HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-09-12 P&Z MinutesKENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
l September 12, 1984
Kenai City HaII
Lee Lewis, Chairman
6:00 P.M. Joint Mork Session with Council: Capital ImprovementslCouncil
and Beautification Canmittee: Trees
AGENDA
I, ROLL CALL
2. AGENDA APPROVAL
3. `"'PERSONS PRESENT 5CHEDULED TO BE HEARD
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Rezone: Portion of CIIAP S/D from Light Industrial to General
Commercial
b. Rezone: Tract F-1, Sprueewood Glen S/D No. 2 from Urban Res. to
~ General Commercial
c. Rezone: Lots 4&5, Block I4, Ahlstrom 51D from Suburban Res. to
General Commercial
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of: August 22, 1984
6. OLD BUSINESS
a. Competititive Lease Applications: Lot 4, Block 1, Gusty 5/D No. 1
Ronald Yamamoto and Patrick & Mary Doyle
b. Kenai Plaza
-Revised Site Plan
-Lease Amendment
(no material available at packet time)
c. Conditional Use and Variance Permits - Time Limitation
d. Preliminary Plat PZ84-74A: Baron Park 5!D
7. NEW BUSINESS
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
September I2, I984
f Page 2
8. PLANNING
a. Resolution PZ84-8Z: Requesting Rssistance for Updating Kenai
Comprehensive Plan
b. Discussion: Community Center Concept
material available at the meeting}
c. Federal Flood Insurance Program
9. REPORTS
a. City Council
b. Borough Planning
c. City Administration
10 PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD
II. INFORMATION ITEMS
Council Agenda
Commission Term Status
~ 12. COMMISSION QUESTIONS & COMMENTS
I3. ADJOURNMENT
~ -6
KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
September 12, 1984
Kenai City Hall
Lee Lewis, Chairman
I. ROLL CALL
Present: Lewis, Bryson, Carignan, Oleson, Osborne
Absent: Smalley & Zubeck
Z. AGENDA APPROVAL
k~'
No material had been submitted prior to the meeting for item 6-b and
Mr. Lowry not in attendance, therefore item deleted.
Agenda approved with the deletion
3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD
None
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Rezone: Portion of CIIAP S/D from IL to CG
Jeff Labahn introduced the resolution stating that this is a logical
step since most of the businesses in the intended zone are commercial
in nature.
Chairman Lewis opened the hearing to the public.
Mr. Doug Keating of Beluga Development came forward, explaining that
his firm has several tenants along Willow Street and he is represent-
ing that group. Mr. Keating stated that after analyzing the zoning
code specifically the sections dealing with non-conforming uses and
the designated uses are not compatible with the businesses there.
Chairman Lewis asked what type of businesses he was referring to, Mr.
Keating stated there was a sheet metal shop, an automotive paint shop,
an automotive repair shop, and the only conforming use would be sign
shop. The others are designated for IL. Jeff Labahn stated that he
felt there was no problem as "there are several specific uses not
outlined in the code. The Planning Commission has the ability to
determine a specific use." Should the tenants change their uses, then
there may be a problem. Councilman Wise asked how long the businesses
had been in place, Mr. Keating stated that to his knowledge, since
some type prior to 1968. Councilman Wise stated that he would object
to the rezoning until further study is done on specific uses. Jeff
PLANNING COMMI5SION
September 12, 1984
Page 2
Labahn stated that, in the staff comments it is noted that nothing in
that district would be a non-conforming use, that the question appears
to be one of definition.
MOTION:
Commissioner Bryson moved to leave this issue as a public hearing
for the next meeting, seconded by Commissioner Osborne.
UOTE:
Motion passed unanimously.
b. Rezone: Tract F-1, Sprucewood Glen S/D No. 2 from RU to CG
Jeff Labahn stated that in at the last meeting, it was the consensus
of the Commission that an updated site plan be returned for review.
In absence of the site plan discussed Mr. Labahn recommended
postponing a decision on the rezoning. Something more accurate should
be before the Commission before moving ahead.
Mr. Lowry in attendance at this point and came forward to apologize
for not having the site plan available but does not feel that the site
plan is relevant to a rezoning anyway. Councilman Wise asked if Mr.
Lowry intends to use Tern as a major traffic collector, Mr. Lowry
answered yes, that there will be approximately 100 parking spaces for
the back 2 buildings and 120 spaces for employee parking. Councilman
Wise stated that this is why he felt a site plan was very important as
the impact on the 4 plexes and the residents of Walker Lane and
Central Heights will be greater.
Chairman Lewis opened the hearing to the public. There were no
persons speaking to the issue.
MOTION:
3ryson moved to postpone the hearing to the next meeting,
seconded by Commissioner Carignan.
VOTE:
Motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Bryson stated that he is very concerned about the traffic
flow and parking that was discussed at the last meeting.
c, Rezone: Lots 4&5, Block 14, Ahlstrom S/D from RS to CG
Mr. Jorgen Wuerth, owner of the property and petitioner came forward
to explain that he has been the owner of an automobile dealership in
Anchorage since 1967 and that he has owned this property in Kenai with
an eye to expanding his business here, and feels that with the steady
growth Kenai has shown,. the time is right to expand to the area. With
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 19$4
Page 3
the setback restrictions in the area, it is essential to have the
extra lots to accommodate his business. Since the financing process
will take about a year, rezoning is the essential first step.
Commissioner Bryson questioned the section line which runs parallel to
the lots, Councilman Wise felt that had been vacated at the time this
portion of Ahlstrom was platted.
Chairman Lewis opened the hearing to the public.
Ed Call, 1202 Lilac Street came forward to protest the fact that he
was not notified of the intended rezoning stating that when Superior
Building was built, he had been notified. Jeff Labahn explained that
the City limitations are 300'. Mr. Call protested the rezoning on the
basis that the area has attracted a business with large trucks and
vans which carry dangerous materials. "These people can use the lots
far vehicle storage, that's ok." Rezoning this property just makes 1
more step easier from car lots to trucks.
Mr. Calvin Quandt came forward to protest the rezoning on the basis
that he and his father had developed the other. end of Illiamna street
and at the time were made to put in the street. When the transmission
shop went in, there is a door facing the street, but they were not
made to upgrade it and now with the car lot, they won't either. As
for water & sewer, he has tried for years to get water & sewer and
these people come and get it right away. It cost the Quandts $60,000
to run water & sewer lines to their 6 plexes. "When we develop the
rest of the lots for 6 plexes we don't want them to have to look at
car lots". Section 36 development is just the other side of the lets
and will be using a 50' ROW also.
There being no further comments from the public, Chairman Lewis
brought comments back to the Commission.
Mr. Rick Vann of Sundance Construction stated that he was the
contractor for the transmission shop adjacent to the proposed dealer-
ship and agrees with the rezoning having faced the same problem with
the transmission shop. With the 150' setback restriction, a business
needs alI the room possible, even with a variance. Both the trans-
mission shop and the dealership will be set further back than those
structures directly across the highway.
MOTION:
Commissioner Osborne moved to postpone the rezoning in lieu of a site
plan.
It was explained that site plans are not required for private
property. The site plan required for the Sprucewood rezoning was done
~ PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 1984
Page 4
because it is leased property, because of the greater impact on the
community adjacent in terms of major traffic flow.
MOTION WITHDRAWN
MOTION:
Commissioner Carignan moved approval of PZ84-81, seconded by
Commissioner Bryson.
VOTE:
5.
6.
Commissioner Carignan asked Jeff Labahn, that given the comments of
the gentlemen, would he still recommend the rezoning, Jeff Labahn
answered that there are 2 issues the Commission needs to look at, 1)
all 5 lots are under 1 ownership, and 2) because of the 150' setback,
lots 1,2,&3 can't be developed without a variance or a rezone, and
feels that the rezoning is the cleaner approach.
Commissioner Carignan asked how many property owners were notified,
answer approximately 23. Jeff Labahn suggested that at a later date,
the owners consider replatting the lot eliminating the interior lot
lines.
Motion passed unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES of August 22, 1984
Commissioner Carignan noted on page 3, reference to a fence with no
response from Mr. Labahn, it should read, "yes, on the final site
plan"
Minutes approved with the change.
OLD BUSINESS
a. Competitive Lease Applications: Lot 4, Block 1, Gusty 5/D No. 1 -
Yamamoto/Doyle
Jeff Labahn explained that 2 lease applications have been received for
the same described property and the issue had been referred to the
Planning Commission to be reviewed as competing lease applications,
i.e. the Commission should review each application individually, and
base your recommendation to the Council on 21.10.060.
Chairman Lewis asked if the Doyle applicant wished to go first or the
Yamamoto. Mr. Phil Nash came forward, attorney for Mr. Doyle.
Mr. Nash stated that it should be "a consideration, not of the merits
of the application itself, but in consideration of the merits of the
findings of which this body must make and request permission to speak
to the application itself." There are alledged to be 2 competing
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 1984
Page 5
applications, this body must make a determination first as to which
application has priority, and second, if subsequent application would
result in the use of lands for a higher and better purpose with a
greater benefit to the City of Kenai and the citizens. Mr. Nash
stated that there are actually 3 applications and further that the
Planning Commission never approved any previous application from Mr.
Yamamoto notwithstanding the minutes from the City Council meeting
which indicated that there had been approval. Mr. Nash went into a
history of the 3 applications stating that the first application was ~
submitted under Ronald and Katherine Collette Yamamoto dba Tailwind
Inc., and the application submitted more recently being Ronald
Yamamoto dba Little Ski-Mo, and proceeded to go into the legalities of
these two applications. Mr. Nash submitted certified copies of the
divorce decree of the Yamamotos for the record. Mr. Nash went over the
minutes of the Planning Commission meetings of November and December
which did not approve the application but did request release and
platting as the property was not classified, unzoned, and unplatted.
"As a matter of law, the application of 1978 was never formally
accepted until the land itself was surveyed apparently in 1983." Mr.
Nash referred to the memorandum decision of the divorce decree
pertaining to unpaid sales taxes and a repayment schedule, plus a
withholding tax repayment.
Chairman Lewis asked the representative of Mr. Doyle, Marko Zurek
(sic) if he was ready with a presentation, Mr. Zurak answered that
they wished the previous application to stand.
Commissioner Bryson asked Mr. Zurek if it would be possible to utilize
a portion of the lot to complete the project, Mr. Zurek answered that
if the venture was successful then the plan is to put in additional
gas pumps and car wash stalls which would utilize the entire lot.
Commissioner Bryson asked Mr. Labahn to go over some of the legal
points, Mr. Labahn referred the Commission to the material enclosed
and to the point where the Planning Commission did approve the concept
lease application on 3/8/78, however, was never approved by the City
Council. Essentially, the material shows the submittal of the concept
lease application under the ordinance in effect in 1978, the approval
of the application by the Planning Commission and then subsequent
actions to ready the property for availability.
Chairman Lewis called Mr. Yamamoto.
Mr. Yamamoto, resident of Kenai, stated that he had been sent by the
City Council to present his concept plan and to get a recommendation
from this body. Mr. Yamamoto stated that he "can't defend himself for
Mr. Nosh's presentation, however, there are 2 sides to every story."
Mr. Clark, attorney for Mr. Yamamoto had written a summary letter and
it has been put before the Commission. The site plan was presented to
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 1984
Page 6
the Commission with a color rendering done by Carmen Gintoli,
architect. The plans are for either office space, and import/export
or an ethnic restaurant, but the building plans will remain the same.
Commissioner Bryson asked if it would be possible to develop the
project with a portion of the lot instead of the entire lot, Mr.
Yamamoto stated that it would be possible if there would be a way to
work it out with Mr. Doyle. Mr. Yamamoto stated that if he could turn
the building around, Mr. Doyle could use the back part towards the
ballpark. He had discussed this with Mr. Doyle, but they made no
decision pending the outcome of this meeting. Commissioner Bryson
asked if these talks had taken place recently, answered no, that the
talks had taken place up until recent months.
Commissioner Bryson stated, "I think we've come to a position where I
don't know how a person could quantify their proposals, both have
existing businesses and they both have ties to adjacent land, who's to
say someone has a higher value both benefit the public in general
provided they do it in satisfactorily". Mr. Yamamoto stated that, for
the record, he does have a beer and wine license which could not be
obtained if sales taxes are in arrears. Commissioner Bryson asked if
Mr. Yamamoto was current with his lease, the answer was yes, that the
lease had come up for review and that the lease rate was increased
"phenomenally", however the payments are being made at the old to keep
current. .Jeff Labahn stated that there are 5 leases that are being
negotiated in the same manner.
Commission recessed for 8 minutes.
MOTION:
Commissioner Garignan moved that Mr. Yamamoto and Mr. Doyle meet with
the City to explore the possibility of replotting these 3 lots into 2
lots. Should this not be possible at that time, this Commission will
take up the matter and make a recommendation, seconded by Commissioner
Bryson.
VOTE:
Motion passed unanimously.
b. Conditional Use and Variance Permits - Time Limitation
Jeff Labahn explained that a problem is created when there is no time
limit for development after a permit is issued. At the present these
permits are perpetuating themselves. It is agreed that townhouses and
planned unit developments would be excluded. Commissioner Garignan
asked if what this means is that if a permit for townhouses were
approved, the developer could sit on it forever, answer yes. "In
1 situations like that you might have a phase development, esp. under
PUD's with a multi year phase development, therefore the Commission
PLRNNING COMMISSION
September l2, 19$4
Page 7
would want to handle these on a case by case basis with some type of
plan incorporated into the permit.
MOTION:
Commissioner Carignan moved to set a public hearing for amendment to
the zoning code as stated, seconded by Commissioner Oleson.
VOTE:
Motion passed unanimously.
c. Preliminary Plat PZ84-74A: Baron Park S/D
This is the revision of the plat that appeared at the last meeting.
Lot 2 was approved for lease to the Chrysler dealership and the
subdivision is in the process of being rezoned to CG. Commissioner
Carignan asked if some arrangement could be made to leave a greenstrip
somewhere that could not be touched, i.e., some type of screening
easement. Jeff Labahn, at the next meeting, to come up with some type
of plan for future plats. With all the businesses trying to get space
along the highway it would be in the interest of the Commission to
plan ahead and show developers that we are interested. Jeff Labahn
stated that it could be done one of 2 ways, by placing a note on the
plat or by being specific when the application comes before the
Commission. Jeff Labahn stated that a good area would be the back lot
line along the Marathon Road, Commissioner Bryson stated that at one
time, the City did maintain some leverage for a predictable period of
time, but with so much of the property being sold, it becomes the
prerogative of the property owner to do as he deems fit. With a note
on the plat, we would at least have something to fall back on.
Commissioner Carignan stated that the Commission could take some
sections as we`re going down the road and say that these are not going
to be developed. Commissioner Bryson stated that even if its included
in the parcel and its an undevelopable area, presumably it lowers the
value of the property an equivalent amount so the person buying the
property is not penalized because they are buying an area with a
greenstrip already dedicated. A good example is an area on both sides
of Ryan's Creek, it was dedicated as a tract. Commissioner Carignan
stated that what he would hate to see happen is the area from Tesoro
to where the ballfields are, that area is just about whiped out. If
we just had some pieces in there where some vegetation was preserved
it would break it up without disturbing commercial enterprises. The
only way to ensure it would be to put it on the plat. Commissioner
Bryson stated that it was done twice as a precedence, once along
Walker lane and once along the Dairy Queen. The only reason Ryan's
Creek survived at all is because "you get your boots wet if you try to
develop it". Jeff Labahn stated that it was a valid paint and he
would make some suggestions on future plats and possibly some
easements.
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 1984
Page 8
MOTION:
Commissioner Bryson moved to approve PZ84-76A, seconded by
Commissioner Carignan.
VOTE:
Motion passed unanimously.
7. NEW BUSYNESS
None
8. PLANNING
a. PZ84-80: Requesting Assistance in U~dating Comerehensive Plan
Jeff Labahn stated that the Borough has money available for this
purpose and since the plan is now close to 4 years old, a move to
begin the updating process is logical.
MOTION:
Commissioner Carignan moved to approve PZ84-80, seconded by
Commissioner Oleson,
VOTE:
There were no objections
b. Discussion: Community Center Concept
A rendering was submitted which depicts a potential way to develop
the property where the FAA antenna complex is located now. It was
presented to the Council. It now comes to the Commission for
comments. The other facilities that are being proposed are ideas, the
important part of that plan is to demonstrate how a community center
could be developed on that block of city property and still have
access into and around if the antenna complex was to remain for
several years. The FAA has been waiting for federal money to relocate
the facility.
Chairman Lewis stated that there really isn't anything the Commission
could do on the concept right now, but could preserve the land for
this concept. Jeff Labahn agreed. Commissioner Carignan asked what
part the City would take, primarily preserving the land, developing a
general overall plan and then the private sector would come in to
develop around the guidelines, answer yes. The City would move to
platting out that piece of property and the road system, then take the
remaining property, plat that appropriately with or without the
antenna facility and make them available. The idea would be for going
out the proposal, the City would say here is a piece of property the
City has and would consider leasing it for purposes a,b, or c and
submit your proposal and would be more restrictiue than just what the
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 1984
Page 9
zoning code would allow. Commissioner Carignan stated his feelings
that he did not have enough information about the concept. Councilman
Wise stated that it was his feeling that the Commission should request
a briefing paper.
MOTION:
Commissioner Osborne moved, seconded by Commissioner Carignan to have
administration provide more information at the next meeting.
VOTE:
Motion passed unanimously.
c. Federal Flood Insurance Program
The Borough is not participating in the national program. No
ordinance or regulation exists to regulate development in floodplain
areas. The Commission further discussed the issue.
MOTION:
Commissioner Bryson moved, seconded by Commissioner Carignan to
pass along a recommendation of non-objection with the stipulation
there there be substantial media coverage, seconded by Commissioner
Carignan
VOTE:
Motion passed unanimously.
9. REPORTS
a. City Council
No questions or comments
b. Borough Planning
One plat concerning the Gity, Baron Park, was postponed due to
modifications. The plat load has dropped from 35-40 to 15.
Question came up regarding Corps permits, has the City been receiving
applications, Jeff Labahn stated that he has, Commissioner Bryson
asked if the City were receiving 4 or 5 per week, answer no.
Apparently there have been reports that several municipalities were
not getting them and the Borough is going to ask that these be
forwarded to the City and for wider distribution. If for nothing
else, the notices make the public aware that something is going on.
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 1984
Page 10
c. City Administration
The only information is that of the terms of office for Commissioners
which was provided.
10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD
Edwin Lowry asked to be heard regarding a change to his site plan
which deals with access points. Mr. Lowry stated that a potential
buyer for the small corner lot requests an easement to his lot. Mr.
Lowry stated that he wishes "to show this to you all and get your
feelings on this". The problem is that it is quite a distance from
the other access and is primarily used for something that doesn't
relate to the mall and because of that they need their own traffic
area so it doesn't conflict with the mall. An example is MacDonald's.
The distance is 270' from the intersection of Walker Lane and 250'
from the first entrance to the mall. Councilman Wise asked if the
state had any objections, Mr. Lowry answered no. The state standard
is 300' separation. The concept would be almost identical to Arby's
except that it would be better suited as an entrance than an exit,
either way, Walker Lane is greatly impacted negatively. Commissioner
Bryson noted that, given the expansion of traffic, Walker Lane will be
a traffic signal and this will became a greater problem. Jeff Labahn
noted that the request for the access places it less than 100' offset
from the Spur Highway. It would almost have to be barricaded off to
contain the traffic flow from the mall. Commissioner Carignan stated
that Jeff Labahn should review this and provide some feedback, and per
the reviewing, return this and the site plan to the next meeting. The
Commission concurred.
Mr. Ed Call requested information regarding the ballfield and the
waste site, however, most of the conversation was inaudible as Mr,
Call did not approach the speakers rostrum.
11. INFORMATION ITEMS
There were no questions or comments
12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
None
13. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next
regular meeting will be Wednesday, September 26, 1984.
Janet Loper
Secretary
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Ro~1
Call
,~ , "
~~~~~ ~~
J
~~
V-~~~
.~
n ~ ~~ ~~~. ~. ~~1
Chairman
Lee Lewis
~
~
~
~
,,I _
-Phil Bryson
~~~~ Richard
Carrignon ~ ~
~ Bob Oleson
~ ~
,
~
y ~
Ozzie Osborne ~ ~
Hal Smalley
Bi11 Zubek _
TO DO
~~'f~~~~ ~~-~y
.- _ _ _ ,
~~ TAD .S~/ S~ c~~-
y A
n
l~7 i~f ,~