Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-05-09 P&Z MinutesKENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ~ May 9, 1984 Kenai City Hall Lee Lewis, Chairman NOTE: There will 6e no work session this week. AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. AGENDA APPROVAL 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD a. Walter Them - Cooperative Extension Service 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Variance Request: Lots I7 & 18, Block 13, Ahlstrom S/D - from ~ Centerline Setback Requirement - Victor G. Tyler b. PZ$4-36: Conditional Use Permit for Construction of l Townhouse Unit on Lot 5, Block 6, Mommsen's S/D Add 4~1 - Jess Hall (Plat item 7-~) 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of April 25, 1984 Not available at this time. Should be available at the meeting. 6. OLD BUSINESS a. Request for Vacation of Section Lines: Lots 9 & 10, Etolin S/D No 3 Tract B, CIIAP S/D No 2 b. Lease Application: Tract B, Gusty S/D No 2 - Jesse & Catherine Wade 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Resolution PZ84-39: Establishing Standards for Zero Lot Line Construction b. Request for Home Occupation Permit: Lot D1A, Killen Estates Add No 1 - for Temporary Aircraft Sales Office - Sid Ayer "W PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ` May 9, 1964 Page 2 c. Preliminary Plat PZ84-37: Replat of Lot 5, Block 6, Mommsen's S/D Add 1 - for Townhouse d. Preliminary Plat PZ84-35: Replat of Lots 7 & 8, Block 2 FBO S/D 6. PLANNING 9. REPORTS a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. City Administration 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE NEARD 11. INFORMATION ITEMS Letter of Complaint Concerning Cone Pit Council Agenda Letter Concerning Partee Lease P.U.R.D. Ordinance Final Draft from Borough ~ "illustrated Guide to Parking Lot Landscaping" 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS 13. ADJOURNMENT I® ~~ ' KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Kenai City Hall Lee Lewis, Chairman 1. ROLL CALL Present: All Commissioners Present 2. AGENDA APPROVAL 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED 70 SE HEARD a. Walter Them - Cooperative Extension Service At the request of the City Council, Mr. Them appears before the Commission with his proposal and offered a slide presentation. Mr. Them explained that the Service wishes to have a test site in this area to better obtain knowledge of growing conditions particular to the Peninsula. A fence would be necessary, not so much to keep out people, but to keep out destructive forces such as 3-wheelers, etc. Mr. Them proposes to share the burden of the fencing, offering to construct the fence if the City could provide the materials. The type of fence discussed was woven wire at approximately $130/roll and approximately 3 rolls for the area. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved to approve the project concept and request that this recommendation be sent on to the City Council, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. VOTE: There were no objections. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Variance Request: Lots 17 +~ 18, B1k 13, Ahlstrom S/D - from Centerline Setback Requirement - Victor G. Tyler Mr. Schilling representing Mr. Tyler appeared before the Commission and explained his request. It does not appear that the request is out of line with the rest of the buildings along that strip. The size of the lots prohibits development because of the 150' State requirement. NOTE: Commissioner Carignan joined the meeting. Voting will include Commissioner Carignan from this point. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to approve the waiver, seconded by Commissioner Zubeck. PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page Z The Commission asked to review the variance granted last year and noted a 10' setback from the rear. MOTION AMENDMENT: Commissioner Bryson amended the motion to include the comment of requiring a 10' rear setback, seconded by Commissioner Carignan. VOTE: Both MAiN motion and AMENDMENT passed unanimously. a. P784-36: Conditional Use Permit for Construction of 1 Townhouse Unit on Lot 5, Mommsen's S1D Add #1 - 3ess Hall Chairman Lewis opening the meeting to comments From the public. Mr. Tony Doyle came forward to speak against the development stating that he did not feel 37 112'adequate for this type of concept, and would like to see more space around any development of this type. Mr. Doyle felt that people would rather have a smaller house on a larger lot and at a later date add amenities such as a garage when money allows rather than cram a small house on a small lot litterally on top of a neighbor. Chairman Lewis noted that a resolution is before the Commission addressing the issue of lot width on zero lot line construction. Councilman Wise stated that if this type of development were denied multi-family units might well be the replacement. Commissioner Bryson noted that while this development would not meet the minimum lot width under the proposed resolution it would meet the minimum lot area. Mr. Mark Passe came forward to speak far the development stating the need in Kenai for this type of development due to the rising cost of both land and building materials, plus the fact that there are few 90' wide lots in Kenai. Chairman Lewis and Commission Smalley painted out to Mr. Passe that all of the developments before the Commission thus far have been for unsubdivided lots. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to postpone this issue until later in the meeting when the resolution is addressed, seconded by Commissioner Smalley. VOTE: There were no objections. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of April 25, 1984 Minutes were provided prior to the meeting. ~ PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 3 MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved to approve the minutes as submitted, seconded by Commissioner Bryson VOTE: There were no objections 6. OLD BUSINESS a. Request for Vacation of Section Lines: Lots 9 & 10 Etolin S/D No. 3 Tract B, CIIAP S/D No. 2 These are vacations of section lines on city-owned properties that are to be leased or sold. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved, seconded by Commissioner Carignan to recommend approval of the vacations of the referenced section lines. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. b. lease Application: Tract B, Gusty S1D No. 2 - Jess & Catherine Chairman Lewis introduced this item stating that it returns at the request of the Commission for a site and landscaping plan. Mr. Wise, representing the Wades, stated that his only comment is that the lease application is modified somewhat at the request of the Council and Jeff has recommended approval. The Commission noted that the copies of the site plan were not readable in that colors and pencil markings d4 not copy. The original plan submitted was reviewed. Mr. Wise stated that landscaping would be mainly low shrubs and grass. Commissioner Smalley asked if the landscaping would be on the same schedule as the 2 year time frame, Mr. Wise stated that there is no time frame. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved for the approval of the lease application for Tract B, Gusty S/D No. 2, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. Commissioner Smalley brought to the attention of the Commission that it was the intention of the Commission to have the term of the lease run 20 years, the one before the Commission still shows 99 years. PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 4 MOTION AMENDMENT: Commissioner Smalley moved to recommend again that the desired length of lease to run 20 years, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. Commissioner Smalley also noted that there was comment on the time frame for construction. Ail leases have a time frame and "in this case if there is na attachement as to time frame, what's to stop them from going in and doing this in the 19th year. Since the City and certainly the Commission are trying to da something about landscaping on leases, then this body has a responsibility to set an appropriate time frame." MOTION AMENDMENT: Commissioner Smalley moved to amend the main motion to incorporate a landscaping plan to coincide with the construction phase which would be 2 years, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. VOTE: MAIN motion and BOTH AMENDMENTS passed unanimously. 7. NEW BUSYNESS a. Resolution PZ84-39: Establishing Standards for Zero Lat Line Construction. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved to adopt PZ84-39, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. Chairman Lewis opened the meeting to public comment. Mr. Passe reitterated his earlier comments. Chairman Lewis asked what Mr. Passe felt a minimum standard should be, Mr. Passe felt the current standard was fine. Commissioner Zubeck asked if a survey had been done to determine a need for this type of development. "The Commission has approved about 80 of these units and as yet they are unproven, i.e. no demand has been shown, nor has there been evidence that the Farmers Nome Administration has approved the concept. While you say this type of development is fine in Anchorage, we must note that Anchorage has a space problem, Kenai does not. There is still alot of undeveloped land so why try to squeeze". Mr. Passe stated that FHA has money available in 2 programs, both for very low income families. Commissioner Zubeck asked if money from FHA is available, no direct answer. Commissioner Zubeck questioned Mr. Passe further regarding the financing available, does it mean that builders are unable to build homes in the middle range because banks won't release any money for them until this other need for law units is met, Mr. Passe answered, "we have the low-low income bracket too, now before we can get any homes in the low income bracket which is a maximum of $80,000 they have the low-low income bracket which is $60,000; PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 5 Commissioner Zubeck asked if that meant these units under consider- ation, answer yes, the zero lot line duplex is aimed at the $60,000 bracket. Mr. Passe stated that Soldotna will not have any FHA names built this year, Commissioner Zubeck agreed, stating that Soldotna does not have the land available nor the sewer & water that Kenai does, nor will they for several years to come. "Dv you think there is a need here for 100 low-low income dwellings in Kenai". Mr. Passe stated, "I don't know". Commissioner Zubeck stated that we've seen close to 80 already and reitterated that he would like to see a survey to see if the demand is really out there before commiting the City to more of these, and further, is the City not attracting this type of income in providing this type of housing. Commissioner Zubeck further stated that there was enough public comment including that from farm home owners that do not want to see these small lot splits. Commissioner Carignan felt the Commission was missing the overall point, the intent of the townhouse ordinance. In Jeff's memo it speaks of minimum of 3 structures together. The concept here is zero lot line buildings and the Commissions has not addressed that issue perse. It should also be passed that a minimum of three units be considered townhouse and if there is a need for zero lot line type of construc- tion for the City, then that should be addressed separately. There should be an ordinance created just for them. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved, seconded by Commissioner Smalley, to recommend that the townhouse development be utilized for three or more units. MOTION WITHDRAWN MOTION AMENDMENT: Commissioner Bryson moved that the existing townhouse ordinance be interpreted to apply to three or more attached units involving at lease one interior unit, seconded by Commissioner Smalley. On bottom of resolution this would change the word "two" to "three" attached units. Commissioner Osborne asked if this would change the minimum lot area, Commissioner Bryson said it would become not applicable,. on PZ84-39 the reference to both minimum lot area and width should be eliminated. NOTE: Commissioner Bryson asked that, with permission of second, the reference to elimination of minimum lot width and size be removed from the resolution. Granted. ~ PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 6 VOTE AMENDMENT: Motion passed unanimously. Councilman Wise called a halt to the vote, stating that the Commission must have a public hearing since a major change has been made to the resolution. Commissioner Smalley stated that it was not a public hearing on the agenda, Councilman Wise stated that any time you have a resolution proposed you have a public hearing. Chairman Lewis opened discussion to public input. Mark Passe stated that Walker Lane is a prime example of what can be done on a 60' lot...six 4 plexes in the last 3 years and you won't let us build duplexes on the same footage. Commissioner Bryson stated that this does not pertain to the discussion at hand. Cliff Baker asked, "now that you've made this amendment to the resolution, what happens to the zero lot line issue, the same problem exists." Clint Hall asked questions regarding condos, this item covered under the PURD ordinance. Ed Lowry asked if this was still a townhouse ordinance? Answer yes. If you have a 45' lot in the center of a triplex building, what's the effective width of using that as a building if there's a two story building there, if it was 20' wide would it have to be 1800 sq. ft. minimum and if it goes less than that naturally it would be 900 ft. But it seems like maybe what your doing here is rather than diminish- ing the density problem or what seems to be a density problem that your going to farce people to build long narrow buildings. It would effectively be a wall which would appear more dense. Councilman Wise stated that the original intent was 3 or more units, however, the builders ~ developers in this area do not feel comfort- able with 3 or more units and until the market is established the acceptability this type of structure is established, they have chosen to go side by side units. This City already has 40°0 of its housing units multi-family, apartment units. I personally feel that that percentage is top heavy. I would much prefer to see it 70140°0. I feel the proposed action here while within your purview, simply may be ending up to be extremely discriminatory. Commissioner Carignan referred back to the original intent which is not for the zero lat line concept in this manner, and I suggest this be tabled until we get a report from Jeff regarding what effect this passage of this resolution will have. PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 7 Tony Doyle stated that with townhouses you can build 3 to 6 right now under the ordinance, they are going to get built in the years ahead and I see the zero lot line duplex and separating that as a chance for transition. I think using the 45' width is an excellent compromise at this time. I personally would like to see a zero lot line duplex on 14,400 sq. ft. I build houses too and I'm willing to work with the City and the realtors that come up with the land to do it and I think the land is there. But for right now, I think the 45' minimum width is a good compramise. For me, I know Mark and Jess speak differently, but for me I can deal with that. Commissioner Bryson stated that "people have been commenting on what we've been doing to the price of building and I too would like to dwell on that for a moment. This townhouse ordinance that has been interpreted in the last few weeks has allowed developers to build anywhere from an additional 50~ to 100°0 of structures on the same area. Presumably if a person is putting 12 living units on a 2.5 acre tract, these are costing in the range of $5,000 to 7,000 per lot. Now if that goes up 2 or down 2 it doesn;t drastically effect the unit price of land or that house. In the last month, they're being allowed to develop the density approximately 500 over what they were 2 months ~ ago. All of a sudden we're causing the price of house purchases to go up because we're not conforming to a 24' wide lot or 30 yr whatever it is and I just don't see it that way". Commissioner Carignan stated that the intent of this ordinance is that it provides that low cost housing for folks. This ordinance ameliorates this situation as opposed to zero lot line building. Commissioner Bryson stated that normally, the townhouse units I'm familiar with that are being developed are in a situation where property is acquired at an extremely high value, you know you can talk and talk and talk, but the areas in Kenai away from paved subdivisions and view property is not at that position yet. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved to table this issue and have further discussion at a work session, seconded by Commissioner Bryson. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bryson stated, "I just want Jeff to comment on it. The problem I see with limiting the other to 3 units is that we have no development standards then for 2 units." Commissioner Bryson stated that the only changes were the minimum lot width, i.e., the 45' for 2 unit townhouses was deleted from what Jeff reported; I added a section recommending lot width or Z unit common wall construction They both still have to go through conditional use. ~~ PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 8 MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to delete the statements referring to minimum lot width from the resolution Commissioner Carignan, stated that it would seem that if zero iot lines were to be addressed it would have to be addressed under a separate ordinance. Commissioner Bryson, "we still haven`t changed it. The change was tabled." Commissioner Smalley stated,"I think what we're pointing at is that Jeff's intent in this was for 2 separate issues but it all came out as one and we're trying to separate out." Commissioner Carignan stated that, "all we need to do is direct the secretary to have Jeff prepare some comments on the action that we've taken and also on the second part of the concern that the 2 unit townhouse and minimum lot size." Cliff Baker stated that "unilaterally you ga across the zero lot line duplex has to meet 75o what the standard is for single units and I think its the wrong approach to take here. You have alat of cases where the lots have met the minimum standards by being a 75' lot and still have the long lot where if you split it you would still have minimum square footage and not the width. I think I agree with Phil in that a recommendation of G5' is good in single instances where you have a lot that meets the minimum square footage your going to end up with 75' that's 37 i/Z"'. NUTE: Return to items 4-b, CUP in Mo~sen's S/D Chairman Lewis opened discussion to the Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved to approve PZ84-36, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved to table this item until the next meeting due to the previous action by this Commission Commissioner Zubeck asked who owns the adjoining lots. Mr. Hall owns lot 4. Commissioner Zubeck asked if Mr. Hall planned on coming back in a month and splitting the other lot, answer no. Commissioner Osborne seconded the tabling. VOTE: Motion fails with Chairman Lewis, Commissioners Bryson, Smalley, and Zubeck voting no, Commissioners Carignan, Oleson, and Osborne voting yes. PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 9 VOTE MAIN MOTION: Motion passed with Chairman Lewis, Commissioners Bryson, Smalley, and Zubeck voting yes; Commissioners Carignan, Oleson, and Osborne voting no. c. Preliminary Plat PZ84-37: Replat Lat 5~ Blk 6, Mommsen S/D This plat deals with the conditional use permit just approved under PZ84-36. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to approve PZ84-37 with incorporation of staff comments and correction of negative findings, seconded by Commissioner Smalley. VOTE: Motion passes with Chairman Lewis, Commissioners Bryson, Smalley, and Zubeck voting yes; Commissioners Carignan, Olesan, and Osborne voting no. c. Home Occupation: Lot D1A,Killen Estates Add No 1 - far Temporary Aircraft Sales Office - Sid Ayer Mr. Ayer came forward to explain his request, stating that his home will be a field office to establish a need in the area far additional aircraft services. The Cflmmission questioned Mr. Ayer concerning his proposed use of radio equipment that may cause interference with neighborhood transmission reception. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved to approve the request for home occupation permit as referenced, seconded by Commissioner Smalley. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. d. Preliminary Plat PZ84-35: Replat Lots 7&8, Blk 2, FBO S/0 This subdivision is intended for the proposed flight service station and creates one large lot from two smaller lots. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to approve PZ84-35, seconded by Commissioner Carignan. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 10 8. PLANNING None 9. REPORTS a. City Council Agenda provided. b. Borough Planning Commissioner Bryson reported an the hearings for Tesoro. c. City Administration Report None 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD Mr. Ed Lowry came forward and presented a plot plan for the Kenai Spur Mail. Mr. Lowry stated that he appeared at the City Council meeting ~ weeks prior and in trying to address concerns on the landscaping on the mall site were requested by Council to present a detailed land- scaping plan and some type of time for construction and Jeff sent a letter to Tommy Partee and myself on that I think you have that on the agenda a bit further dawn, i take exception of Jeff's interpretation of what happened at Council and I would like to present the plan to get approval. Chairman Lewis asked if his intent was to present the landscaping plan to the Commission, answer yes. Chairman Lewis stated that it can be presented, however it should go through normal handling through city administration. Commissioner Bryson stated that he would like to see it. Chairman Lewis agreed. Mr. Lowry appologized for having only one copy, he just found out last week that they should be at this meeting and didn`t have time. Al the trees will either be what exists on the site or what will be taken from the back portion of the lot and transplanted. Also will have some shrubs on the islands of the parking lot. Commissioner Bryson asked if Mr. Lowry had a site plan of the mall presented last meeting, answer no. Commissioner Oleson asked what trees are there now, Mr. Lowry indicated those marked on the plot plan. It was determined that all spruce trees are those existing, the new trees planned are the birch. Chairman Lewis stated that there are problems with transplanting trees, Mr. Lowry stated that Mr. Chet Wilhelm has PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 11 had success in transplanting trees. Commissioner Bryson asked if this abuts the property line at the rear, Mr. Lowry indicated that it does, showing the line which follows the street. Commissioner Smalley asked what Mr. Lowry's time frame is, he stated that he expects begin construction this year Council recommended to Howard Hackney that we have been denied a certificate of occupancy until such time as landscaping either been accomplished or if for some reason its too late in the year, that there is funds escrowed in an account to make sure it gets done. Commissioner Smalley asked if that has been an attachment to the lease. Mr. Lowry stated that nothing has happened at this point. Commissioner Smalley and Chairman Lewis stated had a chance for review and it has not gone th Mr. Lowry stated that Council's instruction to to be at the next council meeting, we were not at Planning meeting at all until we got Jeff's little over a week ago and in fact we received day for submitting material for review. that the staff has not rough normal channels. us were that this was aware that it was to be letter which was just a the letter on the last Commissioner Smalley asked if in fact there is a violation of the ZO' buffet natural vegetation. Mr. Lowry stated that he doesn't know what the 20' buffer is. Chairman Lewis explained that they were the trees along the Spur frontage. Mr. Lawry stated that the only buffer to his knowledge is the park strip along Walker. Commissioner Carignan explained that the intent was to leave a row of trees there to serve as a buffer. Commissioner Carignan stated, "I might suggest that we let Jeff have this to review the landscaping plan and recommend that it be forwarded to him for staff comment before being sent to Council". Chairman Lewis asked that in the minutes in be stated that the Commission reviewed the landscaping plan and recommend forwarding to administration and Council. Commissioner Carignan stated that he would like to see more trees along the Spur buffer. Commissioner Smalley agreed saying "I can see where a problem might come with a visibility obstruction to the facility, but its not a facility where you want to read slot of signs, its a known mall and they are going to drive into it. "You're not going to hide it by putting a few more trees in there. Mr. Lowry stated that the maximum distance between trees at this point is 105' and will restrict it much more than by putting one in there every 50'. Commissioner Smalley asked the square footage of your mall, answer 160,000. Commissioner Smalley stated, "I think you could put a whole row of redwoods up there and they'd still know it was there." Mr. Lowery stated that its a question is do we want to try and hide PLANNING COMMISSION May 9, 1984 Page 12 VOTE: it. Commissioner Smalley, no its a question of landscaping, beauti- fication. Mr. Lowry, "what we're talking about is what do we want to look at, trees or the mall." Unanimously....trees. Commissioner Carignan, "I'm having a hard time, I don't know what we're talking about, a patch of trees here or a tree each patch. Mr. Lowry answered, a tree each patch. It was determined that there are 26 trees noted on the plan most of which are already there except for 1, that's a birch. Commissioner Carignan, "Jeff may take exception with that, but I feel more trees are in line". Commissioner Bryson stated that "I don't feel that a reasonably sized cluster of trees visually affects what a person sees when what you're looking at is 150' away. Presumably people are going by there at 20 -30 mph. Its the tree thats moving by its not the building. You see the whole building and I feel that if a car was stopped in front, then yes, the building would be obscured." Commission agreed. Motion passed unanimously. 11. INFORMATION ITEMS a. Letter of Complaint Concerning Cone Pit Commissioner Smalley stated that since he lives in the area the issue was brought to his attention and also that he did in fact witness that this activity was taking place. The Commission recommended that they "request administration to respond to the letter and report back to the Commission". 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS Nane 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next regular meeting is May 23, 1984 Janet Loper Secretary PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ~ ~~ ~(~~' j , c C a 11 , J" X~ ~, a ,~. ~ ~ /~~ ~ ~~ v - ~ V ~ U- "h ~ •~ w v Chairman •Lee Lewis ^r of "Phil Bryson ~~ ~, ~ \ ~ Richard Carrignon \ Bob Oleson \ \ '` \I ~ ~/ ~~ Ozzie Osborne ~, ~ ~ ~ '`~ ~ \ ~ III ~, /~ Hal Smalley \ \ ~ ~ ~~ _ `f ~ (~ Bill Zubek \ "~ \ ~1, TO DO ~ V r C ~~~ ~