Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-02-25 P&Z Minutes~, CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS February 25,1998 - 7:00 p.m. http://www.Kenai.net/city 1. ROLL CALL: 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 11,1998 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7. NEW BUSINESS: a. Development Requirements Table -Review ~ 8. OLD BUSINESS: 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: 10. REPORTS: a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. Administration 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. Reconsideration Information b. KPB Borough Plat Committee action of February 9, 1998 c. KPB Administrative Approval-Ruby's Dazzling Scenic View S/D 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: 14. ADJOURNMENT: Approved CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 25, 1998 - 7:00 p.m. Chairman: Carl Glick *** MINUTE3 *** Vice Chairman Bryson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Phil Bryson, Teresa Werner-Quade, Karen Mahurin, Ron Goecke, Barb Nord, Michael Christian Members Absent: Carl Glick Others Present: Administrative Assistant Marilyn Kebschull, Councilman Hal Smalley, Contract Secretary Barb Roper 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: GOECKE MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AND ASKED FOR ~ UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY MAHURIN. AGENDA WA3 APPROVED A3 PRESENTED. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: -February 11, 1998 CHRISTIAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 1998. MOTION SECONDED BY GOECKE. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 1998 WERE APPROVED A3 WRITTEN. 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: Noae 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: -None 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: -None Planning & Zoning Commission February 25, 1998 Page 1 Approved ?. NEW BU3INE33: a. Development Requirements Table -Review Kebschull reported she had reviewed the development requirements table with the City Engineer and Building Official and their recommended changes are included in the packet for review and input by the Commission. Kebschull reminded the Commission this item is one of their goals and objectives. The City Engineer and Building Official would like to meet with the Commission for a full review of the table. After a group discussion it was decided a work session will be held at 6:00 p.m. on March 25, 1998, one hour before the regular meeting. Mahurin asked what the impetus was behind changing the development requirements table. Kebschull replied, when the land use table was reviewed several discrepancies were noted with regard to what was allowed in the zones versus what the development requirements table stated. Kebschull continued, there were also questions about dashed lines and what they meant. As a result, staff went back through the table and made changes based on the land use development table, the zones and DEC and tried to fill in all the blanks. Additionally, the information on the one,' two, three-story basement structures was removed because the City Attorney advised that any time a part of a structure was more than a single story it should be considered as a whole building and not a separate structure. Basically some of the changes include modifications, new material, and some that include DEC requirements which the current code does not. Werner-Quade asked if DEC reviewed plats before they came to Planning and Zoning. Bryson confirmed that was correct and noted the change was made about a year ago. Bryson continued, all reliance is given to the private engineer to do the same type of evaluation work DEC required. This goes to the Borough and the engineer certifies that is conforms to the Borough Ordinance. Bryson also noted this was for on- site waste water issues. Mahurin asked if the process was to take action on the item after the work session to include a public hearing. Kebschull confirmed that was correct. Mahurin asked if this was at the direction of staff and not Planning & Zoning Commission February 25, 1998 Page 2 Approved Council. Kebschull answered, Council did not give this direction and reiterated the item is one of the first goals and objectives for the Commission. Bryson noted he had several concerns which include the elimination of the 15' side yard setback; clarification if the 2-stories or greater was put back in the table; clarification of side yard setbacks; and detached accessory buildings near the back lot lines which have been a problem and the attorney interprets the issue differently than the building department. Bryson continued, the section that references the Kenai Airport obstruction criteria on page 72 needs to be re-worded as there is no sheet called obstruction criteria. This should be done before the City adopts the current Airport Master Plan. Werner-Quade asked about the detached accessory structures because she understands a building permit can be obtained to put one within the setback as long as it can be moved. Werner-Quade continued, she would like to know what is acceptable and what isn't. She read the definition and it was very vague. Bryson replied, present interpretation from the attorney is that accessory buildings will need to conform to side and rear yard setbacks. Kebschull added, the City accepts them as long as they don't take up more than the 30% or 1 / 3 of the rear yard. Werner-Quade asked if a building permit was required to do this. Kebschull answered, only if it is over 120 square feet, anyone can put up a structure without a permit if it is under 120 sq. ft. Werner-Quade asked where the square footage information was and requested a copy of just that section. Kebschull stated the information is in the building code and accessory structures are covered in Title 14, 14.20.200. Bryson stated that presently the requirement calls for a side yard set back. Kebschull stated the 3 foot to the adjoining lots discusses unenclosed passenger landings or carports but detached accessory buildings may be permitted to occupy the rear yard provided that no more than 1 / 3 of the total area in the rear yard shall be occupied. The City Attorney does not feel that alleviates the responsibility of maintaining the rear yard setback. Werner-Quade stated that some people don't even know they need a building permit to place an accessory building so they are encroached right up to the next lot line. Werner-Quade asked if the building was put together by screws would it be okay. Kebschull replied, those are questions the building official would have to answer. Kebschull stated this issue came up on the Planning & Zoning Commission February 25, 1998 Page 3 Approved Jahrig property on Angler Drive because he hooked up water and sewer to a structure and since it was not enclosed it was considered a principal rather than an accessory structure. The difference is whether or not it is something that is easily movable. Smalley indicated he would not be at the March 25 meeting but he would bring this to Council's attention. 8. OLD BUSINESS: -None 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: None 10. REPORTS: a. City Council: Councilman Smalley made the following report based on the agenda included in the meeting packet: Item A- l , Ron Dolchok asked the City to provide a letter of support to be provided to financial institutions for his pressed wood products. The City requested additional information before providing a letter. Item C-2 identified the parcel of land just outside the fence at Cunningham Park as not being required for public use. The ordinance was amended to identify that particular parcel of land as not being in the Cunningham Park. Members from the family that donated the parcel were contacted and indicated they were comfortable with the proposal. Item C-4 set the appraised value of the land next to Cunningham Park at $2,025.00. The Board of Fish amended their agenda to include the City. The City asked that a portion of the river be closed to dip net fishing. The request was denied but will be pursued again in 1999. City Council will hold a work session before budget time as the impact on the City needs to be reviewed with regard to Parks and Rec and law enforcement. A public hearing will also be held to see what type of comments they have regarding the dip net fishery. Planning & Zoning Commission February 25, 1998 Page 4 Approved Items H-5 through H-10 were approved. There will be two open houses on March 7. The new animal control shelter from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Barry Norwood, the young man who donated $116.01 to the shelter, will be present. The new City well function will be held at 3:00 p.m. Christian asked if Council made a decision on the Chumley appeal. Smalley replied, a decision has not been made and will not until the 30t'' day. b. Borough Planning Bryson reported a meeting was held on Monday, February 23 and the following action was taken: Item F-1 was denied. This was a vacation of 200 feet of aright-of--way in the Lowell Point area. This parcel went from dedicated road way to the bay and is adjacent to property owned by State Parks. The petitioner was attempting to make the case that since State Parks owned the adjacent property it was reasonable to vacate the public right-of--way. Item F-2 was approved. This is a gravel site in north Kenai next to Wik Road. The petitioner was Hugh Chumley. Item H-1, request for special consideration granting a waiver variation was approved. The Cater wetlands fill item which was being brought back to the Planning Commission was pulled from the agenda at the request of the applicant as he is negotiating with the State on selling the property. The review period has been delayed. c. Administration: Kebschull made the following report: At the last meeting a question was raised with regard to reconsideration. The information requested is included in the meeting packet. A question was also asked about temporary signs. Staff reviewed the Planning & Zoning Commission February 25, 1998 Page 5 Approved code and it's not clear so this is an item that also needs attention. However, on page 1443 it states that temporary signs not more than 5' may be put up for one week without a permit. In commercial zones it's not clear but any temporary signs, which a pennant sign could be considered temporary, is allowed if not more than 16 sq. ft. total. Staff reads that part of the code as it would be required to fit into the total square footage per business in the commercial zone so they would have to stay underneath which is 81 sq. ft. for one business, including the pennant sign even though it is temporary. A problem with temporary signs is code enforcement. If a problem is brought to the City's attention then a letter is written and hopefully people will comply. The Giffords wrote a letter to the City relinquishing the variance that was granted at the last Planning and Zoning meeting. This was a result of an appeal filed by the property owner (Mr. Amen) who has the lot on the side where the five foot variance was granted. Apparently Mr. Gifford had an agreement with the property owner to have the variance at 10 feet so when the five foot variance was granted Mr. Amen filed the appeal. The variance no longer exists. The city attorney was written a letter asking for clarification of the code regarding home occupations. The attorney advised that he is not going to issue a directive until after the Chumley appeal. In the meantime people will continue to be told that a permit is required. Christian asked for clarification on the temporary sign, if it is up for one week it is a temporary sign, if up a month then it is no longer a temporary sign. Kebschull answered, that's the way the code reads, it could be up for a week then it would have to come down but it would have to be within the guidelines of 5' or less. Kebschull continued, it's not very clear if the temporary sign, 5' or less, has to be included in the total square footage in that zone. Mahurin stated during the appeal hearing, Mr. Chumley brought up the concern about Mrs. Ward's home occupation but she didn't think it was part of the appeal. Mahurin asked why the City Attorney was not acting on the issue if it was not part of the appeal. Kebschull replied, she could not answer other than report that the attorney was not going to issue a response. Kebschull added, a letter was received from Mrs. Ward asking for clarification on the code as she did not see where it required her to have a permit. Planning & Zoning Commission February 25, 1998 Page 6 ~~ Approved Werner-Quade stated the actual appeal cited three, what Chumley referred to as businesses, in the adjacent area. These were in fact three home occupations, one of which was Mrs. Ward who did not have a permit, the other Mrs. Espey whose permit is no longer in service, and the other was Mr. Quade who has a permit. Mr. Chumley alluded to the fact that there were other businesses in the area so he should be allowed to have his. Since Mr. Chumley tried to tie this into his appeal the attorney may be trying to step back to separate the two issues. Goecke stated that he hoped the City Attorney was trying to separate the issues so that it doesn't become a neighborhood slug-fest. Geocke added, staff should make sure that anyone operating a business in the City should have a permit, regardless of what that business is. Goecke thought that Mrs. Ward read where the code states that a home occupation is permitted but failed to understand that a permit was required. Goecke felt Mrs. Ward should come in with an application and money to get a permit just as the travel agency person did recently. Kebschull clarified there is no fee for home occupations, basically it is just a record keeping so the Commission could verify there is a home occupation and not a conditional use. A conditional use would require a public hearing so neighbors could be notified. Kebschull added, staff interprets the code the same way Goecke did that it is a permitted use and does require a permit from the City, the wording may need to be changed to make that section more clear so that the public could understand it. To better educate the public, Administration is considering advertising in the paper on a quarterly basis about required permits, etc. and adding more to the home page. 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. Reconsideration Information b. KPB Borough Plat Committee Action of February 9, 1998 c. KPB Administrative Approval -Ruby's Dazzling Scenic View SD Planning & Zoning Commission February 25, 1998 Page 7 Approved 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS: Bryson reported the City of Soldotna has a free planning commission training program scheduled for April 18, 1998 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. John Isaacs, the association planner from Dames & Moore and Max Best, the Borough surveyor were invited to speak. Best will cover Borough requirements on plats and Isaac's will cover everything else. Anyone interested in attending should contact Kebschull. Nord had no report from the Kenai River Quality Monitoring Group as she was unable to make the last meeting. Christian reported that Blockbuster Video had asemi-truck sitting on the bike path unloading. The area which was supposed to be for their dumpster is now being used as a delivery site. It was also noted the dumpster still didn't have the shield around it. Smalley confirmed the City was aware of the problem. 14. ADJOURNMENT: MAHURIN MOVED TO ADJOURN. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, C.. lJ Barbara Roper, C tract Secretary Planning & Zoning Commission February 25, 1998 Page 8