HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-07-10 Planning & Zoning Minutes} CITY OF KENAI
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
July 10, 2002 - 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER:
a. Roll Call
b. Agenda Approval
c. Consent Agenda
*All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non-controversial by
the Commission and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of
these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which case the item will be
removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as
part of the General Orders.
2. *APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
a. *June 26, 2002
3. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT:
4. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS:
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. PZ02-37-An application for an encroachment permit for side setbacks for the property
described as Lot 3, James Subdivision (506 Japonski Drive), Kenai, Alaska. Application
submitted by Paul and Teresa Quade, 409 McCollum Drive, Kenai, Alaska.
b. PZ02-39-An application for a variance from the Development Requirements for afive-
foot front setback variance and variance from Iot coverage for the property described as
Lot 1, Block 6, Redoubt Terrace Subdivision Addition 3 {406 South Forest Drive), Kenai,
Alaska. Application submitted by F, DeWayne Craig, P.O. Box 1613, Kenai, AIaska.
c. PZ02-40-A resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai,
Alaska, recommending to the Council that the recreation zone be changed by amending
KMC 14.20.145 (Recreation Zone), 14.24.010 {Developments Requirements Table) and
14.22.010 (Land Use Table) 1) to allow lodges and bunkhouses as principal permitted
uses; 2) to not allow four or more family dwellings as either principal permitted or
conditional use; 3) allowing retail businesses as a secondary use in certain cases; and 4)
changing minimum lot requirements.
6. OLD BUSINESS:
7. NEW BUSINESS:
S. PENDING ITEMS:
9. CODE ENFORCEMENT:
10. REPORTS:
a. City Council
b. Borough Planning
c. Administration
11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED:
12. INFORMATION ITEMS:
a. "Zoning Bulletin" -June 25, 2002
13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
14. ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF KENAI
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
JULY 20, 2002 - 7:00 P.M.
CHAIRMAN RON GOECKE, PRESIDING
ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Goecke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
1-a. Roll Call
The roll was confirmed as follows:
Commissioners Present: Bryson, Goecke, Glick, Nord, Tunseth, Osborne
Others Present: Councilman Bannock, City Planner Kebschull,
Department Assistant Harris
1-b. Agenda Approval
The following items were requested to be added to the agenda:
ADD AT: 6-a, Reconsideration of PZ02-36 An application to amend Conditional
Use Permit PZ99-O1 to include outdoor recreational activities for the
property known as 9775 Kenai Spur Highway (That portion of the W 1/7
SW 1/a SE 1/4 lying S of the Kenai Spur Road ROW excluding leased
portion per agreement 559 @796), Kenai, Alaska. This is the site of the
City of Kenai's Multipurpose Facility. Application submitted by the City
of Kenai, 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Suite 200, Kenai, Alaska.
ADD AT: 12-b, Planning and Zoning Commission Resignation of Donald R. Erwin.
MOTION:
Commissioner Glick MOVED to approve the agenda with the listed additions and
requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Commissioner Osborne SECONDED the motion.
There were no objections. SO ORDERED.
1-c. Consent Agenda
MOTION:
Commissioner Bryson MOVED to approve the consent agenda and requested
UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Commissioner Glick SECONDED the motion. There were no
objections. SO ORDERED.
ITEM 2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES -- June 26, 2002
Approved by consent agenda.
ITEM 3: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT --None
ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF PLATS -- None
ITEM 5: PUBLIC HEARINGS
MOTION:
5-a. PZ02-37 An application for an encroachment permit for side setbacks
for the property described as Lot 3, James Subdivision (506 Japonski
Drive), Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Paul and Teresa Quade,
409 McCollum Drive, Kenai, Alaska.
MOTION:
Commissioner Bryson MOVED to approve PZ02-37 and Commissioner Tunseth
SECONDED the motion.
The item was opened for public comment.
VOTE:
Tunseth Yes B son Yes Nord Yes
Osborne Yes Glick Yes Goecke Yes
MOTION PASSED UANIMOUSLY.
5-b. PZ02-39-An application for a variance from the Development
Requirements for afive-foot front setback variance and variance from lot
coverage for the property described as Lot 1, Block 6, Redoubt Terrace
Subdivision Addition 3 {406 South Forest Drive), Kenai, Alaska.
Application submitted by F. DeWayne Craig, P.O. Box 1613, Kenai,
Alaska.
MOTION:
Commissioner Glick MOVED to approve PZ02-39 and Commissioner Nord
the motion.
The item was opened to public hearing.
Verbatim:
FLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 2
} Nelson Arnen 1508 Toyon Way: Good afternoon. My name is Nelson Amen. I reside
at 1508 Toyon here in Kenai. 283-6085. I just wanted to comment on this request far
the variance by my neighbor about three houses dawn the corner. My comments
today mirror the ones I gave to this same body a few weeks back. I considered that
the location of the driveway is not very safe as far as the approach into the Toyon Way
Street from Forest. That right hand turn is more than 90 degrees. Both my wife and I
support the recommendation that this variance be denied, which is right here in front
of me with the letter that we received. I'm not sure what else I should be stating today
on this other than I believe the use of that particular lot is already above anal beyond
what should be reasonable for the neighborhood as far as number of occupants, the
traffic, the parking, the area required to accept that many individuals in one spot, no
snow removal area. You~e read the same reasons I have so I don't need to repeat
them. But I da know that time and time again, myself, my wife, and the neighbors 1
have talked ta, both across the street neighbor and the one across the street next to
them, asked me to be here and basically say that they don't agree with the way the
driveway is placed or would be placed near that corner stop sign making that right
hand turn you're, you have a blind spot due to the brush and the vegetation on the
immediate, across the street lot from this variance request and you flat can't see, you
wouldn't be able to see anybody coming out of that driveway before you got on top of
them. So, my viewpoint, what's happened at that lot is, enough is enough. He kind of
went ahead and, they asked for forgiveness far the other variance a couple of weeks
ago as far as a residence on top of the garage, I'rn a good neighbor I'm kind of game for
that, I'm not going to ask someone to tear down a house they already have. But on
the other hand, the reasons we do have these restrictions in the neighborhood is
because that's one of the reasons I bought in that neighborhood, is to have these
codes in place. So, I requestfully ask that this request be denied and that we no
longer have additional construction an that particular piece of property in our
neighborhood. Thank you for you time.
Goecke: Anyone else wishing to speak to this item
DeWavne Craig, 40fi South Forest: I just wanted to go through some of the reasons,
talk to you from my paint of view as some of the reasons brought up against denying
this permit. On the sheet of paper I gave you, there is a large amount of space that is
taken up in right-af-ways because it goes on two streets. Also, the green and the
brown area are landscaped areas. 20 years ago when I pushed up the dirt and
reinforced the banks with rubber tires, to stabilize it, and I planted that area in grass
and it's been maintained and mowed and fertilized for 20 years. It's a very nice piece
of grass area there. Those spruce trees are, about 25 of them, which I planted where
that bench is; I planted the spruce trees there. I don't have any idea where they came
up with, where the staff came up with the seventh residence. It's caused problems for
me; people have asked me about having another apartment there. Nothing was ever
said by me about a seventh residence, it's going to be used for storage, garage, and a
PLANNING 8v ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 3
} living space. I want to talk for a minute about the driveway. They're using a highway
manual, local roadways, in. chapter 1$.10 of the regulations for the City of Kenai talks
about cut curves and driveways, that's the only thing the City has that's on the
regulations. The highway code of use of local highways, use the local highways and
take the residential part, local roadways, it gives you twelve meters which is
approximately 39 feet, from the curb, from the curb of the driveway. My driveway
would be approximately 43 feet from the intersection. Just down the road at 402 S.
Forest and Stellar Drive they have a driveway that is 41 feet from the corner. That's
one block down, exactly the same setup. It's in the Southwest corner. I checked with
the police...if the policeman were down there...the city police, they said they~e had no
accidents in five years and there are two families that use that driveway. The one that
I'm proposing, there would only be one family using that driveway. Twice in 20 years I
have actually seen somebody slide across the driveway trying to make that corner onto
Toyon, sliding across, coming up from the bluff into my property a little bit. I could
see the tracks in the snow. I've only seen that twice in twenty years. I've been parking
my truck in there and ibe found it's very easy to back out, of course trucks are a little
harder than cars there, but I can see very well anything that's coming and when cars
are stopped or slowing down to stop, it's much easier to back out into the street than
it is, or drive out and drive back into my driveway, to drive out when than when
they're going 25, 30, 35 mph. Also, that area only has about 20 houses that come
down and use Forest Drive. It's a very, you know, it's pretty limited to the amount of
traffic that comes down there. Just real quick on snow removal. For 20 years I've
been pushing it out onto the street, I'm about 75 yards from the place where the City
~ pushed it to the end and pushes it around the corner, so I push mine out into the
street and I push it around the corner just the City does, so I pile it up. I've never had
any complaints from the City, nobody ever said anything about my snow removal for
20 years because I store it in the same place that the City stores theirs, doom there by
the brick wall. The other thing too, they said in here about me, putting in that one
foot from the west boundary, there is one of those large electrical boxes extends 12
feet into my property so I can't get over much farther than I am now with my driveway.
The only other thing. The garbage can was another thing they mentioned. I'rn about,
a little less than three feet from the curb, but I have landscaping all around my
garbage can. I have lilacs on one side and potentilla on the other and then some
variegated dogwood behind it. It's in a landscaped area; there is no way anyone is
going to traverses through that area. It's off the sidewalk. I'm went over and talked to
John Parker about it because he told me where to look in the code and at 907
Highland Avenue, they have 18 inches from the sidewalk, at 910 they're two feet from
the sidewalk, and then just around the corner on Upland 405 there is no sidewalk,
but they're 6 feet from the street, 4 feet 8 inches from the curb so I don't see why my
garbage can is causing a problem. Can I ask how much time I have?
Goecke: You're out of time. Thanks.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2D02
PAGE 4
Craig: There was another point I wanted to cover but it's going to take a minute ar
two. Thank you.
Goecke: Anybody else wishing to speak to this item at this time? At this time I will
close the public hearing portion of this and bring it back and ask staff if there is
anything additional.
Kebsehull: Nothing additional, but I'll answer any questions you might have about
the staff report and about Mr. Craig's home.
Goecke: Ok. Thank you. Bring it back to the Commissioners, anybody have any...
Mrs. Nord.
Nord: Mr. Craig had mentioned that it was not to be a residence above the garage, but
he did state it was going to be living area so I'm just curious on what he meant by
living area.
Craig: Right now we have one small bedroom, and then we'll have a living roam, we
changed the garage into a living room and kitchen area. I'm going to put storage,
bedroom, bathroom over there. Just general living area. So I have a guest bedroom, I
want to have a place to lift weights, then I want, I'd like to have a shop too. When you
get over 60 it's nice to be able to putt around a little bit.
Goecke: Anyone else? Mr. Bryson.
Bryson: I have one question for staff. Mr. Chairman, does the city have any
restrictions as far as developing access from both sides of a corner lot?
Kebschull: Not that I'm aware of. Basically, they're looked at individually and they
require excavation permits and look at safety issues.
Bryson: Ok. Thank you.
Goecke: Anybody else? Ok.
Harris: (Began taking roll call vote)
Bryson: That was if we had questions for staff, right?
Goecke: Right. I'rn sorry. Sorry about that. Mr. Bryson.
Bryson: A variation of this same issue came before us at the last meeting in the
nature of an encroachment permit, something done in advance of approval. I
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 5
supported that encroachment permit and I made an amendment at that time that
specifically would not have addressed this issue. The applicant concurred that that
didn't effect what he was proposing and two weeks later we see it as a proposal to
approve it. I guess that I, it takes some degree of umbrage to do that. I would not
have voted to approve the encroachment during our last action if this had been made
public. The applicant stated, when specifically asked that he understood what the
motion was. I consider the proposal intrusive to the neighborhood and it deviates
from other existing development in the area. There are issues of encroachments,
variance, area coverage, and...I~l leave it at that. Thank you,
Goecke: Mr. Tunseth.
Tuaseth: I agree that, I have some problems with some of the issues involving snow
removal where it's being deposited, the amount of parking that's currently available for
the people that now reside there. It looks to me like growing pains and I would
probably vote to denying the application.
Goecke: Anybody else? Mr. Osborne.
Osborne: Mr. Chairman, I also drove by there this evening on the way here, it looks
like it's well developed now and any more would just be pushing the envelope on how
much development you can put on one lot. So I~1 be voting no on this.
Goecke: Mrs. Nord
Nard: Mr. Chairman thank you. I'm going to go ahead and follow staff's
recommendations on denying this based on (inaudible).
Goecke: Mr. Glick.
Glick: Well I can't see that us denying this is going to cause him a hardship because
there's quite a bit of development already. So I can't vote for this either.
Goecke: Ok. Call for question.
VOTE•
Glick No Tunseth No Osborne No
B son No Nord No Goecke No
MOTION FAILED UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNING 8s ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 6
Goecke noted, anyone wishing to appeal the decision could do so to the City Clerk
within 15 days of the action.
5-b. PZ02-40 A resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Kenai, Alaska, recommending to the Council that the recreation
zone be changed by amending KMC 14.20.145 (Recreation Zone),
14.24.010 (Developments Requirements Table) and 14.22.010 (Land Use
Table) 1~ to allow lodges and bunkhouses as principal permitted uses; 2j
to not allow four or more family dwellings as either principal permitted or
conditional use; 3) allowing retail businesses as a secondary use in
certain cases; and 4) changing minimum lot requirements.
MOTION:
Commissioner Glick MOVED to approve PZ02-40 and Commissioner Tunseth
SECONDED the motion.
Goecke: Seeing no one, we will now close the public hearing portion of PZ02-40 and
bring it back and ask staff if they have anything additional.
Kebschull: Nothing additional, just to remind the commission that this amendment,
or amendments to the code is the result of the Commission's requests to amend the
recreation zone. I believe were covered all the areas we were concerned with.
Goecke: Ok. Thank you. Bring it to the commissioners, if anybody has questions or
comments on this item. Mr. Bryson.
Bryson: One question. Is the staff recommending approval of this?
Kebschull: Yes we are.
Goecke: Ok. Anybody else? Ok.
VOTE:
B son Yes Nord Yes Osborne Yes
Tunseth Yes Glick Yes Goecke Yes
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ITEM 6: OLD BUSINESS
PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 7
6-a. Reconsideration of PZ02-3b -- An application to amend Conditional
Use Permit PZ99-01 to include outdoor recreational activities for the
property known as 9775 Kenai Spur Highway (That portion of the W 1/a
SW 1/2 lying S of the Kenai Spur Road ROW excluding lease portion per
agreement 559 @ 796), Kenai, Alaska. This is the site of the City of
Kenai's Multipurpose Facility. Application submitted by the City of
Kenai, 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska.
MOTION:
Commissioner Glick MOVED to request reconsideration of PZ02-36 and Commissioner
Bryson SECONDED the motion.
VOTE TO RECONSIDER:
Nord Yes Osborne Yes Tunseth Yes
Glick Yes B son Yes Goecke Yes
MOTION TO RECONSIDER PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION TO AMEND:
Commissioner Glick MOVED to amend the motion to exclude the skateboard facility
from the motion. Commissioner Osborne SECONDED the motion.
Verbatim begins:
Bryson: What I heard in that motion was skateboards could be used there on an
individual use. But the overall facility would presumably be relocated.
Goecke: That's my understanding. If we were going to outlaw them we'd be in a
world of hurt because they're all over town.
Glick: The reason I brought this back is talking to the City Manager, they're going to
move this skateboard facility. They're working on a memorandum of agreement with
the Borough School District at the moment to move it out to the front of the high
school where the old tennis courts use to be, where the bonfire is there. And as soon
as that memorandum of agreement is completed then they'll make the move. SO, that
should happen in the next week or so. According to the City Manger. So, I have no
heartburn with outdoor activities taking place there, once the skateboard facility is
moved.
PLANNING 8s ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 8
Goecke: Anybody else?
VOTE:
Osborne Yes Tunseth Yes Glick Yes
B son Yes Nord Yes Goecke Yes
MOTION TO AMEND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Goecke opened the item for public comment.
Nelson A=nen: Good afternoon, my name is Nelson Amen I reside here in Kenai at
1508 Toyon. Being caught unaware by this proposal I'd be more than happy to
comment it. I think the skate park equipment as it is now and trick bike equipment is
a great activity for the kids. My son likes it, in fact, I'm probably the oldest card
holding member from when it was over there at the other location, but, I also believe
it's an accident waiting to happen and so, I think any method we can take to further,
not enforce, but further stress the fact that the usage of that facility should be as safe
as possible. I hate to say we're just going to move it and then move the problem with
it. I did miss the last comments at the last meeting, unfortunately, so I'm sure what
was discussed. I would like to see, I guess, it visible, which is a good idea to move it
out there in front. But, also, some sort of helmet restriction where you have to use
helmets if you use the place. A lot of sharp edges a iot of fun ramps and jumping
devices but I would hate to have a somebody who's an adult be injured on that device
because of some common sense issues...they're not smart enough to put a helmet on.
I'rn not sure which direction you're going with this, I just wanted to say that moving it
is probably a good idea than where it is now...it's really not acceptable in my view
point either, I think it's a good idea to go ahead and move it somewhere else, but lets
not just move the problem maybe take some additional steps as far as, how is a good
question, but as far as enforcing some sort of safety measure. Right now it's a mixture
of skateboarders, inline skaters and bicycle riders and sort of mixing it up and doing
their best not to hit each other and I think we can do better than that. I'd be the first
one to vote to remove the device, but unfortunately take away a play toy for my
children, rather than have somebody get hurt. Thank you.
Goecke: Anybody else? Mr, Bryson.
Bryson: Yes, I support the motion, I just wanted to bring it into context that is, you're
aware the issue refocused to skateboarding, that was not the intent of the original
proposed activity. The activity is outdoor activities on the Challenger/Rink site and I
fully support the action proposed at this time.
PLANNING 8v ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 9
Dave Fandel: Hi my name is Dave Fandel. I was here at the last meeting and talked
to you guys at length about this issue. Unfortunately, what happened to me was
when I went to see Bob Frates, when I talked to Linda Snow, I was told that in order
for any action to be taken on this, I would have to fight this particular requested
action. I didn't, I explained to them at length that I did not oppose the outdoor activity
at that building. What I did oppose was the noise that was generated by the
skateboard park itself. I don't oppose a skateboard park....I teach 7+~ and 8~ graders,
they love this stuff, they need a place to do it. I don't oppose that, but the noise
generated by that place is just, it's unbearable. And it continues today. Ok, every
night, every night. Now, I didn't want to come in and do this to begin with and I
wanted to express that last time, but I didn't have the time. I wasn't opposed to the
outdoor activity use for this particular structure, none of us were in the neighborhood,
but 15 of the people that live in that very, right in that vicinity, said "this thing has got
to go because it's too laud and too obnoxious...it goes on and on and it's not
monitored". There is no way for the police to get there unless they drive through and
back to the woods and I am not opposed to the skateboarding, I'm not opposed to the
facility, I'm not opposed to the outdoor use of that facility, and neither are my
neighbors. We just wanted that particular aspect moved someplace where it was more
appropriate and had less impact on our lives. And sa I just wanted to clear that up, I
didn't want to put any gray clouds on anybody's parade, I don't want to ruin it far the
kids, they need a place to do this stuff. The reason why I had to appose this whole
thing was that I was given no choice in the matter. Ok. I just didn't oppose the whole
thing, I had to. And so I really appreciate you being able to divide the two issues and
thank you for your consideration, very very much.
Goecke: We thank you. That's what we're trying to do here now. We're trying to
make it so it is palatable for the neighbors. Anybody else? Mr. Bannock.
Bannock: Mr. Chairman thank you, I'fl just give you a brief run down of what the
Council did, just a little bit out of turn. Most of it's been already stated. Mr. Glick
reported what the City Manager's plan was. When I spoke to the Gity Manager last
week it was on track...can't give you the day that it's going to happen. Interestingly
enough, when the City Manager approached the school district, thinking that that was
going to be the battle that we had no chance, the school district was quite receptive to
it. In fact, they have a skateboard park at one of their other schools, I believe North
Star Elementary. One of the schools in the north has one there already. So, there is
certainly an inherent risk that does go with it as Mr. Amen has already noted. Our
rules are not going to change any. The rules that were posted when it was in town,
those rules were there. One of the reasons that facility was moved, just from a
historical aspect, was from a usage standpoint. Many of the council members, myself
included, weren't real big on the fact that we had spent a lot of money to create an
activity and then we limited it with the fence and the hours. We have a 2 million
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 10
dollar multi-purpose facility that you can put skates on in the middle of the night and
go ice skate on and you can break your neck on ice skates just as easily as you can
break your neck on a skateboard in the summertime. So, the whale idea was to get it
so it was useable all the time. The entire council, I think, gets a warm fuzzy feeling
when we know that our multi-purpose facility was being used at all hours of the night,
particularly during Christmas break, 2 am there were organized hockey games going
on over there. We envisioned kind of the same thing with the skateboard park where I
think the error may have been was in the physical placement of it. The City Manager
is directed that that be changed and has taken those steps, as Mr. Glick has noted.
Its new home will be, most recently the site of the bonfires in the front side of the
parking lot. That solves several issues: noise being first and foremost, it's very visible.
Just by the nature of construction of where it is it's a little bit elevated does it's not
like someone is going to roll their car into it. It's not to say someone couldn't drive up
there if they wanted to, but, certainly there is a little bit of isolation there. I'm very
pleased though, with what appears to be the outcome because, I will tell you, I told the
Council last week I was not interested in the administration appealing your decision
any more than I was interested in pitting one volunteer commission against another
volunteer commission that just the night before you had turned the request down, had
voted unanimously to support it. So, kudos to the City Manager far putting together,
keeping together, what I consider a very valuable asset to the City of Kenai, yet
satisfying the needs of the neighbors, satisfying the needs of the community as well.
That's my little wrap-up on that.
Goecke: Thank you. Any other comments or questions? Seeing none, call for roll.
VOTE•
Nord Yes Osborne Yes Tunseth Yes
Glick Yes B son Yes Goecke Yes
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ITEM 7:
-- None
ITEM 8: PENDING ITEMS -- None
ITEM 9: CODE ENFORCEMENT --None
ITEM 10• REPORTS•
10-a. City Council -Councilman Bannock provided a recap of city council
action items.
PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE ll
10-b. Borough Planning -- Commissioner Bryson reviewed the Borough Planning
Commission agenda and actions taken during their last meeting.
10-c. Admini stration -Kebschull reported on the following:
• A revised plat regarding the Zubeck issue will be presented at the next
meeting.
• Code enforcement citations have been taking place; Kebschull will keep
the Commission informed of any changes or additional citations.
• A review of Borough School properties is taking place. The Commission
will be asked to review and discuss when a complete list is compiled.
ITEM 11: PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED
Verbatim:
Ona Wilbert: My name is Ona Wilbert and I Live at 1107 West Aliak. Unfortunately, I
work in Seward so 1 wasn't able to make it here, because somebody decided to have
fishing open. I had to drive all the way back, couldn't be here on time. The issue is, I
know, I can go ahead and appeal, it's the, to with the place on Japonski, Lot 3. I
guess I want an understanding on how to appeal. I realize that it's going to be past,
he's going to get this right-of--way and it's only 1.5 feet, I realize that. But, what I
would like to understand is how do you appeal for a remedy? I don't think that
somebody should just be handed something when A). they're a general building
inspector B.) they literally had the police called on them because we took a fence down
on our own property and he was so sure that it was on his property, and instead of
doing an as-built in the survey, a knowledgeable person before they built the
warehouse on the property, they went ahead and did it anyway. It caused all kinds of
havoc, they were very obnoxious and very rude, and I feel a person that is that
obnoxious and rude shouldn't just be able to walk into a mistake like this. And, I left
the fences up and everything. I didn't dare even spend money to do that until I could
afford to have the as built done because I didn't want any more. I mean, he
threatened to take a pipe, the police had to be called, to somebody's head, because we
asked him to please his stuff off the property line so that we could put in appropriate
fence. To this day he has never moved the stuff off. He paid to have that survey done.
The survey's done; it shows that that's our property line. To this day he's left all his
junk on it. He has absolutely no respect but yet he, you know, is just nicely coming in
here and asking for something and I think there should be a remedy. I think that it
should be built into the property, that anybody, not just for me, far anybody that buys
that property, my property, because that's why we bought, an investment, a remedy
that would state that I can go ahead and put a warehouse anywhere on the property
that doesn't offend the property owners that weren't involved in this, just to them. If I
want to put something 13 feet three stories high right in front of somebody's house,
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 12
~ that, you know, I can do it. And I know it sounds ridiculous, but that's what
everybody's allowing the other person to do. This is what he did. He devalued my
property and my ability to build wherever I want and he did it and he did it in a way
that was ridiculous. He could of gone and had that as-built done before he did what
he did. I'rn almost positive, I'm, in town enough, but if I went ahead and pulled the
plats and do all the work, this is not the first time he's done this. And he hasn't, you
know, the issue hasn't come up yet, as to his next encroachment that he's going to
ask for. SO, what I want to know is how do I appeal and still ask for a remedy, as
well.
Goecke: Ok. The appeal process is across the hall here at the clerk's office, anytime
within the next 15 days. You can go in and submit your appeal.
Wilbert: Do you guys, I mean, is that an issue? Do people ask for remedies to, you
know, you're going to give them the encroachment but what does the person that's ,
you know, actually, living next to this warehouse, how do they remedy for what
happens to their property?
Goecke: The, I'm going to, not being completely familiar with this, I'm going to ask
staff to maybe answer the question at this time.
Kebschull: The only option that would happen is if it was appealed and denied, and
the remedy is they'd have to remove it.
Wilbert: And see, that's not going to happen. I was told, I talked to, Ike done some
homework. I went into the title agency, I've called a few title agencies, and this is such
commonplace, that builders do it, knowing, they'll never have a problem, it's only 1.5
feet. It's not a big deal. Then they do their stuff afterwards and they thought they
were right, but oopsie, you know, these guys hand it out right and left. And this guy
has a background. He does stuff for a living. Not only does he have a background, you
know, and I (inaudible), how do I know I'm not going to get worse neighbors than what
I already have? I mean, having a neighbor threaten to take a pipe to your head
because you've asked them to move their stuff off of, what turned out to be, and the
stake were their and everything, the right land, and you know, it was pretty bad. Bad
enough that we never turned it into a rental, I did not want to deal with it, so what,
everything that we were planning on doing, we stopped because of the incident. I
would never want to put somebody there that would have to experience what
happened that day. I, I don't know. I just, I feel that if there, if the only remedy is to
tear it down and you don't have another remedy, well then. obviously, people aren't
going to tear down great big warehouses. There are no remedies, people are getting
away with it.
Goecke: Well there is all kinds of remedies and this, if you were to appeal this,
PLANNING Ss ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 13
} tomorrow, for instance, the permit would be held until the appeal process had run its
course. They could not do anything, if they did anything, then, again, it would be a
police matter and they would be given a cease and assist order, which means
absolutely, don't even take a shovel out there and shovel any dirt.
Wilbert: Well, it's already there, it's already built.
Goecke: Well
Wilbert: And he, and I, I, I know he did this on his other property. I had an aerial
photo done of it, I went onto the Internet, had some stuff....there it is, surprise, same
type of thing on other properties. So, nobody's going to pay attention to because he's
right on government property until maybe he has to sell (inaudible). And he's a
knowledgeable person; he knows what he's doing.
Goecke: But, an answer to your question is that is the appeal process. Go over and
see the clerk within 15 days.
Wilbert: And I will but I do think that people should give a remedy, and the remedy
shouldn't be that, oops, it's not an oops 9 times out of 10. And even if it is, maybe
people would go out and get their as-built stuff first. Three hundred and some dollars,
for an as built, or whatever they cost. It's not a lot of money to not irritate and cause
problems with your neighbors before you build a warehouse.
ITEM 12: INFORMATION ITEMS:
].2-a. "Zoning Bulletin" -June 25, 2002
12-b: Donald R. Erwin Letter of Resignation from the Kenai Planning and
Zoning Commission.
ITEM I.3: COMMISSION COMMENTS & UESTIONS -- None
ITEM 14; ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately $:00 p.m.
Minutes prepared and trans ribed by:
%~ ~
Sh on M. Harris, Department Assistant
PLANNING 8s ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 10, 2002
PAGE 14