Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-06-10 P&Z PacketRENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION June 10, 1992 - 7:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers Chairman Art Graveley AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 27, 1992 4. PLANNING a. Application for Lease - Lot 3, Block 4, General Aviation Apron - Erik Barnes 5. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD a. Judith Bittner - State Historic Preservation Officer Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation Office of Historical and Archeaology Preservation 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Townsite Historic Zone Ordinance 8. OLD BUSINESS 9. REPORTS a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. City Administration 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED 11. INFORMATION ITEMS 1. Appeal CUP - Davidson 2. Letter From KPB Regarding Comprehensive Plan 3. City Council Agenda 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS 13. ADJOURNMENT MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 27, 1992 - 7:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Art Gravely at 7:05 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. 1. Ro11 Call was taken by acting secretary, Diane Craig. Commissioners present were: Carl Glick, Phil Bryson and Bernie Landeis. Kathy Scott and Saylor Rehm were absent. City Staff present were Jack LaShot and Howard Hackney. Commissioner Duane Bannock arrived at 7:13 p.m. Councilman Hal Smalley arrived at 7:30 p.m. 2. AGENDA APPROVAL There were no changes or additions to the agenda. Mr. Bryson moved for approval of the agenda. The Agenda was approved by unanimous consent. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 13 1992 MEETING: Mr. Bryson requested an addition to the minutes at the top of page 8 after Mr. Cowan's statement regarding rebuilding after a fire, etc. Add the following: Bryson stated that a building would have to be conforming if it were destroyed by a fire and reconstructed, under the normal interpretation of zoning. Mr. Bryson also indicated the name of Marcus Targonsky should be Marcarius Targonsky in the last paragraph on page 8. Mr. Bryson moved for approval of the minutes as amended. Mr. Landeis seconded. The minutes were approved by unanimous consent. 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: None 5. PLANNING Item a. Resolution PZ 92-14: Alaska Land Survey No. 92-41 Jack LaShot reported that this is Obert's property along the river. No definite plans other than what is presented in the packet. They are just in the platting stages of the property. We will need an Installation Agreement to construct the road and right-of-way. The action to be taken is to recommend approval of the plat. If they develop a park, it's listed as a secondary use in that zone, so, they do not have to come back before this commission. KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 27, 1992 Page 2 Mr. Glick moved for approval of PZ 92-14. Mr. Landeis seconded. DISCUSSION: Mr. Bryson pointed out that if Salmon Drive is to be dedicated as a right-of-way, it should be so stated. Mr. LaShot agreed, and if not they will have to build to city specifications. Mr. Bryson said that the road, if constructed, would provide a large amount of traffic through this area and if it is not paved in a short period of time, it's going to become quite obnoxious to the houses in that area, and some treatment of at least the portion off the highway might be reasonable at an early time after it's developed. This might be addressed in the Installation Agreement if they propose it as a right-of-way. VOTE: Graveley - Yes; Glick - Yes; Bryson - Yes; Landeis - Yes 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS Item a. Resolution PZ 92-15: RV Park Bookey Conditional Use Permit - Graveley stated that at this time this RV Park is in Townsite Historical Zone, and the conditional use permit before us technically does not apply. We will hold a public hearing regarding this permit to hear input of local residents within that area. Mr. Graveley requested Staff comments. Jack LaShot stated that this is pretty confusing because the existing RV Park is in General Commercial. The proposed addition is currently in TSH. The proposed rezone would make it Central Commercial. That hasn't happened yet. In either of the commercial zones a conditional use permit would be required. In TSH no conditional use permit apparently is required. If the developer doesn t build anything there that requires a building permit, it wouldn't have to come up for review. The development plan is on the agenda for review, which is required because it is city leased land. Mr. Jim Bookey was called upon to inform the commission of his plans. Mr. Bookey referred to the plan submitted before the commission. He stated that it is a very basic plan similar to what was already done in the past (in the existing RV Park). Water, sewer and electric will be installed to all the spots drawn out, and same gravel. Mr. Graveley asked if there is any structure to be built. Mr. Bookey answered no. Mr. Bryson asked about Lot 3 outside of this property - will the parking area be extended over onto Lot 3? Mr. Bookey answered no. Mr. Bryson asked is the proposal from 9 to 16 parking spaces. Mr. Bookey said yes, and we're going to full water, sewer and electric. The main reason for that is that we can put the new spaces in comfortably with the PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 27, 1992 Page 3 right spacings, and people require the water, sewer and electric in order to keep them here in town, and so we're are going all the way. Mr. Bryson asked about trees on the city lots near the Bicentennial Building Tract. The lease application showed parking areas between trees. Mr. Bookey said right, but at that time it was electric only and it's a little hard to do it the other way. Mr. Glick asked are you taking all of the trees out? Mr. Bookey replied, on that back line; up to the front end, we're going to leave trees on the very front end - about 15 trees are going to come out. You won't see a major amount of difference. Mr. Glick asked, so there will still be some on the Overland side? Mr. Bookey replied that all the trees behind the old restaurant building will still be there and about six trees on the front end - there will be replants and grass on the .outside end. Mr. Glick:. Then the two RV Parks will tie together then? Mr. Bookey: It will all tie together, right. There was no other public comment. Chairman Graveley stated that at this time the Commission does not need to take any action regarding this. We should not hold Mr. Bookey up because of the fact that he is in Townsite waiting on a change of zoning. Technically, as brought up before, he does not have to have a permit as long as there is no building in the vicinity, Mr. Bryson asked if that is the opinion of the administration? Jack LaShot said yes. 7. NEW BUSINESS Item 7a: Development Plan for RV Park - Bookey Lot 2 Gusty Subd., Add'n #8 Mr. LaShot advised that it is the development plan looked at under item 6a. Kim Howard, Administrative Assistant informed the commission that the city lease requires that if the original development plan is changed, it must be approved by Planning & Zoning. If approved, Kim will request the Planning Secretary to write a letter to Mr. Bookey advising him of the approval. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 27, 1992 Page 4 Mr. Bryson moved for approval of the proposed modifications to the site development plans. Motion was seconded by Mr. Glick. VOTE: Graveley - Yes; Glick - Yes; Bannock - Yes; Bryson - Yes; Landeis - Yes Item 7b: Doyle Proposed Development Plan for Car Wash Expansion Lot 5, Gusty Subdivision No. 3 Kim Howard reported that this property has a 99 year lease with the city. The addition must be approved by Planning and Zoning. Mr. Don Moffis was present to answer the commissioners' questions. Mr. Bryson moved for approval of the proposed development plan for Lot 5, Gusty Subd. #3 of Mr. Doyle. Mr. Glick seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: Mr. Moffis drew a sketch of the existing structure and the proposed addition and explained the dimensions and layout. The addition includes a waiting room, a storage area and a self-serve wash stall. It will run 12' wide by the 62' length of the building, with a 17x35 slab as an exterior self-serve car wash. Traffic will exit behind the building onto the gravel road between the car wash and the ball fields. The substitute drawing (handout) shows deletion of the 6x8 portion which has been incorporated inside the addition. Mr. Graveley asked the distance from the outside wall to the property line. Mr. Moffis said 36 feet to the easement. Mr. Bryson asked about discharge of liquid into a sump in the slab itself. Mr. Moffis explained it will be discharged into the city sewer. The sump is a catch basin to alleviate any of the solids so they can't go down into the sewer, and also any film such as oil from the cars will float to the top - an oil trap. Mr. Bryson asked staff if this is compatible. Jack LaShot said we are working with them on the draining. Mr. Bryson stated this is basically a slab on grade and it adds no other impacts to the extent that it does not encroach into setbacks. VOTE: Graveley - Yes; Glick - Yes; Bannock - Yes; Bryson - Yes; Landeis - Yes PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 27, 1992 Page 5 Item 7c. Resolution PZ 92-15 - Amending KMC Procedure for Conditional Use Permit. Jack LaShot stated that this resolution was prepared by the City Attorney as requested. By removing the one sentence it would then give the Commission more discretion as to what's allowed, an opportunity to look at other uses, and placing more responsibility on the Commission. Mr. Glick moved for approval of Resolution PZ 92-15. Mr. Bannock seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: Mr. Bannock stated that if the commissioners feel that decisions can be made solely from a book or code guide, do not support this resolution. Vote against PZ 92-15 simply because you don't want to make sometimes difficult decisions. After all, without this resolution the excuse "sorry it's just not in the book" is always available. The alternative is not to keep amending the Land Use Table every time we have a unique situation to allow for conditional use permits. The beauty of a conditional use permit is that we can tailor the proposal to meet the needs of the zone, the area, the neighbors, as well as the needs of the applicant. Please, support this measure, take the responsibility and utilize your good judgment for which you are appointed a Planning and Zoning Commissioner. Mr. Bryson stated that although the administration was requested to prepare this just like it comes out, I would like administration to come to a conclusion as to the effects of how this fits into the zoning code itself and its interpretation. All this does is strike the appropriate words, but there is no evaluation as to its effect on the rest of the code or the way the rest of the code is written. A lot of the code is written specifically because items are listed. To just strike three letters and change one sentence changes the philosophical approach of the code itself. I would just request that the City Attorney to comment on what he thinks the effect is. Mr. Graveley asked Jack LaShot - I'm under the impression the City Attorney drafted part of this or looked at part of this? Mr. LaShot replied, he drafted the whole thing. Mr. Graveley stated, it would be my opinion that if he went this far with it that he obviously looked at the whole code to see what impact this would have? PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 27, 1992 Page 6 LaShot answered: Well, if you read the rest of the paragraph that the one sentence is taken from, it actually leaves it up to the Commission whether it is compatible with a particular zone - I guess it leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Mr. Bannock stated that in speaking with Mr. Graves two weeks ago about this, I spoke with Mr. Graves before I made this motion at the end of the meeting, and if we were dealing, and I hate to be point specific, if we were dealing with the same situation last week,- or if this had been a replacement ordinance and it had passed, we would have been free to do what we, what I wanted to do last week, without breaking any city codes. If this was the order of the day on the books, as opposed to what was on the books two weeks ago when a situation arose that was not specifically addressed in the Land Use Table, this body could make a decision on it. Where it is the way it stands today, it's silly to even, it's silly for the City to even entice an applicant to apply for a conditional use permit when the clerk could look in the book and say I'm sorry it's not in the Land Use Table - don't waste your time applying, don't waste your $100 applying. This gives a particular applicant an opportunity to do something. To come before this body and sell his idea to this body when it's not specifically addressed. Without this ordinance, any time we have a person who wants to do something that's not in the Land Use Table, we can do what we did two weeks ago with the one that failed last week, and we can keep tagging things onto the Land Use Table every single time. But the problem with that Mr. Chairman is that we'll realize that 1) there's an error; then we will take the minimum six weeks that it takes to add something to the Land Use Table for it to be okay for the original applicant to even apply. So, we come up with this hodgepodge of Land Use Table thing every single time it's not addressed. This puts the responsibility on this body. Mr. Landeis stated that when you read this, in my mind, the first sentence that you read, that power to the commission is taken away by the sentence proposed to be removed. I agree with Mr. Bannock. Why have that paragraph in there if you can't use the discretion that it gives you unless it is in accordance with the Land Use Table. Mr. Smalley stated that he had not talked with Mr. Graves on this, but he was requested by this body to prepare something, and I guess I even suggested too, that I don't want to say, what would be least resistance to a pathway, but would cause fewer problems when applications came in. In my looking at this resolution, it gives a great deal of control in these matters to this body. I wish the City Attorney were here to speak to this, I don't know if anybody from the City can. It's pretty clear. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 27, 1992 Page 9 9. Item a. City Council Report. Mr. Smalley reported on actions being taken by City Council at the last council meeting. Ordinance 1492 was pulled for further administration work. The Cab Company Ordinance change was tabled until further investigation of state regulations, etc. The Resolution to change the name of Eadies Way did not pass. Some change directives on the Congregate Housing were passed. Some Russian Dancers will arrive on June 7th and housing is needed. If any commissioner is interested they should contact the Mayor or City Hall. Item b. Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning. Mr. Bryson reported CIIAP#6 Replat adjacent to Carr's for the new K-Mart was approved. A land use application for permit to store logs on borough property in Cooper Landing was denied. The Leo Renault grazing application was recommended to go to public hearing in Homer. Comments are being accepted on the Comprehensive Trails Plan and should be submitted soon. The Assembly sent back the Town & Country Disposal septic permit and the Planning Commission declined to take additional testimony and sent it back to the Assembly and it will continue to be a hot item. Item c. Jack LaShot advised the commission that the TSH Rezone was tabled by Council and additional work sessions are requested as indicated in the Clerk's Memo handed out to commissioners. Mr. Smalley said council had received numerous telephone calls and so they want additional community input at work sessions. After much discussion, it was decided that the Commission would send a letter to Council explaining steps already taken, that no additional public hearing.is required, and request the Council to vote. Mr. Bannock moved that P&Z send a letter to Council stating the commission's position and requesting they bring the action to a vote on the resolution presented on Townsite Historical Rezone. Mr. Landeis Seconded. Unanimous Consent. Mr. Bannock will draft a letter and get copies to all commissioners before submitting to council packet on Friday. 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS Mr. Smalley suggested that the Commission have a spokesperson at the Council meeting next Tuesday evening when this comes up under the Commission Reports to speak to this body's concerns, and get input from all councilmembers as to what direction they wish you to take. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 27, 1992 Page 10 Mr. Bryson commented on the action on the Davidson item - the enabling ordinance. It's a two-sided sword when you list allowable uses. There can be abuses from the other perspective and the Borough Land Obnoxious Use Ordinance is a situation which abuse is taking place from the other side and the procedure is so complicated to get through the appeal stage that it becomes a very political issue. A planning commission is to some degree much less politically aligned, and they aren't getting elected when all the assembly are, so they can come up with different decisions that are very difficult to confront when you're looking at a thousand voters in a small area. That is a valid situation in the elective process. It's not all gravy when you're making the decisions as to whether something is a reasonable use because it effects a lot of people and they will voice their opinions. Mr. Bannock commented on the garage sale matter, suggesting a possible ticket/permit with location, beginning and ending date, and a token fee, maybe $5, just so that the City has some recourse to say the ticket (time) has expired. There was a discussion about other possibilities of non-compliance by persons who aren't aware of the requirements. Mr. LaShot was asked to consider these suggestions in drafting an ordinance. Mr. LaShot handed out a Capital Improvements Project List for the Commissioner's information. 13. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approx. 8:47 p.m. Submitted by Diane E. Craig Acting Secretary