HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-01-22 Planning & Zoning MinutesCITY OF KENAI
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
January 22, 2003 - 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. *January 8, 2003
3. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT:
4. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS:
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. PZ03-03---An application for a Conditional Use Permit for pet grooming and boarding for the
property lrnown as Lot 2, Donnybrook-Shamrock Subdivision, 1707 Shamrock Circle, Kenai,
Alaska. Application submitted by Theresa J. Eddens, Kenai K-9 Spa, 1707 Shamrock Circle,
Kenai, Alaska.
d. OLD BUSINESS:
a. Education Zone -Rezone Study --Discussion -Schedule Work Session
7. NEW BUSINESS:
*a. PZ03-04--An application for a Home Occupation Permit for operating a daycare at the property
known as Lot 1, Block 1, Herman Subdivision, 1314 Fourth Avenue, Kenai, Alaska. Application
submitted by Linda Savok, 1314 Fourth Avenue, Kenai, Alaska.
*b. PZ03-OS---An application for a Home Occupation Permit for operating a quilting business at the
property known as Lot 16, Block 2, Redoubt Terrace Subdivision Addition #8, 114 Haida Drive,
Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Jane Kaiser, 114 Haida Drivc, P.O. Box 1855, Kenai,
Alaska.
c. PZ03-06 (PZ97-19)-A request for transfer of Conditional Use Permit PZ97-19 {Cabin Rentals
and Guide Service) from Will Jahrig to Keith Holton for the property described as Lot 12, Angler
Acres Subdivision, Part 3 (1215 Angler Drive), Kenai, Alaska. Transfer requested by Keith
Holtan, P.O. Box 741, Kenai, Alaska.
d. PZ03-O8-A resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai, Alaska
recommending to the Council of the City of Kenai, Alaska, that the Land Use Table in KMC
14.22,010 be amended to change parks and recreation in the RR., RR1, RS, RS 1, RS2, RU, 1L,
and lH zones from a secondary use to a principal permitted use -Discussion
S. PENDING ITEMS:
9. CODE ENFORCEMENT:
10. REPORTS:
a. City Council
b. Borough Planning
c. Administration
} Agenda -January 22, 2003 Page 2
11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED:
12. INFORMATION ITEMS:
a. Code Enforcement AnnuaVYear End Report
b. Zoning Bulletin (12/24/02)
X3. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
i4. ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF KENAI
PLANNING 8a ZONING COMMISSION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
JANUARY 22, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Goecke called the meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m.
1-a. Roll Call
Roll was called and confirmed as follows:
Present: Osborne, Tunseth, Nord, Glick, Goecke, Bryson, and Amen.
1-b. Agenda Approval
MOTION:
Commissioner Nord MOVED to approve the agenda, including the handout of
additional information for item 5-a and Commissioner Osborne SECONDED the
motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED.
Y-c. Consent Agenda
MOTION:
Commissioner Osborne MOVED to approve the consent agenda as presented and
requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Commissioner Amen SECONDED the motion.
There were no objections. SO DRDERED.
ITEM 2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES -- January 8, 2003
Approved by consent agenda.
ITEM 3: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT -- None.
ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF PLATS -- None.
ITEM 5: PUBLIC HEARINGS
5-a. PZ03-03-An application for a Conditional Use Permit for pet grooming
and boarding far the property known as Lot 2, Donnybrook-Shamrock
Subdivision, 1707 Shamrock Circle, Kenai, Alaska. Application
submitted by Theresa J. Eddens, Kenai K-9 Spa, 17D7 Shamrock Circle,
Kenai, Alaska.
MOTION:
Commissioner Nord MOVED to approve PZ03-03 and Commissioner Glick SECONDED
the motion.
Chairman Goecke opened the floor to public testimony.
Verbatim:
Naxicy Henrickson: My name is Nancy Henricksen. I reside and operate
Groomingdale's at 1802 Fourth Avenue here in Kenai. Thank you for allowing me the
opportunity to present my testimony. I will be as brief as the situation allows, please
bear with me.
I wish no hardship upon my competition. There is no ill will between us. I believe
competition keeps business owners aware of customer needs and I welcome it. All
businesses should be a welcome addition to the City of Kenai. Residents will have
more options and it will bring money in tax dollars to Kenai coffers.
It is not my intent to bring hardship. It is my intent to see that the City of Kenai
Planning and Zoning Commission. apply fairness and justice overall. Expect of one as
you would expect of another, If the City of Kenai expects one wholly enclosed
business within a residence that is operating under a conditional use permit to erect a
sight-obscuring fence, it should be expected of all. I adamantly object to granting this
conditional use permit unless the City of Kenai applies the same condition to this
permit as has been applied to mine.
This business is of the same nature as mine. Not withstanding, I believe, the same for
all business. I have been required to construct asight-obscuring fence by June 30th
of 2003, by the determination of the City of Kenai Board of Adjustments. It is my
intent to comply. Given my financial hardship, having to construct a fence is likely to
be unattractive and an embarrassment. I'm hoping this does not interfere with my
income. I think it unfair for the City of Kenai to expect of one, or any of us, to
construct asight-obscuring fence for a business that is wholly enclosed within a
residence. Why was the condition to construct asight-obscuring fence applied? The
City of Kenai Board of Adjustment took the easy way out. The City of Kenai made a
fanciful decision within their broad spectrum of power and put me in a position of
having to go to great expense, of building a fence and moving or relocating my
business. The City of Kenai Board of Adjustment, is improperly named and would be
more suitably titled `Board of Arbitration' as they zx~ake arbitrary determinations.
Why was this necessary? My neighbor has a problem. My business is wholly
enclosed. My neighbor works during my business hours. My neighbor has objected to
and complained about my dog, my yard, my automobiles, my garbage, my dandelions,
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 2
my fence posts, and my business--both personal and economic. Due to my neighbor's
complaints, valuable time and expense has been used in having the City of Kenai code
enforcement officer, John Parker, over to my home on two separate occasions. All
violations noted an the first visit were remedied and the follow up confirmed this. A
second report, instigated by my neighbor, no doubt, resulted in no code violations.
Due to my neighbor's complaints valuable time and expense has been used in having
City of Kenai animal enforcement officer, Bill Godek, over to my home on several
occasions. There have been no City of Kenai code violations relating to my animals, or
their care, in twenty-four years. Nineteen of those twenty-four years have been spent
at my location now requiring asight-obscuring fence. My neighbor's lack of presence
here this evening regarding this grooming business and its request for a conditional
use permit, indicates and validates to me that his complaints are personal in nature
and not related to my business and its operation at all. For this reason, I feel you are
in a difficult position this evening. I ask you now, given the matters explained to you
and that I have a wholly enclosed business, what do I attempt to obscure?
The second matter of fairness: kenneling, boarding or day-care aspects of business in
Kenai. I find that the City of Kenai limits free enterprise. If properly planned,
organized, built, operated in a sanitized facility, would be a tax paying enterprise.
Restrictions of numbers being applied or adjoining property owner's objections, I can
understand with valid justification. The exclusion, I cannot. In theory I can, given as
likely the City of Kenai....
Goecke: You have fifteen seconds.
Henricksen: I ask you to modify the conditional use permit and eliminate the
requirements to construct asight-obscuring fence by June 30. If you can do this I will
withdraw my objection. In closing, I will ask collectively and individually, do you have
the courage and heart to bring equal and impartial hardship without prejudice or do
you choose to modify the conditions on my arbitrary, unfair, biased and prejudiced
conditional use permit in order not to continue to deprive any residents of our civil
liberties? I have thirteen signatures under a statement that states, "We, the
undersigned, wishing no hardship upon the applicant, support this testimony and we,
too, adamantly appose the approval of this conditional use permit unless and until a
modification is made to Groorningdale's conditional use permit to eliminate the
condition applied, asight-obscuring fence. We find that the condition is unnecessary
for a wholly enclosed business and that the City of Kenai, particularly the Board of
Adjustment, abuses the power granted to it by making arbitrary decisions in order to
take the "easy way out". We, the undersigned, hold the City of Kenai accountable by
signing this document. Thank you.
Goecke: Any questions?
Inaudible question regarding address.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 3
Henricksen: 1802 Fourth Avenue, Kenai.
Goecke: Anybody else? Mr. Bryson.
Bryson: I ask that the petition be placed with the City Clerk
Henricksen: Certainly.
Goecke: Ok. Anybody else?
ivaa Schooleraft: My name is Ivan Schoolcraft and I reside at 1802 Fourth Avenue in
Kenai. My question comes, and I have a hard time speaking in front of the public
here, but, from what I understand from communicating with the animal enforcement
in Kenai here, that boarding kennels come under zoning and can only be in rural
residential subdivisions. I find that this property is not in rural residential
subdivision. According to the maps I can find, anyway. If this is going to be done as a
boarding, the City is really losing in its definitions of what boarding is and I can't find
any definitions in my computer researches an what boarding is or kenneling in the
City of Kenai's definitions. So, my concerns would be that the zoning would be proper
for kenneling in the City of Kenai. Thank you.
Goecke: Any questions? Thank you.
Judy Stiedl: Good evening. My name is Judy Stiedl, I live at 313 Rogers Road here in
Kenai. Nancy does my grooming at Groomindale's. I have been over there several
times. My only problem with her being granted, being able to kennel and stuff, I
believe Nancy Hendrecksen at Groomingdale's should be allowed to kennel, too. As
you are well aware, nobody in the city limits is allowed to kennel and this makes a
hardship if any of you own dogs, you realize you have to go all the way to Nikiski to
kennel our dogs or we have to go to Kasilof. It's really inconvenient.
I believe the City of Kenai is losing a lot of money by not allowing a kenneling in these
businesses if it can be monitored and everybody is up to the same rules and
standards. I think that would be fair. But, I know that with Kmart leaving and a lot
of things that this...Kenai is going to pretty much be a ghost town if we don't do
something. And I think that we're losing a lot of businesses when we have to leave the
town of Kenai just to find a place for animals. We all have a lot of animals and it
would make it a lot mare convenient for a lot of us residents. And I think you guys
would be able to monitor them a lot better and make sure care of the animals are
taken care of. And, that's all I have to say.
Goecke: Any questions? Anybody else?
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 4
Terrf Eddens: I am Terri Eddens of the Canine Spa. I wasn't going to speak tonight
unless asked questions. As far as the kenneling situation, the boarding, if you will,
situation, the type of boarding I do is mostly recommended by veterinarians and they
are geriatric dogs. They are dogs that need special needs. A lot of their outside, they
don't have much outside time and when they do go outside, I am going with them. It's
like I'm taking the dog for a walk. It's within a closed fence area that I take them but I
also take them on a leash so I am with them all the time. That way I can also oversee
their toilet habits to make sure there is nothing wrong with them since these are, most
of them, patient dogs.
I've spoken with Bill Godek and he knows the kind of facility that I'm running and
under the circumstances, since it's kind of an extended care facility, that I wouldn't
need a kennel license, per se. And that's what I have to say about that and as far as
having, complaining neighbors, I have none. I believe before you, you have affidavits
from each and every one of zny neighbors. I'm on a small cul-de-sac, there are five
houses on the cul-de-sac, each one of the homeowners, residents of those signed, it's
like a petition farm that you have. And then I have neighboring apartment buildings
on two sides of me and I have letters from those neighbors also. Anyone who is
within, oh, five hundred yards of my house....or fve hundred feet, I guess, I contacted
and most of them don't even realize there is a business there because I keep it very, I
mean it's very quiet for having dogs in it. And that's all I have to say.
Goecke: Ok. Any questions? Ms. Nord.
Nord: How many special needs dogs to you keep at one time?
Eddens: The most I've had there are five and they were ranged from, there was a
schnauzer, a toy poodle, Maltese, a Yorkie. That was over the holiday. Normally I
have one at a time.
Nord: When you have these special needs dogs, you take them out separately or...?
Eddens: Yeah, no. I take them one at a time.
Nord: One at a time.
Eddens; Yes. I never mix my dogs.
Nord: What is the average stay of your dogs?
Eddens: Ire not had anybody leave a dog longer than two weeks with me. Generally,
it's shorter than that. The two weekers are long ones, to me. Especially if they're high
needs it's a long stay, you know, because I spend a lot of time with them and
nurturing them and I also do pet massage on them to help them relax while they are
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 5
there. That's one of the services I offer and that's, you know, people seem to really
enjoy that far their pets.
Nord: Thank you.
Goecke: Anybody else? Mr. Amen.
Amen: Several questions. You said you had a five maximum. What's the maximum
number of dogs you feel like you could take care of yourself?
Edden: I wouldn't want in there any more than six or seven. The five was a lot of
work. So, I`d probably keep it at five.
Amen: Ok. And this (inaudible) has a fence? What type of fence is that?
Edden: It's a, I believe it's five foot high.
Amen: It says a five fence on the sketch.
Edden: Yes.
Amen: And the type of fence?
Edden: Oh, I'm sorry. It's chain link.
Amen: In your interpretation what is the difference between boarding and kenneling?
Edden: There is none. I just use the two terms. I call it extended care, because of the
type that I do.
Goecke: Ok. Anybody else? Ok. Thank you.
Edden: Thank you.
Goecke: Ok. At this point irz time well bring it back to the Commission and ask staff if
they have anything additional on this item.
Kebschull: The only thing that I would have in addition, is I did receive one phone call
from an applicant, or from one of the neighbors who couldn't be here tonight and it
was Mr. Kemble and he stated he rents his house...he's directly next door to Ms.
Eddens, and he basically said they had had no problems with the dogs there. He said
one time he was there and there were some dogs barking but she was right there and
he thought they may have even been her personal animals. He just said he didn't
have any problem at all with it.
PLANNING 8v ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 6
Goecke: Ok. Mr. Bryson.
Bryson: Question for staff. I presume that this petition is in suburban residential. As
is, what the former petition. Is that correct?
(Unknown): That is correct. I have the map here if you'd like to see.
Bryson: And in both cases I have traditionally seen uses required for (inaudible).
Kebschull: The code does not have a list for grooming and in those cases we consider
a conditional use required. However, animal boarding is listed as conditional use in
the land use table.
Bryson: In regard, specifically, to the conditional use of that petition, (inaudible] that
exists, do you find any difference between these two situations? Specific to the
conditional use itself? Other than requirements put on by the Board of Adjustment?
Kebschull: The only, as far as the application I see no difference.
Tunseth: i have a question regarding the Groomingdale's...is that actually a separate
issue? She mentioned that the Board of Adjustment actually made the ruling on her
having to have a fence. Is that due to an appeal?
Kebschull: Yes. That's correct. It was denied at this level and it was appealed by the
applicant and the Board of Adjustment ruled the permit could be granted with that
requirement.
Goecke: Mr. Bannock.
Bannock: Mr. Chair, if I could just speak to that just briefly. When the council sits as
a Board of Adjustment, there are, in essence, three actions that the council can take.
They can take the action to deny the request. In this instance it would have been to
uphold the planning and zoning commissions decision. Or to overturn the Planning
and Zoning...there are four things. Remand it back to Planning and Zoning because
maybe something else happened or changed or something like that. Or, they, acting
as a Board of Adjustment can actually pass the conditional use permit, acting with the
same authority that the Planning and Zoning has with your ability to place conditions
on things. So those are the four things that the code has granted the Council when
acting as a Board of Adjustment. What the Council did, what the Board of Adjustment
did, is they acted on the fourth option where we almost, I hate to use this word,
assumed your powers but we acted like the Planning and Zoning could in granting the
request by putting conditions on it, much like you have the authority to place, as well.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 7
Kebschull: Mr. Chairman I would like to remind that the question Mr. Bryson just
asked me as far as the applications were the same, however, the Planning Cornrnission
did amend and Ms. Henricksen agreed not to kennel pets. So, when the action was
denied at this level it was strictly denied for an amended petition for the grooming.
And, as my understanding it was not approved for boarding at the Board of
Adjustment.
Nord: I just don't remember this at all. I'rn...did the Planning and Zoning
Commission deny it and...apparently Ihad been out of town and was not here.
Henricksen: Could I briefly recap for you what happened?
Bryson: I, it was defeated at the Planning Commission level by a 3-1 voting favor due
to a Iack of quorum. It was reconsidered with a switch of voting and it was again
defeated by a 3-1 vote, three in favor. At that point it was perceived to be denied, it
was appealed, and went to Council as the Board of Adjustment and they had their
hearing.
Nord: Thank you.
Goecke: Mr. Amen.
Amen: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a question for staff, is there anything
different between boarding and kenneling, is there a number of dogs involved, or,
what's that do?
Kebschull: I believe that kennel permits are issued by the animal control officer and
he has criteria in his section of the code. I'xn not sure what that is, but if you have
mare than three adult animals, I believe it is, in the City of Kenai, you require a kennel
permit. And it may be your own animals, it's just a number and I don't have a copy of
the code here but that's what it is. They allow for you to have puppies up to a certain
age and then you have to get rid of them or have a kennel permit. So, people in the
city who had kennel permits don't necessarily take care of other people's pets.
Boarding is in our section of the code where you actually do it as a business.
Henricksen: And boarding is not defined within the zoning code. Kenneling is defined
in the animal control code. Sorry. I'm sorry. Sorry.
Goecke: You can't be speaking from back there. First off it can:'t be recorded
Henricksen: Can I step to the podium?
Goecke: Make it brief.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 8
Henricksen: Boarding falls under zoning. It is not defined under zoning definitions.
Kenneling falls under animal control. It is defined as a person who keeps four or mare
dogs over the age of four months. What needs to be definitive in there is the word
keeps. What does keeps mean? Do you own it? Do you partially own it? Is it your
friends, your neighbors, do you take money do you not. Thank you.
Goecke: Ok. Mr. Bryson, you look like you have a question.
Bryson: Well, concerning the grooming, I find very little difference between the two
situations. If anything, specific to the conditional use there is less activity taken place
on Fourth Street location as opposed to Shamrock Circle. Be that as it may, I will be
voting in favor of the conditional use that is before us tonight.
Tunseth: Just another question. Regarding this issue, this requirement of having a
fence that was placed upon Ms. Henricksen was actually placed upon her by the
Board of Adjustment.
Kebschull: That's correct and her next step was to take it to court; to the Superior
Court. That was her next step with appeal. The Planning Commission cannot take
action on an action by the Board of Adjustment.
Goecke: Mr. Glick.
Glick: The big difference I see here is that this is in a cul-de-sac and it's very close to
other houses and all the people around her say they don't mind, it's not a problem,
she does have a fence, however it's not asight-obscuring fence. The dogs are not out
there very often. And I live within a block of where this activity takes place, I don't
ever see anything out of order down there, so I'm going to be voting in favor of the
conditional use.
Goecke: Anybody else? Ok. Seeing none we'1i call for question.
VOTE:
Osborne Yes Tunseth Yes Nord Yes
Glick Yes Goecke Yes B son Yes
Amen Yes
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Goecke stated anyone wishing to appeal could do so within fifteen days at
the City Clerk's office.
ITEM 6: OLD BUSINESS
PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 9
6-a. Discussion -- Schedule Work Session/Education Zone/Rezone Study
Kebschull explained the Commission previously passed a resolution recommending an
education zone be formed and council then passed an ordinance amending the zoning
code to add the zone. She added, additional information had been received from the
Borough to have the Commission review the properties to be recommended for
inclusion in the zone.
Kebschull noted, the public presentation of the Comprehensive Plan was scheduled for
February 12 and noted she would be absent for the second meeting in February. Due
to these issues, the Commission set a work session to be held immediately following
their March 12 meeting.
ITEM 7: NEW BUSINESS
7-a. PZ03-04 -- An application far a Home Occupation Permit for operating a
daycare at the property known as Lot 1, Block 1, Herman Subdivision,
1314 Fourth Avenue, Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Linda
Savok, 1314 Fourth Avenue, Kenai, Alaska.
Approved by consent agenda.
7-b. PZ03-OS -- An application for a Home Occupation Permit for operating a
quilting business at the property known as Lot 16, Block 2, Redoubt
Terrace Subdivision Addition #8, 114 Haida Drive, Kenai, Alaska.
Application submitted by Jane Kaiser, 114 Haida Drive, P.O. Box 1855,
Kenai, Alaska.
Approved by consent agenda.
7-c. PZ03-06 (PZ97-19( -- A request for transfer of Conditional Use Permit
PZ97-19 (Cabin Rentals and Guide Service) from Will Jahrig to Keith
Holton for the property described as Lot 12, Angler Acres Subdivision,
Part 3 (1215 Angler Drive), Kenai, Alaska. Transfer requested by Keith
Holtan, P.O. Box 741, Kenai, Alaska.
MOTION:
Commissioner Osborne MOVED for approval of Resolution PZ03-06 and
Commissioner Glick SECONDED the motion.
Kebschull explained the code allows for a transfer of a conditional use permit upon
written request as long as the applicant agrees to adhere to the original conditions. In
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 10
this case, Mr. Holtan purchased the property from the Jahrig's and has agreed to
adhere to the original conditions. She also noted, she had not received any complaints
from neighboring property owners.
VOTE:
Osborne Yes Tunseth Yes Nord Yes
Glick Yes Goecke Yes B son Yes
Amen Yes
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
7-d. PZ03-08 Discussion -- A resolution of the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Kenai, Alaska recommending to the Council of
the City of Kenai, Alaska, that the Land Use Table in KMC 14.22.010 be
amended to change parks and recreation in the RR, RR1, RS, RS 1, RS2,
RU, IL, and IH zones from a secondary use to a principal permitted use.
Kebschull reported she and City Attorney Graves reviewed the Land Use Table and
noted parks and recreation are currently listed as secondary uses in several zones and
there is no primary use. She added, it basically meant no parks would be allowable in
most of the city zones. She noted, this was an anomaly overlooked when the Land Use
Table was amended in the past. Kebschull stated, the situation needed to be clarified,
either by determining parks and recreation to either be a "C" or "P." She added,
administration did not feel there were any zones where parks or recreation should be
not allowed.
Bryson noted a concern that it was not known, by definition, if parks and recreation
was limited to only municipal use or could it be quasi-public or a business. He noted,
a golf course is a recreation but also a business. Bryson continued, if the requirement
was made of primary use in residential zones and the Lions Club wanted to build a
skateboard park, for example, it would not be private or a business, but would have
an impact. Bryson added, he felt, in all circumstances, parks and recreation should
be a permitted use, and modify the definition of parks and recreation to be only
municipal and the council can then make a determination.
Goecke stated he agreed and thought the matter should be discussed further, but first
go to council and the Parks & Recreation Commission to determine a definition.
Kebschull explained, when no definition is available, the common definition is used.
In this case, parks and recreation was listed under Public and Institutional in the
zoning district table and then could be municipal, borough, or state, but not private
use. She added, should a conditional use permit be required before the approval of
the plat? She noted, the city attorney suggested it could be listed as municipal use
and "C" under higher density zones and "P" in the commercial and industrial zones,
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 11
etc. Kebschull suggested the matter should be brought forward for a public hearing.
Bryson stated he had no objection to the determination of placing a park being
reviewed and approved by council. He added, he felt the Commission should be able
to limit the use in residential zones.
Bannock suggested the Commissian should determine whether they wanted the issue
to return to them as a public hearing to make a formal recommendation. He added, in
reference to Bryson's comments, it was easy to discuss commercial versus public, but
there can be a public/commercial operation, i.e. the Recreation Center, a public
facility. He encouraged the Commission not to get too concerned about the
commercial versus municipal aspect, but rather an applications standpoint.
Kebschull asked if the Commission would be comfortable with a resolution to
recommend changing the "S" in the residential zones with "C." Because the city takes
a long time in developing a park, she didn't think it would be a problem. She also
suggested changing parks and recreation to "P" in the Industrial and Commercial
zones.
Bryson stated, it would be important to make the change from "S" to "P" as it would
place precedence on interpretation of other areas where principle use is not performed
on the property. Kebschull added, currently the code does not allow far a variance as
it states the use must be a principle permitted use and technically, in those zones, no
parks and/or recreation is allowed. Bryson stated he was supportive of the
conditional use approach.
Kebschull stated she would bring back a revised recommendation for a resolution
stating to change the "S" in residential zones to "C" and in Commercial and Industrial,
changing the "S" to "P." Those not to be changed are currently listed in the Education,
Recreation, Townsite and Conservation Zones. There were no objections.
ITEM 8: PENDING ITEMS -- None.
ITEM 9: CODE ENFORCEMENT -- None.
ITEM 10: REPORTS
10-a. City Council -- Councilman Bannock reviewed the action agenda of the
January 15 council meeting and noted the following:
• The presentations prepared for the Arctic Winter Games Site Selection
Committee were very successful.
• Commissioner Gaecke was reappointed to the Commission and the
resignation of Commissioner Nord was accepted.
• A public hearing, without an ordinance, regarding smoking in eating
establishments will be held at the February 5 council meeting.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 12
10-b. Borough Planning -- Commissioner Bryson reviewed the actions taken
by the Borough Planning Commission at their January l3 meeting and noted the
following:
• A petition for vacation of three feet on a lot on Candlelight Drive was
approved.
• A petition to reclassify 400 acres of Borough land for agricultural use
was approved and the Assembly will now have to approve the reclassification and
determine the method of transfer of the property to the general public or individuals.
Nord noted a state statute requires properties within one mile of agricultural
properties disclose the agricultural property to potential purchasers. She added, she
was concerned due to the many homes in the area of the property to be reclassified.
10-c. Administration -- Kebschull reported the following:
• In regard to the certified mail requirement discussion, she was asked by
the city manager to obtain a clarification of delivery confirmation and whether using
this method would give verification of receipt and whether it would save money.
Kebschull noted she met with post office personnel who indicated the cost savings
would be approximately twelve cents if the item were mailed at the regular $.37 fee.
She added, the use of large envelopes is required and no signature is required at the
time of receipt, however a person would not have to stand in Iine at the post office to
pick up the mailing, but there would also be no knowledge of whether the item was
picked up.
• The yearly reports were completed and all were in compliance and they
also found there were some permits no longer active.
It was noted 22 out of 23 property owners had received certified mailings of the public
hearing held during the meeting and it appeared only one of those receiving the
notices attended the meeting: Bannock stated he felt council was being cautious and
didn't want the public to feel they were not being informed. He also noted, there is no
legal reason for the certified mailings and administration is in support of discontinue
the requirement. He believed a compromise might come sometime in the future.
ITEM 11: PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED -- None.
ITEM 12: INFORMATION ITEMS
12-a. Code Enforcement Annual/Year End Report
12-b. Zoning Bulletin (12/24/02)
ITEM 13: COMMISSION, COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
Amen -- No comments.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 13
Bryson -- No comments.
Goecke -- Thanked Commissioner Nord for her work and interest while serving
on the Commission.
Glick -- Reported he would not be in attendance at their February 12
Commission meeting.
Nord -- Stated it had been a pleasure serving on the Commission and would
miss working with the commissioners, administration and public. She also noted she
was glad the Commission approved the conditional use permit for the animal care
facility as it served the community with special needs dogs.
Tuaseth -- No comments.
Osborne -- No comments.
ITEM 14: ADJOURNMENT
MOTION:
Commissioner Osborne MOVED for adjournment and there were no objections. SO
ORDERED.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:20 p.m.
Minutes transcribed and prepared by:
Carol L. Freas, City Cierk
PLANNING 8v ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 22, 2003
PAGE 14