Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-02-09 P&Z MinutesKENAI ADVISORY PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING WITH ?E KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING CUflAISSION FEBRUARY 9, 1976 KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RON MALSTON, CHAIRMAN 1. ROLL CALL APPROVED Z /ZS /!b Present: Chairman Ron Malston, Nels Kjelstad, Art Evans, Roland Raymond, Cliff Heus and Betty Glick. (Mrs. Glick was seated on the Borough Commission and voted on both Commissions.) Absent: Mike Hamrick Ex- Officio Member Present: Councilman Ed Ambarian 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Borough Ordinance 76 -3: Rezoning of Tracts 31 through 35, Killen Estates, to General Commercial Mr. Sam Best, Director of the Kenai Borough Planning Department, read a letter from Woodland Subdivision property owners, written by Mr. Al Poore. The letter was in opposition to the Ordinance because of ample commercial property within the City Limits, and it was felt that rezoning of this property would be detrimental to the subdivisions located on Forest Drive. At this time, Chairman Dimmick opened the meeting for a public hearing on the above Ordinance. Mr. Bruce Bartell of Kenai spoke in opposition to the Ordinance for the following reasons: Sears School was planned to coincide with a rural residential community. The increased traffic and construction in the area would be hazardous to the approximately 700 children who use the road each school day. A commercial establishment in the area would possibly cause loitering by older children, which would be a bad influence on the younger children. The noise of the con- struction would disrupt the classrooms at Sears School. Mr. Thomas Thompson of Kenai spoke in opposition to the Ordinance. Mr. Thompson read a letter written by the Principal of Kenai Elementary School, Mr. Kimpel, to the Mayor of Kenai which requeste a remedy for the adverse affect the traffic problem was having on the children of Kenai Elementary School. Mr. Thompson stated that if this Ordinance passed, the children of Sears Elementary School would be faced with the same problem. Mr. Lee Glad, representative of Glad Realty in Kenai, spoke in opposition to the Ordinance. Mr. Glad felt that there was ample commercial property available in the City Center and that unless there was a proven need for more commercial property, this rezoning should be denied as poor business practice. Mr. Walt Sweet of Kenai spoke in opposition to the Ordinance because residential areas are already established in the Forest Drive area, and a commercial zone in this area would detract from the exclusive residential areas. Commercial property scattered in residential areas would be poor zoning practice. KENAI PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING Fr` "RUARY 9, 1976 (Item 2 -A continued) PAGE 2 The established residential areas need protection for property value to remain stable. Mr. Don Bailey of Anchorage, property owner in the Forest Drive area, spoke in favor of the Ordinance. He stated that this location was ideal for a small shopping center and that it would decrease the traffic on Forest Drive since people would not go to the downtown area, but would shop in their immediate area. There would be no detrimental effect on the rural residential environment, as a buffer strip would be placed between the commercial property and the adjoining rural residential property. Ms. Dorothy Shaw of Kenai spoke in opposition to the Ordinance because the increased traffic would be hazardous to the children in the area. Mr. Wade Lundstrom of Kenai spoke in opposition to the Ordinance because there had been no advantages presented to rezoning this property to commercial. There are good shopping centers within a short distance of the Forest Drive area and commercial property was available in the general business area. The increased traffic would be hazardous to the children of the area. Ms. Inez Loftis of Kenai spoke in opposition to the Ordinance. Since January 1, 1975, the Borough had spent a great deal of money on zoning and there was no proof that more commercial property was needed. Ms. Ruby Coyle of Kenai spoke in opposition to the Ordinance because the cost of the original zoning had been immense and the original planning of the area should be followed to cut costs. Ample commercial property is available at present in the Kenai area. As there was no further public comment, Chairman Dimmick returned the matter to the Commission tables. A discussion followed the recess of the Borough Planning Commission to enable the Kenai Advisory Planning Commission to vote on the Ordinance. Councilman Ambarian stated that he was opposed to rezoning of this property for all of the reasons stated at the public hearing. Mr. Raymond stated that as the Commission was not aware of the type of business which might be established, they could not be assured of its compatability with the neighborhood zoning concept. Mr. Kjelstad asked the acreage of the land to be rezoned. Mr. Best stated that it was 20 acres, divided into two 10 acre tracts. Mr. Kjelstad asked what the comprehensive plan showed. KENAI PLANNING F, ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING F 2UARY 9, 1976 (Item 2 -A, continued) Mr. Best stated that the property was rural residential. PAGE 3 MOTION: Mr. Kjelstad moved, seconded by Mr. Evans, to recommend to the Borough Planning Commission that rezoning of Tracts 31 through 35, Killen Estates, from rural residential to general commercial, be denied. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. The Kenai Advisory Planning Commission then recessed for the Borough discussion. After discussion, the Borough unanimously refused the zoning change. B. Borough Ordinance 76 -4: Amendment to Chapter 21-76, Natural Resources Ordinance within the Kenai Municipal District The Ordinance was introduced by Mr. Sam Best of the Borough Planning Department. Chairman Dimmick stated that although this Ordinance would be for the Borough, it would be administered solely by the City of Kenai if passed. The only Borough participation in this Ordinance would be through standard appeal. The public hearing was then opened to the public for comment. Mr. Jim Elson, Mayor of the City of Kenai, was in favor of adopting this Ordinance. Mr. Elson stated that at present, there is no zoning by resource. The resources are extracted by conditional use permit under this ordinance and, therefore, the extractions would have to be compatible and follow the guidelines of those zoning areas to preserve the intent of the zone. Through lengthy discussion and revision by the Kenai Advisory Planning Commission, City Administration and City Council, Mr. Elson felt that they had established a reasonable, workable plan in this Ordinance to protect the rights of property owners and to preserve the integrity for the intended zoning. This Ordinance would be laying out criteria for conditional use through a development plan to be submitted to the City of Kenai. If the development plan was not adhered to, the City would maintain the right to regulate the resource extractor as seen fit. An important factor in the effectiveness of the Ordinance would be how well the City administered the Ordinance. KENAI PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FY "VARY 9, 1976 (Item 2 -B, continued) PAGE 4 Mr. Walt Sweet of Kenai spoke in favor of the Ordinance. He felt that through numerous public hearings it had been established that public sentiment was generally affirmative towards this Ordinance. Therefore, it should be passed. Ms. Ruby Coyle of Kenai spoke in opposition to the Ordinance. She did not feel that the 150 foot buffer strip between the extracting property and adjoining property would be sufficient to protect the adjoining property. She further stated that the Ordinance was too restrictive for the extractor to benefit from the resource. There being no further public comment, the issue was brought to the Commission tables. Mr. Peterson of the Borough Planning Commission asked what the minimum yardage for gravel extraction would be before an individual would come under the regulation. Mr. Best stated that the revision of the Ordinance did not state this only that commercial operators would be regulated. Mr. Elson stated the Ordinance was not intended for only commercial operators. It would regulate the aesthetics of the adjoining property to maintain value and, therefore, anyone who was extracting against the initial intent of the zoning would come under this. Ordinance,. Chairman Dimmick asked if the City of Kenai had established a minimum. It was determined that although the City had no minimum, regulatory measures would be administered by the City and City Manager. A set of guidelines would be made in that office to administer the intent of the regulation. At At this time, the Borough adjourned to allow the Kenai Advisory Commission to vote. Chairman Malston asked for discussion. Mr. Kjelstad stated that the revision of the original ordinance had taken eight months and was extensive, but the form of the ordinance had changed through this time. If it was to be administered solely within the City Limits of Kenai, The Commission's request for approval should be followed by the Borough Planning Commission. He felt that the problems would be difficult to see in the winter, but through first -hand observation by the City Council and the Kenai Commission, there was a definite need for regulation. Mr. Kjelstad stated this was basically a good Ordinance and that it was impossible to include everything in it. Guidelines would be given to the Kenai Advisory Planning Commission at a later time by the City Administration for review and approval. He stated that a settlement of this Ordinance was needed at this time. KENAI PLANNING F, ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING Fr" RUARY 9, 1976 (Item 2 -B, continued) Mr. Heus stated that the Commission's initial intent was for the best use of the land within the City Limits of Kenai. He stated that regulations within the City were needed. MOTION: Mr. Raymond moved, seconded by Mr. Heus, to request the Kenai Borough Planning Commission to adopt Ordinance 76 -4 for the Natural Resources Ordinance. 3, APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 28, 1976 MOTION: Mr. Kjelstad moved, seconded by Mr. Heus, for approval of the minutes of January 28, 1976 as distributed. Motion passed unanimously. There being no further business, the Commission adjourned at 9:45 p.m. PAGE 5 Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. The Kenai Advisory Planning Commission recessed at this time for Borough discussion, after which the Borough unan- imously approved a recommendation for the Borough Assembly to adopt the above stated Ordinance. Chairman Malston then called the Kenai Advisory Planning Commission to order.