserving life, planning policies should be aimed at the goal of providing adequate supplies of housing, commerce, industry, public facilities, transportation and open space. Objective. A measurable short-range step toward achieving a goal. TE_xa_m_P7e_. Build 9,000 units of low-income housing by 1975.) Plan. A detailed method, formulated beforehand, for doing something. (Example: Land use.plan.) Policy. An accepted or professed rule of action. (Example: Close-in building sites should receive priority for water and sewer extension.) Priority. An assignment of precedence in time, order or importance. (Example: Utilities before landscaping.) Program. A plan of procedure or activity. (Example: Building maintenance program.) D-1 Project. A proposal of something to be done, a scheme. (Example: 20 -G'n-its to be built on site "B".) Public. Intended for use by the general public. Pursuit of Happiness. Requires that people be able to achieve satis- Ta-ction and enjoyment in their activities. Thus, a certain quality must exist as well as an adequate supply and choice. Shall. Subject to deliberation and appropriation. Standard. An approved basis for comparison which is measurable. (Exampf-e: units must rent for under $300 per month.) Value. That which is believed to be intrinsically desirable. T-Example: Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.) o-2 Appendix E Participants in Planning Process Former Mayor Leo Rhode Mayor Erle Cooper City Manager Larry Farnon Administrative Assistant Bob Klein City Planner Marlene Helminink Steering Committee Members Mark Guldseth Bruce Turkington Bill Butler (Chairman) Pat Evarts Robert Ditton Thomas Schoder Jan Jensen Robert Barnett Bill Russell Tony Swartz Mike Herring Mike Pate Ex-Officio Members Leo,Rhode Larry Farnon Bob Klein Comprehensive Plan Public Input Summary Contract awarded - February 10, 1982 Conducted Public Opinion Survey - Spring 1982 Resolution establishing Steering Committee - February 8, 1982 Steering Committee organized February 1982 Steering Committee meetings 9 March 2 August 24 April 8 August 27 June 23 October 5 July 27 November 2 E-I Appendix E (continued) Public Workshop - 4 April 6 June 22 July 26 - Homer Spit Merchants November 29 - Council/Commission Hearing Agency Meetings - 3 June 22 August 27 September 14 First draft submitted - October 31 - Distributed to Department Heads Department review March 30 - November Department meeting April 2 Port and Harbor Comment and Review 3 August 11 September 8 November 10 Parks & Recreation Comment and Review - 6 April 15 October 21 May 20 November 18 September 16 January 19, 1983 Planning Commission Comment and Review - 10 March 3 September 1 April 7 October 6 May 5 November 3 June 2 December 1 July 7 December 15 Final Draft sent to Council - January 19, 1983 City Council Meetings Progress Reports February 14 January 31 E-2 NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY 3 6668 14110134 7