Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-02-22 P&Z Minutes~~<._',~ KENAI PLANNING & Regular Meeting, Kenai City Hall Hal Smalley, Vice 1. 2. 3. ROLL CALL ZONING COMMISSION February 22, 1984 Chairman Present: Smalley, Bryson, Carignan, Oleson, Osborne, Zubeck Absent: Lewis, Excused 1 a. Swearing in of new member, Richard Carignan AGENDA APPROVAL Add 3-a, Jack Sipperly, Purchase of Government Lot 11. Agenda approved with the addition. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD a. Jack Sipperly, Purchase of Government Lot 11 Mr. Sipperly explained that he has lived on Gov't Lot 10 since 1977. Mr. Sipperly had approached the City approx- imately 5 years ago about the purchase of the same lot and was told at that time that it could not be sold because it was zoned as a conservation area. Recently, it has become apparent that the City is taking steps to release land and Mr. Sipperly felt that it would be a good time to request purchase of that property again. Mr. Labahn was enthus- iastic about the possibility of Mr. Sipperly acquiring the lot and Mr. Sipperly decided to go ahead with his request. His intention is to build a house on the lot since he has outgrown his present house. Also, it appeared that the conservation aspects of the gully had changed since quite a few hundred cubic yards of dirt had been dumped there. Mr. Sipperly asked why the request was not approved. Vice Chairman Smalley stated that the question came out that it was not on the list of lands to be disposed of; the list being one that is developed for lands suitable for devel- opment. Mr. Labahn stated that when the application was first brought to the attention of the City, it was explained to the applicant that there were several steps that would have to be gone through with approvals from all bodies involved, one of the steps being rezoning from the present conservation zone; another being that the Council would have to declare that property not suitable for public purpose. ~, -~~'; ~; KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ~~ ~,. Regular Meeting, February 22, 1984 ~= Kenai City Hall ~ Lee Lewis, Chairman AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL a. Swearing in of New Member 2. AGENDA APPROVAL 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Resolution PZ84-10: Land Use Plan Amendment - Amend Use from Neighborhood Business to High Density Residential - Gov't Lot 136, T6N, R11W, S.M. b. Resolution PZ84-11: Rezone: Gov't Lot 136 Sec. 31, T6N, R11W, S.M. - from General Commercial (CG) to Urban Residential (RU) c. Resolution PZ84-12: Lots 1-10, Block 2, Donnybrook S/D d. Townhouse Ordinance Revision 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of February 8, 1984 6. OLD BUSINESS 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Lease Application: Lot 1, Etolin S/D First Addition - for Bowling Alley & Indoor Shooting Range Norm Blakely b. Lease Application: Lots 3 & 4, Block 3/Lots 9, 10, & 11, FBO S/D - Holding Freezer for Fish Haul - Joe Nord c. Lease Application: Tract A, Sprucewood Glen S/D - for Retail Store - Partee 8. PLANNING a. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Process '~ PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 2 9. REPORTS a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. City Administration 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 11. INFORMATION ITEMS 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS 13. ADJOURNMENT ~~~ KENAI PLANNING & Regular Meeting, Kenai City Hall Hal Smalley, Vice 1. ROLL CALL ZONING COMMISSION February 22, 1984 Chairman ~~~, ~~ +~ Present: Smalley, Bryson, Carignan, Oleson, Osborne, Zubeck Absent: Lewis, Excused I a. Swearing in of new member, Richard Carignan 2. AGENDA APPROVAL Add 3-a, Jack Sipperly, Purchase of Government Lot 11. Agenda approved with the addition. 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD a. Jack Sipperly, Purchase of Government Lot 11 Mr. Sipperly explained that he has lived on Gov't Lot 10 since 1977. Mr. Sipperly had approached the City approx- imately 5 years ago about the purchase of the same lot and was told at that time that it could not be sold because it was zoned as a conservation area. Recently, it has become apparent that the City is taking steps to release land and Mr. Sipperly felt that it would be a good time to request purchase of that property again. Mr. Labahn was enthus- iastic about the possibility of Mr. Sipperly acquiring the lot and Mr. Sipperly decided to go ahead with his request. His intention is to build a house on the lot since he has outgrown his present house. Also, it appeared that the conservation aspects of the gully had changed since quite a few hundred cubic yards of dirt had been dumped there. Mr. Sipperly asked why the request was not approved. Vice Chairman Smalley stated that the question came out that it was not on the list of lands to be disposed of; the list being one that is developed for lands suitable for devel- opment. Mr. Labahn stated that when the application was first brought to the attention of the City, it was explained to the applicant that there were several steps that would have to be gone through with approvals from all bodies involved, one of the steps being rezoning from the present conservation zone; another being that the Council would have to declare that property not suitable for public purpose. PLANNING COMMISSION February 22, 1984 Page 2 Commissioner Bryson stated that the property fronts on an existing easement and there is no reason why someone else couldn't come in with a developed access and develop the property. Commissioner Bryson felt that Mr. Sipperly didn't have a situation where if he didn't get the property it would not damage a situation he already has, further that it should not be separated from the greenbelt from an environ- mental standpoint. Last, Commissioner Bryson did not feel that the situation warranted negotiation with Mr. Sipperly and eliminating the rest of the population, i.e. no hardship situation. Vice Chairman Smalley asked if the Commission wished to take action. Vice Chairman Smalley stated that the Commission wishes to take no action on this, it is now your right to take this matter to the City Council. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Resolution PZ84-10: Land Use Plan Amendment - Amend Use from Neighborhood Business to Medium High Density Residential - Gov't Lot 136, T6N, R11W. S.M. b. Resolution PZ84-11: Rezoning of Gov't Lot 136, Sec. 31, T6N, R11W, S.M. from General Commercial to Urban Residential THESE TWO RESOLUTIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER Mr. John Williams, agent for John Vania the owner of the property and Hill Street Investors, noted a letter of objection from Mr. Elmer Richardson and went on to introduce the plan initiating the rezoning request. Mr. Williams stated that for some time real estate agents have been trying to get some type of commercial development in the area and have not been successful due to the greenbelt separating the highway from the property, commercial property needing frontage on the Spur. With this in mind, Hill Street Investments feel that apartments would be a better use. Mr. Williams stated that entry and exit would be from 2nd Ave. Twenty-four units are intended. Hill Street Investments have many other apartment complexes in the area. Mr. Roland Lynn came forward to introduce the plan, quoting statistics to support the need for low to medium income housing. PLANNING COMMISSION February 22, 1984 Page 3 Commissioner Carignan stated that he had some concerns for strip zoning. This area is still General Commercial and looking at some of the uses allowed, what kind of effect this rezoning is going to have on a residential area if this area continues to be developed as a General Commercial. Commissioner Carignan asked if the gentlemen shared the concern since right next to the apartments could very well be a service station. Mr. Lynn stated that he does not have that concern and further the surrounding area is subdivided into small residential lots, the chances of commercial property being developed in that area is extremely remote due to the Conservation strip which screens businesses from the highway. Commissioner Carignan stated that when driving through Spenard, this kind of development can be seen and is an eyesore. Mr. H.A. Poore, owner of property directly across the street came forward to voice objection. Mr. Poore will be three single family residences on those lots by summer. Mr. Poore stated that he would not object to a 2 plex or similar, but does object to 24 units, it being far too crowded. Vice Chairman Smalley brought discussion back to the Commission. For the record, Mr. Labahn introduced Mr. Richardson's letter of objection. Mr. Richardson is a property owner in the area. Mr. Labahn stated that the question seems to be whether it would be spot zoning as opposed to the best use of the property, the point of the conservation strip being well taken. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to recommend approval PZ84-10 incorporating the analysis section of Mr. Labahns memo as finding of fact, seconded by Commissioner Zubeck. VOTE: Motion passed with Vice Chairman Smalley, Commissioners Bryson, Oleson, Osborne, and Zubeck voting yes, Commissioner Carignon voting no. Mr. Phillip Bruce, owner of Kenai Funeral Home came forward to object to the rezoning, stating that what the businesses in the area wanted was to have zoning that would be compat- ible with all businesses. PLANNING COMMISSION February 22, 1984 ~~ Page 4 MOTION: Commissioner Bryson, seconded by Commissioner Oleson to recommend approval of PZ84-11. VOTE: Commissioner Carignan again wished to voice his concerns that the City spent slot of time developing a comprehensive plan setting out areas contiguous to one another for specific purposes and this does not align, it may begin a trend, there are CG businesses that still could occur there. Motion passed with Vice Chairman Smalley, Commissioners Bryson, Oleson, Osborne, Smalley, and Zubeck voting yes, Commissioner Carignan voting no. c. Resolution PZ84-12: Rezone Lots 1-10, Block 2, Donny- brook S/D from Rural Residential to Suburban Resi- dential Vice Chairman Smalley opened comments from the public. For the record there was no response.. Vice Chairman Smalley then called for comments from the Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved approval of PZ84-12, seconded by Commissioner Bryson. Jeff Labahn explained that the request resulted from a preliminary plat reviewed and approved by the Commission a few weeks previously. It was not noted by the developer and surveyor at that time that it would require rezoning. Since City water & sewer are appropriate and planned, the rezoning is consistent. Vice Chairman Smalley asked if the City had received any written input, Mr. Labahn stated that there has been no correspondence either written or verbal. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. d. Townhouse Ordinance Revision The townhouse ordinance was developed and recommended by this Commission and was recently enacted by the Borough. In the meantime there was concern about one provision; (21.76.155 F-1) definition of total floor area. It was revised and appears for public hearing as part of procedure for revision. PLANNING COMMISSION February 22, 1984 Page 5 Vice Chairman Smalley called for public comment. For the record, no one appeared to speak on this issue. Vice Chair- man Smalley called for wishes of the Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved to recommend to the Borough Planning Commission approval of the revision as stated, seconded by .Commissioner Bryson. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of February 8, 1984 Jeff Labahn stated that since Mr. Carignan was not officially a member of the Commission at the last meeting his name should be removed from the absent list. MOTION: Commissioner Osborne moved approval of minutes as amended, seconded by Commissioner Bryson I Motion passed by unanimous approval. 6. OLD BUSINESS None 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Lease Application: Lot 1, Etolin S/D First Addition - for Bowling Alley & Indoor Shooting Range - Norm Blakely Mr. Norm Blakely came forward to address his application. Mr. Blakely stated that he was presently the owner of the bowling alley in Soldotna. Mr. Blakely explained that he had not received his plans from the architect in time for review and found that 16 lanes were drawn, it should be 14 lanes and the elevation shown will be different, to overlook the airport and baseball fields. Mr. Blakely stated that the indoor shooting range is just a concept, that a feasi- bility study is being done for need, with perhaps mats that could be folded away for archery. Mr. Blakely stated that regrettably with the lot size, he may not be able to retain trees but will landscape. Construction should begin around April 15th with opening to be September. PLANNING COMMISSION " ~ February 22, 1984 Page 6 Councilman Wise asked that with the other proposed bowling alley, would Mr. Blakely feel another would be viable. Mr. Blakely stated that Mr. Church has leased property and has not as yet built the alley, and further that the competition would not be harmful, the community could very possibly support two. Mr. Blakely ran through his financing, stating that it is available and ready to go. Councilman Wise asked Mr. Blakely his plans for a liquor license, he answered that there were no plans for one at this time. Vice Chairman Smalley questioned Mr. Blakely on the indoor shooting range, it will be in a basement area below a restaurant, small bore rifles and pistols, a 100 yard tunnel with a konagraph machine for projecting the speed of the bullet and all would be strictly supervised. Vice Chairman Smalley asked Mr. Blakely to state his plans for snow removal and landscaping; he stated that he would have to bring in some type of landscaping but could not state details at this time, not having reviewed the site plan. Vice Chairman Smalley called for wishes of the Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to recommend approval of lease application for Norm & Sally Blakely, Lot 1 Etolin S/D 1st Add., seconded by Commissioner Carignan. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. a. Lease Application: Lots 3&4, Block 3/Lots 9,10, & 11, FBO S/D - Holding Freezer for Fish Haul - Joe Nord Mr. Joe Nord came forward to address his application stating that lots 9, 10, & 11 are slated for future expansion of the runway so lots 2 & 4 are the lots that could be used presently and by that time, the apron could be brought past those lots. Vice Chairman Smalley asked for comments from the airport manager. Mr. Jim Swalley stated that, regarding lots 9, 10, & 11 which Mr. Nord is requesting for his primary facility; in 1979 the City began applying for grant money to extend the ramp from any channels which seemed available at different times. It is Mr. Swalley's understanding that Mr. Nord wants to lease those lots now, however, there is no way of knowing how long before grant money is received and that ramp is extended and Mr. Nord could be paying lease money on PLANNING COMMISSION February 22, 1984 Page 7 those lots for a long time. On lots 3 & 4; would he be giving those up after completion of the facility or will those be maintained for the full 50 years? Mr. Nord stated he felt lots 3 & 4 would be an interim lease until lots 9, 10, & 11 could become available. What Mr. Nord wants on lots 9, 10, & 11 is an option, as far as paying lease on them, it was his impression that the ramps would be put in sooner than indicated. Mr. Nord stated that it is justified to build on lots 3 & 4 since there is no direct access to the airport. Commissioner Bryson asked what the City Council policy is on lease options. Councilman Wise stated that there is no policy, there have been lease applications which have dragged on forever but usually not for this type of a reason. Councilman Wise commented that if lots 9, 10, & 11 would be leased today they would be leased at a much lower value rate per square foot than they will be when that ramp is assumed to be in existance. Mr. Nord asked, "can we go ahead with the proposal and see what the appraisal comes to and economics dictates all action anyway". Councilman Wise stated that he would not want to mislead Mr. Nord, but if the appraisal would come in today it would be good for five years, at the end of five years it would be reappraised and your rate would be changed according to the current valuation so you face that aspect. Mr. Smalley is correct, there is no assurance that we're going to get that ramp extended in the forseeable future. Commissioner Bryson asked if he were intending to strip and gravel lot 3 & 4 in the interim period. Mr. Nord answered no, it is clear. Commissioner Bryson stated that, "in general, the lots were platted so that it would be required that 2 or more lots be required for the lease area as far as building across the lot line, and would personally feel much more comfortable if it was broken out into 2 leases to give him some flexibility". Vice Chairman Smalley agreed saying that a 50 year lease on 3 & 4 may tie him up and would encourage a 5 year lease on those lots and perhaps coming back later for lots 9, 10, & 11. The Commission next discussed construction and dates of leases. '` PLANNING COMMISSION ~ February 22, 1984 Page 8 MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to request that this item be postponed until the next meeting allowing administration to come back with a revised lease application if so desired, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. Commissioner Bryson asked what effect this would have on his time schedule, Mr. Nord stated that it would drop him back 3 weeks, March 15th being the next meeting for the Com- mission. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. c. Lease Application: Tract A, Sprucewood Glen S/D - for Retail Store - Partee Mr. Partee came forward to address his application referring to the letter he had submitted this afternoon. Commissioner Bryson asked Mr. Labahn if the lessee is asking for the entirety of Tract A, proposing a use for approximately 1 acre of the area. Mr. Labahn stated that there is concern over the usability of only a portion of the lot and of access from Walker and to the back portion of the tract. Commissioner Bryson asked if Mr. Lowry's development presently underway ties in with this tract, Mr. Partee answered yes, "the buildings will be connected with zero lot line". Commissioner Bryson asked if the legal access would have to cross the buffer strip from Walker for the rear lots Mr. Labahn stated that the sole access for the whole tract is from the Spur Highway, the rear lots would be accessed from Tern Avenue and the interior ROW. Mr. Partee stated that, "there will be a 20' easement to the side next to the buffer zone to go around to the back for the trucks to unload and the little triangle piece in back will be for truck storage, to turn around, and to use for private storage for the retail store." Mr. Labahn asked if all the customer parking would be on the Spur side of the development, Mr. Partee answered yes, the rear being for service only. Vice Chairman Smalley asked for clarification on time schedule for construction, Mr. Partee answered that with weather conditions and approval of lease it would be March of 1984. If there are any holdups, it would be March 1985. Vice Chairman Smalley commented on the landscaping, Mr. Partee stated that there are 20' of trees that are in the ROW that won't be cut. Snow removal will not be pushed to the buffer strip which would damage the trees. In most of PLANNING COMMISSION `'~ February 22, 1984 Page 9 the malls the snow is carried away. Commissioner Osborne stated that he felt a more complete application was indicated to prevent any future problems. Councilman Wise asked the significance of March as a beginning date. Mr. Partee stated that he needs to know by March to allow the persons that are interested in the space to be into the space by September. Mr. Labahn stated he was still not sure of the relationship of the retail store tying in with Mr. Lowry's lot. Commissioner Oleson noted Mr. Lynn's site plan in that it was very complete, right down to the parking lot light poles. Commissioner Zubeck also noted that the application brought in by Mr. Blakely was the proper method of submitting a lease with every item on the application addressed and further that the City should take into consideration, for any future lease, that it should be submitted with all items addessed and would save slot of time for all concerned right down to the inspection. Neither of the last two applications have been presentely properly either for the building permit or for the Commission. Mr. Labahn asked the Commission if there were any objections to the basic concept of the lease, Commissioner Bryson stated that he had no objection except that when the Commission has approved things conceptually, we never see then again, they are subsequently approved on the momentum of that motion and I would like to see them come back. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson requested postponement pending reciept of a sight plan, seconded by Commissioner Oleson. Vice Chairman Smalley called for comments, Councilman Wise stated that it was his feeling that a designed sight plan done by an architect associated with the project which would identify all items requested so that the Commission could have a reasonabe opportunity to review and make a decision and if you're going to spend this kind of money, you're going to have to do eventually anyway, and with pressure from the community on the Commission to develop good looking, attractive, commercial areas, it is to the applicant's advantage to give the people on the Commission something to show that you have met the City's needs, then they can approve a project with a good clean conscience. You understand what you're going to have to do, they under- stand what they are approving and they can defend it to their constituents, and they and you can be proud of it and what we have now is simply a panic drawing, you give them nothing to defend. With 1.6 million in the project, it has PLANNING COMMISSION February 22, 1984 Page 10 VOTE: to be done anyway. Right now, both the Commission and the Council have an application that doesn't have what we want, and we have had some problems with lessee's. Motion passed unanimously. Commission called a 5 minute recess. 8. PLANNING a. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Process Mr. Labahn addressed a letter from the Borough, the issue which was generated by the City of Seward, they had run into a problem rezoning property in the City: the Borough zoning code does not allow rezoning property of less than 1 acre unless it serves to expand an adjacent area. The City of Seward has slot of very small lots which do not meet that requirement. They're approach is that a rezoning of less than 1 acre be allowed if it serves to implement the Comprehensive Plan. It is Mr. Labahn's feeling that this change should be supported, one of the major purposes for rezoning being to implement the land use plan, assuming that the plan is reasonably accurate. Commissioner Carignan asked in what way it would serve the City of Kenai's self interest. Mr. Labahn used Old Town as an example it having small lots. If the land use plan is accurate, it seems to be in the city's best interest to go to any reasonable length to make sure that the changes are made consistent with the land use plan. It tends to go against zoning (spot zoning) but if we're working towards implementing the land use plan perhaps it's not undesirable. The Commission decided to take no action - to look at the issue further. 9. REPORTS a. City Council Report The Commission reviewed the Council agenda as submitted. There were no questions of Councilman Wise. b. Borough Plannin Report Commissioner Bryson reported there has been no meetings. PLANNING COMMISSION -~~,~ February 22, 1984 Page 11 c. City Administration Report Mr. Labahn called attention to the two information items submitted. Mr. Labahn reviewed a plat of Park View S/D Tract A, Vic Tyler has approached the City about purchasing Tract A. This was subdivided in 1979 and was removed from parks and conservation for disposal for lease or sale and up to this point no interest has been shown. In order for disposal; the Council needs to designate this land as not needed for public use and rezoning. Mr. Tyler has requested a Suburban Residential matching the property to the south. This will come before the Commission formally in the near future and Mr. Labahn would like to get a feel for the Commission's wishes. Vice Chairman Smalley asked if the Parks Commission or any other agency had been contacted, Mr. Labahn stated that he had talked to Kayo McGillivray and it had been taken out of the usable category. A work session is set for Thursday, March 1st 6:30 pm to 8:30 pm for the zoning ordinance. 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Commissioner Carignan wished to voice concerns on spot zoning pertaining to Government Lot 136. Perhaps the Commission needs to take a look at the entire strip. The Commission agreed. Mr. Labahn offered to prepare a map of the strip in question. 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next regular meeting will be Wednesday, March 14, 1984 at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers. Janice E. Taylor Acting Secretary Janet A. Loper Secretary PLANNING & ZONING rp,OMMISSION Ro11 ~ (}~~ `~ J \\ ~ /,` /, Chairman ee ewes .. __ - - _ - - --- /~' -Phil Bryson ~/ ,~ ~'~ `~ ~/ ~ ~ 2~ ~ '` P Richagd Carri non ~ ~ ~` IV ,~(~ ~ r`~ ` ~ ~ ~l `1 ~ 1I y Bob Oleson `^ Ozzie Osborne `~ ~ ~ ~~ Hal Smalley ~ ''~ ~ ~ `~ !'~ Bill Zubek ~ i~ ~ ~ ~ `~ TO DO ~~-