Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-06-25 Planning & Zoning MinutesCITY OF KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS June 25, 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. *June 11, 2003 3. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT: 4. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: a. PZ03-25--Preliminary Plat -Strawberry Fields Forever Addition #1. Plat submitted by Integrity Surveys, 605 Swires Road, Kenai, Alaska. b. PZ03-26-Preliminary Plat - Shankel Subdivision. Plat submitted by Integrity Surveys, 605 Swires Road, Kenai, Alaska. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. PZ03-22-Conditional Use Permit for Cabin Rentals - 130 Phillips Drive (Lot 6, Block 8, Valhalla Heights Subdivision Part 3), Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Clinton & Delores Coligan dba Captain Bligh's Beaver Creek Lodge, P.O. Box 4300, Soldotna, Alaska. b. PZ03-23-Conditional Use Permit far Cabin Rentals - 140 Phillips Drive (Lot 7, Block 8, Valhalla Heights Subdivision Part 3), Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Clinton & Delores Coligan dba Captain Bligh's Beaver Creek Lodge, P.O. Box 4300, Soldotna, AIaska. c. PZ03-24-A resolution of the Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission recommending approval and adoption of the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Kenai by the Kenai City Council. G. OLD BUSINESS: 7. NEW BUSINESS: 8. PENDING ITEMS: 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT: 10. REPORTS: a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. Administration 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. KPB Notice of Plat Committee Meeting of June 9, 2003 - Keemau Subdivision Crestwood Addition 2 b. KPB Notice of Planning Commission December of June 9, 2003 -Strawberry Fields Forever Addition #1 Revised Preliminary Plat; KPB File 2003-045 c. Zoning Bulletin - 6/10103 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: 14. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF KENAI PLANNING 8a ZONING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS JUNE 25, 2003 - 7:00 p.m. CHAIRMAN RON GOECKE, PRESIDING MINUTES ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Goecke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1-a. Roll Call Ro11 was taken and confrmed as follows: Commissioners Present: Glick, Eldridge, Bryson, Hammelman, Amen, Goecke Others Present: Councilman Osborne, City Planner Kebschull, Eileen Bechtol and Elizabeth Benson 1-b. Agenda Approval MOTION: Commissioner Glick MOVED to approve the agenda along with the lay downs and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Commissioner Bryson SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 1-c. Consent Agenda MOTION: Commissioner Eldridge MOVED to approve the consent agenda and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Coxnmissioner Bryson SECONDED the motion. SO ORDERED. 1-d. Approval Of Minutes -- June 11, 2003 Approved by consent agenda. ITEM 2: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT -- None ITEM 3: CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: 3-a. PZ03-25-Preliminary Plat -Strawberry Fields Forever Addition # 1. Plat submitted by Integrity Surveys, 605 Swires Road, Kenai, Alaska. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson MOVED to approve PZ03-25 and Commissioner Glick SECONDED the motion. Staff had no additional information to the item. Commissioner Bryson reported part of the subdivision came before the Commission previously (Tract B). There was same difficulty in workaing out the access as the Borough proposed extending Wolfe Avenue over to Strawberry Road. The subdivider was opposed to that proposal and a reconsideration was requested with a proposal of dedicating Shell Drive. This required the consent of Tract A, who was not part of the original subdivision. Effectively, Tract A, now proposed to be divided into two parcels at the same time, is dedicating the 30' solely for the benefit of the city and to assist in working out the access problem with the borough. Bryson added, he understood the city engineer indicated he felt an agreement concerning the roads was applicable in the situation and he concurred the owner of Tract A is proposing to dedicate the 30' and it is not something the city had requested. He added, the 30' is extending across the parcel and the remaining 859 feet is coming off the unsubdivided portion of the original petitioner's property. Bryson stated he would support the recommendation of the staff. Commissioner Amen noted, at their last meeting, they reviewed the letter from the residents opposed to the extension which stated they did not think the extension would go through Shell Drive due to a swamp area. He asked if this is the same Shell Drive or a different part of Shell Drive. Bryson stated, as he understood it, the bog area of Shell Drive to which they were referring was further west. Bryson also stated, for the record, he voted on the issue at the Borough Planning Commission level and added, the property to the north is owned by a corporate partner of his. Bryson stated, he has no connection to the property, however. He added, the Borough allowed him to vote on the matter due to his having no financial interest in the issue or property. Eldridge stated he did not think it looked reasonable to extend Wolfe Drive through the subdivision and as the new Comprehensive Plan is adopted, streets to be developed into "through streets" should be identified. Bryson added, Shell Drive lies on a quarter line and it probably would be more logical than extending Wolfe Avenue. Additionally, there were objections from property owners who did not want the Shell Drive extension either. A petition for reconsideration of the plat action to the Borough Planning Commission was submitted but not approved. VOTE: B son ~ Yes ~ Eldridge ~ Yes ~ Amen ~ Yes f PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 2S, 2003 PAGE 2 Glick Yes Hammelman Yes Goecke Yes MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-b. PZ03-26-Preliminary Plat - Shankel Subdivision. Plat submitted by Integrity Surveys, 605 Swires Raad, Kenai, Alaska. Goecke indicated, this item was added to the agenda at the beginning of the meeting. City Planner Kebschull reviewed the information added to the agenda and noted, when the city made their initial analysis and presented the information to the surveyor, it was stated it would not be recommended far approval without the 50' right-of--way vacation as it would strictly limit development of Lot 5 and felt it would be unnecessary if a 30' right-of-way easement would be dedicated along Baker. After the surveyor received those comments, a new plat was submitted with the vacation, however it was not introduced as a revised plat because the original plat had not formally been reviewed. The City Attorney determined, because the City had advertised the plat and the name had not been changed, the Commission could consider the vacation at this meeting. She added, nothing changed except the 50' right-of--way being vacated and Baker Street being a 30' dedication. Bryson asked the source of the 50' right-of--way easement and Kebschull answered, it was noted on the original plat of the Government Lot. She added, a 100' right-of--way is not necessary in this area. MOTION: Commissioner Glick MOVED to approve PZ03-2b and Commissioner Amen SECONDED the motion. VOTE: Eldrid e Yes Axnen Yes Glick Yes Hammelman Yes B son Yes Goecke Yes MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM 5: PUBLIC HEARINGS 5-a. PZ03-22-Conditional Use Permit for Cabin Rentals - 130 Phillips Drive (Lot 6, Black 8, Valhalla Heights Subdivision Part 3), Kenai, Alaska. Appiicatian submitted by Clinton & Delores Coligan dba Captain Bligh's Beaver Creek Lodge, P.O. Box 4300, Soldotna, Alaska. PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 3 1 MOTION: Commissioner Glick MOVED to approve PZ03-22 and Commissioner Eldridge SECONDED the motion, Glick opened the matter to public comments. Verbatim follows: Merchant: My name is Jessie Merchant. I live at 13S PhiIlips Way, Kenai and we'd like to ask some questions as to get exactly which direction that the this area is going because we were under the idea that the community is a rural residential community and it seems like now it's more turning toward abusiness-type of a of a thing than what we had in mind. It was quiet. It was residential and no nobody was coming going during the night. But if this is put open to a business-type of atmosphere and all of the people corning and going at night in connection with fishing parties and whatever, it won't be a quiet neighborhood and it would down the real estate value of what we're trying to keep up. Over this last year which this project has been being built, I've had to rebuild my lawn three times because of them people,...(inaudible/noise from sound system)... also.....from all the traffic being generated from this and it will be even more .... My wife has an allergy and she has a difficult time to breathe sometimes because of the dust and everything that gets stirred up from that. I got nothing against anybody from trying to make a living, but I would like to have business set up in business areas and residential areas set up as residential areas and not have to wonder which way we're going. That's primarily what I had to say. Goecke: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak to this item? Russell: I'rn Sheryl Russell and I live at 4220 North Dogwood, sa I'rn just up the street from the original first two cabins that were built and I know that the people that own them keep them clean, but I really don't want to have my residential neighborhood turned into a summertime camping and I know at the far end on Lupine, I don't know who owns those, I think it's the second Iot in, and we've had motor homes parked and I think a residential area should be left at that as this is not helping our property taxes ar our property value at all. So that's my concern. If we have what we have, but I really don't want any more coming into the neighborhood. If there's any way of and if we can at least have something to say with the size of the cabins. The one on Lot 8 is of good size, or the one on Lot 7, but the one on Lot 6 is very small, when ever you think of residential and if they're planning an putting a cabin on Lot 8, (inaudible) of size, that would not look like a cabin and that's my feelings of the whole thing. I appreciate it. Thanks. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 4 Goecke: Thanks. Anybody else? Okay. Bring it back at this point and close the public hearing portion and bring it back to staff, do you have anything additional on this item. Kebschull: I don't have anything additional at this time. Goecke: Okay, thank you. Bring it to the commissioners. Male voice from audience: Sorry, I didn't hear you sir... Goecke: I said, at this point we will bring it back to the commissioners. We've closed... . Female voice from audience: ...close it? We didn't understand. We, we are the owners of that. Do we get a chance to speak? That is our question. Do we get a chance to speak on this? Goecke: I had asked if anybody.... Male voice: We didn't hear you, sorry that's my question. I didn't hear you. Goecke: Okay, yes I'll open this, 1'11 open the public hearing portion of this back up for your three minutes with the concurrence of the rest of the commissioners. Okay. Coligan: My name is Clinton Coligan. My wife's is Delores and we are the owners of the present two cabins that are an Lots 3 and ~ and the owners of these current two cabins being built are actually not cabins. One is a substantial log home, three bedroom, two bath of almost 1,800 square feet. The other is a much smaller cabin of only 800 square feet, but I think my neighbors will agree that I've done in every way possible and in the best style that possibly they can be done and a very substantial cost exceeding $200,000 so if that's a cabin for two cabins, they're couple cabins, and that's not the finish of it yet and as far as, in answer to traffic coming and going, we won't even be coming in the front way, we have access off the back way through our other property which is the way it's designed to approach, but traffic is a moot issue here for the simple reason that we're not going to create any traffic. The people that are going to use those cabins are booked here for a week at a time and I can guarantee that you as a resident or me as the owner, we rarely see those people. I mean, they leave early in the morning and they're doing what tourists do and take their place amongst whatever on the rivers or wherever they go, return it home. As far as noise and any activities, they're too tired to be any noise or activities and we've never attracted those kind of people in the past and I believe these people can verify and attest to that from the fact that I got two cabins that have been there for seven or PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 5 eight years already and not more than 100 yards away from these two that are being built. So I don't truly understand that, but and as far as the digging in this person's, gentleman's lawn, that's digging that was done by the city of Kenai to install normal utilities, precisely as prescribed and I do believe they went back and I'm sure, did their best to make it right, or I don't think they dug it up and just left it, I don't know, if they did, I guess the City of Kenai is who he has the problem with and Enstar which, and I'm sure when they had their own buildings installed or built, they went through the same procedures and somebody else would have had to endure the surrounding area being, and it isn't like it was tore up anyways, heck, they just went down the ditch and property values, I don't think I've hurt the values of any property. If anybody cares to question that, I'll show you pictures of all the adjoining properties around me and I think you'll agree that and if you would like to see the pictures, I'rn more than happy to show you. They're not totally finished, but three, four days away, they're certainly equal to anything around us. And, we're not there to cause any problems for anybody. This is our livelihood. This is our business. I spent twenty years to save the money to do this and assemble those lots to do it on and that's basically all I have and as far as business, I do believe it's properly zoned far what I'm doing and was told so when I started this whale project ten years ago and never been told different, so, and there are multiple, multiple other businesses around us, including one at Mrs. Russell's house, a man with a knife shop. I mean, that's no different than me and he's, he's going to create as much traffic or more than me. And there's another business on the back side of the lot and there's another business on the corner around the block, so what makes us different AlI we're doing is providing some luxurious accommodations for some tourists and as far as causing great stress or anything, our total season is only a total of two months and we'll probably have a group, a total group of no more than twelve people throughout the season booking those places and the rest of the time, they are just a permanent rental. That's all I have. Thank you very much. Bryson: I may have misunderstood when the square footage was stated, it appears as though there's 400 square foot on the Lot 6 building and 800, 837 on the Coligan: On the bottom floor there's 980 on the bigger one and 400, I believe 420, on the little one. And then athree-quarter loft on top brings the little one to slightly under 800 feet and the big one I believe, is 1,620. I have pictures here to show you if you care to see... Bryson: Okay, I didn't see where it was indicated that there was a second story, but I could have missed it. Thank you. Coligan submitted the pictures to the Commission of the cabins and explained the locations of the neighboring properties. PLANNING 8v ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 6 End of public hearing and end of verbatim, Glick stated he has a problem with continuing to approve conditional use permits in this area and was concerned a problem as has been in Anglers Acres would develop eventually and would not support the motion. Commissioner Amen inquired as to when a structure is a permanent rental. Kebschull informed him rentals of more than 30 days are considered residential use and less than 30 days, in this case is a cabin rental and requires a conditional use. Amen asked if there is a minimum size far a dwelling and Kebschull answered, not in the zoning code, however she believed the building code has a minimum size as well as other restrictions, i.e. sanitary facilities provided, etc. She added, both of the cabins at issue meet residential use requirements. Bryson stated he would support the motion and added, he felt the use is basically residential with short-term rental potential and effectively meets the intent of the zone. Amen asked staff if any complaints had been received over the years for the operation of those cabins currently situated on Lots 3 and 4 and Kebschull answered, to her knowledge no complaints had been received on the conditional use permits for those cabins. Eldridge commented he had similar concerns as did Glick, and felt at some point, zoning should be clarified to identify places for cabin rentals, etc. Amen asked if more than one cabin could be placed on a lot and Kebschull answered, in a rural residential zone, a minimum of 20,000 feet is required for each principle structure. In this case, the lots are fairly small and would not allow another principle structure without a variance. VOTE: Amen Yes Glick No Harnmelman Yes B son Yes Eldrid e Yes Goecke Yes MOTION PASSED. Goecke noted, anyone wishing to appeal the issue to the City Council has that right and the appeal must be submitted in writing, to the City Clerk, within 15 days. 5-b. PZ03-23--~-Conditional Use Permit far Cabin Rentals - 140 Phillips Drive (Lot 7, Block 8, Valhalla Heights Subdivision Part 3), Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Clinton 8a Delores Coligan dba Captain Bligh's Beaver Creek Lodge, P.O. Box 4300, Soldotaa, Alaska. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 7 MOTION: Commissioner Harnmelman MOVED to approve PZ03-23 per staf#'s recommendation and Commissioner Bryson SECONDED the motion. Public hearing opened and verbatim begins: Bryson: I wonder if I might, with the consent of the petitioner or the people who have commented, just enter their testimony that was received on the first item in this as part of the record? Is that possible? I see this as identical situation except far the difference in lots. Goecke: I agree... Female voice from audience: I have a question on this. Can I come up and ask a question? Goecke: Ma'am, you can do that and we're going to just let you do that right now because if, if you, if the people in question will concur, we will dispense and do away with part of this, and make it a little shorter and sweeter. But, yes, you can come to the podium and ask your question please, or to the table. Female voice from audience: ....sign in on? Goecke: I would prefer that you did, yes. Woman's voice: Okay, I think our concern is that ah, there are some other lots that are empty there and we'll, we'll, they keep building. Will we keep having these small cabins all around us because there are, there's another lot, there's two more lots that are empty and we are wondering if this will keep going. Will we have a little subdivision of fishing and hunting cabins? Goecke: That is, that's a question that cannot be answered at this time because we don't know, or at least I don't know who owns the property and again, it's a conditional use permit arrangement with these and so that is something that cannot be, the question is a good question, don't get me wrong, but it's a question that, at this point in time, cannot be answered. Woman's voice: But will they, I mean the same thing, that's what we're worried about, that these will keep building and building besides. Because we have a lot right beside us and we don't want that to be another cabin if we can help it. And, you don't know... PLANNING 8s ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 8 Geocke: We don't know. Sorry. Male Voice from audience: May I speak please... Geocke: Yes. We'll just open the public hearing portion of this and so, come ahead... Unidentified Male voice (Coligan): The lot that Mrs. Russell refers to that's next to them, closest to them, by her own husband's, well actually that one, 1 don't intend to building another cabin on the other lot and you know, I'm out of money, this is all she wrote, as far as the cabin that's closest the lot that's next to Mrs. Russell's, which there, there's an enormous lot in between us, as you well know, a big empty field... Bryson: I would like to request that he speak to the chairman... Goecke: Yes, speak to... Unidentified Male voice (Coligan):...anyways, Mr. Russell, Jimmy and I are friends, and he is pointed out to me that the lot in question that Mrs. Russell was mentioning that's closest to them, is not suitable to build on because it's a lot that's filled with fill from when they built the roads and consequently, I had that, or checked into that, and I find that it's totally true and it's not feasible to build on the property there. And, as far as building more cabins, I could only question and ask you this, what would be the...what if I did? I mean, I'm not building inferior homes. I think, of anything, I think i've improved, I'm improving an the area. I think the pictures will testify and say that all far me in a mouthful, so I'm not, I'm not taking anything away from this community or anything from that neighborhood by any means and I, if I owned the lot, what would be the problem if I did, in fact, want to build a cabin on every lot. It's not like we're building shanty cabins, we're building luxurious places. Yes, one is small, but it's only going to house two people. It's only going to house two people for two months of the year. That's the time it's just a rental. I, I, I'rn really quite baffled that there's questions. I, I tried to do it by the numbers and, and going up and dawn the street, there're houses side by side, Iot after lot after lot, and every lot in there, the record will show, is all the same size, so why, so what's different about me? And more than a few rentals in there, I'm sure. Glick: The rest of the year, do you rent these houses? Unidentified Male voice (Coligan): i have a property manager and those houses are rented and stay rented from the middle (inaudible/noise from sound system) are rented by the month just like a regular rental. It's just rental property. Woman's voice: One person all month all winter... PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 9 Glick: One person though? Male voice: Yes, of course. Amen: Still the factor is this thirty-day trigger... that's... inaudible. Male voice: That only goes on for two and one-half months. Amen: But that's what's different. Goecke: Okay, would you state your name just for the record... Male voice: My name's Clinton A. Coligan. Goecke: Thank you. Coligan: Thank you. Goecke: Okay, anyone else wanting to speak to this item? Seeing none. Close the public hearing portion and bring it back and ask staff if they have anything additional on this one. Verbatim ends. Staff had nothing additional for the issue. VOTE: Hammelman Yes B son Yes Eldrid e Yes Amen Yes Glick No Goecke Yes MOTION PASSED. Goecke noted, anyone wishing to appeal the issue to the City Council, the request is required to be in writing to the City Clerk and submitted within 15 days. BREAK TAKEN: 7:40 P.M. BACK TO ORDER: 7:55 P.M. 5-c. PZ03-24-A resolution of the Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission recaminending approval and adoption of the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Kenai by the Kenai City Council. Bechtol and Benson provided a presentation for the Commission, which outlined the PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 10 ~ oals and ob ectives, framework g j ,purposes and policies and proposed future land uses outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The public hearing was opened, however there was no public comment. Kebschull reviewed information submitted to the Commission at the beginning of the meeting as follows: • The information was submitted by Mr. Waring in memorandum form after having discussions with Mr. Gease and Mr. Segura of the Kenaitze Indian Tribe. He did not receive any specific recommendations from Segura, only general discussions. • She spoke with Gease during the day who was unable to attend the Commission meeting. • She believed the Commission may want to consider the proposed Amendments 1 and 3. • She did not feel Amendment No. 2 should be included in the Comprehensive Plan as environmental issues should not be in the Plan, however it would be for the Commission's determination. • Proposed Amendment No. 1, Historic Shki'tuk't Village, had been discussed during Historic District Board meetings in regard to preserving the site as a park. There are informational signs along the bluff noting the historic relevance of the property which were placed through a sign project of the Board. They hoped during the Millennium project, there would be a park there to preserve the area and to give recognition of its importance. She added, she believed this is a valid amendment. • Proposed Amendment No. 3 is fairly new to her as well as the Kenai River Gateway Natural. Area. This is something that came up as the Plan progressed with the consultants. She stated she felt it was appropriate to include the Gateway in the Plan to give recognition to the river and the Kenaitze link to the river. Kebschull noted there was no motion on the floor. She added, a list of changes to the Plan was provided to the Commission and noted Item No. 3 on the Index page, under Maps, Map No. 12 was incorrectly identified and should be noted as Millennium Square Map. Kebschull requested this change be incorporated into the motion. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson MOVED to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Kenai by the City Council and Commissioner Glick SECONDED the motion. MOTION TO AMEND; Commissioner Bryson MOVED to incorporate the latest proposed amendments received from Mr. Gease, incorporating No. 1 and No. 3 as recommended by staff. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 11 Commissioner Harnmelman SECONDED the motion. Amen clarified the amendments were noted as No. 1 and 3 on the memorandum from Waring and No. 1 through 3 on Kebschull's chart. Bryson noted, future city center land use was discussed in the presentation and was indicated as an area along the westerly boundary of the airport property as a cons~;rvation/buffer area. He noted, the buffer area would be a strip which cuts across area that will be used, such as the Float Plane Basin, and stretches info open areas to the North as a triangle where it is wide open bog, cutting across the cemetery, and incorporated in areas which would need to be cleared or tree levels lowered because of restrictions on the approach pattern of the airport. Bryson stated he would be hesitant to recommend approval of that without further evaluation of the airport. Kebschull approached Bryson and requested clarification. Kebschull noted to the Commission the tract of land Bryson spoke to and she concurred with Bryson of the cemetery area. Bryson suggested and pointed out two lots of airport lands that may be appropriate to provide the buffer. Kebschull asked if Bryson would recommend excluding those properties and include them in the airport industrial zone. Bryson stated he would prefer the airport staff and/or Airport Commission comment on what they perceive as the use in that area. Kebschull stated, she was concerned to take airport Iands and place them in conservation (which it already is) and further restrict, which is what the Plan wants to alleviate with the airport industrial overlay. At this time as it is unknown what the future airport land needs may be. If the properties are placed in the airport industrial overlay, there will be an option to use it for airport needs. Bryson agreed, airport properties should be included in that zone. Amen asked if there was also concern in relation to the triangle piece cutting into the float plane basin area. Bryson answered, it is an area the city acquired to provide for a future fence in the area. The fence had not yet been relocated, but it is a wet area and not likely to be developed. Bryson stated he would prefer this property to remain in the airport overlay area. Eldridge noted, in the Plan, a certain amount of conservation land should be designated as part of the airport development plan. He added, he believed the property would have to be reviewed by administration, airport manager, and Airport Commission. He added, he believed all appropriate airport land should be available for development and move it out of conservation status. Eldridge added, if the threshold for the airport runway is to be moved north, some of the noise may change. Bryson, indicating on a map, noted the area seaward from Redoubt Subdivision, is privately owned and below mean high-water line and the un-subdivided green area to the west is also privately owned. The consultants stated they could reconfrm the land PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 12 ownership maps again. Their intent was not to designate conservation on privately- owned property and this could be a mapping error. Kebschull stated she was uncomfortable leaving the airport land and conservation issue and felt it was something that could be easily handled by including the properties in the Airport Industrial Zane. She added, they were not deciding what to do with the property at this time, but would take the properties out of the conservation zone and takes care of the issue at this time. At this time, it is an unknown what will happen with the airport, but they are aware there may be a need to cut trees for the approach, etc. She added, she didn't think delaying the adoption of the Plan until it is known what the development of the area will be would be appropriate as it could be years before decisions may be made. Kebschull stated, the Airport Commission had been given a copy of the Plan and provided an opportunity to discuss it and comment. She received no comments. The consultant stated, to err on the side it will be developed as airport, place it in the airport zone and in the future, when the ALP is finished and an airport overlay area is developed, the property could then be moved out. Since it is city property, the city has control of it. Kebschull added, this is a proposed land use plan and technically, the current airport properties are zoned conservation and unless they are rezoned, they will remain conservation and airport and related uses are allowed in the conservation zone. Bryson added, the document will be used as a rationale (a planning document) as to why no development should occur there as well. Kebschull agreed and added, that is why it would be pr~;ferable to place the properties in the airport industrial zone and correct the map. Eldridge stated the airport and approaches are all conservation land and felt they should be zoned as light industrial. Kebschull stated, that was why the issue arose, because every time there was a possibility of development or selling a piece of airport property, it requires a rezone. The hope is, by creating a land use for airport industrial, eventually, through the implementation of the Plan, allowable uses may be created for the Airport Industrial Overlay Zone. MOTION TO AMEND: Commissioner Eldridge MOVED to designate the whole airport property as airport industrial zone and Commissioner Bryson SECONDED the motion. Kebschull asked Bryson, did the airport lands match with the ALP drawing? Bryson stated, it would include the green strip. Kebschull asked if the airport lands included properties not included in the map to which they referred. Bryson answered yes, airport lands go beyond Marathon Road and across the Spur Highway. Kebschull asked if his intent of the motion was to include all those lands or incorporate only the PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 13 1 green strip previously discussed. Eldridge answered, his intent was to include the property colored purple in the proposed land use plan outlined in the Plan. He added, he recognized there were other airport lands (court house property, etc.), but to primarily get the conservation land around the airport into an airport development. Eldridge stated, he was suggesting the whole of the purple properties {airport lands) should be drawn as airport light industrial. Kebschull noted, the hatched area was recommended by the Airport Manager and Airport Commission and discussed earlier in the Plan. She added, they looked at what they felt was developable land around the airport. Eldridge stated his recommendation remained to do the broad scope of the conservation land in the airport light industrial zone. Kebschull asked if he wanted to include all the purple and the hatching and Eldridge answered yes. Bryson stated, his interpretation for the discussion was to include all the property noted as plain purple, purple with the vertical hatching, and the green an the map that are within the airport boundaries. Bryson stated, it would exclude the angled hatching as it was a different designation, Eldridge concurred. Amen stated he would not vote in favor of the motion until a new map with the appropriate hatching, etc. VOTE ON AMENDMENT REGARDING AIRPORT PROPERTY: Glick Yes Hammelman Yes B son Yes Eldrid e Yes Amen No Goecke Yes MOTION PASSED. Bryson referred to the Kenai Gateway Natural Area (last drawing in the handout packet) and asked if the City Council had commented on how this will fit into their long-range plans on the wetlands area. Kebschull stated no; the issue came from a discussion with Waring and Mayor Williams and she was not aware of any discussion at Council level. Eldridge stated the matter had also been discussed with the Harbor Commission and did have same comments, including the area would include the city dock as well as others, but not actually as part of the Gateway Natural Area, but more of a marine use, industrial development along the shoreline. Additionally, in other plans reviewed and discussed with the state for possible trade, the city wanted to reserve its right to keep a portion of land (to the boat dock road) out of a conservation area in order to allow possible future development. Eldridge stated he did not think the lines on the map were accurate as to the intent of what council wanted. Bryson stated, conceptually, he agreed with what was included on the map. He added, the value of the property was in not being developed and it translates to dollars and cents. Bryson stated, he would not want to commit to a situation where it is created as a conservation area but would support it subject to the boundaries. PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 14 Kebschull referred to page 40 of the Plan, and noted the wording stated, "...explore the creation of a Kenai River Gateway Natural Area." She added, the discussion in the Plan noted, the property is worth something for negotiating, i.e. bluff erosion project, etc. Bryson noted a portion of the lower right-hand side of the map (area in the white, to the right of the vertical red boundary and north of the river, below the yellow tract) was State property, acquired through a recent land transfer from the city to the State. The map will need correcting. Bryson stated he was supporting the concept and the intent of the written description; he felt it was appropriate. Bryson referred to Page 12, the Iand use within the Anglers Acres area. He asked if it should be described as "residential" as opposed to "commercial" as opposed to zoning? The consultants stated it was probably mapped this way because the borough has it designated as residential. Kebschull stated, the borough designates it as residential, but the conditional uses of the properties are not noted. She added, there are several showing as commercial on the map, however. Kebschull stated, unless those properties are rezoned, they could revert to residential use at any time. The consultant noted, the map was designating existing land use. VOTE ON MAIN AMENDED MOTION: Hammelman Yes B son Yes Eldrid e Yes Amen Yes Glick Yes Goecke Yes MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Kebschull clarified, the Commission approved the plan to recommend to council it be adopted with the corrections noted on the "Corrections and Additions" paper given to the Commission, as well as the Index Map on # 12, Items 1 and 3, and the Airport Industrial correction. Goecke answered yes. Goecke referred to Item 5c submitted to the Commission during the meeting, and stated he felt Mr. Cease should have presented the issue through the Commission instead of going to Waring directly. He added, he felt it was a breach of protocol. Eldridge stated he believed it was a comment made during the public hearings in February. Kebschull confirmed that and added, it took time for Waring to decide how to present the issue. She added, they had hoped to get input from Segura as well and didn't think Cease wanted to sidestep the Commission and presented it in writing in February. This was a result of his comments. ITEM 6: OLD BUSINESS -- None PLANNING $G ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 15 } ITEM 7: NEW BUSINESS -- None ITEM 8: PENDING ITEMS -- None ITEM 9: CODE ENFORCEMENT -- None ITEM Z0: REPORTS: 10-a. City Council -- Councilman Osborne provided a re-cap of council action items. 10-b. Borough Planning -- Commissioner Bryson provided a re-cap of Borough Planning action items. 10-c. Administration --City Planner Kebschull reported the following: • For clarification, Kebschull stated the City of Kenai did not dig in Mr. Merchant's lawn. The City of Kenai does nat do work of that nature and Kebschull speculated it could have been HEA or a similar entity. • An ordinance regarding the discontinuation of certified mailings is in the process. • Beginning July 1, 2003 the Code Enforcement Officer is laid-off. She has not received any instruction on how to proceed and will keep the Commission informed. ITEM 11: PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED -- None ITEM 12: INFORMATION ITEMS 12-a. KPB Notice of Plat Committee Meeting of June 9, 2003 - Keemau Subdivision Crestwood Addition 2 12-b. KPB Notice of Planning Commission December of June 9, 2003 - Strawberry Fields Forever Addition # 1 Revised Preliminary Plat; KPB File 2003- 045. 12-c. Zoning Bulletin - 6/10/03 ITEM 13: COMMISSION COMMENTS 8a QUESTIONS: Coxmissioner Amen: Congratulations to the Commission and all others who participated and worked so hard on the Comprehensive Plan. Cammissioner Bryson: Congratulations on the Comprehensive Plan. The Valhalla PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE lei 1 Subdivision lawn issue wasn't clarified, but the utilities would have been in the right- of-way area of Mr. Merchant's lawn. Commissioner Glick: No Comment Commissioner Amen: No Comment Commissioner Hammelman: No Comment ITEM 14: ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Commissioner Glick MOVED for adjournment and Commissioner Bryson SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. The meeting adjourned at 9 :15 p.m. Minutes prepared and transcribed by: ~~ Carol L. Freas, City Clerk PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2003 PAGE 17