Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-08-22 P&Z MinutesKenai Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting, August 22, 1979 `~ Kenai Public Safety Building, 7 p.m. - Philip Bryson, Presiding Chairman AGENDA OATH OF OFFICE - DAVID CLTRTIS 1. ROLh CALL 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Petition to rezone the proposed Tract B of Park View Subdivision from Conservation to Urban Residential B. Petition to add a new subsection K to Section 21.76.140 (Conditional Uses) to allow churches as a Conditional Use in the General Commercial District 3. AGENDA APPROVAL 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF ATJGUST 8, 1979 5. OLD BUSINESS i A. Lease Application: F.B.O. Subdivision, Block 1, Lots 1, 2, and 3: Dean Yeasel 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Petition to vacate the 33-foot wide public access road and utility easement along the west boundary of Government Lot 36 B. Discussion of Airport Master Plan relative to future development C. Discussion of Spur Subdivision No. l~(16.25 acres) 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. City Council Report: Betty Glick B. Borough Planning and Zoning Report: Betty Glick C. P.dministrative Report D, Borough Report: Jim Hendricks 8. COMMISSION QUESTIONS. AND COMMENTS 9. ADJOURNMENT _x ,,.-"! KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING, August 22, 1979 Kenai Public Safety Building, 7:00 p.m. Philip. Bryson, Presiding Chairman OATH OF OFFICE - DAVID CURTIS 1. ROLL CALL Present: Phil Bryson, Karen Mahurin, Sol Raymond, and David Curtis Absent: Dwain Gibson and Jerry Andrews Others: Jim Hendricks, Borough Planner; Mr. and Mrs. Ed Garnett; Dr. Bailey; Jim Carter; Ernie Schlereth, City Attorney; Jim Swalley, Airport Operations Officer; Stan McLane. 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Petition to rezone the proposed Tract B of Park View Subdivision from Conservation to Urban Residential Mr. Bryson opened the public hearing to the public for comments. Dr. Bailey was present representing the Catholic Church which is located next to the proposed Tract B. He presented a letter to the Commission and requested that it be made a part of the minutes. He also pointed out that the beach area is a well-known drug exchange location and the Church is against putting the Care Center in this area. He further requested that the City and Borough deny the request for rezoning. Phil Bryson read the letter from the Catholic Church which presented the reasons why they are opposed to the Care Center being put next to the Church. There were no other comments from the public on this. Mr. Bryson read the Borough comments on the rezoning. Betty Glick gave a~brief summary of the background behind the need to move the Care Center from its present quarters. Their lease has been extended but they need to move the Center to another location as the City feels the land could be used for other purposes. The Care Center does have grant money .from the State to build and feels that the area on Spruce would be a good place to build the Care Center. Mrs. Glick stated that if the ~ Planning Commission decides not to allow the rezoning of this Tract then they should find another location for the Care Center. Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting, August 22, 1979 Page 2 Dr. Bailey stated that the Catholic Church was not notified soon enough of the proposed building on this lot. Karen Mahurin stated that she does not. have any problem with the Care Center building on this lot or with the rezoning as she has dealt with the Center previously. She further believes that this is a good location for the Center. Jim Hendricks stated that this is a logical area for a high density zone for multiple family units. He further stated that Churches also should be located in high density areas. The Planning Commission is considering the rezoning at this point and the City Council will decide what particular use the land will be for. He felt that if the City tried to find another site for the Center that it would have difficulty. This site only affects a few land owners whereas other areas more people would be affected. The final decision is with the City Council. MOTION: Karen Mahurin moved, seconded by Sol Raymond, to approve the petition to rezone the proposed Tract B of Park View Subdivision from Conservation to Urban Residential. The motion passed unanimously. B. Petition to add a new subsection K to Section 21.76.140 (Conditional Uses) to allow churches as a Conditional Use in the General Commercial District Jim Hendricks read the Borough's comments on this proposed addition to the zoning ordinance. Sol Raymond stated that he was present at former Planning and Zoning meetings concerning churches in a Commercial District. He felt that Churches area restrictive influence on Commercial development in a neighborhood. Karen Mahurin stated that she felt a Commercial area is a logical zone to put a Church .and wants to see them allowed. There were no aumments from the public. MOTION: Karen Mahurin moved, seconded by Sol Raymond, to approve the petition to add a new subsection K to Sectioh:21.76.140 (Conditional Uses) to allow churches as a Conditional Use in the General Commercial District. The motion passed with Sol Raymond voting negatively. Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting, August 22,1979 3. AGENDA APPROVAL Page 3 MOTION: Karen Mahurin moved, seconded by Sol Raymond, to approve the agenda. There were no objections. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 1979 MOTION: Karen Mahurin moved, seconded by Sol Raymond, to approve the minutes of the August 8, 1979 meeting as submitted. There were no objections. 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Lease Application: F. B. 0. Subdivision, Block 1, Lots 1 , 2 , and 3 : Dean Yeasel Jim Swalley stated that the Yeasels came in to see him this past week and they were to get together with Mr. Garnett to discuss this further. They are still willing to accept any of the other seven lots. Phil Bryson questioned whether they have considered withdrawing their application for the first three lots.: and reapplying for three others. There was further discussion concerning which lots would be acceptable to the Yeasels. Mr. Garnett stated.:that he talked with the Yeasels briefly at the last meeting but had not been able to get together with them this week. He pointed out that they do need three lots so as to have enough room for the planes. There was further discussion concerning the lots in question. MOTION: Sol Raymond .moved, seconded by -Karen Mahurin, to recommend that the City Administration propose .that the Yeasels change their lease application to Lots 6, 7, and 8. The motion passed unanimously. Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission Page 4 Regular Meeting, August 22, 1979 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Petition to vacate the 33-foot wide public access road .and utility easement along the west boundary of Government Lot 36. There were no comments from the public. Jim Hendricks commented on the Borough Staff Report and stated that the plat and the vacation should be two separate items and treated as such. The Commission should be only considering the plat. The Commission discussed the plat and the right of ways. MOTION: Sol Raymond moved, seconded by Karen Mahurin, to adopt Resolution PZ 79-26 approving Church Subdivision: Preliminary Plat upon the following conditions: Corrections of negative findings of Items 9 and 10 and change Item 5 to the following. 9. Utility easements, if required, are not shown. 10. Lots are not identified by street addresses in accordance with City Code. 5. .The. right of way along Fourth Avenue should be specified as 33 feet to conform with adjoining property right of way. The motion passed unanimously. B. Discussion of Airport Master Plan relative to future development The Commission discussed the Master Plan and pointed out that th.e people doing the Plan did not anticipate the fish haulers or Wein coming to Kenai. They discussed _ fish hauling and the impact on the economy and the opportunity to bring cargo flights into the area. Jim Swalley stated that he has talked with the FAA and is working on extending the existing ramp space. Any ramp lots which the City leases-will reduce the parking on the existing ramp. Both the Garnett and Yeasel lease applications allow for parking on their own lots. Mr. Garnett stated that three lots .are not very much area when talking about large aircraft. He suggested that Lots 4 or 5 be reserved as access for lots across tiVil:low and Lots 4 or 5 ~ to handle transient aircraft. Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission Page 5 Regular Meeting, August 22, 1979 Mr. Garnett further stated tha-t answers are needed for these problems and not further studies.. C. Discussion of Spur Subdivision No. 1 Betty Glick pointed out that this land was up for sale and the City had no bidders on the 16.25 acre tract. The price that the City was asking was not that high per square foot. Should the City consider dividing it into smaller lots? The Commission discussed the Subdivision and reviewed the plat and decided that it should .not be divided. 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. City Council Report: Betty Glick Betty Glick reported on the last City Council meeting where Carmen Gintoli gave a presentation on three proposals for a new City Hall; discussion of -Kenai house numbering; and transfer of monies to put up street signs. B. Borough Planning and Zoning Report: Betty Glick Betty Glick commented on the results of the public hearing on the Borough land sale. A decision will be made on Monday concerning this. C. Administrative Report There was no Administrative Report. D. Borough Report: Jim Hendricks Jim Hendricks commented on the memo from the Borough on the Comprehensive Plan Schedule Update. The Commission members agreed to hold a meeting Wednesday at 7 p.m. at the Public Safety Building with Thorpe, City Administration, and Council to discuss Capital Improvements and Transportation Study. Would like to have the Airport Manager and someone from public Works attend. 8. COMMISSION QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS Mr. Garnett requested to get back on the agenda since the Yeasel application is not- right for the first three lots and he needs an answer as soon as possible concerning his application. He needs to have at least concept approval of Lots 1, 2, and 3 with the reservation of Lot 4 for negotiation with the City to get the transient parking off the ramp. ~ .Phil Bryson stated that he would abstain from voting as he is doing work for Mr. Garnett. Kenai Planning and Zoning .Commission Regular Meeting, August 22, 1979 Page 6 The Commission discussed the proposed building size,~:p~r~ing-_;; and fencing. The Commissioners stated;that they need to have a site plan which shows the land which will be left natural and the land to be developed, parking areas showing the entrances and exits, and how parked, where the buildings will be located and their size. MOTION: Sol Raymond moved, seconded: by Karen Mahurin, that contingent upon the withdrawal of the prior lease application on Lots 1, 2, and 3 F. B. 0. Subdivision, the Commission approves the concept lease application for John and Kristine Stoehner and reserves final recommendation based upon an acceptable development plan which includes consideration for drainage. Betty Glick questioned whether they are still considering the fish processing plant. Mr. Garnett stated th~.t they ran into problems with water and sewer so they are going ahead with their original plan for cargo and aircraft parts. The motion passed with Phil Bryson abstaining. The Commission discussed the possibility and need for an Airport Commission to review the airport development. They commented on the future need to provide access to the Lots across Willow. The possibility of using the land in front of the CAP for parking was discussed. 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Karen Mahurin moved, seconded by Sol Raymond, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~, J nice E. Taylor Secretary to the Commission OUR LADY OF THE ANGELS CHURCH BOX 555 KENAi, ALASKA 99611 August 22, 1979 City of Kenai Resolution No 79-103 Rezoning Tract S of Park View Subdivision Ta the City Council of Kenai and the Borough Planning and Zoning Commission: A LETTER OF PROTEST TO THE ABOVE PROPOSAL Property Ownership-- vested inthe tithe of the Catholic Archbishop of Anchorage, by appointment as Pastor of this church I the undersigned Robert J Wells have the right and duty to protect the property and speak in the name of the named owner. Additional and indeed real owners of the property in the above title are the 175 families who comprise this parish, whose sacrifice over a long term constitute a real investment in the grounds and entitles them to real concern at the above proposal. In the name of those families I presume to speak, OUR REA SONm1VG: It is the contention of the City Council that the proposed rezoning would be "compatible and in Line with similar uses in the area and in spirit of the comprehensi$e plan" A : We state that the rezoning is definitely NOT compatible and not in line wi th similar uses in the present: 1 } PRESEENT AREA USES: are a church, a pasbNr's residence, a private residence (a family with two small children) and a recently sold section to be developed for housing, Introduction of the Community Center is diametrically opposed to these presen t uses. The above mentioned family intends to make their opposition clear by letter to the Borough. For the Church: a) This or any church seeks to maintain aid indeed requires a reasonable amount of serenity and security to conduct its services and functions. It is our contention that the placement of the Care Center adjoining our property will seriously affect both the serenity and security necessary to a place of worship. b) Placement next to our property will surely be destructive of our property value and of the property itself- if one may fairly judge from the present practice at the community center, c) Such placement would impose unreasonable and discriminatory hardship upon our church to provide additional secure fencing and other protections to our buildings and property. d) The roadway (Spruce Road) which is already a hazardous racecourse to the beach and already noisy until 2:00 or 3:{30 pm on weekends, would be even more unbearable wth the placement of the Care Center on this road, B) The resolution further gratuitously alleges that such rezoning will becompatible with the future planned use of the land in the area. We deny this most strongly from our own plans for the future-- since we have hopes of soatrre day beginning our own school on our premises. With the Care Center next door we would be forced to abandon our plans permanently, page 2 OUR LADY OF THE ANGELS CHURCH BOX SSS KENAI, ALASKA 99611 C) All of the above reasons examine the situation as if it where purely a speculative matter. When anyone looks at the present Care Center shows that the practice is far worse even than the theoretie~l objections: 1 }The physical condition of the buildings, All the bui Idings where turned over to the center by the FAA in a state of good repair. The present condition-even though the main building ~nas been repaired several times- can only be described as poor, a) Numerous outbuildings- shacks, and lean to's that are ~aaphazard, unkempt and just plain dirty are around both buildings b) Livestock ;includes 3 horses, 3 head of cattle, several pigs, chickens, rabbits, dogs, The horses often rove free as do the dogs. Even though it is said that these are the property of an individual (husband of the one in charge) they arefouling the property and the adjacent area. c) Hay has been stacked against the one building for more than 2 years, a firehazard as well as an eyesore. THE POINT OF ALL THESE THINGS IS: The present condition of the buildings and grounds argues to such poor management that the Care Center is a real threat to property value not only where they are but more so if they should be put into the proposed area ---EVEN IF the animals are not brought to the new location- the past performance shows complete disregard for property value or at best complete ineptitude to carefor property. It shows poor or no management and is a most serious threat to property in the new proposed location. ' Rahter than call the new rezoning Urban Residential- past performance argues that it should really be "Instant Slum" Since Our Property is the closest to the proposed area we naturally stand to be the greatest Losers and therefore feel most strongly about it, For all these reasons we register the strongest possible protest to the proposed rezoning since it is destructive of property values that have been built and maintained by the sacrifice of a Large number of people. It will be most surely and seriously disruptive of the purpose of our institution and imposes unfairly ins necessitating security measures that will be forced on us if the rezoning is appoanoved, We ask therefore that the City and the Borough deny the proposal to reaone the property mentioned, r1ey, Rev. Robe J Wells Pastor, atholic Chhrzrch