HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESOLUTION 1984-01-~
Suggested by: Council
CITY OF KENAI
RESOLUTION N0. 84-1
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA,
REQUESTING THAT THE BOROUGH ASSEMBLY DELEGATE THE POWER TO
PROVIDE ZONING REGULATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF KENAI AS PROVIDED
BY KENAI PENINSUL A BOROUGH ORDINANCE 21.01.020 AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Kenai Peninsula Borough Ordinance 21.01.020 provides
that upon request by City, the Borough Assembly shall delegate
zoning regulations within the City, and
WHEREAS, Council of the City of Kenai deems it in the best
interest of the City of Kenai to request a delegation of the
power to provide zoning regulations to the City.
WHEREA5, the City of Kenai deems July 1, 1984, an appropriate
date for receiving delegated zoning powers, which date would
provide sufficient time for an orderly transition.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KENAI, ALASKA, that the Borough Assembly is hereby requested to
delegate the power to provide zoning regulations within the City
of Kenai, to the City of Kenai.
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CIT~OF KENAI,'ALASKA, this 4th day
of January, '1984.
TOM WAGONER, MAY9R
ATTEST:
,~
net Whelan, City Clerk
~_
^--~
.~.,
.~
~•.
CITY OF KENAI
P. O. WX St0 KENAI, ALASKA 9l~1 i
iEtEPNONE 333 • 7533
MEMO
T0: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
FROM: Jeff Labahn, Land Manager
RE: Delegation of Zoning Powers
GATE: December 28, 1983
Resolution 84-1, requesting the delegation of zoning powers from
the Kenai Peninsula Sorough Assembly, has been drafted as
directed by Council at their last meeting. The proposed
effective date of July 1, 1984, is intended to provide for a
reasonable transition period. The procedure for delegating the
zoning power and the responsibilities vested in the City Council
and Planning Commission is outlined in Kenai Peninsula Borough
Code of Ordinances 21.01.020.
Council formerly considered the assumption of zoning powers on
March 2, 1983. Resolution 83-21 failed on a 4-3 vote. The
resolution and meeting minutes are attached for your reference.
JL /md
Enclosures
'`
~_
~~
c
o.~v-t-@- ' F....err`-~,,: ~L~... ~ ... a .~ .... ~ ~p .rpv 1~. ~~o dt.- e -~ `J ~ ~.' ~-w..L S
..1.01.010--21.01.020
Chapter 21.01
LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING POWERS
IN THE BOROUGH AND CITIES
Sections:
21.01.010 Powers of the borough and the cities.
21.01.020 Option--Delegation of zoning powers to cities.
21.01.030 Borough and cities--Central files, maps,
photographs.
21.01.010 Powers of the borou h and the cities. A.
The borough shall exercise all planning, zoning and platting
powers on an areawide basis within that portion of the
borough designated as the rural district by Section 21.040.010
(B). The borough assembly shall be the board of adjustment
for appeals made from decisions of the borough planning com-
mission.
B. The borough planning commission shall exercise jur-
isdiction within the rural district and the municipal dis-
tricts regarding planning, platting, subdivision approval,
the siting of borough schools, buildings and other borough
facilities, the planning and development of transportation
networks and related facilities, the overall economic de-
velopment of the borough, and regarding borough lands and
natural resources. The decisions made by the borough plann-
ing commission under this subsection shall take into con-
sideration the recommendations of the affected municipalities.
(Ord. 81-2 ~1(part), 1982).
21.01.020 Option--Delegation of zoning powers to
cities. A. If a city by resolution of the council requests
the assembly to delegate the power to provide zoning regu-
lation within the city, the assembly shall delegate the power.
A city to which the zoning authority is delegated may exer-
cise all zoning powers within the city to the extent that
such powers have been granted to the borough by statute,
except those powers reserved to the borough by Section
21.01.010.
B. The city council is delegated the power to establish
a planning commission to hear all requests for amendments to
zoning codes, or for variances, conditional use permits, con-
tract rezoning or to hear all other matters coming under the
zoning ordinances enacted by the city. Appeals from a de-
cision of the city planning commission may be made to the
council of the respective city, sitting as a board of ad-
justment. Appeals from decisions of the board of adjustment
shalom be made to the superior court as provided by law.
178b {Kenai Peninsula
Borough 8/82)
--,~-~---~ 1
-- --. i
- ~~ Z'' ~~
Suggested by: Councilman Wagoner
CITY OF KENAI
RESOLUTION N0. 83-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA RE-
QUESTING THAT THE BOROiiGH ASSEMBLY DELEGATE THE POWER TO PROVIDE
ZONING REGULATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF KENAI AS PROVIDED BY KENAI
PENINSULA BOROUGH ORDINANCE 21.01.020 AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Kenai Peninsula Borough Ordinance 21.01.020 provides
that upon request by City, the Borough Assembly shall delegate
zoning regulations within the City, and
WHEREAS, Council of the City of Kenai deems it in the best
interest of the City of Kenai to request a delegation of the
power to provide zoning regulations to the City.
WHEREAS, the City of Kenai deems September 1, 1983 an appropriate
date for receiving delegated zoning pavers, which date would
provide sufficient time for an orderly transition.
NOW, THEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF TtiE CITY OF
KENAI, ALASKA, that the Borough Assembly is hereby requested to
delegate the power to provide zoning regulations within the City
of Kenai, to the City bf Kenai.
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA this 2nd day
of March, 1983.
Ronald alston, Mayor
ATIEST:
ane elan, ity erk
C!
C=,
i
';
'. I
t
.,
t
,, •:;
Ii
-~-~ ~
~~
~F '
:it_ t`
--:-
t
,;
{
_;.,
'.1 E ,..
.,
~;
~ ~;
i,
~~
r
F
J
Supp. X26 21.01.030
C. The borough will not be responsible for the pro-
secution of zoning violations arising within cities, or for
the defense and enforcement of decisions of the planning
commission, the city council, or.• the board of adjustment.
D. The funding for zoning functions in the cities
including administrative costs of exercising the delegated
powers of zoning will not be the responsibility of the borough.
E. The borough will not be responsible to defend
against any claims for damages, or other liability arising
from the exercise of any zoning power by the city, the city
advisory planning commission, or any administrative officer
of the city. (Ord. 81-2 §1 (part), 1982).
21.0.1..030 Borough and cities--Central files, maps,
photographs. The borough will maintain central files, maps,
and other photographs showing the land use status of each
area within the city and other areas of the borough and this
information shall be public and made avai'_able to the public
upon request and payment of any appropriate fee established
by the borough. (Ord. 81-2 §1 (part), 1982).
178c (Kenai Peninsula
Borough 8/82)
1
1
- ~ ----'~
j ~a~.~"Y..' _
I
Kenai Ctity Counrtl
March 2, 19fl3
Page 5
Councilman Wagoner asked, once the prc.ject is engineered
where will the money come f:om anc! how long will we have
to wait? City Manager Brighton replied, he dtdn't know,
the Governor wanted work-ready projects. We are trying
to get into the Governor's budget, it is not at this time.
They will not even consider it if it not engineered. We
have en ADAP application on this. Councilman tlagoner said
5140,000 is a lot of money to put into engineering and put
on the shelf. Councilman Vise asked, what was the status
on all ADAP proposals? Airport Manager SKalley said, we
currently have ? requests submitteri. One was just approp-
riated at the last meeting, ramp overlay and itinerant
parking, has been since 1979. The other, extension of the
taxiway, has been since 1980. We will put to bid on the
ADAP fencing projects. The machinery requested in 1979
was lowered in priority. Councilman wise noted the FAA
has been [squired to set funds, when will they flow? 14r.
Swalley replied, we should get release about June 1. Mr.
Brighton added, the State has signed off on both projects
(overlay and itinerant parking). We were short on itinerant
parking and have requested 580,000 discretionary money. It
was allocated for airport, it is an approved project.
Councilman Wise asked, regarding the 5 cents a gallon bill,
there was ADAP 1985-86 funding. Are we getting any money?
Mr. Brighton replied, that has not been released at this
time. It should come in the next 6 months, if it comes
we can make up the difference on the shortfall. Councilman
Ackerly noted 5140,000 for engineering is a lot of money.
Mr. Brighton said the project will cost 52.5 Million to
52-3/4 Million. It is our only chance to get the money
to do the project. Safety, fish hauling, additional room
for commerce and to open up additional lots are the reasons.
Councilman Wise asked if we were to reduce the scope, would
there be a major problem? Mr. Brighton replied, it would
have no bearing on whether the Governor gave it to us.
YOiE (Pesaed)z
Yesz t4alston, Ackerly, Bailie, Measles, yfagonet, Click
Nos Wise
C-6 Resolution 83-21 - Requesting Borough Assembly Delegate
Zoning Powers to City
MOTION:
Councilman Wagoner moved, seconded by Councilman Measles,
to adopt the ordinance.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
1. Ruby Coyle. This was before Council less than a year
ago. Public hearings were held and professional test-
imony was given by Sam Best. Title 29 says P&Z may
be turned over to the City if the City wishes to take
:t. The Borough nay take it beck. She didn't think
we should do this. The Borough has said they will only
give zoning. They also said they would not pay any
part of the financing. The citizens of Kenai pay the
same amount to the Borough, and ii is their obligation.
Why should we pay the Borough to do the planning for
all pieces and then for the City? We will pay 2 tines.
If we get another Borough Mayor, he could take it away
from us. It will cost us money. Councilman Wagoner
said he knew there are problems with just taking over
I
J
~~~~~
e,~ -r
.f
Kenai Csty Council
March 2, 19A3
Page 6
1
zoning, but he has problems a:ttinq an f_ouncil when
the City P8Z is only advisory. There are 15 people
on the Assembly that are oat residents of Kenai that
make decisions about the City. Yte should make an
attert•pt to get the powers back. It woulA not. cost
us that much for zoning only. Councilwoman Railie
said she talked to the planner in Homer, they are
satisfied. The time factor is better. In Homer,
they doubted the Rorough will take it back and are
willing to live with it. they also did not think
it would cost that much. Mrs. Coyle asked, how long
has Homer had these powers? Councilwoman Railie
replied, since last summer. Also, the Planner was
not hired as Planner, but as Administrative Asst.,
so 1t did not mean a new position. tors. Coyle said
she sat on Ptf2 on the City and the Rorough. She
could not remember a time when the Advisory Comm.
was turned down. It did take longer. She asked that
we take out the transfer powers from Title 29, and
require thy Cities to be paid. Councilman Wise
suggested a financlal impact statement. Councilwoman
Glick said Mayor Thompson had said help was avail-
able. We had help from the Borough in the past.
She has requested a Borough resolution for submittal
to the Legislature emending Title 29 that when 8 if
powers were transferred, they cannot be arbitrarily
withdrawn unless the City agrees. Councilman Wagoner
noted the more cities that take back these powers,
the less chance it will be taken back.
VOTE (Failed):
Yes: Bailie, Measles, Wagoner
Nos Wise, Malston, Ackerly, Glick
Councilman Wise asked for a financial impact statement.
Council agreed to put it off.
C-9 Resolution 83-22 - transfer of Funds -Federal Revenue
Sharing - Maintenance Agreement on 5 Word Processors
ASOTION s
Councilman Heasles moved, seconded by Councilwoman Glick,
to adopt the resolution.
Councilman Wagoner asked if this was for maintenance through
June 30 or from the time the warranty would run out for 12
months? Councilman wagoner said if this is for une yCar,
it should be paid through June 30 end then have on the same
period as our fiscal year. Finance Director Brown was not
present.
MOTION, Postponements
Councilman Wagoner moved, seconded by Councilman Ackerly,
to table till the next meeting.
Motion passed by unanimous consent.
City Meneger Brighton was asked to find out and report et
the next meeting.
~. _-
,~;,~ _ _
r,,,®- - - - - -
••f ~ ~. .
,-.
CITY 0~ ~ENAI
~• O. {OX Si0 KENAI, AIASKA 9911
-' TEIE/NONE 283 • 7531
MEMORANDUM
TD: William J. Brighton, City Manager
FROM: eff Labahn, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Assumption of Zoning Powers
DATE: December 19, 1983
Mayor Wagoner raised the issue of assumption of zoning powers
when he addressed the Kenai Advisory Planning ~ Zoning Commission
last month.
Realizing that this topic has been discussed before and will
probably resurface in the future I would like to convey several
thoughts on the subject.
• 1) Cost
The actual cost to administer the zoning power will be
directly related to the level of commitment made by an
individual municipality. For example: the City of Homer
hired a planner analyst who devotes half of her time to
zoning administration. Actual administrative costs are
offset by application and processing fees. To date the
City of Homer is the only municipality in the Borough to
assume the zoning powers.
2) Impacts
a. The City Council instead of the Borough Assembly
• would be responsible for authorizing amendments to
the City of Kenai Zoning Ordinance and map. The
processing time for a rezoning application would be
1
.~
r
~-.
reduced from the present 2 1/2 to 3 months to approxi-
mately half this time period.
b. Exercise of "Local Control" would be greater if the
City assumed the zoning power.
c. The City of Kenai, instead of the Kenai Peninsula
Borough would be responsible for processing all
rezoning requests, i.e., receipt of application fee,
legal advertisement, certified mailings, etc.
d. Additional administrative effort would be required from
the planning ~ zoning commission secretary, city
attorney, and land manager
There are other existing concerns which will also need to be
addressed, for example, delegation of the zoning powers to the
city would result in a separation of planning and zoning
administration. The Alaska statutes still provide for the
retractment of the delegation of zoning power to a city if it is
ordained by the Borough Assembly.
I would strongly recommend that the City of Kenai examine all
these issue prior to making a determination of whether or not to
assume the zoning power. I am prepared to discuss pros and cons
of this issue in detail if there is further interest in this
matter.
JBL: jl
2