Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-01-14 P&Z Minutes.~ ~ KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Kenai City Hall Lee Lewis, Chairman AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL Swear in New Members: Church, Mischou, O'Reilly, Election of Chair and Vice Chair 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Amend KMC14.20.185 by Adding New Section Pertaining to Encroachment Permit ~ b. Amend KMC14.20.145 by Adding New Section Pertaining to New Townsite Historic Zone c. Amend KMC14.20.240 Pertaining to Mobile Homes and Adding Verbage Pertaining to Recreational Vehicles 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF December 10, 1986 6. OLD BUSINESS 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Vacation Request for 66' of Section Line Easement Lying Within and Adjacent to Lot 1, Angler's Acres S/D - McKechnie/Foster b. Preliminary Plat PZ87-1: Baron Park S/D #6 8. PLANNING a. Amend Zoning Code: 14.25.010 and 14.25.020 Pertaining to Landscaping/Site Plan Regulations } KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Kenai City Hall Lee Lewis, Chairman 1. ROLL CALL Present: All Commissioners Present a. Swear in New Members: Church, Mischou, O'Reilly, b. Election of Chair and Vice Chair NOMINATION FOR CHAIRMAN: Commissioner Smalley moved to nominate Lee Lewis, seconded by Commissioner Bryson Nominations were closed, Commissioner Lewis will remain Chairman. NOMINATION FOR VICE CHAIRMAN: Commissioner Osborne nominated Hal Smalley as Vice Chair, seconded by Commissioner Bryson 1 ~ Nominations were closed, Commissioner Smalley will. remain Vice Chair 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as submitted 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Amend KMC14.20.185 by Adding New Section Pertaining to Encroachment Permit Planning Specialist Loper explained that this amendment comes about by request of the Commission for a measure to assist those homeowners who do not fall under the variance criteria. This does not approve encroachments into ROW's. Chairman Lewis opened the issue for comments from the public. Jackie Russell came forward to ask if these amendments pertained to future buildings, answer no, they refer to pre-existing cases only. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Page 2 There being no further comments, the issue was brought back to the Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved approval of KMC14.20.185 adding new section pertaining to encroachment permit, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. Commissioner Bryson used a scenario for question: if in the next building season, a contractor builds a building which is in violation, they will not be able to use this section to resolve their problems, answer no. What is being constructed at the time is not a pre-existing use. This body, at one time, had considered penalties for construction violations, these are entirely different situations. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously b. Amend KMC14.20.145 by Adding New Section Pertaining to New Townsite Historic Zone Planning Specialist Loper explained that this section had been placed on hold by the Council pending the approval of the Site Plan Ordinance which is now in place. This section returns to the Planning Commission due to the fact that there has been a request to extend the boundaries of the proposed zone. The text of the section remains the same. Certain members of the public feel that such buildings as the Harbor View are between 40 and 50 years old and should be included. Commissioner Bryson stated: for the record I am part owner in property that is included in the zoning modification and unless there is some objection, I will be voting on the issue. Chairman Lewis felt there would be no objection. Chairman Lewis opened the issue to the public. Father Targonsky: have all property owners been notified? Answer no, the code has a provision that any large zonings do not require individual notification. Notices have appeared in the newspaper. John Williams, appearing as resident of the city and property owner in the area to be rezoned. Mr. Williams asked for detailed explanation, it was provided. Mr. Williams explained that he had approached this Commission about a year ago about a zoning change and is glad that it is moving forward. Jackie Russell asked if the newspaper was correct when they said no more than duplex style residences are allowed, answer, the code reads discouraged rather than prohibited. Chairman Lewis returned the issue to the Commission. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Page 3 `~ MOTION: Commissioner Osborne moved approval of KMC14.20.145 by adding the new section, seconded by Commissioner O'Reilly. Councilman Wise stated that he had a problem with the ordinance, under item 4-c it forwards the plan to the Old Town Committee and it should not. After approval and finalization that Committee will be sunsetted. The Commission agreed and exchanged the word Old Town Committee for Building Official. The section will be amended and passed on to the Council. MOTION AMENDMENT: Commissioner Bryson moved to amend the main motion by adding correction to item c, removal of the words Old Town Committee and replaced with Building Official, seconded by Commissioner Smalley. VOTE AMENDED MOTION: Motion passed unanimously. VOTE MAIN MOTION: Motion passed unanimously. c. Amend KMC14.20.240 Pertaining to Mobile Homes and Adding Verbiage Pertaining to Recreational Vehicles Planning Specialist Loper explained that this is also by request of the Commission. Several complaints had been received by private individuals and public agencies of different types of vehicles being used for living purposes in areas where they are inappropriate. These revisions are placed with the intent of helping those persons who do have complaints. These revisions are not intended to interfere with the bona fide tourist who comes to use campgrounds or any other area for a short time. The Commission agreed to the addition of the words "recreation vehicles" to all passages which currently exist with only the words "mobile homes". The Commission asked for definitions of recreational vehicles, this will be added under section 14.20.320. The Commission discussed the verbiage of 14.20.242 with several suggestions, none meeting with the satisfaction of the Commission. *for the purpose of discussion, RV's will be defined as vehicles designed for temporary or permanent habitation. Chairman Lewis opened the issue to the public for comment. Father Targonsky asked the Commission if this meant that the 30 days means you can have your mobile home on a site for 30 days then move it to another location for another 30 days. Chairman Lewis ,_ answered that the ordinance states anywhere in the city for less than 30 days. Father Targonsky stated that a person could take it out of the city for one day and return and be legal. Councilman PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Page 4 Wise answered that the ordinance could get very specific, but then you have defeated the entire concept. The Commission next discussed the 30 day clause. Commissioner Smalley suggested, "no motor home, RV, etc., may be used as a residence or sleeping quarters after it has been parked in the city 30 days". The Commission agreed that it would create triple negatives, however, that is the idea. Bill Brighton suggested that the canneries use that type of arrangement and placing a 30 day limit on them would be restrictive. Chairman Lewis answered that what this is for is only a guideline to give the city the opportunity to do something about those nuisances. Bill Brighton felt that the term nuisance can tie yourself up and nullify what you are trying to do in the first place. Planning Specialist Loper explained that this verbiage comes from the Kodiak code and is workable there, further it is placed under the zoning code rather than the police section of the code so that the city would be more responsive to complaint than outright enforcement. The Commission suggested a fee for areas such as the canneries. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to continue public hearing to the next regularly scheduled meeting, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. Commissioner Smalley asked if the item did not return to the Commission from the attorney by the 28th, do we need to readvertise, answer from Commission, yes. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF December 10, 1986 Minutes were approved as submitted Chairman Lewis called a 10 minute break. 6. OLD BUSINESS None 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Vacation Request for 66' of Section Line Easement Lying Within and Adjacent to Lot 1, Angler's Acres S/D - McKechnie/Foster Planning Specialist explained that this type of item usually comes before the Commission and Council prior to Borough action, however, in this case the City did not receive notification in time for the ~~ Borough action which was denial. The applicant has requested the item come before the City through an appeal process. It will be handled as a normal vacation request, that is, the Commission will PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Page 5 review the issue and pass along a recommended to'the Council who will stand as a Board of Appeal. The applicant supplied material which were not brought out at the Borough level, which you now have before you. The applicant felt the verbiage on the application itself was worded badly. It uses terms which suggest restricting the public access to the river, where this is not the case. The applicants wish to provide direct access in an orderly way and include an easement for the drainage ditch. Commissioner Smalley noted that the access would be provided, however a fee would be involved. Planning Specialist Loper explained that the applicants could do so without the vacation as they own the property. The vacation would merely give them additional space for the project. Commissioner Bryson noted that the wording says they are willing to provide access, however this requests that public access be eliminated. It appears that this is what the state also suggests in the letters provided. Bill Brighton, City Manager spoke. It appears that the river study committee was saying that there are not enough accesses to the Kenai River between the City boat ramp and Eagle Rock. They are encouraging additional accesses to the river. With that recommendation, our Cunningham Park has a boat launch, if you can carry your boat down, its not feasible to drive down and launch your boat. Therefore the City has been looking at it for either ~~ restricting boat launching and leave it to fishing or providing launching. During the fishing season that place is so crowded and congested that it is not practical to provide boat launching without spending substantial amounts of money to upgrade. Council also considered a suggestion to go across Beaver Loop and acquire real estate to provide parking because you couldn't possibly park all those cars in that small park. The Chamber of Commerce became involved through their boardwalk on Bridge Access Rd. and it was suggested to them that if there was some way private enterprise could undertake to build another boat ramp or launch into that river it would help alleviate the congestion and put a middle section between the City boat ramp and Eagle Rock. From those conversations came this .idea that you now have before you. Most of the folks at the City felt this would be a great idea because the City is not going to be involved in spending substantial sums in order to provide an additional boat access to that river and encouraged this individual to pursue that operation. Yes it will deprive the public from a free boat launch because he is not going to expend that money that you must in construction of a site such as this. At the present time, even though the public has access you can't put a boat in down there. It is impractical due to soils, the bank, etc. unless it is one that you can pick up and carry. Therefore if he is going to expend the money to build a reasonable boat launch, some of the folks at the City felt this would be a good idea. I don't know how it got °~ in front of the Borough before coming to you, however, it did. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Page 6 In conjunction with the boardwalk that the Chamber is promoting and apparently is going to get built, they became involved in this project also and are willing to lend a hand to this individual. He came to us and we have attempted to make the road, from the permitting standpoint, as easy as we possibly can, hoping that eventually there will be another area along the river within the City where individuals can launch their boat. You can launch your boat at Eagle Rock, but not for free. The only free place in the City, is the City boat ramp at the canneries and the City feels that it might take a burden off their shoulders of trying to acquire, pay for, and build another boat ramp in order to create easier access to the river. John Williams, I agree with City Manager Brighton for the need for this type of facility, however, some of the things that bother me is the statement to restrict public access through the properties and help to maintain natural drainage. As you are well aware, Congress set aside 66' easements along section lines for public access. This is one of the only section lines that I can see that would allow public access in the general vicinity. I am concerned about the letter from the Alaska Dept. of Fish & Game in which they state that they have plans to spend several million dollars on the Kenai Peninsula for recreational access and has received inquiries from Kenai River property owners interested in selling property which totals over $3 million. It does not appear to be in the best interests of the state to vacate lands on the one hand and to spend public funds to acquire lands on the other... I tend to agree with that, you have a gentleman that says give me the land and I will expend my own money, while on the other hand you have the state saying that they will be spending money to acquire, however, we will not be spending money. I feel that more material should be reviewed, if he is going to charge for the launching, where the drainage is, etc. Planning Specialist Loper referred to the material submitted at the meeting from the applicants and explained some detail. Mr. Williams commented that there had been a similar situation where the City had given land away for a large project and the City ended up reclaiming those lands at a price of $125,000. I would encourage the Commission to wait on a decision until full plans have been submitted. Councilman Wise indicated a desire to see an entire package brought before the Commission feeling that the Borough had denied the vacation due to the lack of such information. Commissioner Bryson referred to the proposed boat ramp profile indicates a public boat ramp which infers that there is no fee. In looking at the area adjacent to the section line exists either as an easement or undeveloped ROW. I would presume. the property owner that has a deed to that property has the right to use the property until it is developed for access by the appropriate government. It appears ~~ that he has plenty of room to be able to develop a boat ramp on that lot. He could use the easement for other non-permanent facilities without a vacation. I am concerned with restricting PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Page 7 foot access to the river under either circumstances. I would be supportive of a private boat ramp in the area but not at the expense of eliminating foot access. Chairman Lewis asked if there was foot access at the present time, answer yes. Councilman Wise stated that he was not aware there was a path there. Commissioner Smalley stated that people have used the path for a long period of time with Mr. McKechnie chasing them away. Commissioner Smalley referred to the notation concerning the drainage ditch and asked if the City were going to maintain it. I believe they had to come before us before when they wanted to deepen that drainage. Commissioner Bryson asked if the City would be doing that man made water course as a part of the Angler Drive project, it is unknown. Commissioner Osborne commented on the letter from fish & game, it appears as though the letter had been written by someone who had never viewed the site. Commissioner Mishou commented that what it appeared to him was that the individual was asking for the Commission to recommend approval of a vacation which would allow a private individual to put in a boat ramp and collect fees to further enhance his private business. Commissioner Smalley referred to the letters submitted to the Borough; ADF&G has suggested that all public access points to the river should be maintained, Div. of Parks says the same thing. Planning Specialist Loper referred to the Kenai River Study which presents the concept that private individuals should be encouraged to develop facilities along the river. Councilman Wise asked the Commission to make some type of recommendation for the Council. Several Commissioners stated that they would like to have the issue postponed to the next meeting with additional material presented. Councilman Wise stated it is immaterial. The only thing before you tonight as in the case of the Borough is the vacation with the retention of a 25' drainage easement. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved to recommend to the Council to uphold the denial of the vacation of the 66' section line easement, finding of fact; denial because specific criteria, which is requested by the state agencies was not submitted referring to denial of public access along a section line to the river, seconded by Commissioner Mishou. Commissioner Bryson stated for the record, during the public hearing at the Borough there was one representative of the group that petitioned for this vacation. After the submittal of the state information, Mr. Foster indicated that he didn't care whether or not the application was approved or not because his concern was a 25' drainage easement was being maintained and that was his primary interest at the time., he explained nothing about future development in the area. There were no other individuals commenting on it. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Page 8 ~) Commissioner Mishou stated that it would be nice to have a paved ramp, an RV park, and a lot of these things provided we did not help a private individual make money. Is there any way we can recommend the submission of a complete operational plan and a fee schedule including use of the fees, answer no. b. Preliminary Plat PZ87-1: Baron Park S/D #6 Planning Specialist Loper referred the Commissioners to the memo from Land Specialist Gerstlauer. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved approval of PZ87-1, seconded by Commissioner Smalley VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 8. PLANNING a. Amend Zoning Code: 14.25.010 and 14.25.020 Pertaining to Landscaping/Site Plan Regulations Planning Specialist Loper explained that this item comes from the Review Board who, after working with the "new" site plan portion of `I the ordinance felt that the verbiage still did not quite convey the intent and went on to explain. Commissioners .Bryson and Smalley discussed the definition of the word new, stating that the interpretation could be an addition to an existing structure or changing the interior of the structure. Planning Specialist Loper explained that the Board used the word "improvement" because it would cover just about any circumstance in the building industry. Commissioner Smalley asked if the building inspector had reviewed these amendments, answer yes, they originally came about at his suggestion. It is his decision as to whether or not a contractor goes before the Board. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved to approve amended KMC14.25.010 & KMC14.25.020, seconded by Commissioner Osborne VOTE: Motion passed yes: Lewis, Church, O'Reilly, Osborne, Smalley, & Mishou no: Bryson 9. REPORTS a. City Council Councilman Wise wished to correct the Council agenda, under the report by Joe Arness, the word is "agree" which is not the action of the Council. The Council agreed not to automatically ban the PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1987 Page 9 ;} baling facility, and to hear more, not agree to the facility itself. b. Borough Planning Commissioner Bryson reported on the request to vacate already discussed. c. City Administration None 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 11. INFORMATION ITEMS a. Letter from Kenaitze Indian Tribe b. Letter of Resignation from D. Carignan c. Letter of Resignation from B. Zubeck d. Borough Planning Commission Minutes - Sprucewood Glen Vacation e. Council Agenda - December 17th and January 7th f. Borough Planning Agenda - December 15th and January 5th i r No comments 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS Commissioner O'Reilly asked for length of terms. It shall be provided. Commissioner Bryson asked Council feeling on the application for Tract F Dena' Ina and what changes go along with the removal of the word "advisory". Councilman Wise answered that the Council introduced an ordinance authorizing sale of Tract F and will be up for public hearing next meeting. The word "advisory" was related more to the Borough when it was formed years ago when you were advisory to the Borough. The Council took it out because you do have functions authorized by Council that are not advisory, particularly with the resumption of zoning powers. Technically every group is advisory to the Council. It was one of the least controversial issues we have had. Commissioner Smalley asked if Parks & Rec had submitted comment on the use of that tract, answer from Councilman Wise, Kayo McGillivray indicated that Commission had no use. Commissioner Smalley noted that the Commission had not met until last night, Councilman Wise answered that Kayo is authorized to speak for that body. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Wednesday, January 28th. Janet Loper, Planning Specialist Secretary to the Commission PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Roll r ., i ~ 0 ~~ ,~ ` /i V (111 A! 01~ ~~ 1- V ~ ~V ~\ ~, v Chairman 'Lee Lewis ~ -Phil Bryson SCUi~-+fiLfi,~~// C~ '~/ f Ozzie Osborne ~ ~ ~ v ~ Hal Smalley %~ r \ TO DO