Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-10-08 Council Minutes - Joint Work Session with Planning & Zoning Commission• KEtnt crrY cOu)Icn. ant rL►rnmro $ zoNIxo conMIesioa J01INf WORE SESSION OCT08EA 8, 1999 I{ENAI CITY COUNCIL C1iAlQSF1t9 7t4B P.ffi. Council Present: Williams, Measles, Smalley, Bannock, Swarner, Moore. Council Absent: Bookey Planning & Zoning Commissioners Present: Glick, Bryson, Geocke, Nord, Werner- Quade, Mahurin, and Christian. Others Present: City Engineer La Shot, Administrative Assistant Kebschull, Building Official Springer, City Clerk Freas, City Attorney Graves, City Manager Ross, and David Lucas, Peninsula Clarion. Mayor Williams opened the work session, noting its purpose was to review and discuss the Land Use Table as updated and presented by the Planning & Zoning Commission. Williams noted, the Council was not adverse to the Table itself, as they all felt the Table needed revising, however they were uncomfortable with a few of the 40 designations within the revised Table. Councilman Smalley referred to Building Official Springers memorandum which was included in the packet as Item 10. He added, the memorandum stated a lot of the council's concerns. In the memorandums, Springer explained he was concerned the proposed/updated Table was much more restrictive than the existing table. It also noted, the existing Table had blank spaces, which had been interpreted as requiring a conditional use permit and with the revised Table, many received "N's" (not allowed). The memorandum noted particular problems with the RR-1 and RR zones allowing multi -family dwellings on a 40,000 square foot lot. Councilman Measles stated, his concern was making the Table too restrictive. The revised Table gave no give or take for special conditions and would take away the need for the Commission to make decisions and the appeal process. Commissioner Christian stated, when the Commission was given the job of revising the Table, they were under the impression the blank spaces meant "No" and the "C's" meant there was a conditional use. He noted, a few year's previous, the Commission reviewed the Table and at that time, the blanks were interpreted as C's. The Commission tried to fill in the blanks, looking at what was originally thought and put in what they thought was originally wanted. They didn't want to change, they were trying to interpret what the blanks meant at the time. In doing that, there were a lot more C's included in the revised Table than N's. They placed a few N's because there were certain zoning districts, i.e. conservation, that shouldn't be brought up to the 0 KENAI CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING & ZONING COMMIS310N JOINT WORK $ES3ION OCTOBER S, 1997 PAGE 2 Commission and thought that was why they were left blank in the first place. He added, they were not trying to change the districts, but interpret what the blanks meant originally and fill in the blanks appropriately. Commissioner Mahurin noted, it was her understanding the Table was causing more of a problem with not having the blanks filled in. She noted, during their review of the Table, there was staff available and their advice was to fill in the blanks. She added, their intent was to solve the problems based on recommendations from what they were hearing. Measles stated, council was not saying, "don't fill in the blanks," but most of their concern was there were too many N's. Mahurin requested council to identify those areas. Smalley identified Page 14-65, RR-1, four -family dwelling (addressed in the third paragraph of the Springer memo). Smalley noted, in the past, that type of development had been permissible and with the N, there now was no appeal process. Commissioner Bryson stated, in the distant past, his interpretation of the Table was • that interpreted areas requiring conditional use permits. At that time, the blank areas were intended to not be permitted. He added, his interpretation could be supported because a conditional use is required in this area and was not addressed in the other table, it meant something - maybe a conditional use. Smalley stated, he thought what may have happened with the blank spaces was when the city became legally involved, they meant conditional, because the table doesn't say it was not. He added, he thought that was the problem the city attorney mentioned - that when the spaces were blank, we assumed they were not permitted because they didn't say. The determination was made, they were conditional uses. Bryson stated, that was the determination of the legal staff at the time - that it was not an allowed use and in the case of the RR zone, he remembered the discussion (at that time) the people who petitioned to create that district, wanted to preclude multi -family structures of that size. Christian agreed and added, the people who introduced the RR-1 zone and didn't want multi -family dwellings, he felt, the Commission should have disallowed multi -family dwellings in that zone. Smalley added, that was in one particular zone. If another petition came forward for another RR-1 zone, and those petitioning had no objections to multi -family dwellings, as the revised table is, the petitioned area could not be set as RR-1 and there would be no debating the request because the table has an N. Christian noted, he believed that would be why petitioners would want the RR-1 zone, otherwise, they would stay with an RR zone. Smalley stated, that wouldn't be known until a petition came forward. • KENAI CITY COUNCILJPLANNINf3 & ZONING COMMI33ION JOINT WORK 3E3SION OCTOSER 8, 1997 PAGE 3 Springer noted in RR-1 zones in the city, there are several buildings greater than two- family dwellings existing - which may be have been built in the early 80's. Christian noted, that was what got the Commission to thinking that if the petitioners objected to having the multi -family dwellings, they could prevent more of that type of development. Councilman Bannock noted it would be unfair to have property owners prevent further development because of their desires and that a person should have the right to come to the Commission and request a change. The discussion continued and was noted, the crux of council's concern was the revised table, in many instances, would not allow citizens of the community the ability to come to the city and apply for a change. An argument for including Cs where some of the N's appeared would allow flexibility and allow the Commission to hear requests and make a decision. An argument for the N's was stated as protection for the landowner who may not want a certain type of building to be built in his area. It was pointed out that not all the decision for filling in the blanks was unanimous by the Commission. Councilman Measles stated, some of the blanks clearly should have N's. However, if there is any question of whether something should be allowed or not allowed, there should be a C in the blank - the request should come before the Commission on a case -by -case basis. He added, unless all members of the Commission agree the item should not be permissible, the blank should have a C - the N's should be a unanimous decision, not a majority decision. As a commissioner, it was thought by Councilman Bannock, the Commission would want more Cs in the Table in order to bring each issue to the Commission for consideration. Commissioner Christian commented, as a landowner he would want protection from buil .ding structures in a zone which were compatible to those already there and not a detraction from their value. It was noted, in the early 70's the Code stated that an RR lot was automatically rezoned when water and sewer was installed. However, that was found to be illegal and now to change a zone, it has to go through a rezone process. It was also noted Thompson Park and along Redoubt are RR with water and sewer; RS doesn't have water and sewer; and an RR-1 zone exists in east Kenai (Cinderella, Magic, etc.). Also noted, was the difference between RR and RS is the lot size and the different requirements for one district or another must be equated by property available. Nord stated, when they were looking at the development requirement table, they were assuming lines drawn through meant "not allowed." Councilman Moore asked Why would an RR lot, that has large lot sizes, require a conditional use permit for a 5/6-plex when in the RS zone, where there are smaller • KENAI CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION OCTOHER 8, 1997 PAGE 4 • 0 lots, they are permitted. (He noted, as in Inlet Woods, the covenants do not allow multi -fancily dwellings, however if there is not an active homeowners association, covenants hold no ,weight. Also, the city does not police covenant compliance.) Commissioner Christian explained, the "P" was already there when they were reviewing the table. Bryson explained, RS was always interpreted as having city water and sewer available. It was noted, in Inlet Woods, if a person owned three lots and eliminated the lot lines, a 5/6-plex could be built. Bryson stated they would rather have people go to an RS- i zone instead of relying on covenants. He added, the RS-1 zone has been very poorly utilized and the only area rezoned to RS-1 is Inlet View. Review of the Table: Council identified the following areas where they felt a change from N to C should be made. Council and Commission discussed and made the following changes: ftidgrtial: RR-1, four -family dwelling, change N to C RR, 5/6 and seven -dwelling, change N to C Commercial - RR_ - L: Change N's to C's from Automotive Sales through Theaters In discussing the RR-1 and RS zones along Spur Highway, Bannock suggested there was too big an area to have all N's. -Christian commented, at -the same time, one of the values and beauties of the city is to have. the green strip along the road. Bannock commented, the city would grow east and suggested a corridor rezone of the property along the highway to commercial because it was doubtful residences would be built along a four -lane highway. After much discussion, it was agreed to change the N's to C's at Commercial, RR-1, Auto Sales through Theaters.. Industrial - _ -1: Change N's to C's with a footnote that ingress and egress must be from the SpurHighway. Industrial - RR: Change N's to C's with a footnote that ingress and egress must be from the Spur Highway. Footnotesti i ential: The footnotes should be kept where there were changes in residential. • KENAI CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING} & ZONING COMMI33ION JOINT WORK $E$SIOId OCTOBER 8, 1997 PAGE 5 The group discussed what defined a storage/warehouse in regard to manufacturing. Williams suggested the N should be a C in order to allow individual review. Commissioner Mahurin explained, in their deliberations, the Commission referred to events happening in the Townsite Historic District and the limits set in the Code. Measles stated, there has to be enough flexibility in the uses to allow for what may be happening in the area in the future. Administrative Assistant Kebschull noted that if someone wanted to have a cabinet building business in their garage, they would not be able to as the proposed table restricts it. Discussion continued in regard to commercial use of property along the highway corridor. The proposed table would restrict commercial use of the property. Commissioner comments were, from past experience, homeowners in the area did not want commercial businesses in that area because of the residential areas behind the highway -fronted property. It was commented that the Commission felt there were obligated to protect people as well as businesses. Williams reminded all the findings of the Economic Forum stated the city lacked small commercial business climate. Allowing commercial businesses in the corridor area would be in tune with the community comments (from the Forum). Kebschull suggested a footnote be added to Industrial, RS-1 and RS with C's that all ingress and egress must be from the Spur Highway. Commission and Council agreed and the N's were changed to C's with the footnote added. Townhouses: Williams noted, as it is written, in the RR zone, a property owner with a one or 2 %- acre lot- would be forced to subdivide the property, change the footprint, and cause the building to be designed in a way that it is not conducive to the area. It was decided the townhouse ordinance could be dealt with after the changes to the Land Use Table were made as there is already specific rules designated in RR and RS. END CONME Williams requested the Commission to review the Land Use Table again and consider the elements of the existing rule, the pitfalls discussed, and clarify some of the things that would be done if the proposed table (with changes) was adopted. Williams thanked the Commission for their long effort in review and preparation of the proposed Land Use Table. 0 • KENA1 CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING & ZONING CQMMI93ION JOINT WORK SESSION OCTOBER 8, 1997 PACE 6 ADJOU�I�ICN�T: The work session ended. at approximately 9:34 p.m. Notes transcribed and prepared by: dew� 4 PC Carol L. Freas, City Clerk • f �'""'":^'l � ©y COUNI 1.