Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutORDINANCE 1550-1993a~ Suggested By: Planning & Zoning Commission • PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 1993 _ • ORDINANCE NO. 15Sa-93 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA AMENDING THE OFFICIAL CITY OF KENAI ZONING MAP FOR A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SECTION 36, T6N, R12W, S.M. (A 200 FOOT STRIP ALONG EVERGREEN STREETj. WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.270 establishes a procedure to amend the Official Zoning Map of the. City of Kenai; and, WHEREAS, the Official City of Kenai Zoning Map depicts lands described as a portion of the SE 1/4, Section 36, T6N, R12W, S.M. as presently zoned Rural Residential (RR); and, WHEREAS, the City of Kenai desires to render the entire area one zone; and, WHEREAS, the proposed zoning designation is Suburban Residential 1 (RSI); and, WHEREAS, the Kenai Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing on May 26, 1993 and as a result of that public hearing recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Suburban Residential 1 (RS 1) zoning designation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, as follows: i 1 Subject properties of those lands depicted in Exhibit A described as a portion of the SE I/4, Section 36, T6N, R12W, S.M. (a 200 foot strip along Evergreen Street as shown on attached map) aze hereby amended to Suburban Residential 1 (RS1). i That the official zoning map of the City of Kenai be amended in accordance with this ordinance. day of June 16th, r"~ ~-~.J First Reading: Second Reading: Effective Date: June 2, 1993 June 16, 1993 July 16, 1993 .~:ti:. _ carol L. Freas, City Clerk ul ~ _ _ T ~ ~ . zs • . 11 1. ., su~a .. • 1 ~• • ,. R~ ~~ . ` ~, > , try RR ~ Q ~-~~ . , ` R [IRYENTARr w M~ ~ • w .; ;~~' sCM00~ ~ C ~ ~ ~_ t I t r ~•!'M '~, t ~~ -CO 'dE 1 1 ~ ~ 1 t ~ ~.w '~$,LGfJE'T~ i ~~ ~ ~ IluRCll » ~~,, 1 1 1 s ~ 1 s t t- ~ /1 0 3 ~ y 1 +1 1 1 ~~ --~ _ ----J Lam.! 1 _ _ ~ 1 aazz a~ b' ~ ..... -- T. ~ _ _.. 1 1. '~ i :4 ~ 10 i ~ j t 1 ~ .. ~ ~ 111 t 1 Its ~ it ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 ~ _ _ 1 ' ~4 1 1 1 ~ 1~ 1 ~t S t = I~f ~ -- - J S ~ 1 1 ~ ~ / L 1 ~ ~ • . KEhA/ SPUR MWY'. T .T RR ~ • ,~ - CG ~ + l~S+ ~~ -- •i~ T t / u • ~ 1 ~+ t + t ~ ~~ wig !- + ~ ~ ', REZONE .1~~r ~~, ~ „~+ + + + CITY OF KENAI ~`: ~~ r~~~ t ~ ~ m + 1 STRIP NEAR EVERGREEN ° +t~ g ~ P2 93-2Q ,~ ~q~ ~q*°• 1~ R ~•. tR. ~ v~~ n MIT '} R" wl » ~~ , 1-' wa C ~- + . ~ ~ • r~•,~~~ ~~ .: 1781-1881 CITY OF KENA1 ~, "ail e ,q~~~„ Z10 FIDAlQO KENAi~ ALA8KA li9d11 TELIrPHONE Z83.7a3; FAX 907.283.3014 REZONIlVG APPS Tc~A~rrn~v • PL}~`.: CITY OF KENAI ADDRESS 210 Fidalgo, Suite 200 Kenai, AK 99611-7794 PHONE 283-7933 LEGAL A portion of the SE 1 /4, Section 36, T6N, DESCRIPTION R12W, S.M. (a 200 ft. strip along Evergreen Street as shown on attached map) PRESENT ZONE Rural Residential (RR) PROPOSED ZONE Suburban Residential (RS) Intended Use and/or Reason for Rezoning: o d e o med um densit resfdentia 1 l nf-e~ r~ ~J Section 14.20.270 ~-n-endment Procedures governs any amendment to the Kenai Zoning Code and Official Map. PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING, COMP ETE THE BLANKS AND INITIAI,~ THE SPACE AFTER THE ITEM NUMBER TO INDICATE THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THESE CONDITIONS. 1• ~ Amendments to the Kenai Zoning Code and Official Map may be initiated by petition by a majority of the property owners in the area to be rezoned; or, a petition bearing the signatures of fifty (50) registered voters within the City of Kenai to amend the ordinance text; or, submission of a petition as provided by the Home Rule Charter of the City of Kenai . • • R®aoning Application Page 2. _ ~~,. A~oasndments to the :4ffi~i~t1 Zoning Map .shall be consid+~red only if the area. tq ~ .rezcaned contains a minimum of one (i~ aare (e~tcluding ~t,.reet or alley right-of-ways unless . the amend~tent. e~nlarc~ed an adjacent district boundary. 3. „~,_ A Public Notilica~~;Qn And H®aring f~ required before the issuance of. this.permit. A $2.00.00 non-refundable deposit/advertiairig and adntinistrativ® services fe® is required to cover these notification costs. 4• _~ A proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance which fs. substantially the. same as any other proposed amendment submitted within the previous nine (9) months and which was not approved shall not be considered. Pet t oner~s S gnature ATTEST: Loretta Harvey,~Seareta y REZONING CHECKLIST: ~- CHAIRPERS N _._...~.,__ a • MAP ~__ b. SIGNATURES _ c. DEPOSIT/ADVERTISING FEE ($100 d . APPLICATION ~'OR1~ OR LETTER • f ~~, 1- 1 '''~' _. ~..:~,.. _... .... _ .s. ~. ~»~-~n~ CITY OF KENAI _, Z10 FlDALGO KENAi~ ALASKA ~lN1 TELERMONB ~3 - 7lf38 FAX 907.283.3014 STAFF REPORT • " Tc33~~ . P & `Z. Co~uat~:8~ai~: ': ~ ~ ~ : ~ :.. .......................... :: PREFAREI~::83~::~ . : .. .. D1~TE:: ~i~t y 13~, ~ .1993 .::. .. ~. .R~~aL~JTION::~©.~ .... :.. . PZ:93:-.20 .:::.:;:~~:~: APPLICANTS City o! 1Ceaai 2l0 Nidaigo, Suite 200 1Ceaai, Alaska 996ii ate .e~.ted Act~:on:~: Rezonin Legal pescr.ipton:: A portion of the SE 1/4, Section 36, T6N, R12W S.M. PrO~~e~t Z~n3:n' Rural Residential (RR) Pro ~O~set~ Zonis .:. Suburban Residentisl (RS Cux'~~n~ L2tnd .U~e Medium Density Residential ANALYSIS: The proposed rezone will allow the City to develop a strip of medium density residential lots along Evergreen Street. These lots will be sold by the City to help offset paving costs of the adjacent streets. The current land use designation is medium density residential. ~tBCO AT=ONS s Staff recommends approval. ~-`Y'TACHMENTBs 1. Resolution PZ 93-20 2. Application . 3. Map • CITY 0! E~I1T pL~Q 1~WD SOKII~Iti ~58~lIQ~T ~@OLn't'tOK pS l8~Z0 A R83gLOTION OF '17IE PId1NNING AND 201TTING C01+~II$BION 08 TBE CITY OF 2F8tiAI NQ APB&OVI-L TO TH8 Itffii11I CITY COUDTCIL OP TH8 R8S2UESTEDP~A All 808MITTBD SY Applicant) WHEREAS, the Commission finds the following: 1. The subject property is currently zoned Ruda„ 1 Re,~sid,~ ential, 2. The present land use plan designation of the subject property is __ Medium reeidentia~,_ ,,, 3. The propose~~ ZOO DI8'1'~ttC'1') !ox the lf~ct~d rop ~y is 4. An appropriate public hearing as required has been conducted by the Commission on Mav~2 ,~,_ 1993 _______ 5. That the following additional facts have been found to exist: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Advisory Piann Wing Commission of the City o! Kenai that the petitioned ROi$ONI~Tti) is hereby recommended to the Kenai City Council. pW PA88HD by the Planning and Zoning Commission o! the City of Kenai, Alaska, this ___,~2~~~, day of Mby_,__, 1993. IRBSRSON ~. ATT. T s P anti ng 8ecre cry ~_ .. ~f ~a~~~~ xENAI PLANNING ~ zoNING ~o1~ISSION MAY 26, 1993 -11dINUTES i PAGE 6 MUTTON AND VO~'B: Gooclae made a MtYITON t4. move to lutva a separation of tbge two items. Bannock Second. . Bryson Discussion on approval of the catering. Walker I call for a question on that one. Bryson Any further discussion. Vote: Barmock -yes, Bryson • no, Gioecke -yes, McComaoey -no, Wslloet -yes. Bryson Motion fails due to lank of quon~m. MOTION AND VO-!'E: Bryson The second issue is the fine dining proposal. Discussion... No discussion, call for vote. • Vote: Bannock - no, Bryson - no, Gbeeke - no, McComsey -no, Walker - ao. Bryson The second half of the motion fay'led. For the information of the applicant, they have I believe 30 days to appeal this decision. If the applicant wishes to appeal this decision they can contact the City Administration to find out the appropriate procedure. Chairman Bryson requested a five minute recess. b. Resolution PZ 93-20: Evergreen Re-Zone Bryson Staff report please. La Shot I mentioned to you at the last meeting that the City is in the bel;inning stages of possibly doing a project in the area north of the Spur Highway and west of Forest Drive. It's proposed that this project pave all the gravel streets in that area. The project vvas initiated by residents in that area by a petition to for,~- as assessment district whereby the adjoining property owners would pay 2596 and the city would pay 7'596 of the improvements. In the process of the administration looking at the possibilities of this project we decided to consider subdividing some city lands bordering Evergreen Stxeet. At this time we have water and sewer lines in that street, it would be a simple matter to stub out service lines io potential lots before the paving takes place. Also by selling the lots the city would be able to recoup some of the 759b that the general ... . . _. ,. • KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 2b, 1993 -MINUTES PAGE 7 fund would be paying for on this project. In order to do this we have to rezone from the present rural residential zone to a suburban residential zone. All of this may be moot, depending on what council decides to do with the project. The portion that's RR now is bounded by the Spur, Evergreen and Redoubt, with exception of one square there. Normally it's been fairly routine to rezone a RR to RS when water and sewer is present. The minimum lot size then can go down because you don't have to accommodate water and sewer systems. The adjacent zone is also RS. Any questions? Bryson Any questions at this time? At this point .I would like to open this resolution to the public for comment, is there anyone that would like to speak? **PUBLIC IifEARII~CI - VERBATIlVi** • Naacy Gourley I live at 1802 4th Avenue which is evidently further than 300' away because I didn't get notice of this. I am, realizing the reasoning behind the rezoning, in order, because the city does own that piece of property there, they want to go ahead and put in the stubs before the pavement's laid down in order to save costs later so they don't have to tear the pavement up and redo it. I can understand that with the exception that the pavement we're talking about is strip paving. We're not talking about any sidewalks, gutters, nothing like this. I don't imagine it's going to be too long a period of time before, well actually, hopefully, it would go through and be done properly the first time. But, to rezone this, I'm majorly opposed to rezoning, I'll fight it tooth and nail all the way, I don't want it rezoned just so the city can recoup their cost. I think they can probably do that eventually when the sell the property. Uh, the value of that piece of property there is not going to down um, even if it remains vacant. I think that property will continue to grow, the value. Now what's going to happen to our area in the even chat it is rezoned? There's a possibility of six-plexes going in there. (inaudible) six-plexes. I, no, is my answer. Primarily because already we have an enormous amount of traffic on the road. We have a nice subdivision back in that area now, most of the people in the area take pride and ownership in their properties and I think that if you begin putting six-plexes in there, unless you have an opportunity to buy and take some pride in ownership, um, I think the value of my property is going to go down due to the enormous amount of people that would be there, the traffic, I think it's going to take away from my home and area. The only thing that I would, be suitable is, io have that remain single family residential up to duplex, if indeed you are going to even consider changing that to suburban, I think it ought to be done with some type of stipulation that these lot lines do not change, that they remain the same in order to be able to effectively six- plexes from going up because I do object to having that rezoned. RS would have the opportunity, a builder would have to put in six-plexes. Bryso:t Are there any questions for Ms. Gourley? is there anyone else that would like to comment? Roger Murphy I live at 1806 4th Avenue. Uh, my question is, evidently the gentleman over ... . ,,,., :. ;_, :., ..~>.. .:.,. . ,; :.. ..,, . , t:. .. 1 i':; KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 26, 1993 -MINUTES PAGE 8 there, they already have a project in mind for that area to rezone it. Uh, he stipulated that by June 2, or so, at the meeting there they would, whatever the council's answer would be would give them the go ahead. I would like to know what that project is, as to what buildings they are going to put in. I.a Shat Uh, I am talking about the assessment district project to pave the streets in that area. Murphy So you're saying that right now all you're interested in is putting the stub outs in and probably the streets that are going to be adjacent to Evergreen will {inaudible) is that basically what you're saying? La Shot Yes. Um, Murphy What's the long time purpose of rezoning to RS? La Shot It would allow the city the develop the lots smaller than 40,000 sq. ft. that the zoning presently allows and it would actually rezone it to a comparable zone where the project is now, that is all RS. Murphy Okay, in doing so, keeping the lots smaller I am with the present speaker, Nancy, that uh, it would allow the purchase of that land which would give the revenue back to the city of course but then, um, in the long term, we're looking at the area there, we already have a few duplexes in the area which the biggest is a four-plex in our immediate area there and uh, uh, I think any thing larger is going to start degrading our land in the area getting so many duplexes and such, four-plexes and such in the area and six-plexes in the area I would like to see it stay down to RR area where, then our property value stays up then the city then with lazger pieces being sold off makes a better looking community in the long run and we don't get so crowded. That would be my objection to it, to let them get the pieces in smaller chunks and it starts getting packed up and real crowded. Bryson Thank you, are there any questions? Thank you for your testimony. Other persons that would like to testify. 1Vhurlena Murphy I live at 1806 and I would like it to be known that I did not receive, get a notification of this meeting or this rezoning at all and I live immediately across the street from this project. Um, I am really concerned about the value of our property going down, we get, uh, low cost housing in there and it can't do anything but go down, we're all concerned about that I can speak for everyone here on that. Um, I just don't approve of the six-plex. If the city could put in a covenants that the uh, they made smaller lots, maybe duplexes in there, that ownership would be pride in owning it and keep the quality of the neighborhood up. We have some pretty nice places in there and as we said before we would like to keep it that way. We've already established a nice neighborhood there and if you want to put in a low cost housing KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 26, 1993 -MINUTES PAGE 9 somewhere put it in where a neighborhood isn't already developed and it would not degrade the value of that neighborhood. Um, um, and if it's the selling of the property to be able to get us a black top road in there, as much as I hate that dust amund there, I would rather keep the dust than have low cost housing in there. And I am really set against dust, not only would, it would. just make a less quality neighborhood around there and that cheapens the quality of the city and we have enough of that around already. That's aU that I have to say. Bryson Thank you, any questions? Thank you Ms. Murphy. Other persons that would like to comment. Kimberly Jaclainsld I live at 1803 4th Avenue. I agree with Marlena as far as the rezoning goes, I would prefer that it not be rezoned. If the city finds that they do have to rezone it in order to recoup costs, some of their costs in the paving, I would like to see restriction s ont he land that nothing above a duplex be built, that way our neighborhood can stay the way it is. My fear is that if they don't do that and six-plexes become an option, that low income housing wiU move in. The biggest problems that we have now in that area are from larger four-plexes, um, at the end of Evergreen Street, um, adjacent to 4th, that is all single-family homes that are built in there. Um, it may be zoned for larger but that's not what was built there and is now established as single family residences and that is what is in there and that's the way we would like to see it stay. Bryson Any questions? Thank you. Other persons that would like to testify please. Dawn Bann~t I live at 1804 4th Avenue and I agree with everything that's going on here in the neighborhood we've all gotten pretty close because of this rezoning thing, you decided to do and most of us are very well established. We've all been in our homes at least ten years, at least, and we all know each other and we all take pride in where we live. But when you're going to start throwing extra things at us, we're not ready for this yet. Whether it be black top or not, and I hate gravel also and like I say, I've lived in my house for ten years and I've put up with gravel and I have put up with everybody else getting paving but I would much rather have the gravel than to have six-plexes, four-plexes, dozens of kids that we already have around there, adding up to the traffic that we will be getting in there, um, I am just not happy with it. Thank you. Bryson Just for the record, when you stated that you agree with everything, you agree with the previous testifiers... Barnett I agree with what they're bringing up right now. Bryson Other comments from the public. David Hales I live on 404 Evergreen Street, Kenai, and these are my neighbors here tonight. ., .: .._ w i f ' ~' ~ ., . • KENAI PLArfNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 26, 1993 -MINUTES PAGE 10 I simply feel the same way that they do. We would all like see to see the neighborhood paved and get rid of the dust but when we moved into our house, and they're all singlo-family dwellings, uh, they were pretty much, all in our area have remained single-famil~r ho~aaes. with the exception of a few duplexes and a couple of four-plexes. What we're all afraiid is going to. happen is we're going to see, in the long run tan years down the road, homes for abandoned vehicles right on our main street, another home for junk yard (inaudible), another Larry's Club type of establishment across on the other side. Low iaeome housing up and down one side of the street, more cars, traffic, itinerant fishing people, we'll watch our property values go down. Some developer can come in and develop this, make his money, and get out of town, subsequently leaving it all in the hands of the City of Kenai, who in the long run will have to take care of it. We're not against building in the area, I'm not at least, it's just that I want to see a nice quality of neighborhood. Everybody wants to live in a nice neighborhood. Everybody wants their property value to increase, so do I. I used to live in Anchorage on 5penard. I don't think we need a Spenard type development there. Unless it's rezoned and there are covenants regulating development to this property to the extent it'skept atsingle-family dwellings or duplex only, and a builder couldn't come in and buy an entire block of lots, get it resurveyed, (inaudible) lot lines and (inaudible). So if the city wants to (inaudible) otherwise I don't see a problem with a rezone. Bryson Anyone else with comments, last call. Jay Ship From 313 Haller and uh, I would like to concw with the previous testimony, and the only thing I would like to say is if we have to have an expansion and change this zoning the density should be limited to no more than, is it R2 for duplexes? Bryson For suburban residential zoning there's three classes, one of the three is restricted do duplex but that's not the one that's been proposed. Ship So, could you define to us what this zoning is, uh, what they're changing. La Shot Actually the zone that we're proposing is exactly like the zone you're living ia. At this time, the entire area there is suburban residential, and that zone does allow up to six-family dwellings if you have a 12,000 sq. ft. lot. We don't feel this rezone would be detrimental to- the area or we had no real thoughts of multifamily uses, but, to create lots that were reasonably size for development and actually, we'ree thinking to be marketed now, what people are asking for are single- or seem to be single-family lots. (Inaudible) unless there were special restrictions at the sale of the property and it was rezoned to RS exactly like the land there in that area. Ship So you're saying in our area right now there could be possibly up to six or eightpleaces put in here? La Shat Six. KENAI PLANtNING & ZONING COMIVIISSION MAY 26, 1993 - MINiTTF,,S . PAGE 11 Skip Again, I concur with my neighbors. Bryson Are there any questions? Is there anyone else that would like to testify? Gourley Can I speak again? Bryson Are there aay objections to a second testimony? Ms. Gourley. Gourley What troubles me here is, I heard it said a ,couple of times, the usning is what you have. The proposed change is the zoning that you have. ~ That may be the zoni~ag that eve have but there are very few lots to develop on. It may be the zoning that we have but them isn't room to be able to do this, um, I just wanted do malts that clear to the members hen that aren't in the area, don't know the area, that tha area is developed, there is very few lots, the lots tha# are undeveloped are very tied up, the owners are uninterested in selling and evidently are holding onto them themselves in order to deal, I would imagine later. So I just want to make it clear that there isn't very much area back there to develop and um, what is there is fairly tied up and will remain tied up. WailOer I have a question. Have you by chance, in your last comment you said that that area is very tied up, very developed, um, I too as you are well aware, live in that area and I find many, many, many lots available, lots for sale and for that matter, Larry's Club's there, the Spur Motel, there is eight apartment buildings I can think of right off the top of my heads just going around the various corners in about a four block region. Add a lot of four-plexes and duplexes like that, still, lake my back lot, Irene Anderson's property across from me, and a lot of properties there, there's a lot of property to be developed so I understand your desire for the duplex maximum, but 1 have to take exception as to whether or not there is very much property there to be developed, then is a lot of property there... Ciovrley In what area do you speak, off of Evergreen or... Walloer No, I'm talking about a four block radius. Ciourly So you're tallaing aU the way up basically to Forest Drive, so you're talking Eadies and all those back into, towards Sears. Walker There's a lot of property available all in through there. A,nd it's all in the same zone and it's basically the same neighborhood, uh, and the earns kind of, type of atmosphere, basically, small children, young families, things likethat, aad I definitely don't disagree with you on the amount of development that you're requesting. My one disagreement would be that if, I believe if we're going to have stripping and strip paving put in, then it's time to put in the stub outs now, • r s ;_ _ c.-r_ _ .. , , .. .. . .. ~ ~ .,,, .,, .- ~.... .~... .. .r.: r n ~ ., .. ..e., .. ~...... _.., ..,. KENAI PI,~-1~11~TING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 26, 1993 - MINfUTES PAC3E 12 Gourley I can see the city doing that but I can't see uh, doing that against the homeowners iri the area. And I can see the city wanting to recover the cost of that so they keep it separate. Snll~ it as a package deal, ok we're going to sell you this but, however you have to pay this' assessment we did for the raid and you also need to pay for the stubout. Charge them, it'a in the city's hands, it is a nice piece of ptr~perty, I think you should get a fair, a little chunk of change for it and if you really wanted to rezone it and the city really wanted to matte some money for it, maybe what they ought to do is rezone it commercial. It'd be a good commercial location. I mean it extends the city just a little farther out. How about sticking in a park, you know for the many children that are already in the area, push the city out just a little bit. Bryson Okay, we're in public hearing and we've probably gotten a little too informal here, ub, are you done with your comments. H~maock From what I seem to be picking out from the conversations here, what I'm looking at . when I drove down this street, I found it a little bit odd, personally, that there were two diffpt~eat zones on one side of the street I don't see that the street is that big of a divider (inaudible but let me ask you a personal question, if those lots were just like your lot, what would you like to see there? Gourley Single-family homes. Bannock In relation to your home, bigger, smaller, taller, deeper, more duplex, triplex, you know, what... Gouuley Single-family home. Uh, comparable size, large would be okay. Bannock How about smaller, would smaller be okay? Gourley Smaller would be okay. I don't see a problem with asingle-family home being smaller, on the lot, um, I think what's important here is ownership, pride in ownership. You know, ibat's what keeps it up. Bannock Do you think it should be a different zone than the zone that you're in, do you live off, what was your address again? G~ouurley On Haller Street, just off Evergreen. Bannock Okay, so right across the street, should that be a different zone than the zone you're living in? Gourley At this point, yes I think it should be, in order to be able to, um, to be able to have the flexibility to keep six-plexes out. Because with the zoning the way it is, am I correct ~n ,. ,~ ~ ~_ t 1 y KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 26, 1993 -MINUTES PAGE 13 assuming that the way the proposed change would allow six possibly eight-plexes to go in there? How large can you go? La Shot Up to six-plea. Barmock And asix-plex would be okay on your'side of the street, I mean right now that could happen. Gourley Except (inaudible)..... Bryson I'd 1ik+e to keep this a public hearing and she has the floor. Gourley There is not in the area that these families are the people that are here to testify, there is not, contrary to what Mr. Wallcer says, there is not the area in order to put up a six-plea. Now the area that he's talking about is further away from us, we're taUdng another 2 - 3 blocks and I imagine that if we got wind in the sails that asix-plex was going in down there, that you would see us again in here or somewhere, whoever, in order to be able to stop that because of the amount of duplexes, four-plexes that we have back there now. Behind me on Haller Street we have three duplexes and a tri-plex. We have nine families in an area that if it was dividod for residential single-family homes there would be four, so there's an enormous amount of traffic, enormous, with very little regard to traffic signs, condition of the streets is very, usually very poor, in the winter time, you know, if this is what we have to do to get paving, keep the gravel. Bryson Any further questions for Nancy? Thank you. Anyone else that would like to comment? We would like to bring it back from public hearing back to the commission. **SND OF VERBATIM** Wslloer I have a question for Jack first. Jack is there a provision in our zoning code that would allow us to zone that, and what is that designation. La Shot We could go with an RS-1. WallaEx And that would limit us to... I~t Shot Single-family, duplex. It's similar to the zone across from the high school. Wallax I have property there and they're very happy with that zone. La Shot Except an RS-1 would allow us to go down to 12,500 sq. ft. lots that we're thinking, that would make a decent size lot. KENAI PI.AIVINIIVa & zoNlNtl COMMISSION MAY 26, 1993 -MINUTES PAC1B 14 Bryson The intent of that RS zone originally was to overlay districts like Woodland if they ever wanted to protect themselves other than with covenants. Wailoer I haven't heard. anybody tonight rely speak agaost the zom~ng ehaoge, Choy don't want multiple family housing, I don't blame them, that area will get crowded. i l~avC talked with a number of these people -prior tq this meeting and I haven't heard of anybody other than,, if we could get the speed of the traafffic in that area- under control that would help too, but that's soother matter entirely. I don't think that anybody here is against developing that strip .that we're addressing tonight, as long as it's developed more in keeping with the RS-i rather than tha six- plea thing. I just wanted. to point oui that there's a lot of multiple housing there and there's problems with it. I think the whole neighborhood wants the closer zone. Personally I a~n in favor of that. Bryson I'm not sure what leeway we have because it's been advertised as a zoning to RS whether we could reasonably modify this to RS-l. I suppose we could try it and see what happens. Bannock Jack, from the city's position in wanting it to be RS, what would that do if we went to RS-1, an RS-i would limit out more than duplexes, what would that do to the city's project. • La Shot I don't think it would hurt a thing. Bryson It appears as though, the statement was made that you were going to make available 15 lots, if you split seven per block, about 86 or 87' width on the lots and it's over 12,000'... La Shot We set the dimensions to provide a good size, single-family residential lot, similar to Inlet Woods. Bryson Your intent for hook-ups was for residential hook-ups. La Shot Yes. Bryson We still don't have a motion before us. MOrI'ION AI~1D VOTB: Baaudock Made MO-I'tC1N to spproMe the proposed au~o~e change do the City of K,eaaii from Rural Reaideatiat to 5uburbmm R+esldmtial - Resolution 93-20. WaUcer seconded. Bryson Discussion. Bannock Could we A,Mffi~1D that MOTION to make the new proposed zone be RS-1. Wall~ar ~ h f~ 1, '. ~; 1. , t ' l v I r~vu ± ~A ~ ._ _. ' ~ ~t, ~ .. ._ I~ENAI P1~f,`aMr~~~c~~ &i~ornxo eo~ISSlorr PAGB 1S . Sooaed~ Bryson ~ Discussion. on the amendment. B~noclc Is there anyone that woutcl speak against that, specifically. Bryson . Bearing and seeing none.. Jay Shlg Could you define RS•1. . La Shot In our development table R.S-1 would allow S00 sq. ft. lots if water and sewer is available. It would not allow multi-family housing except for duplexes. Ship If the water and sewer were available... Ls Shot And it would be available. Ship It would. Walker Jack, what size would be allowed if water and sewer were not available. La Shot 20,000 sq. ft. Walloet Water and sewer would only be available only after the improvements were complete. Bye If there was a possibility of someone deciding that they didn't want the water and sewer, are we guaranteed that .they have to have it anyhow? We've atl been stipulated in owr area that we can't have wells, wa can't have septic tanks, okay, because we're in the city, new if somebody over there decided I'm going to buy 20,000 sq. ft. of property and I'm going to do without the water and the sewer, can they do that? La Shot No. 'VVe'11 be selling them as individual lots. We will provide-water .and sewer stub outs to the lots. We also have an ordinance that says that if they are within 200 feet of water or sewer they have to hook up. Harnett Thank you, that's what I wanted to hear. Bryson Jack, do you have any opinion as to whether we should continue the public hearing to the next session for modifying the requested zoning. The general category is the same, although it is different. La Shot our land sale, proposed land sale, it shouldn't hurt to push it back. If it's continued 4 .. :.~ . . .: . ., . ~. 7 a ' . t1 } { ?'~ 1 . • .i 1 ! y :1' ~ _ '.,3. `+ 7' i•'": _ _ \ . i -• ~ ~ i .e,.... . .... s.,. „ .. ~ •i.i ... xt~_._~-_L'_:.:i.:~~i~_-..~ _ •.L::. :i1. v..W .i .~.. ._._ - - ~. -. . _..~ ~., t.. _~_.. . .. ,._ ..- ~ ::<. r, 1....... .. ~ ... :4r...- ...r .:: 4. • ., ,. KEI~TAI PLANNINt3 & ZQNINC3 CO1VAViISSION MAY 26, 1993 - MINtJTP.S PAGiE 16 and it doesn't pass this muting it might. have some bearing on the council's decision on thist project. dune 2, should the council say go witb the pr+nject, we'll start spending money. B~rystsDt J live on a government lat on the other side of the galley. This has always been a district I wish,"I wouldn't m~rtd be incorporated in, of course it takes more effort to do thaa not to do because one body owns .this pxoperty it's easy to do. It wouldn't be so easy if you .found people have diversified opinions on it. B BY the sounds of it you already ha~re a buyer for this land. I.s Shot No, we're just preparing it for a public sale. By our ordinances it has to be a public sealed bid auction. Harnett Okay. So on this June 2, meeting are we just deciding on the paving? La Shot Yes. Brryson Considering the appropriate time to put in water and sewer, I feel this very definitely the time to put in water and sewer services, rE~ardless of which zoning is utilized. Is there aay objection to continuing this public hearing to the next meeting. Walker Before stating any objection or non-objection Y would like to hear from administration on the necessity of the change, I don't want to get in the way of the council. Personally I feel if we can handle it this evening fine, if not, I have no objection to continuing if it's na~;ssary. Bryson Further discussions on the amendment. Call for question on the amendment which, being to amend the original motion substituting RS-1 for classification RS. Vote: Bannock -yes, Bryson -Yes, Cioecloe -yes, McComsCy -yes, Walic~r -yes. MO-1'ION PASSED. Bryson Further discussion on the main motion, no requests, call for question. Vote: ~ -yes, Bryson - yam,, GoeclaG -yes, MoComsay -yes, waik+dr -yes. McYI'ION PASSED, 6. PL~A-NIVINC3 a. Proposed City Land Sale • Bryson The next issue has already been discussed at length. Jack do you have anything further? :, ., ;. .. . .. .; .. ',, . .. . ,. .; ;~:: ., :: :~ ::