Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-07-22 P&Z Minutest RENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION July 22,,1992 - 7:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers Chairman Art Graveley AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL - 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 8, 1992 - 4. PLANNING a. Resolution PZ 92-20: FBO Subdivision b. Resolution PZ 92-21: Beaver Creek Estates c. Vacation - Caro S/D d. Development Townsite Historic Zone - Kenai Pawn Shop - 5. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Resolution PZ'92-22: Conditional Use Permit Fosters Guide Service/RV Park ~ 7. NEW BUSINESS 8. OLD BUSINESS - Reconsideration a. Resolution PZ 92-18: Street Naming b. Resolution PZ 92-16: Sign Variance - Italian Gardens 9. REPORTS a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. City Administration 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED 11. INFORMATION ITEMS 1. Memo from City Clerk - Townsite Historic Task Force 2. City Council Agenda 3. KPB Planning Commission Agenda 4. Kenai River Cooperative River Basin Study 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS 13. ADJOURNMENT y ~-- ~ ~~ KENAI PI~~NNING AND ZONING CODZMISSION July 22, 1992 - 7:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers Chairman Art Graveley ****MINUTES**** 1. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Duane Bannock, Carl Glick, Kathy Scott, Art Graveley Absent: Phil Bryson, Bernard Landeis, Saylor Rehm Also present: Jack La Shot, Cary Graves, Howard Hackney, Councilman Hal Smalley, Loretta Harvey 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Graveley requested an addition to the agenda under Item 4. Planning e. Mission Street Improvements. MOTION AND VOTE: Scott moved approval of agenda as amended. Glick seconded. Graveley asked for unanimous consent. So moved. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 8, 1992 Scott asked for correction on page 2. under vote on Resolution PZ 92-19 Conditional Use Permit Extraction of Natural Resources. Amendment should have been voted on first and vote should be shown on main motion. Glick moved approval of minutes as amended. Scott seconded. Minutes approved by unanimous consent. 4. PLANNING a. Resolution PZ 92-20: FBO Subdivision La Shot reported that this was an addition to the present Flight Service Station property so they can place another antennae. The present lease with FAA will be amended. KENAI PLANNING AND July 22, 1992 Page 2 MOTION AND VOTE: ZONING COMMISSION Glick moved approval of Resolution 92-20: Preliminary plat for FBO Subdivision. Scott Seconded. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. b. Resolution PZ 92-21: Beaver Creek Estates Graveley asked for additional staff comments on plat. Hearing none, he asked that the item be brought forth for discussion. MOTION: Scott moved approval of preliminary plat - Beaver Creek Estates. Glick seconded. Graveley asked Howard Hackney, if the owners of the property build on these new lots, would there be room for setbacks as required by the city? Hackney said yes. VOTE: MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. c. Vacation - Caro S/D La Shot noted the administrative comments in the packet which were: Public works sees no need to retain these easements. The City obtained new right-of-way to construct the Southerly portion of South Ames in a different alignment. Another section line easement exists just to the south of the subject easement, providing creek access. MOTION: Scott moved approval of section line easement between south Ames Road and the slough at the SE corner of Lot 1, Caro Subdivision. Glick seconded. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 3 d. Development Townsite Historic Zone - Kenai Pawn Shop La Shot reported that the applicant planned to expand his present building. Since this expansion required a building permit, the Commission needed to review the project before a permit could be issued. Graveley asked the applicant, when he planned to begin the expansion, if the application was approved by the Commission. Craig Rice, applicant, said he wanted to start the project as soon as possible. MOTION: Bannock moved to approve development in Townsite Historic zone for Kenai Pawn. Glick seconded. Bannock, said he supported the expansion, "but because the Commission has poured over this ordinance so much, my comments are conveyed into the record more to point out the inadequacies of the ordinance, as written." It was his opinion that the Commission should not take action, as long as the Building Official was willing to give the applicant a building permit, they be allowed to construct. Hopefully this will send a strong signal to the ,.Townsite Historic Task Force in regards to their rewrite of the ordinance. Smalley said that the ordinance was written so any development in TSH would come before the Commission. The Task Force has been established to rewrite the ordinance, not review these developments. Graveley said he agreed with Mr. Bannock but felt that this application fell within the criteria for development in Townsite Historic Zone. VOTE: Bannock: Yes Glick: Yes Graveley: Yes Scott: Yes MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. e. Mission Street Improvements - Set Work Session La Shot explained that copies of the preliminary plan were available for Commissioners review. The Mayor had asked that the ~ Commission set a public meeting, sometime after August 4th so the KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 4 Townsite Historic Task Force could attend. The Commission concurred that the Task Force should set the meeting date for the public hearing concerning Mission Street improvements. 5. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Resolution PZ 92-22: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Fosters Guide Service/RV Park La Shot introduced the item as a conditional use permit application submitted by the Fosters for Lot 39, Block 1 on Angler Drive. The area is zoned rural residential and there is currently an existing conditional use permit for a guide service. Graveley opened the meeting to public hearing. He asked that public members keep their comments addressed to the Commission and to the issue. PUBLIC HEARING - Verbatim Jim Richardson, 1015 Angler Drive, Mr. Chairman, Commission members, my name is Jim Richardson, I own the property at 1015 Anger Drive, directly to the south of Foster's property. And I am testifying against issuance of the conditional use permit (CUP). Many of our reasons for requesting denial of this permit were outlined in a letter from Peter Thompson and myself . In it, we've indicated why this proposal is unsuitable. Problems with the conditional use application, violations of conditions of the existing permit and the fact that the applicant has other reasonable alternatives for the operation. We purchased our place in 1989 as a place we want to live. We have a family homestead cabin which was built in 1958. We stay there as much as we can four seasons out of the year and hope to live .here full time as soon as out job situation allows. I'd first like to review some of .the activities that have occurred on the property. The phrase, overnight RV parking does not adequately address the full range of activities that have been occurring. The property is long and narrow. It is about 492 feet by 110 feet, 77 feet there is usable, 33 feet is public section line easement. In 1989, two trailers, two mobile homes were moved onto the property and they've been there ever since. In 1990 a third mobile home was moved onto the property, it remained there approximately two years and was taken out this spring. There is another gravel parking area and for the past couple of years we've ~ KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 5 had one or more trailers or mobile home occasionally using that for shorter periods. On the northern side of the lot, a gravel pad was constructed this mid-May and an RV camper was located on there, at that time and it's been there ever since. About the week of the 25th of June this year, the Fosters built four additional gravel pads, on the property. There have been several RVs parked on their property, two have been there for almost a month now. I passed out some pictures taken from my property last weekend. These pictures clearly show there is no buffer between this property and mine. What we see is, we see what they're doing, we hear what they're doing, we're subjected to noise, trespass, and visual intrusion. Without any permits, the Fosters have developed and operate a 9 unit mobile home/RV park on this small residential lot, that will have a density in terms of people per acre, three times that of the RV park being developed in their gravel pit. These activities are clearly not suitable or in character with the existing residential uses of the area. I asked you to imagine how we feel waking up one morning and having an RV park located right next door to use. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, I would be happy to } answer any questions that .you might have. Chairman Graveley, does anyone from the Commission have questions for Mr,. Richardson? Thank you Mr. Richardson. Jim Richardson, thank you. Peter Thomson, I'm the co-signer of the letter, you have on file now, with Jim Richardson. For the same reasons outlined, as Jim Richardson just said, I object to the permit being issued, for exactly the same reasons. This evening, I think you guys approved for us to split a lot, there's a vacation of a lot and there's two other houses, or three other houses, we would like to build there. The owners, or prospective owners of these houses, are here this evening. We're going to be putting in three quarters of a million dollars worth of property there, so I think it will have an adverse impact on the property value. I think it will have an adverse impact on the living quality down there. On the original permit, I think that was granted in 1987 or 1988 to the Fosters, the understanding would be that there would be a couple or three boats there. On Sunday there was seven boats tied up at that docks, with the associated traffic of seven boats. I just feel, that it's not in keeping with the neighborhood, how it is, and how people would like to see it. Fosters have a big gravel pit there now, I believe again, two years ago they were given KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 6 permission to go ahead and turn it into an RV park. That still hasn't been done. I can't see when we're in the middle of one project, which should suffice, and supply and satiate, the need for places to park RVs, why they would want to go on this small site to do it. With the easement that's there, it's just not a practical proposition for anybody. Thank you. Chairman Graveley, thank you Mr. Thomson. Marilyn Johnson, 1025 Angler Drive, Thank you for allowing me the chance to speak. My name is Marilyn Johnson, I live at 1025 Angler Drive, which is the property that joins Jim Richardson's, it is approximately 100 feet away from the property which is being discussed this evening. Since you'll be hearing from other people and we do have a letter on file, both my husband, Ralph Van Dusseldorp and I have written to you about this plan, I'm going to really address one issue. I've been a resident of the state for approximately twenty years, recently retired from the University of Alaska. In the process of preparing for our retirement, mine just a year ago, we did alot of investigation about where we would like to live in the State. We own property in the Kenai, or excuse me, in the Mat-Su Borough, for some time and thought we wanted to develop there. But what we saw happen in Mat-Su was alot of violations of zoning and planning, and so alot of trailers in the area that we had originally purchased. Finally, we chose to rent for a year, rented in the Kenai Borough for a year, to check out all the property that we could, and to find out as much about it as we could. That allowed us a chance to look all over the area, particularly in Soldotna, and Kenai and finally came across the property along Beaver Creek on Angler Drive that really fit our unique living requirements. I feel, you know, at this point, somewhat betrayed by the Planning and Zoning. In other property we looked at, we carefully checked out the zoning permits. With rural residential we thought we were protected from some of the situations that are happening now, very, very close. to us. In recent weeks, we have had people walk through our property to check out our house, looking in our windows, assuming nobody was home. We, if I stand on our back porch, I now hear generators at night, that are from the two vehicles that Jim Richardson has already mentioned that have been there for about a month. It has certainly changed the quality of living that we have now in the area. It seems to me that with the award that Kenai recently received, as an All American City, it'd be to your benefit to look at things such as this permit. That can change awfully fast, and ~ KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 7 I think we stand right now at a crossroads in this community between a very nice environment to live in and one that can look very shabby, very quickly. Thank you. Chairman Gravely, thank you Mrs. Johnson. Ralph Van Dusseldorp, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, as usual I follow my wife. My name is Ralph Van Dusseldorp, I also live at 1025 Angler Drive, as she mentioned, this is just a little over 100 feet from the proposed RV park. We have, when we purchased this, we checked the zoning very carefully, this is zoned, was and still is zoned rural residential. This is the kind of area we expected to live in, in our retirement. In order for this to be approved, according to the City code, this has to be compatible with other development in the area. I submit that an RV park is, in no way, compatible with the residential area. It's been suggested that this is just an amendment to prior approval for a guide service. I my opinion, an RV park is entirely different then a guide business, an RV park brings all kinds of problems. 1; There are alot of things I could talk about that could happen in the future if this is approved. I'd like to talk a minute about what has already happened. There's a mobile home on the lot that's been there for quite some time (inaudible). There are currently two recreational vehicles with California license plates. The pickup camper is dumping sewage into the little creek that flows into Beaver Creek which in turn flows into the Kenai River. I used to clean and wash my fish in Beaver Creek. Now I don't do it anymore, I don't want to wash my fish in a, a stream polluted by waste. We can see both California RVs from our porch and from our windows. We hear their generators running at night. We have people walk through our yard,_and I expect that they don't think anyone is there during the day, or perhaps, it's the nature of tourists to look around the area. But it's very, very intrusive to have people walk around your yard and (inaudible), and I have in the past. I am afraid I can no longer do that kind of thing. We're going to have to put up shades and lock everything up. That's already, of course, happened. If this is approved, there will be more and more people, more and more RVs, and things will get a great deal worse. It's interesting to me the fact that they've already been operating illegally for some time. As I have observed, this has happened so often in the past, people start an illegal operation, they're caught, they apply for a conditional use permit and it's approved. What I'd like to ask the Commission to do, is to consider how each of you, when you vote, how each of you KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 8 would like to live 100 feet from an RV park? Thank you sir. Bill Bryant, 272 Charity Circle, Soldotna, my name is Bill Bryant, I recently purchased the property north, with Peter Thompson, that you previously reviewed tonight. And, huh, my concern is the same as everybody else. We plan on building a house down there. I've lived around here for 26 years, and we've been looking for a piece or property for a long time. This could definitely change the area down there and I would just like to, I think the RV park would definitely hurt my property value and everybody else along with all the other things that everybody else has brought up tonight. I'd like to thank you for your time. Commissioner Bannock, in your letter, I would direct a couple of questions to Mr. Richardson and you, since you both have the same line. Operating of one or more commercial activities associated with Foster's floating dock on Beaver Creek without a conditional use permit. If one of those, operation of one or more commercial activities, I'm sure that one of them is Altland Guides, since there is a sign up. Is there any others? Bill Bryant, no, not that I'm aware of right now. Commissioner Bannock, perhaps, Mr. Chairman, if I could ask Mr. Richardson that same question, because that's on his letter as well. Chairman Graveley yes sir. Jim Richardson can you tell me, we have three items listed, in an area zoned rural residential. One or more commercial activities, excluding the Altland Guides, which I know is going on down there, is there any other commercial activities involved in Foster's floating dock? I believe the line on that, is from my initial letter to the City Manager, as required to file an initial complaint. I asked the Planning Department to do research rather there were any CUPs, and the answer I got back initially was that there were no CUPs, at all on the property. I really have no knowledge just from being a neighbor, there are somewhere between three and seven boats tied to the dock there. As far as I know only one of those boats is owned by one of the members, one of the owners of the property. As to what other business activities are going on there, I have no knowledge. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 9 Peter Thomson, there is another boat down there, and I don't know if its still being used as a guide boat. I do know that two years ago it was used as a guide boat, but I don't know what the situation is now, it may still be being used as a guide boat. Gordan Sledge 1235 Angler Drive, my name is Gordan Sledge and I live at 1235 Angler Drive. And I've been against what Fosters are trying to do for two years. I was against their original RV park and it's showing up that my reasons for being against it are turning out right. This thing isn't going to get any better, it's gonna get worse unless there is a stop put to this right now. Because before long, if this thing continues, we're going to have another Poacher's Cove down on Angler's Drive and I sure as hell don't want that. Because for the same reason that Ralph and Marilyn retired there, my wife and I retired there too. And two years ago I wrote a letter to this Commission, which was read here to this Commission. It seemed to be the one that everybody took to read, and I state in there all the reasons for retiring there, wildlife, quietness of it, the beauty and in the past six years, since we retired there six years ago, that has changed considerably. Much, much more traffic on the road, people who come in and out and do not live there and could care less about the dust and the noise that they make. Here, about three weeks ago I had some kid come tearing in my driveway with a motorcycle and I just happened to be standing at the window looking at him, and when he saw me he just stopped waved, and turned around and left, no problem. I've had people walk through the property and I stepped out and asked them, "Can I help you"? And they look at me like who the hell are you, you know, do you own this place or something? And that's the kind of thing we have to put up with and I don't like it and if we have any rights at all, the people who live there, I think it's about time we started getting some of those rights. That's all I have to say. Will Jahriq, 491 Bridge Access Road, Kenai, good evening, thanks for the time here to voice our opinion. I do not live directly down on Angler's Drive. My name is Will Jahrig and I live at 491 Bridge Access but we have three cabins down at 1215 Angler's Drive and when we started down there there wasn't very much going on besides myself for commercial activities except for Cook's Guide Service at the time. I looked at it the same intent as the other people, I wanted to put in a good quality service. I wanted to put in a good quality family attitude, where people could come here and really appreciate the setting, get a good quality Alaskan appreciation for the fishing, for the wildlife, for our neighbors KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 10 also. We have some very good quality neighbors next to our property. Any time I do any kind of activity down there I like to touch base with my neighbors and ask them what their feelings are. Is it something that's going to disturb them? We've dealt with timewise where people have to have kinda a lights out attitude down at our places. No noise and its mandatory if there are any problems at all they will be asked to leave. We try to run a service that will set forth a good feeling with the people who live there.. The people who come that are going to spend some money. We have a good quality of people, we have a good quality of what our rooms are. I had property, I had two lots over at Poacher's Cove, and in ' 87 is when I made the transaction to take over this property that I'm on now. The reason being is because I went over and looked at that and wouldn't have anything to do with the thing. It was a low rent, low attitude, your RV's, your campers, there were people throwing trash out, dumpsites, motorcycles, four wheelers, three wheelers, people thrashing up and down your yard with fishing poles and nets and hip boots flailing. I wasn't looking for that as a setting to invest money in our city, to invest my time. Too also, to have the experience, not just for myself, but I have a five year old, for the future that I want him to be able to appreciate what there is to give here. The issue has been brought up about property values. When I built my house here recently, one of the biggest things I had to deal with was the appraiser coming to do an appraisal on our place because there were farm homes built so close to our house our appraisal was in jeopardy. And we couldn't get the appraisal we needed to finish our house because of that fact. And these people who are building new houses down there who are trying to invest and to keep a good quality home for themselves, standard of living, they're going to have a heck of a time trying to get the money when there's RV parks right next to them. I was against the RV to start with at the gravel pit, that was back at, I think, '88. We fought heavily because Fosters wanted to put in a boat launch, wanted to put in a canal tie in to the big pond they were gonna try to put in down at the gravel pit. They had some grandiose ideas to turn the whole thing around and make it another Poacher's Cove. Which, if you look at Poacher's Cove, it's a polluted hole, a polluted setting. People go there and they have no respect for what the setting is. It's just something that is used and abused. They leave it in two months time. They don't care what the setting is like. There isn't any houses down there, except for mobile homes and RVs. With that whole radius down there, it's not just people talking, it's the actual way it is. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 11 Last year I pushed for the no-wake area on the Beaver Creek. And we did get that through. The State Parks finally put up, setting a no-wake area. So we're trying to keep it in that same attitude for the usability of people. Trying to keep the traffic down from disturbing the natural setting. The couple years, I think it was either last year, or two years back prior to this. About six or seven lots from 1215 Angler is our lot, somebody was trying to put in an RV park there also and the City shut them down. For the same reasons that we have right now. And just because the setting, just, I don't think it fits the RV proposals. The people we get in our cabins also state the fact that they really enjoy our cabins because of the pristine, we have a couple of owls in residency there. We have moose, the calves going in there. And they'll still be there with an RV park. That isn't the problem that I foresee. What happens when somebody goes and starts throwing stones? People who don't care, or the noise at night that disturbs the routine. They will have a tendency to leave after a time of annoyance. They, I know that these people come here and we have a good repeat business. And the reason being is because its very quiet down there, they can come and relax, they can take a breath of fresh air and it's quiet. Ninety-nine percent of the time after 7:00 o'clock there is no noise down there, there isn't anything going on where there is a bunch of people running around jammed nine or ten deep in-a small acre lot. One of the other issues I wonder about is the bed tax issue. We're going to be paying a bed tax next year. Chairman Graveley, Mr. Jahrig that's getting off the topic of the subject we are on discussion about tonight. Will Jahrig, another item I wanted to point out I see more and more of the RVs stayed anchored to the ground turn from RVs to mobile homes. I'm totally against this. In our city we have a few parks, mobile home parks, if they want to make a mobile home, go to those places. Prior to doing the work that we did, down on our places, I had acquired all permits that were necessary through P&Z and through other agencies. We have everything at hand before we took upon ourselves to do any work down there. We were one of the first ones to get a conditional use down there also. Last year, there was mentioned. about dumping of sewage. This is the first I've heard about it. They brought up a point last year that the DEC and the State did a study of the Kenai River and they went through and did fecal counts. The Kenai River was above fecal count for human consumption at the time of the study. Beaver Creek was the highest water tested. And, if that's the case, if people ~ are dumping directly into the river, that is going to be one cause KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 12 of the fecal counts to be up. And that's a shame that we would have a nice body of water, a canal area, that's a very slow moving body of water to be contaminated like this. And, I just want to say, from my own perspective, that its just not a rental unit for us, it's our family enjoyment in the evenings. We have very good friends that come down and use the place also and we would like to keep the setting, for more of a pristine Alaska setting, then just a stop off for a bunch of RV parks. I think if we allow this to happen we're setting a precedent for alot of other areas to open up as RV parks. And I think that the city has turned that away as being a viable business proposition. Just anywhere that you would want to put an RV or mobile home, to keep that area where it can be more conducive to uses. So I thank you very much for the time. Chairman Graveley, are there any others who would like to speak on the Conditional Use Permit for Fosters? Steve Foster, my name is Steve Foster, address is Box 303 Soldotna, that piece of property is a, owned by myself and my two brothers. Between the three of us we own four camp trailers. If they wish to call them mobile homes, but, I suppose there's a, you gotta draw a line between them somewhere. We call 'em RVs. Yes, one of them has been there since we purchased the lot, it's owned by my brother Gary. And it's hooked up to a septic system, a leach field. Everything is hooked up to a septic tank and a leach field. The idea that there's raw sewage going into the creek is just another ludicrous statement by these people, grasping at anything they can to justify their means. We do have the intent to park our RVs there. And we do wish to park some relatives, that may come from California, some friends that may come up. Right now the only business we have down there is with Altland Guides. He has a guide service operating off the dock and we also have business with an associate worker who lives in Anchorage and parks his boat there. So we have two paying customers at the dock the rest are either or friends, or our own. And I'm, I was surprised that there would be this much objection. We didn't intend too, we never have intended to put in a, what they call a high use RV park. I don't see that as possible with this piece of property either. I did want to spend some more time going through those letters that you have to point out the truths and half truths and the lies, but I'm not gonna spend that much time up her. We are asking for approval of this permit to park our own Rvs there. Friends and relatives that park there without pay. And if we have a client that, our guide has a client working off of that, that is taking people off of that dock, if they want to spend the KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ~ July 22, 1992 Page 13 night there because they go out at four o'clock in the morning. That's what we made those pads for. The four new pads that we put in, they never will be hooked up to water, sewer or electricity. They are just dry spots. The other pads that we have there are all hooked into a septic tank and a leach field. We do have water from an artesian well. We have piped in there. That pretty well sums it up. If you have any questions I'll be glad to answer them. Chairman Graveley did you sign the register there? Steve Foster, Yes. Chairman Graveley, thank you. Are there any other individuals? Robert Foster, 212 Bravely Ave., California, My name is Robert Foster, I'm an uncle of Steve. We came up from California, we have one of the motor homes down there, the Bounder. My wife's sister is with us, they have the other motor home. We're planning on being here for approximately a month and then we'll return to California. We are not here permanently. I don't know where this generator is coming from that this lady says she hears all night long because there's no generator running in our camp. Chairman Graveley please direct your comments to the Commission. Robert Foster, we do run the generator approximately an hour and a half a day and that's between 1:00 0' clock and 3 : 00 0' clock at soap opera time. We do have to charge the batteries once a day and they run approximately an hour or an hour and a half and that's between one and three. And that's the only noise we make. I have heard skill saws running at night, maybe she has that confused with that. We heard skill saws the other night running till 11:00 o'clock. That's about all I have to say, I think this is a wonderful place, with a, maybe we should not come back again. That's all I have to, I have to put my address on here. Thank you. Chairman Graveley thank you. Peter Thomson, I noticed that the two people that are speaking on behalf of this neither one of these live there. The one gentleman is from California and the other is from Soldotna. Mr. Foster said that the letter we submitted was filled with lies and half truths. He said that he didn't want to go into it, but I think in this public meeting, if it is full of lies and half truths, he should come and tell us. Chairman Graveley please direct your comments to the Commission. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 14 Peter Thomson, I think he should make the point and tell us what the lies and half truths are. There is an RV that has been parked there three months on a public easement connected to a sewer system which is not approve. There is no DEC approval for, I don't believe there is no DEC approval for that system. So I don't think that because it's connected to a sewer system that it's any justification, because it's in there and they put it in does that make it right? I don't think so, I think it's a, this whole deal is an after the fact issue. They have done this and now they are seeking approval for this. Just because it's done, I don't think then it should just be rubber stamped. I would like to hear what the lies and the half truths are. Thank you. Chairman Graveley, thank you. Marilyn Johnson, I just wanted to make an inquiry. Another neighbor came by today and wanted to make sure you received his letter, if not, he would like me to read it into the record. Did you receive Mike Pelch's letter? Chairman Graveley, yes we did. Ralph Van Dusseldorp, Mr. Chairman may I speak again? Chairman Graveley, yes sir. Ralph Van Dusseldorp, let me clear up what I know about dumping raw sewage into Beaver Creek. I'll simply tell you what I saw. There is a pick-up camper and behind the camper is a plastic sewage pipe, where you normally dump your sewage from a pick-up camper into a dump station, this goes into a little bit of gravel, into the creek that flows into Beaver Creek. I have not been in that camper, I do not know how often they flush their toilet. But seeing this leads me to believe, that the sewage from the pick-up camper is going into the creek. And as Peter mentioned, their is a septic tank that's separate from the pick-up camper that's not been approved by any agency. Thank you. Will Jahrig, what I was wondering is the way I see the permit being issued, it says Guide Service/RV Park. So does that allow them to run as an RV Park? Correct? I'm not quite sure how that works. Chairman Graveley, we actually have two issues on the public hearing. Well no, it's one issue. It is a conditional use permit for Guide Service - RV Park, yes. Will Jahriq, so that means it is a business RV, if you pass it, they can run RVs in and out and charge them X amount of dollars per KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 15 night or per month? Chairman Graveley as the resolution reads. Will Jahriq, That's it yea. I was told one time by Mr. Foster, not Steve, but Jack, back in '88, he came to me personally, and he said we will back off the idea of putting a slough in, we will not do any commercial ventures on that property. He said we are gonna keep that just for our own personal use. And he told me this to my face. And he said I guarantee you if you don't push this issue any more, because I was one of the big factors in pushing to keep the slough closed, the tie in to their, for a boat launch. And I said, look as far as I'm concerned if you try to do anything there with the slough, RV, boat launch, anything I said I would beat it to the ground, if I can. And he said we're gonna go for an RV park in our gravel pit. That's all we're gonna do and we're gonna try to make it so that we can sell the property, or run an RV park and tie it into the Beaver Loop Road, so we would not bother the Angler Drive area. And I said that the only thing I had against that at that time, was allowing people to come in that's gonna want access to the river and it's gonna use and abuse the river banks. Trying to find out where the reds are, where the kings, where the silvers are, I don't have anything against people fishing, I have it against point A to point B, or point A to point C, and tearing up point B along the way. And I still have a problem with that, because if there are issues that aren't cleared up now, I just don't see them taking the time to babysit it and make sure that the issues aren't gonna be abused later on down the road. And when he came to me and asked me this and we discussed it very openly with each other and I just don't feel that they have the attitude, the positiveness for what they are doing down there. For the people that are there also. Thank you. Chairman Graveley thank you. Are there any other individuals from the public who wish to speak. Seeing none, we'll close this portion of the public hearing. Mr. Bannock? Commissioner Bannock, Mr. Chairman I would like to request a seven minute recess. ***RECESS AT 8:25 P.M.*** Chairman Graveley called the meeting back to order at 8:40 p.m. This is a continuation of the section of the public hearing under item 6. Resolution PZ 92-22 Conditional Use Permit. I would like to have Miss Scott read into the record a letter which was KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 16 requested by the letter writer to be read into the record. Rathy Scott, Mr. Chairman, this letter is dated July 20, 1992. It is to the City of Kenai Planning Commission, it is from Charles W. and Dottye G. Muhs at 1790 Eastridge Drive, Anchorage: "We are responding to the notice of public hearing scheduled for July 22, 1992 to consider approval of a conditional use permit for a River guide and Overnight RV Parking, submitted by Mr. Gary Foster. As owners of property in this subdivision, Lot 1 Block 31, we are taking this opportunity to provide input on this petition. Obviously, the request for a River Guide service is obviously compatible with other conditional use permits approved in this area by owners of other property in Angler Acres Subdivision. Not only has such approval, in the past, had a very negative impact on the use of the Kenai River, but allowing owners to convert their recreational lots in to business ventures will only serve to make the problems worse. For example, allowing overnight RV Parking will increase the vehicular and pedestrian traffic on the banks of the Kenai River, tax the existing sewer and water systems and increase the use and potential destruction of other property in the area by persons who have no interest in the area except as receiver of a service. We recognize that .similar conditional use permits have been approved for Angler Acres subdivision. However, this does not alleviate our concern regarding the position of the Planning and Zoning Department for the City of Kenai to continue to support and approve such requests. We are unable to attend the public hearing to be held on July 22nd, but wish to have these written comments presented. Signed Charles W. and Dotty G. Muhs." Art Graveley, thanks Ms. Scott, we have a total of seven letters opposing this ordinance, that are in your packet. We also have one of the letters from the State of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) and a key paragraph of this letter: "Until such time as the subject property has been found suitable for the construction of the noted public drinking water and wastewater disposal systems, the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit should be delayed or made contingent upon receiving the required approvals from ADEC." KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 17 And this is signed Scott Forgue, Environmental Engineering Assistant. I would like at this time, to close the public hearing portion and bring this issue back to the Commission and get this on the table for discussion. MOTION: Commissioner Scott, Mr. Chairman for purposes of discussion by the Planning Commission, I will, move approval of the Resolution PZ 92- 22, Conditional Use Permit, Foster's Guide Service/RV. The purpose of the motion is again to facilitate discussion by the Commission. Commissioner Bannock seconded. Chairman Graveley, we have opened discussion for the Commission. I have one item that I would like either the staff or Mr. Graves to address for us. Inform the Commission, if you could please, if the Commission was to vote in favor of this what would transpire there, versus, if the Commission was to deny approval, what would transpire? As far as what avenues of approach or what does the public have as their tool besides the Commission? This is a Catch 22 situation, if I'm making myself clear. ;~_ City Attorney Graves, Chairman Gravele y, an aggrieved party, - however which way the Commission rules, if someone is disappointed with the decision can appeal. And the next level of appeal is to the Board of Adjustment which is the City Council acting in a police capacity as an appellant authority over the Planning and Zoning Commission. And the appeal notice should be filed with the City Clerk and that's upstairs, her name is Carol Freas. So if anyone would want to appeal it, they should file that appeal with the City Clerk. It is preferable, if someone is wanting to do that, they should file as quickly as possible after the decision is made on the Conditional Use Permit. Chairman Graveley, do we have additional discussion, Ms. Scott, Mr. Bannock? Commissioner Bannock, because this is a conditional use permit we have the ability to put conditions on it. I see no conditions in the application self restraining conditions. You know I've heard an awful lot of liabilities so I have come up with a brief list of items that I would like to add as conditions to this CUP. I'll asked that they be voted on either separately or in whole. Whatever the wants of the Commission are. But simple put, condition number one goes hand in hand with the letter from the DEC, certification of the water and sewer system for the afflicted area; number two that we incorporate the comments of Jack La Shot KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 18 for the total number of units on the lot at one given time. I'm not talking about spaces, I'm talking about units; thirdly, I would like to see in the conditions a contact point available twenty-four hours a day, preferably an on-site contact point, a person who would be a responsible party who could answer should any need arise. Those three conditions, I feel, are very important to the granting of a conditional use permit of an RV park. I do however feel, Mr. Chairman, that it would be incorrect to either modify or amend the existing conditional use permit and I would also move to strike the Fishing Guide off of PZ 92-22 as they have one in force right now. So I guess I'm asking for four different changes. Three conditions and fourth to lose the river guide off the title of the CUP. Chairman Graveley, are these changes that you are requesting to be amendments to the original motion? Commissioner Bannock, I would guess that they would have to be amendments to the application, if not amendments, I am asking that they be conditions should this permit be approved. How we'll implement these conditions I'll concur. As far as the public is concerned the Commission is in a situation, I think the public should be aware of. If we approve this CUP, it will allow at least some controls. Should we disapprove, there is nothing to say that the Fosters can't have several dozen travel trailers parked on their property, as long as they're not renting the property out. And as long as the trailers are relatives or friends. This is a tough decision before the Commission tonight and the Commission will struggle to make the proper decision. And I don't think it's going to please everybody, no matter what decision we make. Ms. Scott, back to your original motion. Commissioner Scott, there is no second to the amendment. Chairman Graveley, I didn't I thought we had. Commissioner Scott, there was a second to the main motion but not to the second. Does the motion die for lack of second? Commissioner Bannock, I guess I need some help, do we need to put these, I have four request right now, I can lump them into one or I can break them into four different requests. I'm just comfortable with those four things for starters. Okay I'll make a motion to incorporate comments one through four into the application. For the record those comments include DEC certification; a number of seven units; a contact person available 24 hours a day, preferably on site; and to remove the words River KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 19 Guide from the resolution. Chairman Graveley, and that's in the form of a motion? Commissioner Bannock that's in the form of a motion. Commissioner Glick, that's an amendment to the ? Commissioner Bannock, to the application. Commissioner Glick I'll second that. Chairman Graveley, as Mr. Bannock has stated with the second, with Mr. Bannocks amendment. Ms. Scott does this change your original motion for approval, from the original amendment. Commissioner Scott, no, Mr. Chairman, because the Commission deals in positive motions, we must have a positive motion on the floor for approval on the floor. That doesn't mean I was supporting that positive motion I was just facilitating the work of the Commission. The other option of course is to let the permit application die for a lack of a motion entirely. But I don't think that serves this ,, issue very well, so I moved the approval of the permit so we could, facilitate discussion on that. Commissioner Bannock, and at this point if there is discussion on my four items I certainly open for any suggestions, good or bad, to those four before we vote on that motion. Chairman Graveley on your motion? Commissioner Bannock right. Chairman Graveley do we have further discussion on Mr. Bannock's motion. Commissioner Glick could we have the Clerk read those again, or Duane. Commissioner Bannock, Item number one was in regards to section number two of KMC 14.22.45; a DEC certification for both water and sewer or septic system; a unit number not to exceed seven; a contact person available 24 hours a day, preferably on site; and to remove the words River Guide from the main Resolution. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 20 Commissioner Scott Mr. Chairman, to promote some healthy discussion of the proposed amendment the only portion of the amendment that I could support and agree with, so I would probably ask for distribution of the question, is striking the Fishing Guide from the application. I would like to address the other three, because I think they're pertinent to the discussion before us. The contact person on site, is insufficient for an operation where there is overnight activity occurring similar to a bed and breakfast. We require in a bed and breakfast application that the resident owning, the resident be in residence all the time. Whenever there is, because there's traffic moving through there, because there are people who are non-residents moving through the area. For all those valuable reasons. The number of units proposed is totally in contrast to the intent of the Rural residential zone. Seven units could, most motorhomes carry four to six people, so we're looking at a concentration of up to thirty people on that size lot. Now the code indicates that rural residential zone is intended to preserve the rural open quality of the environment, prevent health hazards in areas not served by public water and sewer, to prohibit uses which would violate the residential character of the environment and generate heavy traffic in predominately residential areas. So I can't support that portion of your amendment either. And obviously, DEC certification for water and sewer is required for residential and commercial lots and there are none here. It speaks specifically to commercial type property for public drinking water and wastewater disposable systems. Perhaps there is private residential certification on the lot already for septic and water. We don't know that. So I guess I would move for division of the question I don't believe that requires a second. I would like to see us deal with item number four, the striking of the Fishing Guide from the application. I'd ask for unanimous consent or call for the question on that issue. Chairman Graveley, on the Fishing Guide issue? Commissioner Scott yes. Commissioner Bannock I have no problem in breaking it into, in discussing them one by one and voting on them one by one. It's okay with me. Chairman Graveley let's start with the Fishing Guide issue. ~ KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 21 Commissioner Glick I agree with the Fishing Guide Service, however, I feel slightly betrayed by what they told us at the time that would happen on the lot. And now something totally different is happening from what we were told. But I think that since they have a CUP we can just give a second one, or not give them one for the RV park. Chairman Graveley so you're in agreement with taking the Fishing Guide issue off this? Commissioner Glick yes. Chairman Graveley call for question on item four fishing guide. Commissioner Glick clarify which way the vote is going to go. Chairman Graveley yes, will mean that we take the Fishing Guide off the conditional use permit PZ:92-22. VOTE: Striking Fishinq Guide from Resolution PZ 92-22. ~:: Bannock: Yes Glick: Yes Graveley: Yes Scott: Yes ,, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY _a Chairman Graveley Fishing Guide, as far as Resolution PZ: 92-22 we'll strike River Guide. The Resolution PZ: 92-22 will be dealing with RV parking Foster brothers. Commissioner Scott if no other Commissioner wishes to speak I would like to take the opportunity to direct the staff. I think that we need to assess here, publicly what the consequences of the Commission's actions are. If the permit is denied what the consequences of that action are in terms of the existing situation. And then I'd also like to hear what the consequences for approval of a CUP with or without specific conditions. Could you paraphrase for us, either Mr. LaShot or Mr. Graves what the consequences of these actions are in terms of enforcement and how we would be satisfying the views of the petitioner or the residents of the neighborhood? City Engineer, La Shot I think if something is passed where we have an RV park implied in the code it's a little more clear. If we don't have an RV park conditional use permit the code doesn't say too much how many RVs can be on a private parcel. There by permission, or owned by the people who own the parcel, I believe that would be 30 days on a private parcel. So what I guess I'm ~ getting at is if no permit was granted there still may be several KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 22 Rvs there. Do you have anything to add? City Attorney, Graves Not really other then just to agree that one of the sort of curious things about this is by allowing the CUP for RVs in some ways we have a little more control then we do by not allowing the CUP for RVs, in this situation because of the way the code works. Commissioner Scott, may I continue? Chairman Graveley, Ms. Scott. Commissioner Scott what is the recourse for enforcement in either case? And practicularly a CUP with conditions. How is enforcement carried out in a complaint driven system which we have with the Municipality? City Attorney Graves, well what would happen is if assuming a complaint were filed it would ordinarily be filed with Planning and Zoning and Mr. Hackney, and probably my office too. And depending upon the nature of the violation, there are different ways to handle it. We handle informally, which they're contacted or written a letter saying you're in violation of the code, don't do this. We can issue a formal Cease and Desist Order, giving them a short period of time to cease the .code violation. And that's usually delivered in a letter form. And that's kind of a step up in the level of enforcement. And the third level is we can issue them a citation and which they have to go to court and is punishable by a $500 fine. Actually every day the violation continues, can be sited as a separate occurrence. So, depending upon the nature of the violation one of those three enforcement steps would be taken. Commissioner Scott one follow-up, and as the situation stands currently, absent a CUP and understanding the applicant represents that the RVs on his property currently are not for rental they are not in a commercial status is there any enforcement provision currently? Is there any further investigation to be done by the city should this CUP be denied? City Attorney Graves I don't really want to put any words in Mr. Hackney's mouth as to what he will do for investigation but he would probably follow up to make sure that any RVs on the property were, in fact, not commercially put forth. That is, they weren't being rented out, but they were in fact, a relative's RV from Anchorage, or something. I'm sure he would do some investigation especially in a situation where the neighbors have shown some degree of concern about it. So I think there would be follow-up. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. July 22, 1992 Page 23 If what you indicated is true it appears, under the code, that there may be no current violation. Assuming that's true, and I don't really know, I haven't gotten involved in the factual factor of it. Chairman Graveley thank you Mr. Graves. Commissioner Glick Mr. Graveley, just some more clarification there, we do have an ordinance which says you can't park a motorhome or RV and have someone live in it for more then 30 days? Chairman Graves that is correct. Commissioner Glick so, friends and relatives could come as long as they didn't exceed the 30 days, whether it's an RV park or personal property? City Attorney Graves right, that's correct. I wasn't dealing with that particular ordinance and that's absolutely correct. ._ Chairman Graveley moving back to Mr. Bannock's conditions which he requested, we took care of item four. Item three, two and one, do _: you still wish to pursue those first three items. Commissioner Bannock yea, but let's break them apart so we can discuss each one of them individually. Chairman Graveley, okay take item three, on site contact for answering neighbors needs, twenty four hour. Do you want to place that as a motion? Commissioner Bannock yes, oh I'm sorry, yes, so move. Chairman Graveley do we have a second? Commissioner Glick second. Chairman Graveley discussion of item three? Councilman Smalley just a point of order, is he making a new motion or is he referring to his previous motion because his original motion indicated it was a person available 24 hours, preferably on site, but not necessarily. Are you suggesting now that it's on site, or not on site? Chairman Graveley I'll let Mr. Bannock address, make that correction. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 24 Commissioner Bannock I'll entertain comments from the Commission, how would you like it to be? I brought these four things out as a tool to go someplace with. I think it would be fantastic to have a facility that was there that was manned, I think that would be the optimum situation. I think it would be fantastic to have a bed and breakfast like operation or requirement. I think that is, regarding a bed and breakfast and not an RV park, so I don't know if it's feasible to ask that the owner be down there all the time. I talked with a neighbor about this situation when I was coming up with these four items and I know of an RV park that owner certainly doesn't live there. He's there an awful lot, but he has someone there that is in charge all of the time that is not the owner. He doesn't hang out there, he just happens to be there alot. But at any given time if there's a complaint in that RV park there is someone there that can answer a question. Commissioner Scott Mr. Bannock through the chair, thank you. Is that RV lot in a residential or a commercial? I believe it's in a commercial zone the one that you're speaking about. Commissioner Bannock I believe, well part of it is. Chairman Graveley I think it would be this Commissioner's feelings that it would be, even though we approved it, it made it so it would be hard to address or enforce. Mr Glick? Commissioner Glick having someone on site rather then available. Chairman Graveley we could make it part of the CUP, part of the permit, but I don't think we have the mechanism to enforce such. Commissioner Bannock then it would be silly to have it in there and it should be voted down. Commissioner Scott I think that we could spend the next half hour going through these conditions, one after one, after one. And, I'm not certain that we're going to accomplish anything. this Commissioner is concern about an after-the-fact permit for an activity that seems to be commercial by a applicant that I am fully aware understood the CUP procedure. Am I just, you know, as much as I would like to make this a workable situation it's a catch 22 and I don't see any kind of, we haven't even had any chance to get feedback since we've heard about the consequences of the actions. But if those parties who protest the permit application knowing the consequences now, wish to withdraw their protest I think they should be given an opportunity to do that. It would certainly be a clear direction to me that we might have it resolved. ~ KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 25 Chairman Gravely I think we need to first of all address a motion that is on the table before us. Mr. Bannock has, whether he wishes to continue through the other three. Commissioner Bannock let's just hammer through them. Glick call for the question on item three. VOTE: Bannock: Yes Glick: Yes Scott: No Graveley: No MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF MAJORITY VOTE. Chairman Graveley item two, number of units allowed on the lot at one time, seven, is that correct? Commissioner Bannock that's the number. Chairman Graveley is that in the form of a motion already? Commissioner Bannock no, let's retract that practicular motion and ,; let's talk about my idea behind number two then. Chairman Graveley you are wishing to retract that motion? Commissioner Bannock sure. It is important that as part of a CUP the CUP is for parking RVs, that there be a certain number that can be parked there at any given time, no different then the boat CUP. No different then any other CUP, there's always been a limit of some sort. Okay let's pick a number. I picked the number for the sake of my motion but I retracted that motion. I think that this whole idea is too big of an impact for such a small area. I don't think that it's workable at all. But, I also see the consequences of not having a CUP and that is the only reason that I am pursuing this avenue. I have never, ever been in this position before, when I have favored more regulations. Never, ever in my short tenure here have I favored more regulations to someone. But I think, in this particular instance it is the only way to solve what is perceived by more then a half a dozen people as a serious problem. so let's talk about a number. And once that number is in place ... Chairman Graveley, two. Commissioner Bannock, the number is two. I think however, now I'm going to open up anther bag of worms, with that number two what does that number two apply too? Does that two units apply only to ~ the commercial side, so they could rent out to two units and still KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 26 bring in a dozen friends and neighbors? It is my interpretation that would be yes. Chairman Graveley, comment from staff? City Attorney Graves this is a new area, we really haven't gotten into this particular area before, but I think the staff feeling is that once a park is permitted as a conditional use park, under the definition then the Commission could regulated both the number of commercial and non-commercial units. Once it's actually permitted. So in that regard, by the permitting you have a little more control over the number of recreational units allowed on a lot, that you don't have in an unpermitted situation. Commissioner Bannock at any given time Mr. Graves? These we are renting out and these are our own? City Attorney Graves right, I think you could say, once it is permitted, you could say you can have X, and I'll pick five just for a hypothetical. You can have five units on this facility, and whether they are all five in-laws, or all five commercial you can't have more then five. Whatever the number is, it can't be more then five, three and two or whatever. Commissioner Bannock Mr. Chairman I'd like to asked that we bring up a representative from Foster brothers to talk about that number, if the Chair okay's that. Chairman Graveley do we have a Foster brothers representative that would like to step forward? Indicate how many units you would like to have on the lot, what you perceive. Gary Foster if the number is seven that's fine. Chairman Graveley let the record show that the Foster brothers have indicated that they would like the number seven. Commissioner Bannock let's take a poll of the Commission members on numbers. Foster brothers go with seven. Chairman Graveley what are we trying to achieve here? Commissioner Bannock I want to establish a number. Just because the applicant is asking for something doesn't mean I'm comfortable with seven, whether you guys are totally comfortable with seven. I want to establish a number that we're all gonna vote on, because it's going to required us, all four of us to vote for this to pass. Now, we can just scratch the whole idea, but I think this is a ~ KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 27 perfect way of getting a grip on that piece of ground. Chairman Graveley As you, you are the maker of the motion? I suggest you issue a number. Commissioner Bannock I'll make the number seven. And that number seven is derived from the fact that there are seven pads presently. Commissioner Scott Mr. Chairman? Chairman Graveley Ms. Scott? Commissioner Scott I'll move to amend this motion, in concurrence with second from seven to two. Commissioner Glick there is no second. Commissioner Bannock there is no second on seven. Chairman Graveley so as it is you have a motion on the floor for the number of units allowed on the lot, as number seven. Is that - your form of a motion? } Commissioner Bannock yes. _ Ch,~irman Graveley do we have a second? Show the motion fails due to lack of a second. MOTION TO LIMIT NUMBER OF RV UNITS TO SEVEN FAILED FOR LACK OF SECOND. Chairman Gravley We'll move to item one the DEC requirements for sewer and water. Commissioner Glick can I make a motion to make that number five? Chairman Graveley for item two? Do you wish to put item two as a motion for Mr. Bannock, if I'm understanding right. Okay, Mr. Glick has a motion on the table for the number of units as five. Do I hear a second. Commissioner Bannock second. Chairman Graveley we have a second. Call for question, discussion, excuse me, Mr. Smalley? KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 28 Councilman Smalley again, in voting on this, and I'm sure it's the intent of Commissioner Glick that these five vehicles that he is talking about are a combination of commercial RV rentals and or personal, private parked, or friends. Commissioner Glick total RVs on the site at one time? Chairman Graveley that's correct. Call for question. VOTE: TOTAL RVS ON SITE AT ONE TIME - FIVE Bannock: Yes Glick: Yes Scott: No Graveley: Yes MOTION FAILS DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM. Chairman Graveley we'll move to item one DEC sewer and water requirement condition and what this whole. And if I understand you right, Mr. Bannock, the amended Resolution PZ 92-22 if passed, would be on condition of, or on contingent, or receiving the required approvals for ADEC. Commissioner Bannock that is correct. So move. Commissioner Scott point of clarification, required approvals for a public system or residential system? I mean, he specified in the letter, Mr. Chairman, that it is public drinking water and wastewater disposal. There may be a DEC type permit tied to this residence already. I don't know that yet, so when I vote on this motion . Chairman Graveley we will make that public. Commissioner Scott thank you. Chairman Graveley Is that agreeable with your motion Mr. Bannock? Commissioner Bannock Yes it certainly is. It incorporates the concerns of Mr. Forgue. Chairman Graveley so we have a motion on the table, do we have a second? Commissioner Glick I'll second it. Chairman Graveley you did make that as a motion? I don't want to put words in your mouth. I'm sorry. Commissioner Bannock yes. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 29 Chairman Graveley, discussion? Commissioner Glick I think you have to have it public in order for it to be an RV park. You can't have an RV park and have a private water system even if he has a permit for private. Chairman Graveley and the letter from ADEC indicates public drinking water. Further discussion? Hearing none we'll call for question. VOTE: ON MOTION TO MARE PERMIT CONTINGENT ON ADEC APPROVAL OF PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM Bannock: Yes Glick: Yes Scott: no Graveley: Yes MOTION FAILS DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM. Chairman Graveley we're back to the motion, or Resolution 92-22 as it stands the only change in this resolution at this moment is striking the River Guide. And this resolution is for RV parking only. All of the conditions that were on the resolution other than, the Fishing Guide have been strickened. l Commissioner Scott, Mr. Chairman, would it be appropriate at this time to redirect to those who testified, now that they've had time to hear the consequences of the issuance of the permit or non- . issuance and ask if any would wish to withdraw their objection to the CUP? Would that be appropriate? Chairman Graveley I would think so. Commissioner Scott I would beg the Commission's cooperation. Chairman Graveley does the Commission agree? We will take a five minute recess so that the public may discuss amongst themselves whether they have feelings one way or another as far as Ms. Scott's comments on the CUP. Jim Richardson it would help our discussion, if we only have five minutes, to try and make clear a very confusing situation if we could clear up a couple different things. One, I guess is were you discussing, with respect to the DEC certification as far as I understand it, it's not there right now, and DEC enforcement person that we talked to indicated that he felt that it would not be possible on that site with a leach field system to obtain a DEC public sewer and water certification. Does that mean given your discussion that you would require that those would be pulled out than? KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 30 Chairman Graveley the motion that was before the Commission, that we had on the table would have addressed the DEC, that the CUP would have been contingent on the DEC. That motion failed. However, the DEC will still have to make their own approvals and requirements and I'm sure that Council will echo that comment. Because that is a strong concern of mine that DEC has a strong handle in this, providing this passes. Chairman Graveley we'll take a five minute recess. Oh, excuse me, we had one more question. IInidentified woman I'd like to know, if a person obtains a CUP, how long does it remain valid? Chairman Graveley indefinitely, as long as they stay within the requirements of the permit. IInidentified woman and when they do, then what course of action can people that observe things that haven't been done according to the CUP. What can the public do if they feel there is a violation? Chairman Graveley we'll ask, can you answer that Mr. Graves? City Attorney Graves, well, if there's a condition on the permit and they go outside of that permit they're committing a code violation. Just like they would any other code violation and the enforcement procedure is to complain to the Planning and Zoning Department of the City. And then it would pretty much go on the three level tier of enforcement that I outlined. Jim Richardson I'm sorry, I did have one more question. In the staff comments and the deliberations so far indicated that answer on how long term parking of trailers, or whatever you call them, RVs, mobile homes how would those be dealt with by the city. City Attorney Graves Commissioner Glick mentioned earlier there is an ordinance providing that RVs that are parked can not be parked for use longer then 30 days. So if they have a recreational park and they, people were sort of living in them, instead of a temporary use it would be another complaint driven mechanism. Jim Richardson well we indicated in our testimony that there are mobile homes and trailers on the lot that have been there for three years. City Attorney Graves, I wasn't here during the testimony. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 31 Chairman Graveley if I may, and correct me if I?'m wrong, but as it stands right now, there is not a CUP for that property. Am I correct? So therefore there is not enforcement mechanism to take place until we put something on it. Commissioner Glick the ordinance would still be in effect. Chairman Graveley the thirty day one? Commissioner Glick, yes. Chairman Graveley, I'm sorry I stand corrected. Marilyn Johnson, How can you make a request for an additional CUP when you already have a CUP that you are already violating? I think that's were the compounding issues are coming in. And I think Mr. Glick referred to it as he went by with some comment about it wasn't exactly the truth and I think that is one of our problems too. Because we don't quite know if under the current conditions they are even in violation. Commissioner Bannock the violations that I see, and I'm not the ~~. enforcement department, and I'll not try to be the enforcement department. But the only violations I see, right now, that are going on down there, if there are any RVs that are parked down there that are commercial type customers, they are illegal, number one. If they are no charge, no rent, they are legal as long as they do not, as long as they are occupied for not more than 30 consecutive days. The only one that I see as a possible violation is the farthest camp trailer, not because it's being used for 30 days but because it is set up for what the city defines as long term use. Long term use includes but is not limited to, connection to external fuel tanks or natural gas, skirting in or exceeding 30 consecutive days. It does not mean that you cannot park your RVs on your private property and not have anyone in it. That is the only violation, the fact that they have a CUP on it right now has nothing whatsoever to do with the alleged violation or the alleged illegal activity. Chairman Graveley Mr. Bannock is correct because of the CUP that they have right at this moment is for a Guide operation, is that right? I still would like to take a five minute recess at this time and be prepared to come back and withdraw, if you wish, your objections to the Planning Commission. ***RECESS AT 9:25*** KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 32 Chairman Graveley I would like to call the meeting back to order after recess please. We are back in order, I'd like to remind everyone please. What I would like to do at this time is to ask for additional public comment with the option of giving the public a chance to withdraw, if they would like their reservations regarding the RV park, after learning what we've learned tonight. Do we have anyone from the public that wishes to address the Commission at this time? Please come back to the podium if you would. Jim Richardson during the break many of the people who voiced complaints about this expressed their total confusion over what our options are and how we might get somewhere from here. I guess the consensus is that we feel that we could withdraw our objections and our complaints if we would have stipulated a CUP that would require a maximum of three trailers/RVs, mobile homes, whatever you would call them, on site regardless of whether they were commercial or owned by the owners of the property or friends or anybody else. Those would be for a maximum of 30 days and they would be required to be moved off the property for 24 hours in between 30 day periods. This would also be subject to approval by the DEC of a public water and sewer system. I believe the DEC term is community septic system for the sewage side and the DEC inspector would be able to inform you of the total package that requires. And I guess the last item is that setbacks according to Municipal Code be enforced. Thank you. Commissioner Scott To your knowledge are the setbacks not currently being enforced? Are they in violation of, are the RV pads that have been constructed, and the vehicles, the units on the property in violation of the setbacks? Jim Richardson at least one is. One trailer is within 4 feet of my property line. Commissioner Scott okay, thank you. Chairman Graveley are there any others from the public who wish to address the commission? City Engineer La Shot on the subject of setbacks, we'll talk about building setbacks are referring to buildings in the code. RV pads, I don't believe are subject to setbacks. Peter Thomson RV in the sense of it being on wheels, but once it has some shielding round the tires and skirting then what is it called? If it's there for two years. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 33 City Engineer La Shot Well if it's there permanently then you might be getting into a situation that would be a mobile home. Peter Thomson this mobile home, we're talking about now, the one within four feet, has shields that go around the wheels and got trellis work around it and not been moved in the last couple years? Gary Foster it hasn't been moved, no. I'd just like to say I did move it when Jim drilled his well. He asked me if he could come across our property to do that. I agreed. And I did move it, it does have skirting around it. It has some trellis work just leaning against the trailer so you can't see the fish nets or something. Other then that it's not permanent, you know. It probably is within four feet of the property line, I'm not exactly sure. We, Jim and I together (inaudible) and I might add that the state of the woods, there on that property, was there when Jim purchased his property. As was everything except the four plots that we put in there. Is that right? Jim Richardson that's right. _ Chairman Graveley I'll bring the meeting back to the commission. Right now what's before us is open to the public to recall their petitions of, withdrawing their objections to the permit, providing the conditions of the permit. We have already gone through the public hearing as far as the public comment on previous. Councilman Smalley question for Administration, I think I know the answer but I'm not positive. Considering the impact, in that general area in the amount of septate that's going into the ground, considering the impact that an RV facility would provide by pumping additional septate into the ground, is it possibly that the City may be required, sometime in the future or the near future even, to put water and sewer in to that area? Because of the septage into the ground? City Attorney Graves join the sewer lines? Councilman Smalley yes. City Attorney Graves I don't think we would, in the sense of a government entity requiring us to do that. I think there may be problems with the septic system as far as overflow or excess capacity that DEC would want to deal with and the city might want to deal with in some capacity because of health concerns. But I don't think we would be required to run water and sewer. If it were a problem we would have to deal with it some way, like we would have to do any other health problem. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 34 Chairman Graveley Mr. Bannock you had a question? Commissioner Bannock would it be appropriate to ask the body that's in front of it, a show of hands of the people who agree with the list of conditions that Mr. Richardson just gave us? Chairman Gravely does the rest of the Commission have a problem with that? Commissioner Scott I would agree with that. Commissioner Bannock could we see a show of hands of those people who concur with Mr. Richardson just outline? Marilyn Johnson what would you repeat them Mr. Bannock? Commissioner Bannock sure, maximum units, maximum total of three units; maximum of a thirty day period before they're moved; public water and sewage system, as defined by DEC; and to meet the setback code. I'm I correct on those Mr. Richardson? Jim Richardson yes, but may I correct you, I guess on the discussion on the setback left me a little bit confused. Commissioner Bannock and I'm not saying that I'm not going to make a motion to adopt these things. I just want to know that this group is happy with those items. That' what I want to see right now. Ralph Dusseldorp I don't think happy is the right word. I don't think anybody would vote positively on happy. Marilyn Johnson I think it's very difficult to agree, I think we can compromise. Peter Thomson, let's see a show of hands on who's prepared to compromise? EIGHT PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE RAISED THEIR HANDS. Chairman Graveley thank you. Commissioner Scott I'm prepared to move the conditions stated by Mr. Richardson as a representative of this group, the motion is still on the floor for approval of the permit. What I'm doing is moving these conditions and if this motion receives a second, I'm prepared to move for postponement of this decision based on these conditions. There are several letters here from people who aren't KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 35 present, and perhaps this is unnecessary. But I think we may want an opportunity to review those conditions and comment back. I don't know if that's the process we should use or not, but, that's what I'd kinda recommend here. Chairman Graveley are you amending your original motion? Commissioner Scott can I do that? Chairman Graveley yes, providing the second concurs. Commissioner Scott, a maximum of three RVs; a DEC permit for public water and community septic; enforcement of the 30 day requirement for motor homes and campers is already built in to the Kenai Municipal Code and I guess the setbacks may be superfluous, but that seems to be important. So enforcement of any kind of buildings that may be, or mobile units that may become buildings. Commissioner Bannock I'll second that motion for discussion. Chairman Graveley, was Mr. Bannock the seconder of the original °~ motion? Planning Secretary Harvey, yes. Chairman Graveley okay, the motion is on the table, as of right now, Resolution PZ 92-22, RV parking. Mr. Bannock? Commissioner Bannock I have a question on the amended motion. I have a problem with the 30 day period, and I'll show you only why I have a problem with it. And I think it's a little problem with it and I think we can get over it. There are 365 days in a calendar year. You multiply that times three RVs, that's approximately 1350 RV days. Whether or not those three RVs stay in their same spots for 365 or whether we have a complete upheaval and a complete turnover ever thirty days, we will still maintain 1350 RV days in a calendar year. What is the difference, if there is only allowed three of them at a time on any given day, what's the difference if they are the same three or three new ones every thirty days? Because the thirty day law does not apply once we have an RV park. The 30 day law applies only to private property. Peter Thomson I just want to make a point, it's more then the thirty day period, it's what it stops doing is planting roses outside and using it as a set object. I don't care if it stipulates, as you mention, may be just to move it out for twelve .hours. It's the fact that it's mobile. This is overnight parking, j is what's been requested, overnight it specifically says. The KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 36 point is it should be mobile, it should be a recreational vehicle and said it can be moved. I don't expect them to move it throughout November, December, or January. But I think during the recognized season, from May 15th through September. Chairman Graveley Mr. Bannock? Commissioner Bannock I just don't agree with that, it's okay but I just don't agree with that. Peter Thomson the application specifically states, overnight parking of RV or RVs. It doesn't say long-term parking of RV, short term, it says overnight. Commissioner Bannock Mr. Chairman, Mr. Thomson does not know my long standing opposition to that practicular line. For prior usage, I have a real problem with it implicated in the commercial use part. I for a long time lost, when it was in my driveway and I think, I just don't think if the law is going to apply to an RV park then that same law would have to be enforced, if we are going to tell RV parks that they must move their RVs every 30 days, whether it be for a day or not. I think it would only be fair that we tell all of the RV park owners that they can not allow their RVs to sit for more then 30 days. Peter Thomson, how about an office, could one of these be an exception for an office? An Administrative office, I don't know. An exception could be granted for one to be there. Chairman Graveley let's bring it back to the Commission, Ms. Scott? Commissioner Scott Yes, I disagree with Commissioner Bannock's line of thinking. I am an RV owner and I know that once you're comfortable and parked, you almost wished you had a second vehicle to go someplace. And you can get all too comfortable in less then 24 hours. And very complacent about moving. Then the next thing you do see is flowers planted in the yard. The transient nature of some of our seasonal residents leads me to believe that we would be wise to stipulate for this conditional use permit, for this particular situation that we enforce a 30 day stipulation. And that's very important to maintaining the integrity of the intent of this application. I know it goes against your personal views of parking of mobile homes in residential areas on a business kind of basis. I think on this CUP it would be appropriate. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 37 Chairman Graveley we have before the Commission a motion on the table for Resolution PZ 92-22 Foster RV parking with conditions: 1) maximum three units, maximum time 30 days, subject to ADEC approval of public water and septic and if need be, setbacks to the municipal code, that they fit the requirement. Mr. Glick? Commissioner Glick I think we have to define the setback, we can't just let that hang out in the open since there isn't a code addressing RV setbacks. We have to put a figure there, if we say they have to have a setback. Chairman Graveley I think it's this Commissioner's opinion that, in this practicular situation, the setback recommendation should be stricken. As it does not apply and we would have to amend the original ordinance to get that. Ms. Scott? Commissioner Scott so than that would entitle the users of the property to park an RV on the property line? Commissioner Glick we could put that in as a stipulation if we want. ~ Commissioner Scott exactly, as a condition of this permit. Commissioner Glick sure and that's what I am saying. Let's put a figure to that setback for this conditional use. Commissioner Scott I agree. Chairman Graveley do we wish to call it a setback, to keep it from conflicting from the original code, the Municipal Code? Or do we call it something else? Mr. Graves do you have any comment regarding that point? City Attorney Graves well I was talking to Jack, if your commission warrants a setback requirement for the CUP, I guess you might require the permittee to follow the ordinance as is, as if these were buildings. Or you could pick a number, and say that no RVs can be parked within X amount of feet of the property line. Either way, I think just to throw out ideas of what you might do if you want to set requirements. Chairman Graveley back to the Commission, do we want to stipulate a requirement or use the setbacks that are already in the Municipal code? Mr. Bannock? Commissioner Bannock I would like to ask Mr. Hackney's opinion on ~ this? Since he checks setbacks on homes. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 38 Building Official Hackney, setbacks wouldn't apply to the RV park or RV, but you can put any stipulations you want on that CUP. I would rather see you pick a number then to say, follow the code because there is a front, side, rear, whatever. Commissioner Bannock I was looking for you to provide us, with what you think would be a good number. Good for the applicant, good for the City and good for the neighbors. Building Official Hackney at least fifteen feet. Commissioner Bannock could we use that number, unlike building codes that have a front, side, and rear, could we use that number on all sides? Hackney, sure. City Engineer La Shot in this zone the building setbacks are 25 feet in the front, 15 feet side, and 20 feet in the rear. I think the side yard is the most important on this. Chairman Graveley I think 15 feet should fit the bounds. Commissioner Scott we will amend the motion accordingly that the setback requirement for use of the property be 15 feet on the side. We did not address the front and back, but the creek is on one side and the road is on the other. Chairman Graveley 15 feet is your number. Commissioner Scott uh-unh, all the way around. Chairman Graveley does that agree with the maker of the second? Is there any more discussion? Ms. Scott? Commissioner Scott you know, during these discussions and speaking to these amendments, we have not discussed whether or not a provision for a buffer, buffer unit buffer material, be employed here and I, before this motion slips away and opportunity to place conditions slips away. I don't even know what to stipulate but I feel it might be important. Unfortunately, whenever you imply a fence if it's a solid fence it might diminish the lighting to the adjoining property, but it might serve as a site and sound buffer. And I might say, and I think I've just asked for an amendment to that, based on the need for site and sound buffer, and see if there's a second here for it, I can't stipulate height or composition at this point in time. i KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 39 Commissioner Glick can I make a comment Mr. Chairman? Chairman Graveley yes Mr. Glick. Commissioner Glick Kathy, we have a setback of fifteen feet, could we not add to that of buffered natural trees and brush? Commissioner Scott we probably could, but I visited the site today and I'm not sure that the buffer is on the adjacent property. We have direct to the property owners, I don't know if there is a buffer there, natural buffer. Could we do that? Chairman Graveley yes. Commissioner Scott to the Fosters, have you retained any buffer on that property, on that adjoining property line? Gary Foster well, most of it is cut except maybe, for one lot, there's probably no buffer on that. Jim planted some trees there and the rest of it does have some trees on the line, it's probably not fifteen feet. And my trailer would be the only trailer we have ~~ that would have to be moved, because I'm probably real close to the edge of Jim's property. The rest of the RV's, you could easily °~ park 15 feet . Commissioner Scott I guess I'm satisfied that the answer to the question is, that there is no natural buffer left on the lot. Gary Foster there's, you can't see, I can't see Jim's house and he can't see our trailer, except my trailer. Commissioner Scott thank you, is that buffer, Mr. Foster, is that on your land, or Mr. Richardson's land? Gary Foster there on both. Commissioner Scott there on both. Gary Foster except in a couple of areas, where my RV is and the one on the side. Jim Richardson the pictures I gave you are from standing on my property if you are standing on my property on my property line. I think in most instances you know there is not a great deal of buffer left. Commissioner Scott, there's a fence here, that's just a piece of fence? It doesn't . KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 40 Jim Richardson that's what Gary said, that he and I put that up. That's actually Gary's fence. Gary Foster May I say, that that was already done. We filled in that hole, it was like that when Jim bought it and when we bought it. Mr. Henry, it was an old driveway. We plugged that up the best we could. Marilyn Johnson I think it is deceiving if you are under the assumption that we can not see the trailers. We can see the trailers from 100 feet, we're on a property that goes down, and we're lower on the property. From our back porch I can see the trailer, two trailers, and pads and the new trailers. In regards to what they are talking about we don't have a visual barrier at this point. Cause that's not the one that was taken care of earlier on the road side. Which is the one that Gary is referring to. Chairman Graveley thank you. Commissioner Scott, I really would like an indication, whether or not fencing, we shouldn't require this is it's not gonna aid or assist the situation. It would be an unrealistic requirement, not unrealistic but it may be excessive. Does fencing assist that or does it diminish the value of your property? You know, I have no idea. Jim Richardson I think from our perspective, a nice fence would be a help. It would not only help some of the visual problems, but it would also probably cause fewer problems with trespass issues. Commissioner Scott and it may also insulate against noise, if it's a solid woven fence. So I am amending to require six foot fencing, minimum of six foot fencing be provided as a buffer to the adjacent properties, along the sides. I don't think that's essential in the back. Commissioner Glick, on that one side you shouldn't have any problems, cause that's where the. drainage ditch is. Commissioner Scott well then it can just be on the other side. Nothing can be built in the drainage ditch, at least at this point. Chairman Graveley does the seconder of the motion concur with the amended amendment? Peter Thomson something can be built on the other side as well. The property line doesn't run down the drainage ditch. My property KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 41 is the drainage ditch and it meanders. So it is possible where it's not just dropping off into the drainage ditch to put some sort of fencing up. I'm not proposing it has to be a prison size fence, just so people have some idea that this is the property line. And 75°s of my side of that property is fencible. Where it is creek and where it is banked to the creek I will accept that as barrier. Where it is possible to fence, I think it should be fenced. Commissioner Scott so for discussion purposes let's put the fence barrier on both sides and try to keep this moving, after 10:00 o'clock people start to loose there ability to think. Chairman Graveley Mr. Bannock do you agree with that amended motion? Commissioner Bannock yes I do. Chairman Graveley one last time, I have on the table Resolution 92-22 for Foster RV park. With amendments as conditional use, three maximum trailers, maximum time limit of 30 days, subject to ADEC public water and sewer approval, setbacks 15 feet, and a six ,F foot .fenced buffer around, fencing off the adjacent properties. ): ,. Commissioner Bannock before we vote on that, I would like to recall one of the Mr. Fosters to find out their feelings on these restrictions, because if they're not going to do these restrictions and wish to withdraw their permit then we are completely back to where we started anyway. So I was wondering if Mr. Foster should tell us, or can we live with these? Gary Foster no, we can't live with these. Chairman Graveley Mr. Foster could you step to the podium? Gary Foster, my name is Gary Foster, the thinking is, what we were after was one or two people for a riverguide to spend the night. And this thing is so blown out of proportion, it's not only not feasible but I wouldn't even want it. I wouldn't want to put a six foot fence down my property line. So, as far as I'm concerned our application for a permit for an RV park on that lot, is gonna be retracted. And we'll just keep it like we are. I mean, I have my own private one, and I don't intend to move it every 30 days. I don't think there is any law that tells me I have to move it every 30 days. It's not a permanent, it's a travel trailer, I stay in it, once or twice a month, maybe and that's it. Once in a while I have a friend who stays in it, other than that, it's definitely nothing permanent. As far as the fence and all, this has to be, another thing, this has to be separated from the RV park, our KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 42 Angler Acre RV Park has nothing to do with this lot that we're talking about here. All we were after was one or two overnight camping spots for our river guide. It doesn't have anything to do with my RV or my mother's RV. So, that's all I got to say. Will Jahrig, my feeling is, you call it an RV park. That is why I'm so negative against it, that it's called an RV park. See that' s why, I knew this was gonna come up, I figured you' d pull the CUP like that. I'm against anything being allowed RV, and the other thing is, the other side of the point is that I don't really want to see RVs down there necessarily. And I understand you have a personal use, and I'm not against that. I have personal use items too, that would probably offend you. I just don't want to see sprouting up of the area and the fence. I don't know how to go about changing this, I don't know how to do that. Because I vote for both sides at this point. I don't necessarily agree with the fence idea also, because I don't want to see it subdivided like a suburb of Anchorage. I don't want to see fences every 100 feet. 'Cause that's the next step that could happen, somebody can point at the guide service, on the other side is the opinion. And it can go on and on and everybody is going to have a fence. .And then it's going to look like a fenced in corral. So, I'm not saying anything for or against but I see negative problems here. Gary Foster Well the whole thing seems to be, we weren't after, in the first place, like it sounds like were trying to put in. That's not what we were after. We were after a permit so we could park our river guide people overnight if they came in. Chairman Graveley I'd like to bring this back to the Commission. we're not in a public hearing right now, the public hearing portion is done. We have a motion on the floor, we are in discussion of the final motion of whether we are going to go through with it or not. Mr. Foster has been brought up by Mr. Bannock to address Mr. Bannock question. And I urge Mr. Foster to address Mr. Bannock's question and the Commission will move on from there. Mr. Bannock, did Mr. Foster address your question as required? Commissioner Bannock, yea. Chairman Graveley, I have one question for Mr. Foster, at this time, do you wish to withdraw the CUP for an RV park on that lot? Gary Foster, yes. Chairman Graveley that is the CUP we are dealing with right now? It that is the case, than there is no further discussion to be made and nothing to vote on. j KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 43 Gary Foster the only thing I would like to clarify if I could, is this is totally separate from the RV resort, which we already have settled? Chairman Graveley, correct. Gary Foster okay. Chairman Graveley, thank you Mr. Foster. With Mr. Foster withdrawing his request for the CUP, the motion is dead. And the public hearing is over. The Commission will continue on with the meeting. ****END VERBATIM**** 7. NEW BUSINESS 8. OLD BUSINESS - Reconsideration a. Resolution PZ 92-18: Street Naming ' Chairman Graveley introduced the item and explained that it had been brought back by request for reconsideration due to the lack of a majority vote. Again the Commission is in the same situation as the first vote as far as quorum or majority. Bannock for discussion purposes I will ask that it be reconsidered at this meeting. MOTION: Bannock moved for reconsideration of Resolution PZ 92-18. Scott second. VOTE: Reconsideration Bannock: Yes Glick: Yes Scott: Yes Graveley: Yes Bannock Mr. Chairman I'm going to kill this again because I'm going to vote no, and I'll tell you why and I hope everyone else votes no on it. I talked to Mr. Dick Troeger (KPB Planning Director), who said that the more control the Borough has on the city the worse it is. The city should have it's own control over street naming. I talked to a gentleman at PTI, he said that uniform street name within the Borough is not imperative for the new 911 system. I ask for reconsideration on this, because I was ~ convinced it was part of the E 911 system. KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 44 MOTION: Scott moved approval of Resolution PZ 92-22: Street Naming. Glick seconded. VOTE: Bannock: No Glick: Yes Scott: No Graveley: No MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF MAJORITY VOTE. b. Resolution PZ 92-16: Sign Variance - Italian Gardens MOTION AND VOTE: Scott moved reconsideration of Resolution Pz 92-16: Sign Variance for Italian Gardens. Glick seconded. Passed unanimously. Graveley asked that PZ 92-16 be put on the table for discussion. MOTION: Scott moved approval of Resolution PZ 92-16. Glick seconded. Chairman Graveley noted the memo from the City Attorney which was in the packet. Scott said that she had originally voted against the resolution I thought perhaps the Italian Gardens sign which is in the right-of- way was a portable sign, but it is not. VOTE: Bannock - Yes Glick - Yes Scott - Yes Graveley - Yes 9. REPORTS a. City Council Smalley said he had been absent for the last two Council meetings, but noted the agenda in the packet. b. Borough Planning None. Bryson absent. c. City Administration KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 45 La Shot said he had a copy of the Mission Street Improvement project if Commissioner's wished to look at it. Scott said she had spoken with the City Manager regarding the situation at RPM's. The City Manager said he would swing by there and have a report for the commission. For the record Scott wanted to note that the originator of the RPM's complaint was Ron and Pauline Goacke of Gallery 25. "They're here tonight and their hearing this portion of the report and we need to look at this situation again." Chairman Graveley asked about follow-up on the perpetual garage sale on Portlock. He requested a report on this item for the next meeting. 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED Ron Goacke, Gallery 25, it was called to my attention by a Commissioner about the RPM problem. Across from this RPM junk yard RVs park in that open field. By your own admission, the 90 days for RPM's to clean up has expired, I would like to see something done about this. Here the City just won the All America City Award ~ which denotes that we're something special. This is not something special. Smalley said that he would talk to the City Manager and also Jack La Shot would discuss this with Mr. Brighton. 11. INFORMATION ITEMS 1. Memo from City Clerk - Townsite Historic Task Force Bannock suggested that Kevin Walker be appointed as Council representative for this Task Force. Graveley thought Chris Monfor would be a good Council Representative. 2. City Council Agenda 3. KPB Planning Commission Agenda 4. Kenai River Cooperative River Basin Study 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS Scott felt that the Conditional Use Permit that was discussed earlier this evening was a lose-lose proposition for everyone involved. She felt that residents of the area for the proposed CUP would never go for a rezoning to Recreational down there. Scott wanted to go on record that violations may be occurring on the approved permit for that lot. She wanted the violations to be KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 22, 1992 Page 46 reviewed, including mobile home on lot and motorhomes which should be moved every 30 days according to code. Bannock felt that the hearing had backed Gary Foster into a corner and he hoped that Foster and his neighbors would come to some agreement and present a CUP that everyone could live with. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respect ully submitted, Lo etta H v Transcribing Secretary