Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-09-11 P&Z MinutesKENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION September 11, 1985 - 7:00 p.m. Kenai City Hall Lee Lewis, Chairman 6: DO PM MORKSESSIL7N with Dick Morehouse of CCC Archs tests Alaska AGENDA I. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Resolution PZ85-69: Conditional Use Permit for Mobile Home Park - Near Valhalla S/D - Boysen b. Resolution PZ85-70: Rezone Inlet Uiew S/D and Adjoining Property from RS & RR to RS-1 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of August 28, 1985 Will be available at meeting time (per Janet Whelan) 6. OLD BUSINESS 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Lease Application: Lot 4, Slk 5, CIIAP S/D - Impound Yard & Storage - Bob Jackson b. Preliminary Plat PZ85-68: Strawberry Hills Estates - Johnisee Replat 8. PLANNING 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 & ZONING COMMISSION September 11, 1985 - 7:00 p.m. Kenai City Hall Lee Lewis, Chairman 1. ROLL CALL Present: Lewis, Bryson, Carignan, Oleson, Osborne, Smalley, Zubeck 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Add: 6-a Lease Review for Lot 1A Baran Park - Aase 6-b Lease Review for Lat 3 Baron Park - Roberts/Swenar 7-c Preliminary Plat PZ85-71: Pelch 5/D 7-d Letter from E.L. Lowry Regarding Gravel Removal Agenda approved with additions 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Resolution PZ85-69: Conditional Use Permit for Mobile Home Park - Near Valhalla 5/D - Boysen Chairman Lewis informed the persons present of the 5 minutes limit and opened the issue to the public for comment. Mr. Randy Caler, 610 Standard Dr came forward, representing 20 persons + from Valhalla Heights S/D. Mr. Caler submitted a petiton for the record opposing the mobile home park. Mr. Caler also submitted a series of photographs depicting "typical" houses in Valhalla and """'typical"water tables. The residents are opposed to the proposed mobile"-home park on the basis of impact on a "quiet residential neighborhood". Mr. Caler voiced concern over mobile homes themselves using himself as an example, having lived in one at one time, by their very nature being transient, temporary homes. Mr. Caler stated he felt it was contradictory to provide an ordinance banning mobile homes, then allowing a mobile home park. Mr. Caler pointed out that water & sewer do not and probably will not run to Valhalla, and the roads are only now being upgraded. Mr. Caler also addressed lower property ~ values should the mobile home park be allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION September 11, 1985 Page Z Mr. Richard Boysen, petitioner, came forward stating an appreciation for the residents over mobile home parks and went on to point out some good reasons for allowing mobile homes in a park, one of the main points being the lower price for the young and retired persons. As state revenues decline, so will the money available for homes.There wr11"'be ~':`7 mobile homes per acre, many homes in Kenai have more density than that. In Valhalla, out of 42 homes, 34 were mobile homes, therefore mobile homes would not be out of character. Mr. Joe Frack (sic) regarding phase development, answer,. the entire half of the mobile hams park will be developed first, than as water & sewer become available, the second half will be developed. Councilman Wise asked if standards for Alaska Nome Financing were going to be met to allow for that type of financing, answer, he had not thought about it, but will consider it strongly. Mr. Don Feltman, representing the Snowshoe Gun Club came forward and explained that the Club has 2O0 acres within 1800' of the proposed mobile home park and the Club is concerned, esp. in light of the ~ discussions between the City and Borough on an incinerator site, that a mobile home park this close will cause problems for the Club. There would also be problems of safety and noise abatement. Mr. Peter Bush Sr., 225 Richfield Dr. came forward to voice strong opposition for a12 the reasons already stated. Mr. Bush presented photographs also depicting the water table in the area. Mr. Bush "stated that he has lived in mobile homes but on a temporary basis, moving into a home as soon as possible. Mr. Tim Wizniewski, resident of Valhalla, wished to go on record as being opposed for the reasons stated above. Mr. Kurt Halvor, (sic) 160 Phillips Way, also opposed to the mobile home park, discussed the need for Corps permits, and that Valhalla residents did not want to be an '"add-on" to the mobile home park, and addressed possible overloading to the drainage system. Chairman Lewis, for the record entered two letters of objection from Mathews and Courtis. Chairman Lewis closed public comments and returned the issue to the Commission. Commissioner Bryson asked Mr. Boysen if he was proposing to plat, -~ answer no. Commissioner Smalley asked if Mr. Boysen had contacted the Corps, answer no, contingent upon Commission approval. Commissioner Bryson asked, hypothetically, in a moderate density develoment whose gravity lines may not be compatible with the City lines, how would you handle that. Bill Brighton asked if Commissioner Bryson were PLANNING COMMISSION September ll, 1985 Page 3 referring to a lift station. Sewage will not gravitate to the end of our sewer system at the present time. The rest of Mr. Brighton's comments could not be heard. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved for the adoption of Resolution PZ85-69, seconded by Commissioner Bryson Commissioner Carignan stated that he could not support the motion based on a presupposition that any closed mobile home parks are in Snldotna and the financial abilities do not seem to be that low, therefore not having substantial justification for a mobile home. Commissioner Bryson asked under what circumstances a mobile home park would be allowed any where within the City, considering firm ground and traffic patterns, the biggest drawback would be the gun .club. VOTE: Motion fails no: Lewis, Carignan, Oleson, Osborne yes: Bryson, Smalley, Zubeck b. Resolution PZ85-70: Rezone Inlet View S1D and Adjoining Property from RS & RR to RS-1 Chairman Lewis opened the hearing to the public. Mr:Tom Thompson, resident of Inlet View and spokesman for the petition stated that of the required 23 signatures necessary, the petition was signed by 30 valid property owners with the remaining persons being absent for an extended period of time indicating very nearly a 100°p interest. "The residents of Inlet View are determined to preserve the integrity of the neighborhood. A potential exists for a safety hazard, i.e. when the surrounding area is developed, the traffic will double or more and you can't double traffic without an impact on existing communities. The neighbors in Inlet View are close, they take care of each other's property, watch out for children, and there is little or no involvement with the police. This does not happen in more dense communities were multi-family units are allowed. Where areas are open to apartment type dwellers, the problems with dumpsters and trash, dogs, vandalism, crowded streets, etc. develop and are like a spreading blight. The residents feel strongly that this is an all or nothing situation, that protect the quiet, close atmosphere of Inlet View, the doer cannot be opened and it must develop as single family only. Councilman Wise pointed out that Mr. Thompson made reference to single family only and RS-1 provides far duplexes. Mr. Thompson agreed, that the goal was to have the most restrictive zone. ~ PIANNING COMMISSION September 11, 19$5 Page 4 Pete Hansen, 41$ Rogers Rd. asked for clarification of the zoning as his intent was to build duplexes on his 2 lots. Commissioner Bryson clarified for Mr. Hanson that the main difference between RS-I and RS-2 was the minimum lot size, RS-1 being 12,500 sq. ft. and RS-2 is 7,200 sq. ft. Mr. Hansen stated support of the rezoning, however, covenants restrict anything other than single family lots with the exception of Mr. Hansen's 2 lots. Mr. Hansen was assured that the rezoning would not affect his ability to construct duplexes on those 2 lots. Commissioner Bryson asked for clarification of the petition by Iot size. Mr. Thompson stated that the intent of the petition was fnr the larger lots or 12,500 sq.ft. Councilman Wise pointed out that regardless of lot size, anything that exists at the time of rezoning is grandfathered at that lot size. The stipulation for lot size pertains to undeveloped property. Commissioner Bryson asked for an evaluation of how many lots currently conform to the 12,500 sq. ft. for R5~1. Irene Fandel of 702 Lawton Dr asked for clarification of the code, i.e. will it affect her house as it now sits, answer no. Mrs. Fandel operates a bed and breakfast, it wail net affect her operation as it "now stands.` Mrs. Fandel is in favor of the rezoning. Walter Winston, 114 Paula St. stated that the request was simple and straightforward. The intent, no matter the lot size, is far single family and no more than duplexes. For example, using Wiidwood Manor, there are 10 4-plexes and everyane knows the condition they are in now. Mr. Winston wishes to go on record as agreeing with Mr. Thompson, i.e. no multi-family dwellings. Bill Osbarn of 423 Rogers Rd, agreed with all comments esp. in regard to the safety and integrity of the subdivision. Mr. Osborne asked that the Commission consider the majority of what the people in the area request and that is for the RS~l. Jerry Hanson, 107 Paula noted Deepwood S/D which has some beautiful lots and hames, however the presence of the 4 and 6-plexes is definitely a drawback. Inlet View is ideal as long as it remains a community of single family dwellings. There are virtually no subdivisions Ieft where it is restricted to single family dwellings and feels that there should be, and the residents are aiming at Inlet View to be one. Mr. Wallingford (no first name given) of Paula St. noted that the _~ multi family units in Deepwood are not fully occupied, and indeed there are several houses sitting empty. With that kind of occupancy rate there should be no reason to deny the petition far rezoning. Mr. PLANNING COMMISSION September 11, 1985 Page 5 Wallingford made reference to a creek area that was donated to the City and intended for park use and asked that the City look into the matter. Chairman Lewis brought discussion back to the Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Carignan moved for the adoption of PZ85-70, seconded by Commissioner Bryson Commissioner Bryson compared the size of lots within Inlet View finding 24 lots that are not in conformance with the RS-1, 8 are conforming. The RS-2 appears to be more appropriate as 12,500 would preclude any further development in the area. The rezoning zncludes the Borough property and asked if the Borough had commented, answer no. Commissioner Smalley felt the restrictions were probably the same and would not be objectionable. Commissioner Bryson stated for point of record, he will be opposing the rezoning based on the lot sizes existing in Inlet View. MOTION AMENDMENT: Commissioner Carignan moved to amend the motion to read RS-2 instead of RS-1, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. Harold Bronner, "I own a bluff lot and I don't want even a duplex on a bluff lot. Other than Mr. Hansen who has special rights, I don't want anything other than an R-1". Commissioner Smalley pointed out that with an R-1 duplexes are permitted, Mr. Bronner understood, however, with an R-2 there is a higher probability to duplexes. The intent of the neighborhood is to make it as restrictive as we can. Peter Hansen asked for clarification of the R-1 and R-2, and questioned the rationale of the lot sizes. Commissioner Bryson stated that this is based mostly an future property, that the lots that are already developed will be allowed to develop within those constraints. Councilman Wise explained that the request for the RS-2 means that the developer of the adjacent undeveloped lands would not be under the larger lot size constraints, (12,500 sq ft) i.e. he could develop an 7200 sq ft and acquire more lots. It does not affect the lots that already exist. "What Commissioner Bryson is suggesting is that you are penalizing a developer". Commissioner Bryson asked for a poll of the persons present if they would accept the RS-2. Of approximately 25 persons in the audience only 1 objected. VOTE AMENDMENT: Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION September 11, 1985 Page 6 VOTE MAIN MOTION: Motion passed unanimously. The amended resolution will be passed on to the City Council 4. APPROVAL OE MINUTES of August 28, 1985 Commissioner Bryson questioned the voting on page 3, stating that it reads that he abstained and he was sure that he did not. The minutes will stand approved until the item is checked. 6. OLD BUSINESS a., Lease Review: Lot ZAP Baron Park S/D - Aase Mr. Aase has done some minor changes on his original lease application submitted and approved by the Commission and the Council earlier. Mrs. Gerstlauer explained that while there are no significant changes, the buildings are positioned differently, plus a letter from the Director of Public Norks concerning the access point onto the Spur Nwy. which is a concern as it creates congestion. Commissioner Bryson Hated that the revised site plan addresses a portion of the property rather than the entire area. Mr. Don Aase came forward to explain that as his plans progressed, the need and financing were available far a larger number of rooms in the motel portion. This moves the lot line 5O'. Commissioner Bryson asked if this site was proposed to be platted along the line at the rear of the motel, answer yes. (a good portion of the comments concerning the site plan were unintelligible at this point) The access point that is being objected to is intended to be shared with the adjoining lot. It was pointed out that there were two access points that could be used in place of the Spur Rd point. The original site plan showed an intended evening use for the cinema, .the new site plan show a 24 hour use with increased traffic for the combined motel/restaurant. There is a liklihood of DOT approval far a cut for three access points that close. It was noted that the site plan had already been approved, however, public works had not seen the plan before approval had been made. Commissioner Bryson voiced concern far the smaller lot now left out of the site plan, and if it is proposed for the cinema, would the parking meet code, answer, no site plan was submitted for that lot, therefore it is unknown. Commissioner Bryson suggested that there are circumstances that shared parking is appropriate in some circumstances and this may be one of the times, however, there is no site plan to substantiate this. ~ MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to approve the revised site plan for Baron Park Center, seconded by Commissioner Smalley PLANNING COMMIS5ION September 11, 1985 Page 7 VOTE: Commissioner Bryson requests administration to evaluate the remaining property and adjacent property for appropriate parking. While this is not in the form of a motion, if the parking was found to be lacking, then it should go on to Council with staff recommendation. Motion passed unanimously. b. Lease Review: Lot 3t Baron Park S/D - Roberts/Swenor Mr. Dan Roberts came forward and passed around his revised site plan. Originally, the site plan called for a single story restaurant, it is now proposed for a two phase building with 2 stories with equal square footage. Phase II was a 12,000 sq.ft. mall which will go to a 2 story motel/bar/restaurant with each floor consisting of 10,600 sq.ft. combined footage of 22,600 sq.ft. Originally, the northwest corner of the lot was proposed for greenbelt, it will now be a summer RU hookup and snow storage in the winter bringing the landscaping to the front of the parking lot along the Spur Hwy. and around the border of the lot. Underground tanks for 2 gas pumps will go near the center front of the lot. There will be 57 parking spaces, security lights will go around the lot. Chairman Lewis asked if there has been staff review, answer no. Administrative Assistant Gerstlauer asked for the revised construction schedule, answer, Phase I was to be completed by 8/10/85. The land has been cleared and partially excavated and request an extension to Phase I to 6/30/86 with completion by 7/31187. Administrative Assistant Gerstlauer questioned the fuel storage which would modify the lease itself. Councilman Wise stated that he was pleased with the RV hookup summer time use and snow storage in the winter calling it "genius", and further that administration should check it far the parking code, and personally, object to the gas pumps. Commissioner Bryson stated that this would be the 6th set of gas pumps within a mile that front on the highway and with the parking being so complicated, staff should work out what is available. Commissioner 'Smalley expressed discomfort at no staff review and also voiced concern with the gas pumps. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to approve the amended cnnstruction dates, seconded by Commissioner Smalley VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION September 11, 1985 Page 8 MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved approval of amended lease application with the restriction of the gas pumps subject to administrative review of the parking and any other concerns, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. MOTION AMENDMENT: Commissioner Bryson moved to reincorporate the gas pumps, seconded by Commissioner Osborne VOTE AMENDMENT: Motion passes yes: Lewis, Bryson, Carignan, Oleson, Osborne, Zubeck no: Smalley VOTE MAIN MOTION: Motion passed unanimously. 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Lease Application: Lot 4, Blk 5, CIIAP S/D - Impound Yard & Storage - Bob Jackson Administrative Assistant Gerstlauer explained that this was formerly the Iease far Snelsan which was approved for 2 years contingent upon the completion of the Airport Master Plan study so that the entire area could be evaluated. It was also approved contingent upon the repair of the site-obscuring fence and that Mr. Jackson does not intend to change the lot or the use, but only upgrade the property per the'-staff comments. Mr. Bob Jackson came forward and explained that he planned on putting `'gravel in the yard to alleviate the problems with mud, to repair the gate and the fence. Commissioner Carignan asked about the quanset hut, answer, it is still questionable but the intent is to repair it and use it for parts storage. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved approval of the lease application, provided that it be in conformance with the previous lease (Snelsan) the major change being the length of time, (2 years) seconded by Commissioner Smalley VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. } PLANNING COMMISSION September 11, 1985 Page 9 b. Preliminary Plat PZ85-68: Strawberry Hills Estates - Johnisee __ Replat A revised plat was presented the day of the Commission meeting and passed out at the meeting. The revised plat and staff comment sheet are altered appropriately. The short off-shoot roads are changed to flag lots and the well location clear zoneis set to create a lesser impact on the adjoining lots in 3-W's S/D. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to approve PZ85-68 as revised, seconded by Commissioner Smalley VOTE: Commissioner Bryson detailed the revisions concerning the lots fronting on the Spur Hwy which were changed to flag lots. This necessitates the notation to the Borough that access be required to be from Wortham Ave. or interior only. Motion passed unanimously. NDTEs Item 7~c taken out of order to accomodate persons waiting in the audience. d. Letter _form E.L. Lowry Pertaining to Gravel Removal The letter made reference to comments by other contractors concerning removal of gravel or overburden From Mr. Lowry's site to another site. Chairman Lewis asked Mr. Brighton for any specific comments that may hve been addressed to the City, answer the City has not heard directly from any contractor. Rumor only has been to the fact that any extraction should be in the farm of a gravel pit permit, Administ- ration does not agree. Further, City residents and Administration has been upset about the berm pile that has been there for over one and a half years, this is a remedy that will occur immediately, and it is a legitimate transaction. The only and real concern is that the City will object and/or file an injunction if any of the berm is to be laid over the water or sewer line that goes through the property. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved for a motion of non-objection to Mr. Lowry's letter, seconded by Commissioner Dleson Commissioner Bryson asked Mr. Brighton if he felt this action may cast a shadow on any permanent sand pit operation or the permitting process, answer no. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION September 11, 1985 Page lO VOTE: Unanimous consent called for and accepted. c. Preliminary Plat PZ85-71: Pelch S/D The original plat was drafted in 1977 and never finalled. There is a dormant gravel pit within the area of the subdivision and a clause has been added regarding removal. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved approval of PZ85-71, seconded by Commissioner Carignan VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 8. PLANNING None 9. REPORTS a; City'Council b. Borough Planning c. City Administration lO. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE iiEARD None 11. INFORMATION ITEMS None 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS None l3. ApJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 PM Janet Loper Secretary Ro 11 Call PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ~~ ~ ,~D ~l ~ ~ ~~'~ ~, ~ ~ ~~i /~~ ~~J~j// Chairman 'Lee Lewis N ~ 1 ~ ~ '~ I /~' -Phil Bryson y T ~ ti~ `} Richard ` ~ Carrignen Bob Oleson ` ~ ~/ ~ ` ` \` `~ ` ~~ 111 Ozzie Osborne 1 ~ ` `~ ~ ~\ V Hal Smalley ~ ~ '~ I_ Bill Zubek ~ - ,' ~ t ~ ~1 111 1 TO DO ~~~ V .~