HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-02-14 P&Z MinutesCITY OF KENAI
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
**AGENDA**
Council Chambers, 210 Fidalgo
~ February 14, 1996, 7:00 p.m.
Chairman Kevin Walker
1. ROLL CALL:
a. Elections
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 24, 1996
4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD:
5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS:
a. PZ96-6, Sprucewood Glen Subdivision No. 7 (R,eplat of Tract D)
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. PZ96-7, Encroachment Permit, Lot 17, Block 1, Anglers Acres, Part 2
b. PZ96-8, Conditional Use Permit, Lot 17, Block 1, Anglers Acres, Part 2
c. PZ96-9, Conditional Use Permit, Lot 8, Anglers Acres, Part 3
d. PZ96-10, Conditional Use Permit, Tract 4, Horseshoe End at River Bend S/D
7. NEW BUSINESS:
a. PZ96-11, Landscape Site Plan Review, Mapco Petroleum, Inc.
b. Proposed Residential Zone (Michael Christian)
8. OLD BUSINESS:
a. Comprehensive Plan
9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS:
10. REPORTS:
a. City Council
b. Borough Planning
c. Administration
11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED:
12. INFORMATION ITEMS:
a. Kenai Habitat Restoration and Recreation Enhancement Project Info.
b. Reappointment Letters
c. Planning Commission Training Seminar Info
13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
14. ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF KENAI
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
~) MINUTES
February 14, 1996
ROLL CALL:
UNAPPROVED
Members Present: Phil Bryson, Teresa Werner-Quade, Ron Goecke, John Booth
Members Absent: Carl Glick, Karen Mahurin, Kevin Walker
Acting Chair Bryson stated there was a quorum and noted that it would take four YES
votes to pass a motion.
ELECTIONS:
Acting Chair Bryson opened nominations.
RON GOECKE MOVED TO LEAVE THE CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR IN PLACE.
Mr. Goecke noted he had spoken to Mr. Walker and he stated he would continue as
chair. Mr. Goecke stated he had not spoken to Mr. Glick but is sure he would have no
objections.
RON GOECKE MOVED TO LEAVE CHAIRMAN WALKER AS CHAIRMAN.
RON GOECKE MOVED THAT MR. GLICK REMAIN VICE-CHAIRMAN.
Bryson noted that for voting purposes the motion would be split into two items. Bryson
asked if there was a second.
MOTIONS SECONDED BY JOHN BOOTH.
Bryson asked if any objection to first motion, hearing none MOTION PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY. Bryson stated Mr. Glick had been nominated for vice-chair and
asked if any objections, hearing none MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Bryson asked if any additions or deletions to the agenda. MR. GOECKE
RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA NOTING HANDOUTS;
HOWEVER, NO NECESSARY ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA. ASKED FOR
UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY MS. WERNER-QUADE.
VOTE:
WERNER-QUADE-YES GOECE-YES
BOOTH-YES BRYSON-YES
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 24, 1996
Bryson asked if any additions or deletions to the minutes of January 24, 1996. MS.
WERNER-QUADE MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JANUARY
24, 1996 AND ASKED FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY
MR. GOECKE.
VOTE:
GOECKE-YES
BOOTH-YES
WERNER-QUADE-YES
BRYSON-YES
PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD:
None.
CONSIDERATION OF PLATS:
PZ96-6, Sprucewood Glen Subdivision No. 7 (Replat of Tract D)-Jack La Shot stated
that this plat resubdivides an existing tract into three parcels, all parcels front along
Bridge Access Road. There is no installation agreement required. Bridge Access Road
is available for extension of utilities. Sewer line is available to tract D2 in the back.
Bryson asked if this plat was related to the construction that is underway. La Shot
stated that construction takes place between the Spur Highway and this plat. Bryson
clarified if that is the smaller tract as noted by dashes on the plat in the packet. La
Shot stated he dashed in the line because it wasn't denoted. Bryson stated there is a
water and sewer easement that stretches through that property parallel to the Kenai
Spur Highway that provides the water and sewer service.
MR. GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR SPRUCEWOOD GLEN SUBDIVISION NO. 7. MOTION SECONDED BY
MR. BOOTH.
VOTE:
BOOTH-YES
GOECKE-YES
UNANIMOUS.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
WERNER-QUADE-YES
BRYSON-YES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 2
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
PZ96-?, Encroachment Permit, Lot 17, Block 1, Anglers Acres, Part 2-Mr.
Bryson asked for further staff report. Mr. La Shot stated that this first public hearing
\) is the first of three that involve properties owned by the same individuals. The first one
involves an encroachment on Lot 17. Mr. La Shot asked that any comments be related
to the encroachment itself so that each permit request could be handled separately.
Bryson stated the action on Lot 17, Block 1 that is open for comment is for the half foot
encroachment into the 15 yard side setback. The building itself is 14.5 feet from the
property line. The rural residential zone requires 15 feet. Mr. Bryson opened the
public hearing.
Nigel Guest, 3320 W 78th, Anchorage 99502-Mr. Guest stated he would try to keep his
comments short and thanked the commission for the opportunity to speak. Mr. Guest
stated that some of his comments do relate to the next item on the agenda. As far as
the encroachment goes, Mr. Guest stated he was disappointed that things weren't
planned and looked at before things were built next door. Mr. Guest stated Mr. Lowe
has built it clearing everything out in the immediate area and basically where he sits is
an eye sore. Mr. Guest stated he had requested that Mr. La Shot make available to the
Commission a letter he had written. Mr. Guest stated he didn't know if the
Commission had had an opportunity to read the letter but hopes that they will before
voting. Guest stated that basically he has asked Mr. Lowe to build a fence that will
shield his property from Lowe's property. Guest stated he would request it be built at
an 8 foot level to block the things that are budding onto his property line and to help
shield his property which he has tried to protect. Basically, to make his property to
continue to be a residential area and something that he hopes to retire to soon. Guest
stated he uses it for recreation in the summer from basically the middle of April when
his tax season is over until approximately October 15 to the 31st. Guest stated this lot
sits in a series of lots that are recreational and this will become a commercial use lot.
Guest stated he would save that comment for the next hearing. Guest asked the
Commission to read his letter and to help him keep some of the quality of life he is used
to on a residential lot.
Mr. Bryson closed the public hearing and brought the matter back to the Commission
for action.
MR. GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ96-7 ENCROACHMENT
PERMIT FOR LOT 17, BLOCK 1, ANGLERS ACRES. MOTION SECONDED BY
MS. WERNER-QUADE.
Goecke asked Mr. La Shot if Mr. Springer said anything about the building that is
encroaching. Goecke explained that he when he looked at it it looked like the building
was moved in okay but then added to after it was on location. Mr. La Shot stated there
was an addition put on the building that was moved in; however, he is not sure if the
addition is what is encroaching. La Shot stated he thought it was the addition. La
Shot asked if there was anyone in the audience representing the Lowes.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 3
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
Brian Lowe, owner of the property on Lot 17 on Angler Drive identified himself. Mr.
Lowe explained he had staked out and had an asbuilt on the property and then had
more gravel put in. In doing so, stakes were removed and then put back. Lowe stated
he moved the one part of the building to the extent he thought it was in the 15 foot and
he said it looks like just the corner of it is in 6 inches over. Lowe stated it was an
accident and it wasn't planned that way. Lowe stated if Nigel wants him to put a fence
up there he has no problem with that.
Mr. Bryson stated the question was whether the 16 foot dimension on the asbuilt as
shown was the secondary addition. Mr. Lowe responded no, that was the building that
was put in. Bryson clarified it was the original building and it was expanded with a 22
foot addition. Lowe stated it was set there and it turned a little bit. Lowe reiterated he
had had someone come in and put more gravel, they removed the stakes and put them
back. The building was tilted and the addition was put on the one right corner is
extending beyond 6 inches. All the other corners are inside.
Mr. Goecke stated looking at the asbuilt, assuming that everything on it is correct, he
has a tough time looking at all the space to the left and wondering why the thing wasn't
moved to the center a bit further, if you are close. Goecke stated there are so many of
these coming in that are encroaching a foot and a half, six inches, a foot ,time after
time, "Oh, I made a mistake." Goecke stated he is becoming a little disenchanted with
the so-called mistakes.
Ms. Werner-Quade stated that based on staff recommendations and the comments of
Mr. Guest she will be objecting to the encroachment.
VOTE:
WERNER-QUADE-NO GOECKE-NO
BOOTH-NO BRYSON-YES
MOTION FAILED, THREE NAY VOTES, ONE YES VOTE.
Mr. Bryson stated that for the record this action could be appealed to the City Council.
Bryson asked what the time limit was for appeal and Kebschull stated the information
would be sent to Mr. Lowe immediately. Bryson asked Mr. La Shot if he was aware of
the appeal period and he responded he thought it was within seven days that he must
give notice of appeal. La Shot stated the appeal board, council, has 30 days. Bryson
stated that should be clarified tomorrow with the city secretary.
PZ96-8, Conditional Use Permit, Lot 17, Block 1, Anglers Acres, Part 2-Mr.
Bryson noted this was the same lot as the above lot. Mr. La Shot stated this
Conditional Use Permit would allow the owner to rent nightly and weekly during the
summer a two bedroom home with a loft. He intends to rent it monthly in the winter
which normally would not require a permit. La Shot stated a contingency has been
requested that the permit be issued upon resolution of the encroachment. La Shot
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 4
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
stated he has an illustration for the Commissions' use to show some of the other
conditional uses that are occurring in the Anglers Drive area.
Mr. Bryson recessed meeting for five minutes.
Mr. Bryson opened the public hearing for comment for Lot 17, Block 1, Anglers Acres,
Part 2, request for a Conditional use Permit.
Nigel Guest from Anchorage. Mr. Guest stated that he wanted to say that he realizes
his area of Angler Drive is important to the City of Kenai because it is one of the few
areas that the city can access the river from Kenai rather than from Soldotna. Guest
stated he is an avid fisherman himself so he likes to see people fish. Guest stated he
would like to mention that sometimes rules seem to get bent and there is little
enforcement in this neck of the woods noting it has been seen in other lots and other
areas not only on the Anglers Drive area but in Soldotna. Guest stated he would like
protection as a residential area. He stated he has no objection to people staying in a
house next to him but he would like to see the business use restricted to the overnight
use, or week use, or monthly use. He stated he would hate to see a boat rental
operation started or a guiding operation started out of that. Especially since Mr. Lowe
has access to other lots which he already owns on Anglers Drive where he has a
business use permit and where he has been running his Hi Lo Charters. Mr. Guest
stated he would like the commission to think of his position of having a lot totally
cleared next to you, campers in there, tents in there, basically the trees gone, and very
little that the Kenai Peninsula offers to us as individuals. Guest stated that when he
lived down here from 1977 to 1988 one of the things he really enjoyed was the fact that
his house was out in the trees, he could look around and not see too many other people,
and not hear too many other things. This is one of the things that keep bringing him
back to the Kenai, the peace and quiet and enjoyment. Guest stated he would like to
ask the Commission members to put themselves in his shoes and try to help a little bit.,
maybe not to deny the permit but to keep it to the actual specific use that has been
asked for and to have some means of enforcement if the use expands beyond that
permit.
Bryan Lowe-stated he wanted to note that he would not be running a guide service out
of the property but it would just be used for lodging alone. Lowe stated he does not plan
on having an RV park and there are a lot of trees left. Lowe reiterated he does not plan
on running a business out of there, lodging only and boat parking. Everybody along
there has parking for boats and Lowe stated he doesn't see why he should be denied as
far as just to have it for lodging.
Will Jahrig stated he owns Lot 12 on Anglers Drive and noted he has been in
conditional use since 1989. Jahrig stated he thought he was one of the front runners
who started the conditional uses there. Jahrig was under the assumption that the
Conditional Use Permit was allowed under city codes to run a small business following
guidelines. And, if guidelines were not followed, the conditional use could be revoked.
Jahrig asked if that was correct. Bryson stated it is. Jahrig stated with that
assumption with their business they have tried to do their utmost to keep their
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 5
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
neighbors happy and that he feels they have a good relationship with their neighbors
down there. Jahrig stated that neighbors use the dock when they want to, they can
come and go and use the phone. Jahrig stated they have tried to be very neighbor
friendly. Jahrig stated Beaver Creek is a very nice, very positive area. It is a very safe
area for clientele and for those who own their places down there. Jahrig stated he
objects to things happening down there that can be negative. Stated he objects if they
are not being perceived to the public or to the clients that are correct uses. Jahrig
stated he has a hard time with some of the conditional uses. Jahrig stated that Mr.
Lowe has Lot 8 coming up along with this lot. Jahrig stated Lowe has been running a
business off another lot for several years now that has not had a conditional use.
Jahrig stated Lowe knows a conditional use has to be in effect to run a business because
he has had one previously. Jahrig states he realizes that the city doesn't have a way of
policing or overseeing this. Jahrig stated you have to take it word wise from people who
are down there. Jahrig stated he takes it as a slap to those who are down there to their
intelligence if somebody has been doing things and stepping over their limits and their
boundaries for years. A little bit here and a little bit. here, and well, we got away with
another one, well I can run this one. Jahrig stated he likes to see businesses down
there and he thinks they are a good, positive business aspect for the city. Jahrig states
he doesn't like it when they are taken advantage of because it doesn't just show lack of
fore thought on their behalf. It makes it harder on somebody like myself. If I want to
come before the board and ask for more conditional usage or a change, the negative
aspect that comes back to us as property users. Jahrig stated they will have a hard
time doing it. Jahrig stated he knows that is not the way it is supposed to happen.
Jahrig stated you get grouped in as an area and he doesn't want to see it happen to that
area down there. Jahrig stated that he thinks you have to grab it by a little bit more of
a hand and make sure that things aren't just walking along and not being noticed, out
of sight, out of mind. Jahrig stated he felt that if commercial businesses are coming in
for conditional uses, he thinks the city should require DEC or some regulatory
commission that would make sure that our septic systems down there are being 100
percent put in, designed, and installed for the usage. Jahrig stated he knows that for
years Mr. Lowe had a septic system that on high tide was flooded. Jahrig stated he has
another septic system now that he installed a drainage ditch for that is within less
footage that is specified for having drainage ditches next to a leach field. Jahrig stated
there is always water in the ditch. Jahrig stated it is things like this that he sees
constantly that nobody does anything about and that it has come to a head now.
Jahrig stated this is one of those issues and if there are going to be conditional uses and
running people down there, he doesn't want his clients having to see somebody drainage
ditch that is probably septic. Jahrig stated there is a fecal count that is a problem in
the creek now and the state and borough are trying to address it. Jahrig stated he
doesn't know that if it is in the city statutes but is an item he thinks should be
addressed. Jahrig stated he knows he is coming in to get his conditional use on Lot 8,
the next item, and he knows that it has been used for guiding and as commercial use for
several years. Jahrig stated he has been there, fishing several times a week as a
private individual off his dock. Jahrig stated he comes and goes and sees it all the time.
Mr. Jahrig stated he appreciates the commissions' time.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 6
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
MS. WERNER-QUADE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ96-8,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LOT 17, BLOCK 1, ANGERLS ACRES,
PART 2. MOTION SECONDED BY MR. BOOTH.
,~
Goecke stated he doesn't have any problem issuing the Conditional Use Permit but not
open ended the way it appears at this point. First, it must be contingent upon council
overturning what was done on 96-7. Also, would definitely want to see a fence along
the property line. Goecke stated that Mr. Jahrig brought up a point about making sure
that the only thing that happens on this lot is rental of housing. Goecke stated he
doesn't know how to state that he would like to see that happen and doesn't know
where the enforcement would come from on that but would like to make sure that is the
only thing that happens at this time if this Conditional Use Permit is granted.
Mr. Bryson stated that at this time the motion was to approve the request for the
conditional use and does not include the comments of the building official or the city
engineer. Bryson noted that if you wish to have those attached, you better be specific or
add them as an amendment.
Booth directed a question to Mr. La Shot stating that he noticed there is a well on the
plat within the flood line and asked if there is a possibility of well contamination.
Booth noted the speaker commented on possible septic contamination in the area.
Booth stated he was curious with annual flooding such as this last year whether it was
a potential that that well could become contaminated. Booth added he is aware that if
you run a business such as a bed and breakfast you are not required to comply with the
same kind of health standards and codes that you would if you had a public restaurant.
La Shot stated that the authority for onsite water and sewer rests with DEC. The city
only gets involved marginally with that. La Shot stated it is not a problem for the city
to communicate with them to let them know what uses are taking place on the lot but
the city doesn't get involved that much in that. La Shot stated that as far as the well
location, DEC has standards to abide by, separation distances from water bodies and
other facilities and leach fields and wells. The flooding that took place last year was
something greater than annual flooding. It was the 100 to 150 year flood. La Shot
stated he is not sure what happened to this particular well but it could flood. Bryson
added that whatever level the water gets in this area is 99 percent tidal situation so it
could be predicted with the moon except in extreme worse situation which would be a
combination of events. Bryson added that to conform with DEC requirements they
would have to have a Class C well conformance. In the past, that has been a purview of
DEC requirements. Booth asked Bryson to explain a Class C well. Bryson stated that
effectively it is (Bryson noted this information was from memory) a well for less than 25
persons and it is not a business situation, not a domestic water source. Booth
questioned if this would require a Class C well and Bryson stated yes. Bryson stated
they are required to have a 150 foot separation between sources of contamination.
Goecke stated he was having a quandary about thinking about doing anything with the
Conditional Use Permit until the first matter is taken care of. Goecke stated that at
this point in time there is not a place to operate the Conditional Use Permit. Bryson
stated they are in violation of a side yard setback. Goecke stated that theoretically
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 7
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
since the commission turned down the encroachment permit, he does not have at this
point in time a place to use the Conditional Use Permit. Bryson stated he felt they
were different subjects but the building inspector has tied them together in his
recommendations which are not a part of the motion.
Councilman Smalley stated that potentially the two resolutions that Mr. Bryson talked
about and the comments could be to add an attachment suggesting that approval be
conditioned upon resolution of the encroachment. That encroachment can be appealed
within 30 days to the city council or Mr. Lowe can resolve that himself by moving his
building. The city engineer is suggesting that once the encroachment has been dealt
with, it could be approved. That is a recommendation that right now is not on the main
motion. So, it could be resolved in one of two ways.
Bryson stated, making reference to Mr. Fretz' letter, that he is somewhat dismayed
that the house trailers and/or tents were being utilized for housing in the area. Though
that is an administrative matter for conformance with the other conditions. Bryson
added that he would hope in the future they are policed.
Councilman Smalley stated that what probably should have occurred is that complaints
should have been called into the city because the city is not actively out looking and
seeking violations. That is the way the code is set up. When a complaint received, the
city goes and investigates. And then, if there is a violation, it can be dealt with. But,
probably no complaints came into the city so there was no awareness. But, whenever
there are Conditional Use Permit violations, the city has to be notified before it has any
knowledge.
Bryson asked if there was a wish to modify by amendment any aspects of the main
motion.
Goecke asked if he could talk to maker of the motion. Bryson asked if he would like a
break or to discuss it during the meeting. Goecke agreed to do it within the meeting.
Goecke asked if the maker of the motion is the only one who can make an amendment
to the motion. Bryson stated that he could make an amendment.
GOECKE AMENDED THE MAIN MOTION FOR PZ98-8 THAT BEFORE THIS
PERMIT IS ISSUED THE PREVIOUS RESOLUTION PZ96-7 BE RECTIFIED
AND TAKEN CARE OF. TWO, THAT A FENCE GO UP ALONG THE
PROPERTY LINE. AND, THREE, THAT ALL QUESTIONS THAT PERTAIN TO
THE WELL AND THE SEPTIC SYSTEM BE APPROVED AND CLEARED UP.
AMENDMENT SECONDED BY BOOTH.
Booth stated he would like to further define the third issue and state that he would like
to see the ADEC permits for the well and septic showing that they are within state
guidelines and regulations allowing for the requested use.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 8
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
Bryson stated he has a problem with requiring that this item be tied directly to the
Encroachment Permit and for that purpose he will vote against the amendment with
that condition in it.
VOTE ON AMENDMENT TO PZ98-8:
GOECKE-YES BOOTH-YES
WERNER-QUADE-NO BRYSON-NO
AMENDMENT FAILS.
Bryson asked if anyone would like to propose any other amendments.
BOOTH MOVED THAT CONDITONAL USE PERMIT PZ96-8 BE
CONDITIONAL ON MR. LOWS PROVIDING THE ADEC PERMITS FOR THE
WELL AND SEPTIC FOR THIS PROPERTY SHOWING THAT BOTH WELL
AND SEPTIC MEET THE ADEC CODE FOR HIS DESIRED USE. SECONDED
BY WERNER-QUADE.
VOTE:
BOOTH-YES
GOECKE-YES
WERNER-QUADE-YES
BRYSON-YES
MOTION PASSED. AMENDMENT BECOMES A PART OF THE MAIN
MOTION.
Bryson asked if there were any other amendments they would like to address.
Werner-Quade stated that Mr. Jahrig made comments about the Beaver Creek area
and he used great adjectives but one she felt was important is the word "fragile" and
that area is very fragile. Werner-Quade stated that as long as the City of Kenai
continues to turn their head to this area and say it doesn't matter and grant these
permits, we will see more and more abuse down there. There will be people coming
after the fact to ask for permits, people writing letters saying they don't want to see
tents and trailers and requesting fences. These are the kinds of things that are real
restrictive and noted she is of the opinion that as a commissioner it is time to take
responsibility for allowing these kinds of permits to continue in the area without
overseeing the actual use of those areas.
VOTE:
WERNER-QUADE-NO GOECKE-NO
BOOTH-NO BRYSON-YES
MOTION FAILS.
Bryson stated he has the correct paragraph regarding appeals. It is on Page 14-58 of
the Kenai Zoning Code. Mr. Bryson read the information noting the appeal must be
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 9
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
made within 30 days in writing to the city clerk and the appeal will be held by the city
council acting as the board of adjustments.
PZ96-9, Conditional Use Permit, Lot 8, Anglers Acres, Part 3-Mr. La Shot
advised this permit would be for an existing two bedroom and one bedroom duplex on
the lot that the applicant wishes to rent nightly and weekly during the summer and
monthly during the winter. Very similar to the last situation.
Public hearing opened.
Will Jahrig stated he feels it is good that we have set a direction for what we want to
see happen down there. Development can be done, it can be done right, and it can be
done to coincide with what we have down there. Jahrig stated he thinks that the
stipulations with water and sewage being permitted properly is very important. Jahrig
stated this area holds into his stomach, stating he likes the area and not just because
he has a business there. Jahrig stated he was raised there, he plays down there, his
kids still play down there and they are going to play down there. Jahrig stated he will
be there for a long time to come. Jahrig stated that if we can try to adhere to some of
these it will be good.
Bryan Lowe stated he has been down there eleven years and noted that he respects the
land there. He stated he runs a very professional operation. Everybody who knows him
knows that he keeps the place clean. Lowe stated that as far as Lot 8, he just
purchased the place. Jahrig mentioned that somebody was running guide businesses
out of the property and Lowe stated that is bull because it was never done. Lowe stated
he purchased the property in April. Lowe stated that he thought there was a
Conditional Land Use Permit and found out there wasn't so he went ahead and
proceeded to get one. Lowe stated his sewer systems have all been done legally. As far
as the flooding, the last 100 year flood we just had, the water never came over the bank
and affected his properties at all. Lowe stated he thinks there is a pissing contest going
on because both of these gentlemen wanted to buy that one piece of property, Lot 17.
Lowe stated he is not in violation; there are a lot of people who are in violation there.
One of them is Conditional Land Use Permits restricting to three boats per dock. Lowe
stated on his permits he has stood by them. He does not run more than three boats on
his dock. There are other problems with people's wells, artesian wells flowing onto his
land, Mr. Nigel's land right next to him has been flowing onto his property for two years
and he has not said a thing. Lowe stated he doesn't think this is fair. That he built a
building there and one corner of it is six inches over. Lowe stated that both these guys
wanted to buy the property from him and he didn't sell it and now they want to fight
him for it. Lowe stated it is not fair.
Ms. Werner-Quade asked Mr. Lowe if he had the proper DEC permits for Lot 8. Lowe
said he does not that he just bought the property in April. Lowe stated that Lot 17 is
DEC coded for three bedroom and the same goes for Lot 8, it is just a house. It is
residential; although, he will be lodging people. Lowe stated there are other people on
the street and stated at least he is trying to be up front and be legal. There are other
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 10
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
people on the street lodging that the city knows nothing about. Lowe stated that if the
city is going to put conditions on him that they need to put them on the whole street,
~ Will Jahrig, Nigel, everybody on the street. Werner-Quade stated she had had DEC fax
her a paper with everybody on Angler Acres who does have the proper permits and that
is why she asked.
MR. GOECKE RECOMMEND APPROVAL PZ96-9 CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR BRYAN LOWS. MOTION SECONDED BY MR. BOOTH.
VOTE:
GOECKE-YES BOOTH-YES
WERNER-QUADE-YES BRYSON-YES
MOTION PASSED.
PZ96-10, Conditional Use Permit, Tract 4, Horseshoe End at River Bend S/D-
Mr. La Shot stated that this Conditional Use Permit would be to convert an existing
single family residential home into a six plex. The property is over two acres. There is
another residence to the east, to the west is a city park, Cunningham Park. La Shot
stated he has attached part of the code, the Land Use Table. This shows that more
than four family dwellings are allowed in this zone by conditional use. There is a
footnote that is also attached to the staff report.
Mr. Bryson questioned for point of clarification that Footnote C has a subscript 3 and
asked if the intent that the footnote on page 14-68 of the code, #3 A through I,
requested to be applied to the permit. La Shot responded yes.
Public hearing opened.
Chris Garcia, owner of the property-stated that last fall he became extremely ill and
was hospitalized and the end result of it is that he is no longer physically able to work.
Stated he is looking for a way to make a living. Garcia stated he owns an extremely
large house and decided that he might as well try to put the house to work for him and
change it into a six Alex. Garcia stated he found out that he has to obtain a Conditional
Use Permit to do it so that is what he has applied for.
Bryson stated that the rural residential zone allows up to a four plex and Bryson
clarified that Garcia would like to put a six plex in. Garcia stated it is his
understanding that he could put up to a four plex without any type of permit but to put
a six plex in requires a permit.
Werner-Quade stated she would like to know about the sites septic and water and what
provisions he has for a six plex. Garcia stated he would have to find out from DEC and
added that there is no sense in spending money until he knows he is allowed to put in
the six plex. Garcia stated he has called engineers to find out and has been told it is a
matter of testing. Garcia stated he has an existing water and sewer and has never had
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 11
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
a problem with it in the 20 years he has lived there. Werner-Quade stated she just
wondered if he had done anything so far and if his intentions were to get a hold of DEC.
~ Garcia stated he can see absolutely no problem with his well, that it is a good artesian
well. Garcia added that he doesn't know the requirements for the gallons of drainage
for the septic system. But, they test it and if it doesn't pass, you change it. Werner-
Quade asked if he would just like to do a rental of the six Alex and have people living
there year round. Garcia responded yes. Garcia added that he will continue to live
there.
Tom Moore, lives across the street from Chris and Delora Garcia. Moore stated he had
had coffee yesterday with the Garcias and talked. Moore stated he built his house two
years ago and is right across from the Garcias. Moore stated he personally feels it will
not do the neighborhood by having a six plex. Moore noted he had spent a considerable
amount of money in building his first home and then to have a six Alex built across the
street. The first thing he did was think that is six different people, two cars a piece,
that is twelve cars, a lot of traffic. Moore stated he cannot support that and that when
he built, the zoning was one way and changes would effect him. Moore stated he didn't
think it was right. Moore advised he had called two Realtors and asked what they
thought about the effect on the property values. Both of them advised Moore that it
would decrease the value 10 to 20 percent; however, it is hard to tell. Somebody could
come up and give you full price, but they said generally speaking that it would not be
unrealistic to say it would drop the value of your house 10 to 20 percent. Moore stated
he had also called an appraiser and asked what he thought. He had been told there is
no scientific data but he said he could tell it wouldn't help. Moore stated he realized
they can do a four plex and that he wouldn't like to see that either but they can do it
and there is nothing he can do. Moore stated he thinks he has some say in a six plex
and he would like Planning and Zoning to respect the money he has invested.
Booth asked if their home was directly across from the Garcia home and that if he
wants to look at the river he has to look at through their home. Moore stated he built
with a river view and showed how much he sees on each side of the Garcia home.
Pat Doyle-Stated that some of the Commission would remember that a couple years
ago he was going to put an RV park across from the Garcia home and that everybody
went against the park. Doyle stated that after hearing all the objections he could see
their point if he was in their place he wouldn't have wanted an RV park across the road
either. Doyle stated he subdivided the property and now he is selling lots along there.
There are three homes there now. Doyle noted he thinks it will devalue the property if
they have a six plex there. Doyle stated he would rather not see it go there as it will
not help it. Doyle added he does not object to a person making a living.
Curt Wilcox of Beaver Loop Road-Stated he feels that due to the close proximity to the
Kenai River that he feels that the word fragile also applies to this area. Wilcox stated
he is at the hearing because he is concerned with the density. Wilcox said he would like
to see some development and noted that all development cannot be stopped. Wilcox
stated in his opinion a six Alex is too much.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 12
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
Ray Barnes of Beaver Loop-Stated he had just built a house on Beaver Loop that is
pretty close to the area. Barnes asked if he could ask a question about the six Alex.
,~ Barnes asked if he decided to rent the six plex on a weekly basis could Garcia do that
during the summer as the same type of permit that was discussed earlier this evening?
La Shot stated that would fall under a different circumstance, weekly or nightly is
different than monthly, long-term rental. Barnes asked if he could be issued a
Conditional Use Permit? La Shot responded that it wouldn't be similar to the issues on
Anglers Drive without an amendment to the permit. La Shot stated that normal,
monthly rental situations can be done without a Conditional Use Permit. Anything
less, short-term nightly rentals, would require amending the Conditional Use Permit to
include that and go through this process again. Barnes stated that Cunningham Park
is adjacent to this area and it is highly used. Barnes noted that he knows they cannot
change it as far as a four plex goes, but as a six plex it increases the river area as the
amount of people who spend their time around there. Barnes added there would be a
lot more traffic, plus Cunningham Park is right next to it. Noting there is a designated
park area with a major six plex. Barnes reiterated that if it is already zoned for a four
plex nothing can be done about that but as far as a six plex he objects to it.
MR. GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ96-10. MOTION
SECONDED BY MR. BOOTH.
Mr. Goecke, speaking to the Garcias, noted that your neighbors are against your idea.
Goecke asked if the Garcias had thought of the feasibility of a four plex and making the
units larger and charging more per month for rent. Goecke added that they have an
ideal location. Garcia stated he is open to that and added that he had sat down and
started doing figuring and realized he could get a six Alex out of the house so decided to
see what would happen. Garcia said that not denying what these neighbors were
saying but that he had spoken to other neighbors and none of them were opposed to it.
Garcia stated he could understand their opposition figuring that their property values
will go down but it is just one of those things. Garcia said he has a large house and it
looked like he could do something with it and when he found out he needed a permit to
do it, he did that. Garcia added that he doesn't think a six plex would cause a traffic
problem on Beaver Loop nothing that there are three gravel pits that have dump trucks
and belly dumps running down there 24 hours a day in the summer.
Bryson offered a point of clarification on the prior motion stating that there were
comments from the city engineer and building official which were not attached to the
motion because they were not specifically addressed. Bryson stated the
recommendations did not address those items in the prior motion. In this case, the
recommendation is to approve subject to public input and footnote C conditions. Bryson
asked if the intent of the maker of the motion to include those footnotes. Mr. Goecke
advised, yes. So noted.
Mr. Barnes asked what the footnotes entailed. Mr. Bryson noted that they are from
page 14-68 of the code and they are additional requirements for the conditional use.
Mr. Bryson read the notes and copies were supplied to the audience.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 13
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
VOTE:
BOOTH-NO
GOECKE-NO
WERNER-QUADE-NO
BRYSON-YES
MOTION FAILED, THREE TO ONE.
Mr. Bryson advised that appeals must be submitted in writing to the city clerk within
30 days of the decision and the appeal shall be heard by the Kenai City Council acting
as a board of adjustment.
Mr. Moore asked if the Garcias appeal if they would be given notice that there will be
another meeting. Bryson responded that City Council would schedule a public hearing.
Mr. Smalley stated it would be advertised in the paper and if you are within "X"
number of feet of the property you would be notified.
FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
NEW BUSINESS:
PZ96-11, Landscape Site Plan Review, Mapco Petroleum, Inc.-Mr. La Shot
stated there were full-scale drawings available. La Shot stated there was general
commercial property and before a building permit can be issued a landscape site plan
must be reviewed. La Shot noted that administration has no problem with the parking,
drainage, or landscaping. Everything appears to be adequate.
Mr. Bryson stated that if the Commission wished to review the full-size plans they were
available and noted that there were portions in the packet which had been reduced.
Mr. Booth clarified that he was an employee of Tesoro but that he will be voting on the
plan but he doesn't see any conflicts of interest. Bryson noted unless there are
comments from the board he would concur.
MR. GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ96-11, LANDSCAPE SITE
PLAN REVIEW, SPUR SUBDIVISION 1, FOR MAPCO. MOTION SECONDED
BY MS. WERNER-QUADE.
VOTE:
WERNER-QUADE-YES GOECKE-YES
BOOTH-YES BRYSON-YES
MOTION PASSED.
Proposed Residential Zone (Michael Christian)-Mr. Bryson noted the packet
contained a submittal by Mike Christian and noted he was in the audience. Bryson
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 14
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
stated if anyone had any questions concerning it, they could ask. Bryson asked Mr.
Christian if he would like to speak to the Commission. Mr. Christian stated he thought
~~ he had written everything in the proposed letter. Christian noted that they see they
could have a problem with developments especially around current subdivisions that
have certain standards. If they are rural residential next to suburban residential, there
is a possibility of poor quality housing, no paved streets, those kinds of things.
Christian stated it would reduce the value of their property. Christian stated they
noticed last year when they looked in depth that they could put duplexes in any of the
subdivisions because there is no code that says single family only. Christian stated
they would like to apply this new code, what they have called Prime Residential Zone,
for single family dwellings, larger size lots, make sure that the sewage systems are
connected to city sewer and water, leaving some trees. Christian stated they have a
problem with certain developers that will clear cut and then promise to re-landscape
and not do a good job. Christian stated they are hoping to leave mature trees on the
property so that the other properties will retain their property value as well. Christian
noted those are the main items that are different from the existing code.
Mr. Bryson stated he would request that the item be placed on the agenda at the next
meeting when the Chairman returns and there is a full staff available. Bryson stated
that several stages have to occur in creating the definition of a zone, requirements of
the zone, and separate from that is the application of those conditions to areas of the
town. And, then council must enact the ordinance. Bryson stated it is a long, time
consuming operation. Christian stated he realized that. Bryson asked if Mr. Walker
~ , would be back for the next meeting and stated he would like the item placed back on
the agenda.
Mr. Smalley asked if it would be suggested that if 51 percent of the land owners sign a
petition to attach to this. Smalley noted that he knows in zoning changes in the past,
such as Rogers area, the city was approached with 51 percent of the land owners.
Bryson stated that the way this was presented there was no petition attached to it,
there are a number of ways of approaching it. It will be up to the council to accept the
method that they prefer. Bryson stated his preference would be as far as commission
acting would be on the basis of a petition. Bryson stated if they were ordered to do
something by council, they would do it. Smalley stated that is what has prevented
them from doing something on "this piece" noting they lacked that 51 percent. Bryson
stated it is quite a large are that they are talking about, around 1000 acres and
virtually most of the lots don't conform to those requirements. Christian stated that
they realize that those that are already subdivisions could not be subjected to the size
lots, but as far as leaving mature trees, sewer and water, and those types of things
Christian stated he felt most people who live in those areas would prefer to see these.
Bryson noted that is the sales pitch Christian would be up against at the council level.
Ms. Werner-Quade thanked Mr. Christian for his time and efforts and the efforts of his
neighbors that went into drafting this proposal. Werner-Quade stated that when she
~ received the letter she felt grateful that someone in the community had made an effort
to put their needs into writing and if these are the needs of surrounding and adjacent
communities, then she thinks this is a good, organized effort.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 15
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
OLD BUSINESS:
Comprehensive Plan-Kebschull advised that what the Commission had been given
in the white folders are the product which were created retrieving the pieces from the
old comprehensive plan. Kebschull noted it had been done by a student at Kenai
Central and stated she appreciated the help received from the vocational program at
KCHS. Kebschull stated that Mr. La Shot had advised the process would be that the
Commission would review the document, a resolution will be on the agenda for the next
meeting. If a resolution is passed, it will be sent to council.
CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS:
Mr. La Shot reported that staff is working on one item and information may be
available at the next meeting.
REPORTS:
City Council-Mr. Smalley apologized for missing the last two meetings as he was
out of town. Smalley reported at the last council meeting there were four scheduled
public comments. Those were: Michelle Brown from the Nature Conservancy of Alaska
presented information and left brochures. Mary Nelson and Lori Landstrom discussed
the Kenai River Festival which in the past was at the Leif Hansen Park. Smalley
stated they were dealing with policy changes at Leif Hansen regarding large groups
being encouraged to use the Ball Park area. As it turned out, none of the suggested
policies were adopted. The festival is scheduled for the Leif Hansen Park the second
weekend in June. Duane Bannock, Mrs. Steffey, and Kathy Scott reported to council on
the Challenger Learning Center and council appropriated $1,000 to file the application
process. This is still being prepared and the city has not been selected as the
"designated site." Smalley noted there are still several stages to go through. They also
presented at the cities of Kenai and Soldotna chambers. John from the Kenai
Peninsula Chapter of Global Relief spoke about Arbor Day and that will be held at the
lot by the Senior Center around May 20th. Assemblyman Navarre and Assemblywoman
Glick were supposed to speak about the proposed concern of the Kenai River but they
did not come to the meeting. There were twelve public hearing. Vice-mayor Measles
ran the meeting and it went real well. They were straight forward. One that was
defeated was Resolution C-5, that was awarding a fuel service contract to Kenai Airport
Fuel Service. Smalley noted that the city shop has had difficulty with the gas and
diesel pumps not functioning property and requiring massive amounts of repair. So,
they have been purchasing it through a pump at a set fee. The resolution would have
been to purchase gasoline through December 31, 1996. Bids were accepted and they
~ were the low bidder. Smalley stated that some council members felt that the city
__ should be self-contained and figures were not available at the time as to how much it
would cost to repair the pumps. Smalley reported that in the last four years the city
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 16
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
has spent close to $25,000 on the present system and it requires additional work at this
time costing close to $12,000. At this time the city is on a day-by-day basis purchasing
j gas. La Shot added that the diesel dispensers are operating and they are doing some
electric work on the gasoline pumps. Smalley stated it will probably be brought back
up at the next meeting as the resolution has attached to it the contract for the docks.
Under old business, reasonable suspicion of drug and alcohol testing policy was
discussed and it was okayed. Smalley stated the city was required by law by January
to have in effect a policy dealing with drivers who have CDLs. The city went further
and drafted a policy that covers city employees operating city vehicles. Smalley stated
police and fireman are exempted under federal guidelines. Smalley stated that the
policy stated that occasionally you might have a law enforcement officer in possession of
a controlled substance because he or she may be transporting from a scene such
materials. Possession would have to be looked at. Consumption is a different story.
(Discussion on the drug and alcohol policy.) Smalley read the policy to the Commission.
Council also approved two lease requests.
Borough Planning-Mr. Bryson reported there was a meeting last Monday night.
Primary items of comment and input were: Unfinished business included the draft
proposed Cook Inlet NPDES permit for oil and gas exploration in the lower Cook Inlet
which was approved. The finding at the borough level is the proposed activity is in
conformance with the Coastal Zone Management Plan. Vacations: Vacated a portion
of Karen Lane for replatting purposes in the Sterling area; vacated a portion of Moose
Turd Avenue on Kalifornsky Beach Road. Bryson stated this is in close proximity to
where the highway washed out several years ago with summer time runoff. There is a
deep gully there and a small tract of land that was held in adjacent tract. The right of
way that was both an easement and dedicated over the top of it was petitioned to be
vacated. That was approved. The adjacent tract is proposing to dedicate an access
down the gully itself for pedestrian purposes for beach access. That vacation approval
is subject to state approval. The right of way the borough can vacate, the easement
underneath the state has veto power for. Eighteen plats were reviewed. From the city
of Kenai, Misty Havens preliminary plat, Richka Park, Norville Replat, Sprucewood
Glen No. 7, and Habitat Acres Addition 1 were reviewed. Bryson questioned if Habitat
Acres had come before Planning and Zoning and La Shot stated it had come in the form
of a cul-de-sac development but the only portion was one lot on the corner that could be
served without full development. La Shot stated he thinks this is the finalization of
that.
Administration-La Shot reported the Commission had been given copies of the latest
Kenai River Habitat Protection Ordinance being proposed by the borough which had
been passed out a meeting last night. La Shot stated they should note the dates for the
public hearings. If anyone has any input, that would be the time to do it. La Shot
stated the city still has concerns regarding prior existing uses and the procedure for
variances as it would pertain to the lower river and the industry and canneries in the
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 17
FEBRUARY 14, 1996
area and how easily they could expand or keep up with businesses with the ordinance
in place. At the meeting DNR Commissioner John Snibley (sp?) gave a presentation,
Department of Parks and Rec Director Jim Stratton also spoke, Lisa Parker and Don
Gilman of the borough also spoke, and a couple of other individuals from the state. One
item discussed was the Kenai River Center which is co-sponsored by State Parks, State
Fish & Game, and the borough and will be opening soon. The center will help provide
education to the public on matters of habitat restoration, acquisition of permits along
the river. It was hoped to be a one stop shopping center for permits which should help
to coordinate the situation.
Mr. Smalley stated the other concerns the council had in reference to the habitat
ordinance was that the assembly discussed that from the Warren Ames Bridge west
being excluded. The problem that the city had with that is that there would be two
different sets of property owners affected by different sets of regulations that were on
the river. And, the council had difficulty with having two standards.
Mr. Bryson stated that what is proposed by the borough now that the city can opt out of
enforcing it. The way it is written, it would apply whether it is inside or outside the
city and it has a potential of developing into a confrontation. Smalley stated then the
borough would have to come in. Bryson stated yes the borough would have to enforce it
rather than the city if the city declined.
ADJOURNMENT:
Meeting adjourned at approximately 9 p.m.
Resp tfully submitted:
,~
Marilyn Kebschull
Administrative Assistant
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 18
FEBRUARY 14, 1996