Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-02-23 Planning & Zoning MinutesCITY OF KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS February 23, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. htt www.ci.kenai.ak.us VICE CHAIR PHIL BRYSON, PRESIDING ITEM ].: CALL TO ORDER 1-a. Roll Call Vice-Chair Bryson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and roll was called as follows: Commissioners Present: Bryson, Erwin, Goecke, Nord, Gough, and Jackman Commissioners Absent: Glick Others Present: City Clerk Freas, Administrative Assistant Kebschull, Councilman Bannock 1-b. Agenda Approval Vice Chair Bryson requested Leo Oberts be added as Item 2-a to discuss the Unity Trail Project. MOTION: Cornmissianer Goecke MOVED for approval of the agenda as amended and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Commissioner Nord SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 1-c. Approval o~ Minutes -- February 9, 2000 MOTION: Commissioner Nord MOVED far approval of the February 9, 2000 meeting minutes and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Commissioner Erwin SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 1-d. Consent Agenda MOTION: Commissioner Nord MOVED to remove PZ00-04 (Home Occupation Permit -Gun Shop/Gunsmith-1110 Channel Way, Kenai) from the Consent Agenda and Commissioner Gough SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. Bryson requested a staff report from Kebschull who noted the item was before the Commission for the second time. The item had been before the Commission initially as a conditional use permit which had been denied. Kebschull reported administration met with the applicants and discussed how the business could be operated as a home occupation. She explained, this would be by appointment only, phone, mail service, etc. instead of as a store front business. Kebschull continued, the applicant, Robinson, submitted an application based on the criteria for a home occupation and administration reviewed the application. Kebschull stated, administration believed Robinsons satisfied the criteria for a home occupation permit. She noted, because the item was reviewed before and there had been same concerns by neighboring property owners, as a courtesy she sent notices of the home occupation permit application by certified mail to those who were notified the last time and to those who spoke at the previous hearing. Kebschull stated she received no comments from recipients of the notices. Bryson stated the item would be discussed further at Item 5-a. ITEM 2: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT Leo Oberts -- Unity Trail Oberts explained he was speaking to the Commission in order to urge the city's involvement in tourism development in Kenai in relation to Silver Salmon Drive and the Pillars State Park area along the Kenai River. Oberts noted the Unity Trail would be passing Silver Salmon Drive, the entrance to the Pillars area, which would be a fantastic opportunity for him and the city to encourage tourism in the city, Oberts gave a history of the development of the Pillars and the subsequent development of the state park area. He noted, when the pillars were placed years ago, the salmon liked the area for spawning and it developed into a favorite fishing hole on the River. However, due to some subsequent damage to the pillars, the salmon stopped spawning in that area. Oberts stated the city had never participated strongly in promoting tourism in the area and he encouraged a change in that philosophy, and suggested the city put some funding into tourism development in the Pillars State Park area. Bryson requested a report from Kebschull in regard to the Unity Bike Trail Project. Kebschull reported she attended the Unity Trail Workshop on February 15 and reviewed the drawings for the txail. She noted, the project would go out for bid in the near future and construction was to take place during the coming summer. Kebschull also reported several concerns were voiced by attendees that the State chose the south side of the highway on which to place the trail. ITEM 3: CONSIDERAfiION OF PLATS -- None. PLANNING 8v ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23, 2000 PAGE 2 ITEM 4: PUBLIC HEARINGS -- None. ITEM 5: NEW BUSINESS 5-a. PZOO-04-Home Occupation Permit -Gun Shop/Gunsmith-1110 Channel Way (Lot 5, Block 5, Inlet Woods Subdivision), Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Steve anal Judy Robinson, 1110 Channel Way (P.O. Box 35$9), Kenai, Alaska. This item was taken off the consent agenda at the beginning of the meeting and a staff report was given at that time. MOTION: Commissioner Goecke MOVED for approval of PZOD-04, Home Occupation Permit for a gunsmith shop at 1110 Channel Way. Commissioner Erwin SECONDED the motion. Bryson stated he understood the proposed activity met the requirements for a home occupation permit and administration felt there were no reasons to deny the permit. There were no other comments. VOTE: B son Yes Erwin Yes Goecke Yes Nord Yes Gou Yes Jackman Yes Glick Absent MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-b. Title 14 Code Revisions -Development Requirements Table/Land Use Table Kebschull reported, the omission of the requirements for the Conservation (C) Zone was discovered in the Development Requirements Table. She noted, it was unclear if the Conservation Zone had ever been included ira. the table, but stated the omission would have to be cleared up. Kebschull added, because the Rural Residential Zone (RR) had the most stringent criteria already included in the Code, administration was recommending the Conservation Zone be added to that portion of the table. Kebschull added, the text at KMC 1.4.20.070 stated "Airport and related uses have been included in this zone to allow for the reservation of aircraft approach zones." She continued, the city attorney reviewed the information and suggested a footnote be added to the Land Use Table to clarify permitted airport uses in this zone, i.e. strictly PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23, 2000 PAGE 3 for an aircraft approach zone. Kebschull stated she wanted to include that change to the list of amendments to Title 14 which had already been reviewed by the Commission and would subsequently be forwarded to council for review and consideration. There were no other comments from the commission members. There were no objections by the commission members to include the amendment to the other Title 14 revisions they had already reviewed. 5-c. Discussion -- Historic District Board -Work Session (April 17, 2000) Kebschull referred to her memorandum which was included in the packet. She noted, historically, the Board had problems making quorums in order to hold their meetings. The number of meetings had been changed to quarterly last year, but only two meetings of the four in the last year had quorums and nothing had been accomplished during the year. She continued, the council was reviewing options for the Board, including whether elimination of the Board would affect the Certified Local Government standing and because the Board was advisory to the Planning & Zoning Commission, whether the responsibilities of the Board could or should be transferred to the Commission. Kebschull reported, the Board would hold a special meeting on April 3 at which time they would be reviewing their options, develop a plan, etc. and council would then meet with the Board during the Board's regular meeting of April 17. During the April 17 meeting, the council would review the Board's plan, etc. She noted, the council requested members of the Commission to attend the April 17 meeting as well. Councilman Bannock added, he believed the council was divided in regard to the Board's purpose and objective and thought the April l7 discussion would help them in their decision of the Board's future. Bannock added, because the Board was a subcommittee of the Commission, he insisted the Commission be included in the work session to include their input. He noted, three new members to the Board were appointed at the February 16 council meeting to give every opportunity to the Board to succeed within its own boundaries. Bryson questioned the degrees of expertise the members of the Board were to provide and noted the Commission would be able to provide assistance, but not necessarily the expertise defined in the code. Bannock noted the phrase "wherever possible" allowed some room for flexibility and was discussed by council. He added, he believed if there were seven people who were willing volunteers and were struggling, the talent PLANNING 8v ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23, 2000 PAGE 4 was at the Commission level. Gaecke stated he supported the Board having a chance to hold quorums, etc., but didn't feel they would succeed if past attendance, etc. was an indication. ITEM 6: OLD BUSINESS 6-a. Title 14 Code Revisions -Balloon Signs Kebschull noted, at their last meeting, the Commission requested the city attorney review and determine whether or not a balloon sign would cause an encroachment in air space. She reported, the attorney researched the question and stated he didn't believe there would be an encroachment, but would be a minor, short-term, and unenforceable trespass and suggested two options; allow the balloon signs in the limited capacity noted ar choose to prohibit the balloon signs. Commissioner Nord suggested the signs be prohibited. Jackman stated she had observed balloon signs in Kenai which was not often and when used, were not for prolonged use. She asked if there had been complaints in regard to balloon signs in the past and added, if there were no complaints and they were for a limited time, she believed the balloon signs should be allowed. She continued, she didn't believe it appropriate to prevent a business from using balloon signs during sales, inventory reduction, etc. as she believed it would be inappropriate to prohibit a business from selling its products. Nord stated she had no objection to balloon signs, but if there would not be any enforcement of trespass, she would object to them. She noted, because the city attorney confrmed there would be trespasses, she could not condone them, even if they would be the owners' responsibility. Nord stated she was in favor of disallowing them as stated in the memorandum, "...balloons or other gas filled figures are not permitted except as provided..." and made a motion to disallow balloon signs. The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION: Commissioner Goecke MOVED to allow balloon signs within the parameters spelled out in the memorandum. It was noted the balloon sign amendments would be included in the other Title 14 amendments and would be before the Commission for public hearing. SECOND: Commissioner Jackman SECONDED the motion. PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23, 2000 PAGE 5 Bryson stated, if it was the Commission's intent to separate the balloon discussion from the other amendments, it should be clarified. Kebschull noted, it had been planned to present one resolution with all the amendments included which would include new changes, housekeeping changes, etc. Jackman asked if each individual item would be included in the advertisement of the resolution. Kebschull noted she would publish the public hearing in the paper twice and would post notices at City Hall, the Post Offce, and the court house. Goecke stated he believed, as a businessman, it was important that every type of advertising be available to be used. He stated, he believed allowing balloon signs could be a problem if a person was holding a garage sale and tied balloons at the end of the driveway and they came loose and floated into the neighbor's yard, however he was in favor of the amendment allowing the balloons. Bryson stated he didn't believe that use of balloons would be covered under the ordinance and if it were so vial that it was a trespass, it would be a trespass. Bryson stated it was his understanding the wording to allow balloon signs would be incorporated into the other amendments to be made to Title i4 and presented for public hearing to the Commission. VOTE: Erwin Yes Goecke Yes Nord No Gou Yes Jackman Yes Glick Absent B son No MOTYON PASSED. Kebschull stated she would try to put the amendments together, advertise and post in order to have a public hearing on the resolution (including all the suggested changes to the code] at the Commission's March 8 meeting. Bannock suggested administration draft an agenda of individual items to be amended in Title 14 to review with council at the March 16 joint work session with the Commission. He noted, he and Cauncihr3an Bookey wanted to review all the suggested changes and not than just the livestock ordinance. Bryson agreed that would be appropriate if time permitted. He added, the Commission's public hearing would be held prior to the work session. Kebschull noted the title of the resolution stated changes to Title 14, but did not list the changes individually except for in the body of the attachment. She added, after the Commission held its public hearing, the amendments would be forwarded to council as an information item. Bannock urged the agenda Iist the changes individually as he and Councilman Bookey both expected to do it that way. PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23, 2000 PAGE 6 Bryson asked if the two additional items discussed during the meeting should be included in the amendments. Jackman stated her concern there were too many amendments to discuss in the one-hour work session. Bannock noted, a number of the items were housekeeping issues and wouldn't take a lot of time. There were no objections to including the balloon sign information in the resolution amending Title 14. ITEM 7: PENDING ITEMS 7-a. Proposed Livestock Ordinance (Work Session scheduled with City Council for March 15, 2000 at 6:00 p.m.) Bryson asked if the commissioners would object to holding a work session on the item after the commission meeting. There were no objections. ITEM 8: CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEM 9: REPORTS 9-a. City Council -- Bannock noted a copy of the action agenda of the February 16 council meeting was included in the packet. He noted a number of items had been included on the consent agenda and would be considered at the March 1 meeting. Bannock reported the golf fees would be increased and a special use permit was approved for selective harvesting beetle-killed and infested trees on city property in the Inlet Woods Subdivision. He added, the contractor would be xnaking himself available to private land owners in the area as well. Bannock noted Executive Director of the Bays & Girls Club spoke to council in regard to its future and the potential partnering of the city and the Club as there was a possibility of their having to move from the Kenai Elementary School in the next several years. Because of the potential, she discussed ideas of adding to the Recreation Center, building a Club on other city property, etc. 9-b. Borough Planning -- Bryson referred to the agenda of the Borough Planning Commission's February 14 meeting included in the packet. He noted all the items on the agenda had been approved. 9-c. Administration -- Kebschull stated she would prepare the amendments to Title 14 for consideration at the Commission's next meeting. ITEM 10: PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED -- None. ITEM l I: INFORMATION ITEMS PLANNING Sv ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23, 2000 PAGE 7 11-a. Kenai City Council Raster 11-b. Planning Commissioner Training Seminar Brochure 11-c. "Zoning Bulletin" -January 25, 2000 i 1-d. Unity Trail Comments and Responses ITEM Y2: COMMISSION COMMENTS & UESTIONS -- There were no commissioner comments. Bannock referred to the February 4, 2000 letter from Mr. & Mrs. Robinson which was included in the packet. He noted, the Commission approved an encroachment permit far the Robinson property and the City Manager determined the City of Kenai would appeal the approval of the permit for the side yard encroachment only. Bannock explained, since then the Robinsons were attempting to purchase the property on which they were encroaching, however the city would not remove its appeal but would request council to set the appeal hearing in July (with bath parties willing) in order to give time to the Robinsons to purchase the property. He noted, if the property is purchased and re-platted, the encroachment would no longer exist and the appeal would be withdrawn. Bannock stated he had been under the impression that when an encroachment permit was in place, the encroachment no longer existed. However, the city attorney stated it would be an allowable encroachment. Bannock continued, the code states where there is an encroachment, no conditional use permit can be obtained. He explained, that would have been a problem if the Robinson's encroachment perrnit had stood and the conditional use permit had been approved. He asked for Commission comments. Goecke stated he also understood that if an encroachment permit was applied for and received from the Commission, the encroachment no longer existed. He added, he believed that authority had been given to the Commission to remove the encroachment. Erwin stated he understood Bannock to say that if a mistake was made when a house was built and axi encroachment permit was received, the house could never obtain a conditional use permit for any reason. Bannock stated, that was the attorney's opinion. Erwin stated that could affect a lot of buildings in Kenai and added, though it might be legal, he didn't think it was right. Kebschull explained, the issue was for principally permitted use. Bannock stated he believed that opinion would be a potential problem. Nord stated, she believed the encroachment would still exist, but the permit acknowledged, permitted, and licenseed the problem. Goecke asked Nord if there would be an encroachment permit granted on property which was for sale, was she, as a realtor, required and/ or the seller required to make PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23, 2000 PAGE 8 it known to the purchaser. Nord answered, if there was a granted encroachment permit, it could be interpreted as a material fact of whether a purchaser would purchase the property or not. She added, as a realtor, she believed it should be disclosed. Nord answered, the State required all sellers to complete a disclosure where it asks about encroachments. Kebschull noted, the code stated, "The issuance of an encroachment permit will not authorize a use which is not a principally permitted use in the zoning district." She explained, the issue arose when Robinson applied for an encroachment permit, and changed the use of the shed from a shed to a shop which was not a principally permitted use. Kebschull added, the shed could have an encroachment because the code allowed for an accessory use for a house to be a shed (accessory structure), but when the shed's use was turned into a business, it was no longer an accessory structure and not a principally permitted use in a residential zone. She noted, that was why administration recommended against the issuance of the encroachment permit. ITEM 13: ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:04 p.m. Minu~tels transcribed and prepared by: (~LC~r~-~ ,~~ Carol L. Freas, City Clerk PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23, 2000 PAGE 9