Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-07-24 P&Z Minutes`' ~ CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION **AGENDA** Council Chambers, 210 Fidalgo July 24, 1996, 7:00 p.m. Chairman Kevin Walker 1. ROLL CALL: 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 10, 1996 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. Encroachment Permit-Lot 7, Lawton Subdivision, (113 Walker Lane) Kenai, AK-PZ96-52 b. Reconsideration of Prime Residential Zone-PZ96-41 7. NEW BUSINESS: a. Landscape/Site Plan Review-Lot 10, Block 2, Cook Inlet Industrial Air Park- PZ96-51 b. Proposed Sign Code for Townsite Historic District 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. James Street Cabins (Miscellaneous Inf. from Council Meeting) b. 1996 Borough Calendar c. Notice of Borough Planning Commission Action of July 8, 1996 d. Telephone message from Betsy Arbelovsky dated 7/16/96 e. "Notice of Meetings" mailed to Woodland Subdivision Residents Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: Page 2 July 24, 1996 14. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF KENAI UNAPPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 24, 1996 ***MINUTES*** 1. ROLL CALL: Members present: Carl Glick, Phil Bryson, Teresa Werner-Quade, Ron Goecke, Karen Mahurin, Kevin Walker Members absent: John Booth Others present: Councilman Hal Smalley, City Engineer Jack La Shot, Administrative Assistant Marilyn Kebschull 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: GLICK MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF AGENDA AS PRESENTED AND ASKED FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY GOECKE. NO ONE OPPOSED UNANIMOUS CONSENT. AGENDA APPROVED. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 10, 1996 MAHURIN MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JULY 10, 1996, PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING. MOTION SECONDED BY GOECKE. GOECKE ASKED FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. NO ONE OPPOSED UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MINUTES APPROVED. 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. Encroachment Permit-Lot 7, Lawton Subdivision, (113 Walker Lane) Kenai, AK-PZ96-52 GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ96-52, ENCROACHMENT PERMIT, LOT 7, LAWTON SUBDIVISION. MOTION SECONDED BY GLICK. Chairman Walker asked for additional staff comment. La Shot stated none. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. NO TESTIMONY. HEARING CLOSED. Item brought back to the Commission for discussion. No discussion. VOTE: GLICK YES BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES MAHURIN YES WALKER YES MOTION PASSED. b. Reconsideration of Prime Residential Zone-PZ96-41 Chairman Walker explained that the Commission had before them reconsideration of PZ96-41 which is a resolution recommending approval to the City Council the establishment of a prime residential zone to be added to the zones listed in Title 14 of the Kenai Municipal Code. Walker stated this item is already before the Commission as result of the reconsideration vote. Walker asked for additional staff comment. La Shot stated he had spoken with Phil Bryson regarding a couple items in the table. La Shot drew attention to page 102 of the Development Requirements Table. La Shot suggested that the word "and" be removed under the column of uses in the far left, minimum lot area, that says with and without public water and/or sewer. La Shot suggested that underneath "without" the word "and" be removed. La Shot stated it should probably say "public water or sewer." La Shot stated that they had also discussed that under the far right hand column that some square footage should be considered to be put in the table. La Shot added that perhaps they had intended that there not be an RP zone without public water or sewer; however, La Shot stated he thought there could be in a rural area. La Shot commented these were just a couple things for the commission to think about. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: Michael Christian, 613 Maple-Christian stated he is the person who has been trying to implement this and bring this about along with the committee who is behind him. Christian stated he would like to continue to stress that the city needs something like this. Christian stated he thinks the city needs a residential zone with only single family dwellings, a zone without conditional permits for businesses and other types of things, a residential zone without bed and breakfast or the possibilities of other activities going on. Christian stated these are the things they had tried to address. Christian stated he didn't think they should include something that would allow onsite sewer and water and that was one of the points of the zone to have them connected to city water and sewer. Christian stated that was a main objective with single family dwellings. Christian recommended that that not be changed. If there is still a question in people's minds on the size of the lots or the tree provision, Christian stated he thought that would be something that would be worth looking at again if that is their only objection. Christian stated he felt that they should keep it that this zone should be Planning & Zoning Commission Page 2 Minutes July 24, 1996 connected to city sewer and water and single family dwellings with very little possibility of conditional use other than single family dwellings. Walker asked if the Commission had questions for Mr. Christian. Walker stated he had a question, that is, where specifically would you like to see this zone utilized? Christian stated within the city limits, he didn't think with the city sewer and water system that the city has that they should allow onsite when utilities are anywhere reasonably near. Christian stated he would personally like to see areas on the other side of the airport where there are numerous areas that he has suggested as possible sites. Christian stated he would like to see it in just about any undeveloped area where there are nice, wooded areas that could be turned into residential areas. Christian stated maybe the Section 36 would be a good place, especially on the bluff. Christian stated the 160 acres next to Inlet Woods on either side of it would be good places. Christian stated that the area they are trying to get the city to buy but if they can't that would be a good area. Christian commented that he thinks they need this and would like to start by getting it on the books and looking for areas that it would fit. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Item brought back to the Commission for discussion. Bryson stated that concerning his discussion with Mr. La Shot about the changes in the column under "Uses" on page 5 of 6, in reading the verbiage it says "with public water and/or sewer" and below that it is "without public water and/or sewer." Bryson stated that "with public water and/or sewer" gives three options. Having both water and sewer, having just water, or having just sewer. Bryson stated the line that says "without public water and/or sewer" has three options also, without either water or sewer, without just water, or without just sewer. Bryson stated that two of those cases in each of those, they overlap on the other definition. Bryson stated that for that reason he discussed a change in those column definitions to make those lines exclusive to eliminate argument. BRYSON PROPOSED THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT NOTING THE MOTION BEFORE THE COMMISSION IS TO APPROVE RESOLUTION PZ96- 41 AS IT PRESENTLY READS. UNDER USES ON PAGE 5 OF 6, CHANGE THE THIRD LINE TO READ "WITH BOTH PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER." SECOND PART OF THE AMENDMENT, PROPOSE CHANGING TO READ "WITHOUT PUBLIC WATER OR SEWER." Bryson stated he would propose changing lot areas but would address that later. MOTION SECONDED BY GLICK. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 3 Minutes July 24, 1996 Walker asked if there was discussion on the amendment. Mahurin asked if Bryson could explain noting she was not understanding and thought this was covered under the "with" and now they would be adding a third one. Walker questioned, "We're adding a third one?" Mahurin stated she was unclear what the proposition was. Bryson stated there are two sub paragraphs to his amendment. The first one is the column under "Uses" the line that presently reads "with public water and/or sewer," propose changing to "with both public water and sewer." The column under "Uses" the line that reads "without public water and/or sewer" is proposed to be changed to read "without public water or sewer." Chairman Walker asked for further discussion. None noted, Walker asked for the vote to be called. Mahurin clarified Walker asking for the question to be called as she had not heard the motion. Walker clarified it had been a motion by Bryson that was seconded by Glick. VOTE ON AMENDMENT 1: BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES MAHURIN YES GLICK YES WALKER YES AMENDMENT PASSED. Chairman Walker stated that brought the Commission back to the main motion. Bryson stated he had an additional comment noting that the same situation in terminology may exist on the next section below that. Bryson added that he hadn't looked at that, that being under minimum multi-family lot areas. Walker noted that under this proposed zone there would not be any multi-family dwellings. Bryson stated that this would need to be corrected. La Shot asked if the amendment would eliminate the possibility of having one of the municipal services noting the first part of the amendment would be without public water or sewer. La Shot stated the and/or was meant to be either one or the other. Bryson stated staff may want to look at this noting his intent was to have one be eliminated. La Shot asked what the wording was on the first part, "with both public water and sewer." La shot noted this would eliminate the possibility of one. Bryson stated it does in his mind but it may not in a legal mind. Mahurin stated she needed a clarification adding that maybe she didn't understand this. Mahurin asked the Chair for guidance adding that she supports the idea of the residential zone with public water and sewer. Mahurin stated she understood that what Mr. Bryson did is that under certain lot sizes they would have to have both water and sewer and on a different lot size, they could have one or the other. Mahurin stated she understood they would not be eliminating that possibility and asked if she was correct in her understanding. Walker stated that is correct adding that lot size is blank at this point in time. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 4 Minutes July 24, 1996 Bryson stated he would propose another amendment. BRYSON PROPOSED CHANGING THE LOT AREAS UNDER THE RP ZONE. THE LOT SIZE ON LINE LISTED WITH BOTH PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER PROPOSE CHANGING FROM 15,000 SQUARE FEET TO 8,000 SQUARE FEET. IN THE LOT AREA LEFT BLANK ON THE LINE WITHOUT PUBLIC WATER OR SEWER PROPOSE ENTERING 20,000 SQUARE FEET. WALKER CLARIFIED IF THIS WAS MEANT TO BE A MOTION. BRYSON CONFIRMED. MOTION SECONDED BY GLICK. Walker asked for discussion on the motion. None noted. Walker asked if there would be any objection to opening this amendment to public input. Bryson stated he would request it. Michael Christian-Christian stated he had lost track somewhere noting they were considering reducing the lot size to 8,000. Christian asked if this was correct for connection to city water. Christian noted this isn't very far from the 7,200 which is already in the RS and RS2. Christian asked what the point was to having a new zone if you go down that low. The only difference would be requiring paved streets and gutters and the tree thing. They are still tiny little lots. Christian stated he doesn't see the point of it. He would like to see the lot size up, the on-site septic and/or water totally out of this zone. Christian noted that is allowed in other residential zones. This is to a zone that is special, unique, something that people would want to buy in this area because they know they will not have a conditional use next to them, know they will have city water and sewer. Christian stated he strongly recommends, suggests, or pushes that we keep the lot sizes up and keep on-site water and sewer out of this zone. Christian stated if they drop them down this far, just go with the RS-1 or RS-2 and make them single family dwellings and throw the whole thing out. Christian stated he felt they had cut this down at the knees and it is not the same zone anymore. Kristine Schmidt-Stated she wanted to say that she agrees with Mike, what he said about trying to keep the lot sizes larger and also to do away with allowing any kind of on-site water and septic. Schmidt stated she was not quite sure where they were at and asked if it is 20,000 square feet now. (From the audience, Christian stated the way it was passed it was 20,000.) Schmidt stated they had said earlier they would be willing to go down some but not all the way down to 8,000. Schmidt stated that is just too small with what people are trying to do with this zone. Chairman Walker clarified for Ms. Schmidt's information that the zone that was presented this evening shows 15,000 square feet. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 5 Minutes July 24, 1996 Malcolm McBride, 1111 5th Avenue-McBride stated he would encourage that the lot sizes remain as large as possible in that area and that well and septic be discouraged in that area. McBride stated that the well water in that area is marginal quality and septic, considering the low water table in the area, tends to affect well water in that area. McBride stated that if there is to be new construction, it should be on city water and sewer. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Item brought back to the Commission for discussion. Bryson stated his intent on changing the lot sizes that comes on the line with both public water and sewer is to enable the vast majority of the people who are petitioning to create this district to be able to be included in this district which they would otherwise be unable to do. Bryson stated his intent on adding on the line that with only public water or sewer is that this is an ordinance that will affect he entire city and a good half of the city is not on city water and sewer and in some cases they consist of very nice subdivisions and they are very much interested in maintaining that lifestyle and they presently have the same problem with multi-family dwellings. This would enable them to utilize that resolution for protection. Bryson reiterated this is an ordinance for the whole city, not just for one tract or location within the city. Mahurin stated she would be voting no on this adding if she thought there was any support, adding she didn't feel there is, she would try to amend it to reach a compromise between 8,000 and 15,000. Mahurin added that knowing how the vote went before that she is the lone vote. Mahurin stated she would like to have the record reflect her previous comments and frustration with the process and with the reconsideration. Mahurin added that she definitely supports the idea of the prime residential zone but does not support the amendment to 8,000 square feet. Walker stated he would like to add a comment noting that he too does not support this amendment. Walker stated it is his belief that if the city was going to have an area without water or sewer that is in fact single family that is in fact a premium area then we should go to the Rural Residential 1 category and go all the way up to 40,000 or one acre lots. Walker stated he feels that this amendment with the 8,000 square foot lot size is definitely not what the petitioners had requested. Walker added that he feels that with the large number of Conditional Use Permits in Woodland and the number of multiple family dwellings that are already there that that area would have to grandfather in a lot of non-conforming uses or wouldn't be eligible for it anyway. Walker stated thus he feels that the 8,000 and 20,000 square feet are basically a moot point and will not be supporting this amendment. Mahurin stated she didn't believe that the petitioners have asked to have their current residential area rezoned. Mahurin added that she felt the discussions that have been Planning & Zoning Commission Page 6 Minutes July 24, 1996 held have clearly indicated that was not the intent to rezone a current existing zone but to create a new zone. Mahurin stated this has been stated over and over and she would like to repeat that she has never supported and the petitioners have not asked for it. Mahurin stated that is not an issue that should be impacting this decision. VOTE ON AMENDMENT 2: WERNER-QUADE NO GOECKE NO MAHURIN NO GLICK NO BRYSON YES WALKER NO AMENDMENT FAILED. Chairman Walker stated that they are back to the main motion as previously amended. Walker asked for any further discussion. Werner-Quade stated she had heard comments about not being willing to change very much of the Prime Residential Zone. Werner-Quade stated she has had some concerns for quite a while and one was the lot size. Werner-Quade stated she had just heard them say they did not want to concede to 8,000 adding that she had gone over this in her mind thinking that maybe they should modify the RS-2 zone. Werner-Quade stated she agrees there is a need for single family dwellings only. But, as far as creating a zone that she personally does not see a real need for, it is hard to be supportive of the Prime Residential Zone as it is now. Werner-Quade commented that in the community she moved from there was an area that was developed and the people who bought into the development had the control of the development. Werner-Quade stated it was much as they had stated they would like the RP to be. Residents had their own key card to get in, it had the amenities of a beautiful place to live and they had control perhaps even their own zoning staff. If anything changed, they all had to get together to make a change. Werner-Quade stated this seems to be more of how she views this. Werner- Quade added she doesn't see a need now but does see a need to look into the RS-2 zone and made it as compatible with their needs as possible. Werner-Quade reiterated that one of her biggest concerns was the lot size. Werner-Quade stated that in all fairness she just cannot see that kind of a lot size being a viable option for people to buy into or for developers to pursue it. Werner-Quade stated it was her understanding that administration had contacted developers asking them their thoughts on the zone and that there was no response. Kebschull confirmed that there had been no responses received. Werner-Quade commented she was in a quandary and is unable to support it in it's current form adding that they need to know that she is not totally against the vision. Walker stated he had one comment pertaining to an information item in the packet under 12 e, "Notice of Public Meetings." Walker asked the Commission to note this committee adding it is The Committee to Protect Woodland, Inc. Walker read, "We are currently working on two major projects. One is petitioning the Kenai City Council to Planning & Zoning Commission Page 7 Minutes July 24, 1996 buy or trade Richka Creek property which the developer does not oppose. And two, ~ lobbying the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council to adopt the Prime Residential Zone which restricts development in the zone to single family residents." Walker stated that when he read this "Notice of Meetings" it reaffirmed in his belief that it is the major intent of this proposed zone to restrict development, not enhance development and perhaps more than anything to stop development within certain subdivisions of town. Walker stated that does raise serious questions in his mind. Walker stated he feels this is perhaps the building of Pandora's Box. At this time with other zones that are even less restrictive on the books such as RS-1 and RS-2 that are used very little if any at all by any of developers or subdivisions. Walker stated he has a very strong concern in creating the RP zone to even be further restrictive. Walker stated he feels it is the intent of this zone to be inflicted upon other persons and not necessarily the persons that own these properties in which this zone is being utilized. Walker stated he will not support this zone based on these items. VOTE MAIN MOTION: GOECKE NO MAHURIN YES GLICK YES BRYSON NO WERNER-QUADE NO WALKER NO MOTION FAILED. 7. NEW BUSINESS: a. Landscape/Site Plan Review-Lot 10, Block 2, Cook Inlet Industrial Air Park PZ96-51 GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ96-51 SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR LOT 10, BLOCK 2, COOK INLET INDUSTRIAL AIR PARK. MOTION SECONDED BY WERNER-QUADE. Walker asked for additional staff comment. La Shot noted that Mr. VanZee is here if the Commission would like to ask any questions about the site plan. Dan VanZee, owner of Lot 10, Block 2, Cook Inlet Industrial Air Park-Van Zee advised they plan to use this property as the office and car sales operation for his Hertz Rent-A-Car business at the Kenai Airport. The site plan is plain and simple. There will be planters out front. VanZee noted he does not want to build a traditional car lot with big signs, he wants it very understated. VanZee stated they would like to have something like the planters where they can be changed on a seasonal basis. VanZee noted there are several trees on the lot that they are trying to preserve but there will be quite a bit of excavation yet to come with the sewer and water and that will come close to these trees. VanZee noted he is not sure that they will be able to save them and that is why they were not put in the plan. VanZee added they will try to save the trees that Planning & Zoning Commission Page 8 Minutes July 24, 1996 do exist in front of the lot as a buffer and try to hide the HEA transformer box. VanZee stated that other than that they want to use landscape timbers to build planter boxes by the street in back of the right of way. They plan to alternate the planting of wildflowers and different flowers. VanZee reiterated he wants the lot to be very understated and simple adding the utilization of flowers will serve his purpose. Mahurin asked if they intend the front to be asphalt or if they intend to leave a grass green strip and asked what the planter boxes will rest on. VanZee stated the grass will be left from the curb back to the lot line adding that is about 15 feet. VanZee stated that the planter boxes will be placed on the lot line. VanZee stated there will be grass from the curb to the planters using treated material right on grade and fill them up with top soil and soils and plant in the boxes. Mahurin asked roughly what percentage of the lot will be cleared. VanZee stated the majority of the lot is already cleared and is all gravel except for a strip along the front where they will put the planters between the city's right of way and the actual beginning of the lot. The lot doesn't start at the curb, it starts back 10 to 15 feet from the curb. That area will be left in grass and then there is probably another 8 to 10 feet of grass back to where they will put the planters. Mahurin commented that she had not driven by to look at it and VanZee explained it is right next to the airplane. Item brought back to the Commission for discussion. No further discussion. VOTE: MAHURIN YES GLICK YES BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES WALKER YES MOTION PASSED. b. Proposed Sign Code for Townsite Historic District Chairman Walker noted that this is a proposed sign code for the Townsite Historic Zone and the question the Commission is being asked tonight is to advise the administration on how to proceed with TSH Board's proposal. Walker stated the proposal is on the sign code for the TSH zone. MAHURIN MOVED THAT WE DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A MORE COMPREHENSIVE ORDINANCE FORMAT FOR THE TOWNSITE HISTORIC ZONE SIGN CODE. MOTION SECONDED BY GLICK. Walker asked for additional staff comments. La Shot stated he would recommend the same as is requested in the memo and that the item be sent back and more time be spent on it. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 9 Minutes July 24, 1996 Item brought back for discussion. Goecke stated he thought they had hashed over the sign code when setting up the zone in the first place. Goecke added that he had not been able to find his information from that time. Goecke stated he seemed to remember that they had stated what they thought the sign code should be at that time. Walker stated that was some the Commission member's impression. Mahurin stated she was not on the Commission when the change was made adding she was not aware of the discussions. Mahurin stated she does know that the very small portion of town that is left as the Historic Townsite has a certain flavor that the Historic Townsite Board is trying to preserve and one of the areas of concern when she was on the TSH Board was signs. Mahurin stated that what they had initially brought as a suggested code left a lot questions and definitely the attorney saw legal problems with it. Mahurin stated she thought they were being asked to give the attorney some latitude to draw up something for the Townsite adding that is a different area from the rest of the town. Mahurin noted they are not talking about Mapco type signs. They are talking about wanting to preserve and protect the nature of that area and that is why they are talking about the signs. Mahurin stated she supports what they are trying to do adding this is a way to conform to other parts of the code too. Glick stated he also thought they had gone through a lot of discussion adding he went back and looked at his notes which showed they did discuss signs. But, in the final version that was voted on Glick stated he didn't see where the sign changes were included. Glick stated that maybe he missed it but looking through his information he couldn't find it. Glick stated he personally didn't see anything wrong with letting the city attorney bring something back for them to look at and then they could decide if they like it or want to make changes. Bryson stated that for the record he questioned if the intent of the motion was to incorporate the recommendations of the attorney. Mahurin stated that was correct. Walker commented that he understands the TSH Board's interest and zeal in proposing a different sign code for the TSH zone. Walker stated his concern that again they are addressing one small portion of town. The entire city is in need of addressing the sign code. Walker stated there are sign code problems all over town and this may or may not solve problems for TSH. Walker stated he felt it was improper for them to address the sign code in just the TSH district without addressing it in the rest of town. Walker stated because of this he will not be supporting this measure to direct the city attorney to proceed. Walker stated this is a concern that he has expressed during the Comp Plan reviews. This same issue has been discussed several times adding he feels this question is again before the Commission in a slightly different format but still has the same questions. Walker stated he fells it is inappropriate to address the sign code in one Planning & Zoning Commission Page 10 Minutes July 24, 1996 particular district and not another district even if it is an important a district as the TSH. Walker reiterated he will not be supporting this measure. VOTE: GLICK YES BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE NO MAHURIN YES WALKER NO MOTION PASSED. Chairman Walker advised the motion had passed and City Attorney Cary Graves will be requested to proceed. BREAK 7:50 P.M.-ON RECORD AT 7:55 P.M. 8. OLD BUSINESS: 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: 10. REPORTS: a. City Council Smalley stated that under public comment Kelly Wolfe came and talked about a restoration program on the Kenai River, a Youth Corps program. Wolfe presented a proposal to have the City of Kenai consider such restoration on the banks of the Kenai River. Joe Lee spoke to council about the James Street four plex problem situation. Smalley stated other folks also spoke. Smalley stated it was discussed and he had relayed some of the discussion that had taken place at P&Z. Smalley stated it was just a discussion item. Under public hearings, Item C2 and 3 were tabled. Under committee reports there was a discussion concerning the Assisted Living Complex. They had gone to get financing. They were able to obtain financing through GMAC but there was a rider attached saying that HUD had to agree to the permit. Smalley stated that HUD feels that the facility in Homer is providing sufficient spaces for the number of individuals who require assisted living. Smalley stated they have gone out to get other private financing and the plan is to break ground in 45 days. The KVCC reported that they are up to 600 visitors per day visiting the facility and they expect that number to increase at the end of the month through the middle of August. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 1 1 Minutes July 24, 1996 There was discussion concerning the proposed purchase/trade of the Hakkinen lot in Old Town and that will come up again in the fall. There was a lot of discussion concerning Item 2, Kenai River Access Dipnet Fishery. Phone calls have been received from individuals that are upset over the gate and the lack of parking. Smalley stated they want to see signs suggesting where parking is available in other parts of town, i.e. the old Carr's Mall. City Council feels that the gate at this point in time the right step to go. Smalley added that the state has placed the city in a precarious position by opening this dipnet fishery and allowing such an impact by significant number of people. Smalley stated they have undertaken as best they can to control some of the traffic on the dunes. Smalley stated the gate will be unlocked the middle of August. Smalley stated there still are plans to put walkways down there and informative signs stating the importance of the dunes. Walker stated he was lead to believe that the Fish and Game, Fish and Wildlife deemed that this particular area at the dunes is a low value habitat versus further up river. Smalley stated they had. Walker noted that the city is still taking great measures to protect it versus other properties in the city. Smalley stated they believe that once the dunes go that the erosion will move more rapidly up into the bluff area. Smalley added that on the opposite side of the river we still have the encroachment of private property, people driving across individuals lawns, and a gentleman who has lost approximately 75 feet of lawn over the years. Signs have been posted. One of the signs was used as a boogie board as a vehicle that drove right over the top of it. The sign has since been replaced. Smalley stated he has received numerous phone calls from individuals who are upset because they can't drive over private property to get to the beach. They are upset because they have to drive over the water. Smalley stated he informed them that the city cannot give permission to drive on someone's private property. Smalley added that this is a citizen of the city and a taxpayer and the city needs to do the best they can to protect taxpayers and property owners within the city. Smalley stated he suggested they might call the State Fish and Game to see if they would be willing to post someone down there to help direct traffic in a legal and safe manner. Smalley stated that under New Business a safety fence has been placed off of Mission Avenue to help keep people back away from the bluff. Smalley stated he was unsure how many feet the fence was. It was hoped that this would keep people from going over the bluff because every time someone goes over the bluff more erosion continues to take place and occur. Under Item 6 the Chamber of Commerce presented a resolution that they had passed regarding the Kenai City Manager. The resolution was to ask the council to consider several things about Mr. Manninen in dealing with him. Smalley stated there was discussion concerning the issue and council primarily did not voice objection to a body presenting a resolution, or whatever they wish to call it, it is their opinion. Smalley stated that as long as he is on this body he will openly listen to the opinions of the public who come in and want to speak. Smalley noted he doesn't necessarily agree with Planning & Zoning Commission Page 12 Minutes July 24, 1996 it and in this particular issue he did not agree with the statements that were made, but they are entitled to make those statements. Smalley noted that Item 7 was not discussed. Smalley added that it was discussed in the past and primarily as to which financial institutions are involved. Goecke asked regarding Item 7 he thought that the city had in fact looked at other financial institutions and that Mr. Smalley had told him that nobody would do it as cheap as what the present financial institution would do it for. Thus, the city was consequently not going to take it out of there. Goecke asked what prompted the discussion. Smalley stated they have had several discussions over the years to look to see where the city is investing their money. There has never been an RFP issued. Smalley stated that the city Finance Director at the time, Charlie Brown, felt that the city was getting a great deal where it was. Smalley stated that some of the councilman over the years have voiced this concern. That being, you don't know what is available if you don't ask. Smalley stated what prompted it was a discussion that took place at the Chamber of Commerce meeting. Smalley added that since he had not attended the Chamber of Commerce meeting he could not speculate on that. Goecke stated that Smalley had told him that in fact the city had looked at other financial institutions and do it on a regular basis. Goecke stated that now he felt Smalley was hedging that a little bit adding he was curious if the city had in fact looked at this and why are they now saying they should look at it. Smalley stated the city Finance Director at the time had indicated that he had looked at other firms and did not find them to be as viable as the present one. Smalley. stated that until there was any change, the Finance Director had recommended that the city stay where it was. At that time, there were two councilman who had objected and wanted to see an RFP issued. Smalley stated this item has been discussed by council several times in the past. Smalley noted that the city has approximately $27 million dollars invested with one banking institution. Werner-Quade stated she had a comment regarding Item B-2 adding she had been at the council meeting. Werner-Quade stated that while the James Street development certainly sounds non-threatening, Mr. Lee did come before the council and presented copies of a signed petition from the residents in the area containing 18 signatures along with photos that had been presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the June 26th meeting. Lee spoke to the fact that there is not a four plex there, it is four separate units on four separate foundations noting that is not allowed in that zone. Werner-Quade commented there were a couple council members who were beside themselves that this had actually gone on and they had asked the Building Official, Mr. Springer, if this man had gotten a permit prior to construction. Werner-Quade stated the answer was no that he had constructed these units and then obtained a building permit for a four plex. Werner-Quade stated that Mr. Lee had made a very aproposed statement at that time, "Well if it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck and it acts like a duck, where I came from it is a duck." Werner-Quade stated she remembered this because she had gone by and looked at the James Street project development Planning & Zoning Commission Page 13 Minutes July 24, 1996 noting it is an illegal use in the zone. Werner-Quade added there are cabins sitting in an RS zone stating you are not even allowed to get a Conditional Use Permit to have cabins in that zone. Werner-Quade commented that somewhere along the line someone decided that it could be (at this point read) "tying detached structures together by some sort of breezeway and calling it a four plex." Werner-Quade stated that when this issue came before P&Z it was presented as a four plex. Werner-Quade noted that had Mr. Lee not come to the meeting and presented the Commission with the petition and photos, they would not have known that there were four units there. Werner-Quade stated that the end result was that City Council sent the issue back to administration. Councilman Smalley stated that it is correct that Lee did present the same information that was presented at Planning and Zoning. Smalley stated that part of the discussion that took place at the council level was should a stop order be put on this man's development. Smalley stated that was seriously discussed and he supported not putting a stop order on it because if the city presented the individual from completing the project as he had applied for, adding he did start the project without a permit. Smalley commented that most people have in mind when hearing the word four plex what it means. Smalley added that when you look at these buildings (drew on board) showing if you put a roof here and here, he would qualify by code. Smalley stated that as far as being an illegal use by the number of buildings that he has in regards to the lot line, if he applies for a permit to remove a lot line since he owns the property to the side, he wouldn't have a problem. Smalley stated code says that he could have more than one cabin. Smalley noted we call them cabins, because they appear to be cabins in every way, but he could rent them by the month and be legal. Walker commented that he would still have to comply with all square footage requirements for units. Smalley stated that all he would have to do is remove the lot line adding there is not a square footage requirement on an apartment. Walker stated 7200 square foot per principle dwelling. Smalley again noted if he removes the lot line he would be fine. Walker asked if that would give him 3,000 square feet. Smalley stated he would be legal with the city adding if he put this under one roof, by all definitions in the code, he would be fine. Smalley noted that if the city were to prevent him from completing his project that he has been permitted by the city to build then the city could be negligent in his development and causing him financial hardship. b. Borough Planning Bryson noted they had a meeting on July 22nd and the agenda is in the packet. There were no changes from the preliminary agenda. Bryson stated there was considerable discussion and public input on Item F-2, the land use permit to operate the halfway house. Bryson noted this carried their meeting past their cut off time. Bryson added that the rules were suspended and the meeting continued. Bryson stated that once the public hearing was closed, there was a request for a work session which has been Planning & Zoning Commission Page 14 Minutes July 24, 1996 scheduled for August 1st. Bryson added he thought it was at 6 p.m. but the time should be verified. Administration has recommended approval of the application with conditions. Among those conditions are not permitting sexual felons either convicted or paroled to occupy the facility. Bryson noted this would go to the work session and the Planning Commission will develop the findings of fact. Item H-1 reconsidered Item 1. Bryson stated that administration had no change in their recommendations and their original motion was reconstituted without change. All plats were approved. Bryson stated that under J-1 Habitat Protection there was an application for a Conditional Use Permit. Bryson stated that was denied. Another application for a Conditional Use along the river. In this situation the use had occurred previously, the cabin had burnt down, and the applicant was requesting to rebuild in the same location. That was approved. It was felt that to deny would deny him all use of property. Goecke asked regarding Item F-2, when did the Borough start zoning items such as this. Bryson stated the ordinance was passed about two months ago. Bryson stated this was a "Mutt and Jeff' ordinance which included two items, half way houses and borrow pits. That was rapidly pushed through the assembly and it was approved. Bryson stated this is the first item that he is aware of two come up under this ordinance. Goecke asked if the Borough can actually do this--zone for this and not anything else. Goecke stated since he had moved here in 1976, it has been a cry that the people in the borough did not want zoning. Bryson stated that his perception is that in the last two years there has been a major shift in philosophy concerning that. Bryson commented that he feels they shouldn't be addressing these things on individual subjects. c. Administration La Shot stated the city is in the beginning stages of seeking designers for the fire training facility that the city may be building. La Shot noted the consultants who are preparing the Airport Master Plan will be attending the Airport Commission's meeting in August. La Shot encouraged the Commissioners to attend the meeting. La Shot stated that in talking with the consultants it appears that the airport noise contour may actually decrease from what was earlier projected which was based on heavy jet traffic to more of a steady commuter airport. Mahurin asked for clarification of the meeting date and was advised August 8th. La Shot advised the Commission that he would be on vacation for the next meeting but someone from administration would be in attendance. 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: Kristine Schmidt-Schmidt stated she wanted to comment and address some of the items that had been discussed. Schmidt stated the last survey of borough residents she had seen when she worked at the Borough several years ago showed the majority of Planning & Zoning Commission Page 15 Minutes July 24, 1996 people who had responded to the survey (several 100) were in favor of zoning. Schmidt stated that there may be a perception that this place is anti-zoning, these survey results don't show that. Schmidt added that they might want to get a copy of that survey adding it is probably three to four years old. Schmidt stated she wanted to talk about what had happened at the Airport Commission as far as the recommendation to the City Council about buying that 40 acre piece of property on which the Richka Creek Subdivision is proposed. Schmidt advised she had attended the June meeting and they did not have a quorum. Schmidt added that the item had been on the agenda but since they didn't have a quorum nothing had been done that night. Schmidt stated she understood that at the July meeting they didn't understand why they were being asked to consider it since P&Z hadn't considered it. Thus, they didn't do anything. Schmidt stated they didn't consider it an action item at that agenda noting she thought that was strange since it had been on the action agenda in June. Schmidt stated she was out of state and not there so was just reporting what had been told to her. Schmidt stated she wasn't at the P&Z meetings but had heard that this body had made a recommendation but understood that they hadn't. Schmidt asked P&Z to consider recommending to the City Council or having that as an action item on a P&Z agenda date in the future to recommend to Council that they consider purchasing that piece of property as a buffer. Schmidt stated she knew she was prepared and is gathering materials that show that it is a common practice for municipalities to buy buffer areas around their airport to protect residential areas from noise, materials from the Environmental Protection Agency, etc. Schmidt stated the last thing she wanted to talk about was the Prime Residential Zone which started from Ms. Werner-Quade's suggestion over a year ago that P&Z's hands were tied because there wasn't a zone that was a single family residence zone only in the city. Schmidt advised that a lot of people worked very hard on that zone including a retired engineer who lives in Woodland Subdivision noting it is disappointing to go through the process of having to come to meeting after meeting after meeting and getting no where. Schmidt stated that if the Commission has some ideas about this, she would appreciate it if they take the initiative themselves adding that she feels people are pretty tired of coming to meetings and getting the run around, basically. Schmidt stated that people worked in good faith on this project and if the Commission didn't like what they came up with, they could have changed it. Schmidt stated she felt it is a mistake to see every attempt to better the quality of life in the community as some kind of anti-development conspiracy as some of the statements heard tonight show. Mahurin asked the Chair for permission to respond. Mahurin stated that in regards to the purchase of the Richka Park Subdivision, adding she didn't believe Schmidt was in attendance, that she had attempted to have a recommendation from P&Z go to City Council. Mahurin noted she had made the motion and it died for lack of a second. Mahurin stated she tried several times to get something passed through P&Z. Finally, Planning & Zoning Commission Page 16 Minutes July 24, 1996 the best that she was able to get through that night was to forward it to the Airport Commission. Mahurin noted she would have a comment under Commission Comments but that would be addressed later in the agenda. Mahurin stated she did want Schmidt to know that there was an attempt to forward the issue of purchasing the property or trading for it to City Council that didn't get approved by this body. Schmidt stated that she felt people were confused who had attended the meeting that night because they came away thinking that the recommendation had been made. 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. James Street Cabins (Miscellaneous Inf. from Council Meeting) b. 1996 Borough Calendar c. Notice of Borough Planning Commission Action of July 8, 1996 d. Telephone message from Betsy Arbelovsky dated 7/16/96-Chairman Walker drew attention to this message to the attention of the Commission. e. "Notice of Meetings" mailed to Woodland Subdivision Residents 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: Bryson requested that administration consider drafting a correction to the Land Use Table for lot sizes with and without city water and sewer as discussed this evening. La Shot clarified if Bryson meant separate from the RP zone. Bryson stated completely separate from the RP zone but with the same comments concerning water and sewer and also including multi-plex that is on the same page. Glick commented that regarding the sign ordinance that the Commission keeps talking about it and that it should be looked at. Glick suggested setting this as a goal to work on the sign code and take some action before the end of the year. Chairman Walker asked how the Commission felt and advised to put it on the wish list. Mahurin asked if anyone had taken a look at the Gary King sign and if it was in compliance with the sign ordinance. La Shot stated it was looked at and without being able to climb up and measure it, it appears to be very close to the maximum size allowed. La Shot added that they represent themselves as having one than one business noting that they book guiding services. Mahurin asked if the sign was on their property and not on the Rainbow property. La Shot stated he believed it was. Mahurin noting that Smalley had stated that the purchase or trade of the Hakkinen property had been tabled to sometime in the fall and asked that P&Z could be notified in Planning & Zoning Commission Page 17 Minutes July 24, 1996 advance of that being scheduled. Mahurin stated that in regards to Richka Park, the Airport Commission responded that they don't hear from people and that the tower does that. Mahurin stated she would like the record to reflect that three times in the past two weeks she has ducked in her own home as she is not sure how close the planes are coming. Mahurin stated it was interesting to note, adding that she sleeps in the downstairs of a split entry, that the noise from the softball field woke her up. Mahurin noted that she is not a light sleeper. Mahurin stated there was obviously a tournament and the noise carried quite nicely through that entire area. Mahurin stated she is not complaining about the noise from the softball field instead she is saying there is a noise situation in that area noting it is loud at times. Mahurin stated she has been following the Clint Hall property at the corner of First and Spruce Street and was under the impression that there was going to be landscaping adding that in her opinion asphalting is not landscaping. Mahurin stated there is no grass, no shrubs, no planters and asked what the Commission's recourse is. Mahurin stated it was her recollection that Mr. Hall begged them to give him a chance to prove what he could do with this property and nothing has been happening and it is halfway through summer. La Shot noted he would have to have that looked at. Werner-Quade passed out a handout to the Commission. Werner-Quade stated she wanted the Commission to take a moment to look over the information. Werner-Quade stated that this utility easement survey is in regards to once again 309 James Street cabins which were talked about earlier. Werner-Quade stated she would like these handouts to be in the packet next time so they would go on to council. Werner-Quade read, "Chairman Walker's statement regarding cabins as anon-allowed conditional use in an RS zone at our P&Z meeting of 6/26 set me wondering as to how the original building permit was issued at 309 James Street. The closest definition I could find is motel to fit these cabins. It read, page 14-62 means a group of one or more detached or semi-detached buildings containing two or more individual dwelling units and/or guest rooms designed for, or used temporarily by, automobile tourists or transients, with a garage attached or parking space conveniently located to each unit, including groups designated as auto courts, motor lodges, or tourist courts." Werner-Quade continuing, "Here is a copy of the document I obtained from the building department. This was accepted by Mr. Springer as a site plan, as per Ordinance 1384 KMC 4.05.025 also included. This appears to be a violation as the survey stamp is only pertinent to the 12 foot utility easement drawn some three years earlier. Land surveyor Pilch didn't attest to whatever you want to call it, the upper right hand corner markings. How did Mr. Richmond obtain a building permit for amulti-family 4-plex without fulfilling KMC 4.05.025 Application for Permit requirement." Werner-Quade stated that if the Commission was interested she had a copy of Mr. Lee's petition and the photos of the cabins along with the actual plans which were submitted and apparently approved, and the building permit which was issued on 4/11/96. Planning & Zoning Commission Page 18 Minutes July 24, 1996 Councilman Smalley stated this had been the item he was not going to discuss but he thinks this may be pertinent. Smalley stated that the city does not require in the issuance of a building permit professionally drawn plans, it never has. Smalley stated that when we look at those structures we think cabins. Smalley noted we can call them that but cabins is not defined in the code. Smalley stated that everything is in the 14 by 16 building, every aspect of the "home" is in that space. Smalley stated that in his prints that he turned into the city with continuing to develop this project. Smalley stated that is why he spoke in favor of not shutting the project down. If he attaches roofs that are common to those four structures then they are no longer four structures. They are units under a common roof. He would obviously be tying the facilities in also with breezeways, walkways; or whatever. Smalley stated that if he is allowed to continue his development and brings it under those restrictions, he in fact has, by our definition in our code, a four plex. Smalley stated he had suggested at the council meeting is does Council want to recommend to P&Z to look at perhaps requiring a change in that professionally drawn plans need to be submitted. Smalley added that he feels that in some cases this puts a hardship on folks. Smalley stated that when he looks at the plans that were drawn, he saw four structures, but if you put a common roof over it, it is no longer four structures. Smalley stated it still is under a common roof. Smalley stated there are some problems with the development to which the developer, Mr. Richmond, has been notified by the city. Part of it is the loss of that one lot line, if they are able to erase that one lot line, then by the square footage of the lot he doesn't have a problem. Smalley stated, again, he could rent by the month all of those facilities without a problem. To require more of prints from him than what you may require of another developer probably could be challenged. Smalley stated there were a couple council people who stated he saw more than they did when they looked at the plans. Smalley stated that if he continues this project through to fruition, he could come within code requirement. Smalley reiterated he wasn't saying this in support of the project but from the standpoint that the city needs to allow the developer the opportunity within the permit time to complete the project. Walker commented that there had been one person who spoke about the zone that was reconsidered and voted down this evening. Walker stated that one of the comments made was something about a conspiracy. Walker noted he didn't have any idea if there was a conspiracy or not. Walker stated he has on many occasions expressed strong concerns that this zone was being brought to us to be utilized. Walker stated he would like to again publicly state that those items were placed in his head by Mr. Christian in a discussion held between Mr. Christian and himself at the door of the building. Mr. Christian did tell Walker that one of the intents of bringing this zone forward was to in fact slow down or prevent some of the development that he did not favor in Richka Park. Walker stated that is why he had asked the question on the record this evening noting that Christian had not indicated the same but listed a number of places none of which included Woodland. Walker stated he thought that was very interesting because in some of the preliminary discussions on the record the rezoning of Woodland was Planning & Zoning Commission Page 19 Minutes July 24, 1996 included in their original testimonies. It was pointed out to them that most of the properties in Woodland would not comply with the zone. Walker stated that again those items were not mentioned this evening. Walker stated I too have felt that we have listened to a tremendous amount of public testimony on this issue and feel that the correct decision was reached in voting down a proposed zone that he does not believe that any developer in the community has the intention to use. Walker added that if at some point in time a developer was to come forward and ask for a zone similar to this Walker stated he feels that this body would have no problem coming up with a zone that would allow a developer that kind of restrictive avenue for development of property. Walker stated he feels that this body and hopefully the council do not want to see zones created and utilized on properties that are adjacent properties rather than those owned by the people requesting the rezone. Walker stated that is the major reason he did not support this item. 14. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at approximately 8:48 p.m. Res ectfully submitted: M ril n Kebschull Administrative Assistant Planning & Zoning Commission Page 20 Minutes July 24, 1996