Loading...
1990-07-18 Regular MeetingI. II. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 18, 1990 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:31 p.m. by Chairperson Robin Heinrichs on July 18, 1990, in the Borough Assembly Chambers. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Robin Heinrichs, Chairperson Jon Aspgren Bruce Barrett Wayne Coleman Tom Hendel Jody Hodgins Commissioners Absent: Jon Hartt, Excused A quorum was established. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Others Present: Linda Freed, Director Community Development Dept. Duane Dvorak, Associate Planner Community Development Dept. Patricia Eads, Secretary Community Development Dept. Staff reported the following additions to the agenda: AGENDA ADDITIONS V. AUDIENCE COMMENTS AND APPEARANCE REQUESTS B. Case S-88-029. Request for preliminary approval of the vacation of a platted fifty (50) foot wide road and utility easement from Sawmill Circle through Lots 2 and 3, Block 4, Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision, and of the twenty- five (25) foot wide portion of the road and utility easement across the rear lot line of Lot 3, Block 4, Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision; and the creation of a ten(10) foot wide electrical easement along the near lot lines of Lots 2 and 3, Block A Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision. 1548 and 1626 Sawmill Circle (Fred P. Turcott; James A. Spalinger) (Postponed from the May 16, 1990, regular meeting for final action) KIBS227122 Page 1 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 AGENDA DELETIONS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS L. Case S-88-029. Request for preliminary approval of the vacation of a platted fifty (50) foot wide road and utility easement from Sawmill Circle through Lots 2 and 3, Block 4, Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision, and of the twenty- five (25) foot wide portion of the road and utility easement across the rear lot line of Lot 3, Block 4, Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision; and the creation of a ten(10) foot wide electrical easement along the near lot lines of Lots 2 and 3, Block A Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision. 1548 and 1626 Sawmill Circle (Fred P. Turcott; James A. Spalinger) (Postponed from the May 16, 1990, regular meeting for final action) ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATIONS IX. COMMUNICATIONS C. Letter to Ingebord Nyland, re: Lot 2, Block 6, Baranof Heights Subdivision (1110 Madsen) - Illegal dwelling. D. Letter to Marcario and Ines Biliran, re: Lot 54, Block 9, Aleutian Homes Subdivision (1019 Willow Street) - Junk and inoperative vehicles. E. Letter to Steven Brooks and W. Conley, re: Lot 22, U.S. Survey 3099 - Junk and inoperative vehicles. F. Letter dated July 18, 1990, to Rick Bundy from Bob Scholze, re: Lot 15, Block 7, Monashka Bay Subdivision - 3076 Lakeview Drive - Junk and inoperative vehicles. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO ACCEPT the agenda with the additions and deletions reported by staff. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. IV. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO ACCEPT the minutes of the June 20, 1990, Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting as presented. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. V. AUDIENCE COMMENTS AND APPEARANCE REQUESTS A) Case 87-028. Planning and Zoning Commission Annual Review of an exception which authorized the storage and wholesale and retail sales of chemicals (including chlorine) and compressed gas in a B--Business Zoning District. Lot 24, Block 1, Russian Creek Alaska Subdivision; 11590 Rezanof Drive West. (Woodruff and Associates/Altex Distributing Company) KIBS227123 Page 2 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 COMMISSIONER HODGINS MOVED TO ACCEPT the staff report dated July 11, 1990, as the annual review for Case 87- 028, an exception which authorized the storage and wholesale and retail sales of chemicals (including chlorine) and compressed gas in a B--Business Zoning District located on Lot 24, Block 1, Russian Creek Alaska Subdivision. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The use shall comply with the performance standards for industrial land uses, Section 17.24.060 A through G of the Borough Code. 2. The number of ammonia and/or chlorine cylinders shall not exceed thirty (30) and the total storage is limited to five thousand (5,000) pounds. 3. All storage shall be contained within a locked container van at all times. 4. No cylinders shall be filled, refilled, or the contents transferred amongst cylinders on this property. 5. The exception shall be reviewed annually for compliance with the above conditions. 6. The exception is limited to five (5) years and will expire on June 15, 1992. 7. The applicant must inform the Women's Bay Fire Department of the quantity and location, and content of all chemicals stored on Lot 24, Block 1, Russian Creek Alaska Subdivision. The motion was seconded. It was noted that the above referenced exception is not currently being utilized. The applicant agreed to abide by all conditions of approval and wishes to preserve the exception until its scheduled expiration in 1992. The question was called and the MOTION CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. B) Case S-88-029. Request for preliminary approval of the vacation of a platted fifty (50) foot wide road and utility easement from Sawmill Circle through Lots 2 and 3, Block 4, Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision, and of the twenty-five (25) foot wide portion of the road and utility easement across the rear lot line of Lot 3, Block 4, Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision; and the creation of a ten (10) foot wide electrical easement along the rear lot lines of Lots 2 and 3, Block 4, Monashka Bay Alaska Subdivision. 1548 and 1626 Sawmill Circle (Fred P. Turcott; James A. Spalinger) (Postponed from the May 16, 1990, regular meeting) KIBS227124 Page 3 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 DUANE DVORAK noted that the Resource Management Officer had provided the Commission with an additional handout in the form of a memorandum dated July 18, 1990. As a result of the information provided by the Resource Management Officer, the Community Development Department recommended denial of this request. CHAIRMAN HEINRICHS recessed the meeting in order to review the above referenced memorandum. CHAIRMAN HEINRICHS reconvened the meeting at 7:40 p.m. CHAIRMAN HEINRICHS invited anyone who wanted to comment on this request to address the Commission from the podium. JIM PURDY, owner of Lot 21A, appeared before the Commission and expressed opposition to this request. Mr. Purdy provided written comments to DUANE DVORAK. FRED TURCOTT, applicant, appeared before the Commission and expressed support for this request. Mr. Turcott expressed his belief that a safe driveway could not be constructed within the easement. AL SPALINGER, applicant, appeared before the Commission and expressed support for this request and concurred with Mr. Turcott's statements. DAN JACKSON, former owner of Lot 21A, appeared before the Commission and expressed opposition to this request. JANE EISEMANN, owner of Lot 20A, appeared before the Commission and expressed opposition to this request. JIM PURDY, reappeared before the Commission, and expressed his belief that a safe driveway could be constructed inside the easement. BUD CASSIDY, Resource Management Officer, appeared before the Commission, and discussed the memorandum (referenced above) that he presented to the Commission. FRED TURCOTT, reappeared before the Commission, and requested a worksession to discuss the request in more detail. SCOTT ARNDT, appeared before the Commission, stated that he would like to see the access go across Lot 7A, and encouraged a worksession to discuss the options in more detail. LINDA FREED noted that it would be prudent to request the Borough Attorney's opinion. JIM PURDY agreed to meet with the Commission at a worksession to discuss the options in more detail. COMMISSIONER BARRETT MOVED TO POSTPONE action on this request until the August 15, 1990, regular meeting, and to KIBS227125 Page 4 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 schedule the request for discussion at the Commission's July 25, 1990, worksession. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. There were no further audience comments or appearance requests. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A) Case 90-032. Request for an exception from Section 17.13.020 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a duplex dwelling (one unit to house hatchery manager and family and one smaller unit for additional personnel and office space) in a C--Conservation Zoning District. Portion of Tract C of BLM Tract D; Section 30, Township 27 South, Range 19 West, Seward Meridian; generally known as the Pillar Creek Hatchery Site. (Kodiak Island Borough; Alaska Department of Fish and Game; Kodiak Regional Aquaculture Association) DUANE DVORAK indicated 7 public hearing notices were mailed and none were returned. Staff recommended approval of this request, subject to conditions. Mr. Dvorak noted that an aerial photograph depicting the approximate proposed location of the duplex dwelling unit was provided to the Commission prior to the beginning of the meeting. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: NORMA HOLT, representing Kodiak Regional Aquaculture Association, appeared before the Commission and expressed support for this request. NOREEN THOMPSON, representing the Kodiak City Council, appeared before the Commission and expressed opposition to this request due to the proximity of the City's water supply. COMMISSIONER BARREIT questioned the City's objections stating that typically water reservoirs are recreational areas and that the hatchery and proposed duplex is located down drainage from the reservoir. Ms. Thompson responded that the City Council's position is clear: the City Council is opposed to both the hatchery and the duplex. The Commission and Ms. Thompson further discussed the City Council's position. SCOTT ARNDT appeared before the Commission and expressed support for Ms. Thompson's comments. NORMA HOLT reappeared before the Commission and expressed the Kodiak Regional Aquaculture Association's Board of Directors desire to discuss the relevant issues with the City Council and City Manager. KIBS227126 Page 5 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER ASPGREN MOVED TO POSTPONE action on this request until after the City Council had met with the Kodiak Regional Aquaculture Association's Board of Directors. The MOTION DIED for the lack of a second. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO GRANT an exception from Section 17.13.020 of the Borough Code to permit a duplex dwelling (one unit to house hatchery manager and family and one smaller unit for additional personnel and office space) on a lot in the C--Conservation Zoning District; subject to condition of approval contained in the staff report dated July 6, 1990; and to adopt the findings contained in the staff report dated July 6, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for Case 90-032. CONDITION OF APPROVAL 1. The residential duplex will be located on the hatchery site, below the road to the powder magazine at or above the 92 foot elevation. The motion was seconded. COMMISSIONER HENDEL, with concurrence of the second, ACCEPTED A REVISED CONDITION OF APPROVAL as a friendly amendment. CONDITION OF APPROVAL 1. The residential duplex will be located on the hatchery site, below the road to the powder magazine, at or above the 92 foot elevation, as depicted on the submitted aerial photograph. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the use as proposed in the application, or under appropriate conditions or restrictions, will not (A) endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare, (B) be inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of this title and (C) adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. A. It appears that the proposed use, with an appropriate condition of approval concerning location of the structure in a non hazardous area, will not endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare. The residential units will be located within one building and will not cause any adverse conditions due to construction or location if an appropriate condition of approval is required. The existing and proposed use of the land for fisheries enhancement will not change as a result of this action. The use however, may be enhanced. The Page 6 of 25 KIBS227127 ag P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 addition of an additional dwelling unit will not substantially increase the traffic in the area or detract significantly from the uses on or around the site. The units will need to be connected to a wastewater disposal system suitable for a duplex as determined by ADEC. After approval of the system by ADEC, the project should have minimal impact upon the surrounding area. The addition of another dwelling unit on the site will not substantially increase the density of the lot due to the large lot area. (Of the total lot area, about 143 acres, this hatchery and subsidiary structures will be located on a 25 acre lease lot) B. The proposed use will be consistent with the general purposes and intent of Title 17 and with the specific description and intent of Chapter 17.13, the C-- Conservation District. Due to the large size of the lease lot (25 acres), and its use for fisheries enhancement, location of a duplex structure will not exceed the maximum density envisioned by the comprehensive plan for rural, low density residential development. In addition, it is clear the additional dwelling is accessory and subsidiary to the primary use of the property for fisheries enhancement activities. An additional dwelling will help to insure that there is someone present at the site at most times thereby enhancing the security of the project and the surrounding area. C. The proposed use, provided an appropriate condition of approval is required to address concerns related to the municipal water reservoir and powder magazine, will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the area. There is adequate area on the lot for two additional parking spaces and the lot is large enough that all required setbacks will be met. In addition, the nearest development, the VFW building, is located over 1/2 mile away. The question was called and the MOTION CARRIED by majority roll call vote. Commissioner Aspgren voted "no." B) Case 90-035. Request for a variance from Section 17.54.010 A & C (Height --Extension on Public Property) of the Borough Code to permit an eight (8) foot tall fence in the side and rear yard (to the established front yard or setback line, whichever is less) and to permit the fence to project to the sidewalk in the Oak Avenue right-of-way. Lot 26A, Block 1, Aleutian Homes Subdivision; 510 Oak. (Edward Randolph) DUANE DVORAK indicated 51 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and 1 was returned, stating non -objection to this request. Staff recommended approval of this request, subject to conditions. Mr. Dvorak noted that two (2) letters from the City of Kodiak (one from the Public Works Director and one Page 7 of 25 KIBS2'2'7128 ag P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 from the Fire Chiefl were provided to the Commission prior to the beginning of the meeting. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: ED RANDOLPH, applicant, appeared before the Commission and expressed support for this request. The Commission and Mr. Randolph discussed the request. Mr. Randolph noted that he wanted to construct an eight (8) foot tall fence to block the view and access from a next door property. The Commission requested staff to investigate a possible zoning violation on the next door property (Lot 24B, Block 1, Aleutian Homes). Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER HODGINS MOVED TO GRANT a variance from Section 17.54.010 A & C of the Borough Code to permit an eight (8) foot tall fence in the side and rear yard (to the established front yard or setback line, whichever is less) and to permit the fence to project to the sidewalk in the Oak Avenue right-of-way on Lot 26A, Block 1, Aleutian Homes Subdivision; subject to the conditions of approval contained in the staff report dated July 6, 1990, and to adopt the findings contained in the staff report dated July 6, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for this case. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The fence is constructed at the applicant's sole expense. 2. The applicant assumes any liability associated with said fence on City -owned property. 3. If at a future time the City determines that the fence must be removed from the City owned right-of-way, the applicant, or any subsequent owner of Lot 26B, Block 1, Aleutian Homes Subdivision, agrees to remove same without cost to the City. 4. Since the land is publicly owned, no prescriptive right accrues to the user. 5. Construction of the fence shall be in such a manner as not to reduce any required off-street parking. 6. The fence must not interfere with sidewalk use, cleaning or maintenance. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Exceptional phvsical circumstances or conditions amlicable to the moperty or intended use of development. 10BS221129 Page 8 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 which generally do not apply to other properties in the same land use district. In this case, the exceptional physical condition relating to the request to exceed the six (6) foot fence height in the side and rear yards on the lot is the elevation differential between the subject lot and adjoining lots which are located two to three feet above and below the subject lot. In addition, the applicant would like to adequately screen a walkway and dwelling addition on Lot 24B, above the subject lot, which are located within the side yard setback near the mutual property line. Concerning the request to encroach the Birch Street right- of-way, the exceptional condition applicable to the intended use of the property is largely a perceptual one. Typically, residential property owners assume that all the land out to the sidewalk or roadway edge is their "yard", and that they should be able to erect a fence of reasonable height around that yard. In addition, if the fence was built along the property lines, strips of City property would remain outside the fence. It is possible that this property would not be maintained by the adjacent property owner. 2. Strict application of the zoning_ ordinances would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships. Strict application of the zoning ordinances would not permit the construction of an eight (8) foot fence in the Rl--Single-Family Residential Zoning District. In addition, the fence would not be permitted to extend beyond the front lot line into the right-of-way. This is an unnecessary hardship when a six foot fence would not adequately screen the subject property from the adjacent lots. In addition, the Commission has also granted numerous variances in the past for fences to project into the road rights -of -way. 3. The grantina of the variance will not result in material damages or prejudice to other properties in the vicinity nor be detrimental to the public's health, safety and welfare. Granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public's health, safety or welfare because a four foot fence along the Oak Street right-of-way will not pose a line of sight problem. Also, the conditions of approval will insure that any future removal of the fence will not result in a cost to the public. The greater height of the proposed fence will increase the privacy of all property owners adjacent to the applicant's property as well as providing for the additional privacy of the subject property. In addition, the fence will comply with the requirements of the code where it projects into the front yard setback. As a result, the proposed fence will not be detrimental to the adjoining lots. Page 9 of 25 KIBS227130 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 4. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Granting of the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the comprehensive plan which identifies this area for Medium Density Residential Development. In general, comprehensive plans do not address minor developments such as fences. In addition, the construction of this fence will not change the permitted residential land use. 5. That actions of the applicant did not cause special conditions or financial hardship from which relief is being sought by the variance. In this case, actions of the applicant have not caused the conditions for which relief is being sought by a variance. The Commission will decide this variance request before any action is taken by the applicant. 6. That the granting of the variance will not permit a irohibited land use in the district involved. Fences are permitted in all land use districts. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. C) Case 90-036. Appeal of an administrative decision in accordance with Section 17.68.020B (Appeals from Administrative Decisions) of the Borough Code of a decision ordering the discontinuation of an unlawful use of land (maintaining an accessory building within the required front yard setback which also encroaches the City right-of-way in a Rl--Single-family Residential Zoning District) and removal of the accessory building within thirty (30) days. The appellant is seeking relief in the form of a variance from Section 17.18.050 (Yards) of the Borough Code to permit a twelve by twelve (12 x 12) foot accessory building to project no more than seven (7) feet into the Baranof Street right-of-way in a Rl--Single-family Residential Zoning District. Lot 18, Block 50, East Addition; 1529 Baranof. (Harry and Charlotte Mickelson) DUAIVE DVORAK indicated 40 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and 5 were returned, 3 opposing and 2 stating non -objection to this request. Staff recommended that the Commission affirm the administrative decision and approve a modified variance request, subject to conditions. Staff noted that updated information on the location of the accessory building indicated that the maximum encroachment would be three (3) feet. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: KIBS227131 Page 10 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 CHARLOTTE MICKELSON appeared before the Commission and expressed support for the variance request. SANDRA COLLINS JACKSON, prospective buyer of Lot 18, appeared before the Commission and expressed support for the variance request. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO AFFIRM the administrative decision that the accessory building located on Lot 18, Block 50, East Addition constitutes a violation of Title 17 due to its location within the front yard setback (and the City right-of-way) established by Section 17.18.050 of the Borough Code. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. The Commission discussed the variance request, the condition of the alley behind the lot, and the options for relocating the accessory building. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO GRANT a variance from Section 17.18.050 of the Borough Code to permit a twelve by twelve (12 x 12) foot accessory building to project no more than seven (7) feet into the Baranof Street right-of-way in a Rl-- Single-family Residential Zoning District on Lot 18, Block 50, East Addition; subject to the conditions of approval contained in the staff report dated July 10, 1990; and to adopt the findings contained in the staff report dated July 10, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for this case. The motion was seconded and FAILED by majority roll call vote. Commissioners Aspgren, Barrett, Coleman, Heinrichs, and Hodgins voted "no." The Commission deferred adoption of findings of fact in support of the denial of the variance until the August 15, 1990, regular meeting. D) Case 90-037. Request for a variance from Section 17.57.020A.2.m (Off -Street Parking --Number of Spaces Required) of the Borough Code to permit a thirty-four by twenty (34 x 20) foot second floor addition to an existing commercial building which requires an additional two (2) off-street parking spaces which cannot be accommodated onsite in a B--Business Zoning District. Lot 7, Block 6, New Kodiak Subdivision; 414 Marine Way. (L.J. Norman; Nancy Sweeney) DUANE DVORAK indicated 24 public hearing notices were mailed and 2 were returned, stating non -objection to this request. Staff recommended approval of this request. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: KIBS227132 Page 11 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 TOM SWEENEY appeared before the Commission and expressed support for this request. The Commission discussed with Mr. Sweeney the shortage of parking in the downtown area. Mr. Sweeney suggested that the Commission talk with the City Council in order to get action on resolving the parking problems in the downtown business area. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO GRANT a variance from Section 17.57.020A.2.m of the Borough Code to permit a thirty- four by twenty (34 x 20) foot second floor addition to an existing commercial building which requires an additional two (2) off- street parking spaces which cannot be accommodated onsite in a Business Zoning District on Lot 7, Block 6, New Kodiak Subdivision; and to adopt the findings contained in the staff report dated July 9, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for this case. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Exceptional physical circumstances or conditions awlicable to the property or intended use of development which generally do not apply to other properties in the same land use district. The unique physical circumstance applicable to the property and intended use of development is the nearly complete lot coverage of the existing structure in which the proposed development is to be located. This precludes the provision of any additional off-street parking on the same lot or adjacent lots. This condition is applicable to the entire downtown area bounded by Rezanof Drive, Center Street, Marine Way and Mission Road. This area is defined as the "central commercial' area in the land use plan for the downtown Urban Renewal Project UR-19. Among other regulations, the urban renewal plan specified that "buildings shall occupy 100% of the area" and the "parking will be provided in public parking lots conveniently located to all development parcels. No public parking shall be used on a reserved or continual basis by or for the benefit of anyone or any use." This clearly presents a physical circumstance precluding provision of off-street parking. A variance is therefore justified. 2. Strict application of the zoning ordinances would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships. Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would not allow any additions or expansions to many structures in downtown Kodiak that are contained in the UR-19 central commercial area. Any change in use that increases the permitted density of development would also be prohibited. This is clearly an unnecessary hardship and presents practical difficulties if the viability of the central yjBS227133 Page 12 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 business district is to be maintained and businesses are able to grow and/or adjust to changing market conditions. 3. The granting of the variance will not result in material damages or prejudice to other properties in the vicinity nor be detrimental to the public's health, safety and welfare. Granting of the variance will not result in material damage or prejudice to other properties in the area and will not be detrimental to the public's health, safety, or welfare. There are physical conditions that justify a variance and public off-street parking is provided in the mall parking lots for the use characteristics of the structure. The Urban Renewal Plan designates these public parking lots as the required off-street parking for the central commercial area. 4. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Granting of the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan which identifies this area as central business district. Comprehensive plans, generally do not address specific development standards such as off-street parking. Historically, however, central business districts have extensive lot coverage with little off-street parking. 5. That actions of the applicant did not cause special conditions or financial hardship from which relief is being sought by the variance. In this case, actions of the applicant have not caused the conditions from which relief is being sought by variance. The existing building was constructed in compliance with the Urban Renewal Plan, which precluded provision of additional off-street parking. Further, the variance will be decided prior to the development of the new addition. 6. That the granting of the variance will not permit a prohibited land use in the district involved. An addition to a retail service commercial building is a permitted land use in the B--Business Zoning District. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. E) Case 90-038. Request for a variance from Section 17.26.040 (Yards) of the Borough Code to permit the reconstruction of an existing mobile home which encroaches four and one half (4.5) feet into the required ten (10) foot setback established by a previously granted variance of Section 17.26.040 (Yards) of the Borough Code. Lot 1, U.S. Survey 3099; 353 Benny Benson. (Beverly Jones; Leroy Blondin; Karen Lee) KIBS227134 Page 13 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 DUANE DVORAK indicated 32 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and 1 was returned, opposing this request. Staff recommended approval of this request and provided the Commission with a supplemental memorandum prior to the beginning of the meeting. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: LORNA STEELMAN, owner of Lot 2A, appeared before the Commission and expressed opposition to this request. At the request of the Commission, Duane Dvorak clarified the variance request. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER ASPGREN MOVED TO GRANT a variance from Section 17.26.040 of the Borough Code to permit the reconstruction of an existing mobile home which encroaches four and one half (4.5) feet into the required ten (10) foot setback established by a previously granted variance of Section 17.26.040 of the Borough Code on Lot 1, U.S. Survey 3099; and to adopt the findings contained in the staff report dated July 10, 1990, as "Findings of Fact' for this case. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Exceptional physical circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or intended use of development, which generally do not apply to other properties in the same land use district. Lot 1, U.S. Survey 3099 contains an approved but nonconforming mobile home park and most, if not all, of the mobile homes in the park are nonconforming to one or more setback requirements. In addition, the lot has been reduced in size since the original survey due to the dedication of lot area to the adjacent right-of-ways (Benny Benson and Rezanof Drive). 2. Strict application of the zoning ordinances practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships. Strict application of the zoning ordinance would mean that the existing mobile home could only be repaired and added to within the setback established by the previous variance. This would require an unusual shape for the front porch and arctic entry as it slightly encroaches the required setback as shown on the attached site plan. This constitutes a practical difficulty. 3. The arantina of the variance will not result in material dama es or preiudice to other properties in the vicinitv KIBS227135 Page 14 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 nor be detrimental to the public's health, safety and welfare. Granting of the variance will not result in material damage or prejudice to other properties in the area. The use and density of the property will remain the same, and granting the variance will not result in a change in the character of r- the neighborhood. 4. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the obiectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Granting of the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the comprehensive plan which identifies this area for mobile home courts. In addition, there is a dirt berm along the Rezanof Drive right of way that blocks visibility of the mobile home from Rezanof Drive. 5. That actions of the applicant did not cause special conditions or financial hardship from which relief is being sought by the variance. Actions of the applicant did not cause the conditions from which relief is being sought by variance. This variance will be decided prior to initiation of repairs and construction. 6. That the oranting of the variance will not permit a prohibited land use in the district involved. Mobile homes as single-family dwellings are permitted in this district. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. F) Case 90-039. Request for a variance from Section 17.54.010C (Height --Extension onto Public Property) of the Borough Code to permit a four (4) foot chain link fence extending two (2) feet to the sidewalk in the Birch Street right-of-way. Lot 18, Block 10, Aleutian Homes Subdivision; 212 Birch. (Laverne and Sandy Kavanaugh) DUANE DVORAK indicated 39 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and none were returned. Staff recommended approval of this request, subject to conditions. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: Seeing and hearing none. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER COLEMAN MOVED TO GRANT a variance from Section 17.54.010C of the Borough Code to permit a four Page 15 of 25 KIBS227136 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 (4) foot chain link fence extending two (2) feet to the sidewalk in the Birch Street right-of-way adjoining Lot 18, Block 10, Aleutian Homes Subdivision; subject to the conditions of approval contained in the staff report dated July 9, 1990; and to adopt the findings contained in the staff report dated July 9, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for this case. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The fence is constructed at the applicant's sole expense. 2. The applicant assumes any liability associated with said fence on City -owned property. 3. If at a future time the City determines that the fence must be removed from the City owned right-of-way, the applicant, or any subsequent owner of Lot 18, Block 10, Aleutian Homes Subdivision, agrees to remove same without cost to the City. 4. Since the land is publicly owned, no prescriptive right accrues to the user. 5. Construction of the fence shall be in such a manner as not to reduce any required off-street parking. 6. The fence must not interfere with sidewalk use, cleaning or maintenance. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Exceptional physical circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or intended use of development, which 9enera4 do not apply to other properties in the same land use district. The exceptional condition applicable to the intended use of the property is largely a perceptual one. Typically, residential property owners assume that all the land out to the sidewalk or roadway edge is their "yard", and that they should be able to erect a fence of reasonable height around that yard. In addition, if the fence was built along the property lines, strips of City property would remain outside the fence. It is possible that this property would not be maintained by the adjacent property owner. 2. Strict application of the zoning ordinances would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships. Strict application of the zoning ordinance would only allow the fence to extend to the front property line. This is an unnecessary hardship when many other fences in the community have been permitted to encroach on the public rights -of -way without first receiving a variance. The Commission has also granted numerous variances in the past for fences to project in to the road rights -of -way. KIBS227137 Page 16 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 3. The arantina of the variance will not result in material damages or preiudice to other properties in the vicinity nor be detrimental to the public's health, safety and welfare. Granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public's health, safety or welfare because a four foot fence -- along the Birch Street right-of-way will not pose a line of sight problem. Also, the conditions of approval will insure that any future removal of the fence will not result in a cost to the public. 4. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Granting of the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the comprehensive plan which identifies this area for Medium Density Residential Development. In general, comprehensive plans do not address minor developments such as fences. In addition, the construction of this fence will not change the permitted residential land use. 5. That actions of the applicant did not cause special conditions or financial hardship from which relief is being sought by the variance. In this instance, actions of the applicant have not caused the conditions from which relief is being sought by variance. The variance request will be decided prior to construction of the fence. 6. That the Lrantina of the variance will not hermit a prohibited land use in the district involved. Fences are permitted in all land use districts. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. G) Case 90-041. Request for an exception from Section 17.19.020 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit the location of a second single-family dwelling above an existing detached garage on a lot in the R2--Two-family Residential Zoning District. Lot 17, Block 3, Killarney Hills Subdivision; 3313 Woody Way Loop. (Russell and Susan Patrick) DUANE DVORAK indicated 11 public hearing notices were mailed and 2 were returned, opposing this request. Staff recommended denial of this request. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: LYNDA GRIMSTAD, representing the applicants, appeared before the Commission and expressed support for this request. Page 17 of 25 KIBS227138 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER HENDEL asked how the owners had received a driveway permit. Linda Freed explained that when the property was subdivided it was inside the City Limits and the property did not require a driveway permit. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO GRANT an exception from Section 17.19.020 of the Borough Code to permit the location of a second single-family dwelling above an existing detached garage on a lot in the R2--Two-family Residential Zoning District on Lot 17, Block 3, Killarney Hills Subdivision. The motion was seconded. The Commission expressed concern with the slope/grade of the existing driveway. The question was called and the MOTION FAILED by unanimous roll call vote. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO ADOPT the findings contained in the staff report dated July 9, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for Case 90-041. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the use as proposed in the application, or under anoropriate conditions or restrictions, will not (A) endanger the public's health. safe , or general welfare. (B) be inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of this title and (C) adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. A. The proposed use does not appear to endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare because the second dwelling unit will not increase the permitted density of the lot provided neither dwelling unit is converted to a duplex in the future. The R2--Two-Family Residential Zoning District does permit two-family dwellings (duplexes) and the potential use characteristics (e.g., parking, number of residents, utility demands, etc.) of two separate detached single-family residences are not substantially different from those of a two-family dwelling unit. B. The proposed use will not be consistent with the general purposes and intent of Title 17 and with the specific description and intent of Chapter 17.19, the R2--Two-Family Residential Zoning District, because it will not generate other than normal vehicular traffic (Parking) on nearby streets, and may create requirements or increase costs for public services that cannot be systematically and adequately provided. This is due to the excessive slope of the Page 18 of 25 KIBS227139 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 existing driveway which will not allow adequate access to off-street parking during times of heavy snowfall or icy conditions. As a result a second dwelling would require additional vehicle parking along the City right of way during snow removal efforts. C. The proposed use should not adversely impact other properties in the area if the development can meet all of the requirements of zoning and building regulations. The second dwelling unit must meet all Uniform Building Codes and the requirements of Title 17, the Zoning Code. As noted above, it does not appear that the driveway slope meets the Code requirements. In this case, it is doubtful that vehicles will be able to gain access to the property during the winter when snow and ice are a factor. As a result, the development of an additional structure would impact the traffic access in the area as it would require the temporary relocation of two additional parking spaces to the Woody Way right- of-way when snow and ice prevent access to the upper lot. Once the upper lot is gained there appears to be adequate parking for an additional dwelling as there is a two car garage and an additional two spaces in front of the garage. The MOTION was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. Fn Case 90-042. Request for the rezoning of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 13, Aleutian Homes Subdivision from R2--Two-family Residential to B--Business in accordance with Section 17.72.030 (Manner of Initiation) of the Borough Code. (Ronald and Phyllis Williams; Lynda Grimstad) DUANE DVORAK indicated 26 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and none were returned. Staff recommended postponing this request until the August 1990, regular meeting and expanding the request to include Lots 101 and 102, Block 9, Erskine Subdivision. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: Seeing and hearing none. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER ASPGREN MOVED TO POSTPONE action on Case 90-042 until the August 15, 1990, regular meeting and to reschedule this request for another public hearing at that time. The motion was DIED for the lack of a second. KIBS227140 Page 19 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 COMMISSIONER BARRETT MOVED TO RECOMMEND to the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly that Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 13, Aleutian Homes Subdivision be rezoned from R2--Two-family Residential to B--Business in accordance with Section 17.72.030 of the Borough Code. The motion was seconded and FAILED by unanimous roll call vote. COMMISSIONER BARRETT stated that he recognized that this area should be rezoned to Business in the future, but, due to access, the condition of Mill Bay Road, and the lack of a development plan for the circulation of traffic ingressing and egressing the lot, he voted "no" on this proposal. The Commission deferred adoption of findings of fact in support of the denial of the rezoning request until their August 15, 1990, regular meeting. I) Case 90-043. Request for an exception from Section 17.18.020 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit development of an airport and airport related activities on several tracts in the R1--Single-family Residential Zoning District. Generally located near Old Harbor within protracted Sections 16 and 21, Township 34 South, Range 25 West, Seward Meridian. (Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities) DUANE DVORAK indicated 5 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and none were returned. Staff recommended approval of this request. Mr. Dvorak noted that another map was distributed to the Commission prior to the beginning of the meeting. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: Seeing and hearing none. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER COLEMAN MOVED TO GRANT an exception from Section 17.18.020 of the Borough Code to permit development of an airport and airport related activities on several tracts in the R1--Single-family Residential Zoning District generally located within protracted Sections 16 and 21, Township 34 South, Range 25 West, Seward Meridian; and to adopt the findings contained in the staff report dated July 11, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for this case. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the use as proposed in the application, or under appropriate conditions or restrictions, will not (A) endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare, (B) be inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of KIBS227141 Page 20 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 this title and (C) adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. A. It appears that the proposed use will not endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare. The project will provide a much greater margin of operational safety than the existing airport location. This project will therefore benefit the community's overall general welfare. B. The proposed project will be consistent with the general purposes and intent of Title 17. Exceptions are provided for in Borough Code to permit land uses which are not specifically permitted by zoning district regulations. Airports and airport activities are only permitted in the PL--Public Use Land, I -- Industrial and C--Conservation Zoning Districts. This project is consistent with Title 17 because it is identified in the 1989 Old Harbor Comprehensive Plan. The project will not interfere with the continuation of single-family residences in the district and it is unlikely that all the areas within the corporate boundaries of Old Harbor that are zoned Rl--Single-Family Residential will actually be developed with single-family dwelling units. C. The proposed use does not appear to adversely impact other properties or uses in the area because all surrounding land is under the Old Harbor or Old Harbor Village Corporation ownership and undeveloped. Future implementation of the 1989 Old Harbor Comprehensive Plan, in consultation with the City and residents of Old Harbor and the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities will take into account the airport use and the need to insure that incompatible land uses are not located too close to this facility. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. J) Case S-90-025. Request for preliminary approval of the subdivision of U.S. Survey 2588, creating Tracts A and B, U.S. Survey 2588. (Dave Ludetke) DUANE DVORAK indicated 3 public hearing notices were mailed and none were returned. Staff recommended approval of this request. Mr. Dvorak noted that a new vicinity map was distributed to the Commission prior to the beginning of the meeting. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: Seeing and hearing none. Public Hearing Closed. KIBS227142 Page 21 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO GRANT preliminary approval of the subdivision of U.S. Survey 2588, creating'IYacts A and B, U.S. Survey 2588; and to adopt the findings contained in the staff report dated July 11, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for this case. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. This plat meets the minimum standards of survey accuracy and proper preparation of plats required in Title 16 of the Borough Code. 2. This plat meets all the requirements of Title 17 of the Borough Code. 3. This plat is generally consistent with adopted Borough plans and provides a subdivision of land that supports those plans. 4. Approval of this plat by the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission does not necessarily mean that development of the property complies with State and Federal regulations which may also be applicable. r'— The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. H) Case S-90-026. Request for preliminary approval of the vacation of a ten (10) foot wide portion of an existing twenty (20) foot wide utility easement located along the north side lot line of Lot 1A, Tract A, Woodland Acres Subdivision First Addition, U.S. Survey 1682. (Karl Fortune) DUANE DVORAK indicated 12 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and none were returned. Staff recommended approval of this request. Mr. Dvorak noted that two (2) new maps were distributed to the Commission prior to the beginning of the meeting. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: KARL FORTUNE, applicant, appeared before the Commission and expressed support for this request. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened. COMMISSIONER HODGINS MOVED TO GRANT preliminary approval of the vacation of a ten (10) foot wide portion of an existing twenty (20) foot wide utility easement located along the north side lot line of Lot 1A, Tract A, Woodland Acres Subdivision First Addition, U.S. Survey 1682, and to adopt the KIBS227143 Page 22 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 findings contained in the staff report dated July 11, 1990, as "Findings of Fact" for this case. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. This plat meets the minimum standards of survey accuracy and proper preparation of plats required in Title 16 of the Borough Code. 2. This plat meets all the requirements of Title 17 of the Borough Code. 3. This plat is generally consistent with adopted Borough plans and provides an easement vacation that is consistent with those plans. 4. Approval of this plat by the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission does not necessarily mean that development of the property complies with State and federal regulations which may also be applicable. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. VIL OLD A) Review and approval of review agencies for plats. COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO APPROVE the following as plat reviewing agencies, as applicable: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Bay View Road Service Area Board of Supervisors Cablevision Chiniak Community Forum City of Akhiok City of Kodiak Public Works Department City of Larsen Bay City of Port Lions City of Old Harbor City of Ouzinkie Fire Protection # 1 Board of Supervisors Kodiak Electric Association Engineering Department Kodiak Island Borough Engineering and Facilities Department Monashka Bay Road Service Area Board of Supervisors Service District #1 Board of Supervisors Telephone Utilities of the Northland, Inc. Village of Karluk Womens Bay Community Council Womens Bay Service Area Board of Supervisors. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. KIBS227144 Page 23 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 There was no further old business. VIII. NEW BUSINESS A) Review of a proposed language change to Kodiak Island Borough Code Section 13.05.055 (Locating of Individual Private Utility Connections). COMMISSIONER HODGINS MOVED TO RECOMMEND that the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly amend Kodiak Island Borough Code Section 13.05.055 to read: 13.05.055 Location of Individual Private Utility Connection. No individual service line may cross private property other than the lot which the utility connection serves: provided, however, that such a crossing may be allowed (1) where authorized by a platted easement, and (2) the easement is determined to be in the public interest, and (3)(a) the easement provides technically superior routing or (b) the easement will contain a pre-existing service line. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by majority roll call vote. Commissioner Hodgins abstained. There was no new business. IX. COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT of items A through F of communications. A) Memorandum to Jerome Selby and Herman Buekers from Linda Freed dated July 2, 1990, re: Review of the Memorandum of Agreement between the Borough and the City for zoning exceptions. B) Memorandum from Marcella Dalke, City Clerk, dated June 28, 1990, re: City of Kodiak response to the Planning and Zoning Commission's suggested Development Standards for Near Island. C) Letter to Ingebord Nyland, re: Lot 2, Block 6, Baranof Heights Subdivision (1110 Madsen) - Illegal dwelling. D) Letter to Marcario and Ines Biliran, re: Lot 54, Block 9, Aleutian Homes Subdivision (1019 Willow Street) - Junk, inoperative vehicles. E) Letter to Steven Brooks and W. Conley, re: Lot 22, U.S. Survey 3099 - Junk, inoperative vehicles. F) Letter dated July 18, 1990, to Rick Bundy from Bob Scholze, re: Lot 15, Block 7, Monashka Bay Subdivision - 3076 Lakeview Drive - Junk and inoperative vehicles. KIBS227145 Page 24 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990 The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. There were no further communications. X. REPORTS COMMISSIONER HENDEL MOVED TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT of items A and B of reports. A) Community Development Department Status Report. B) Community Development Department Plat Activity Report. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. There were no further reports. XI. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no audience comments. XII. COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS The Commission requested that Community Development Department staff schedule a worksession with the Kodiak City Council in order to discuss downtown parking and water conservation. XIII. ADJOURNMENT ATTEST By: CHAIRPERSON HEINRICHS adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION By: YLO" A*44xz� Robin Heinrichs, Chairperson Patricia Eads, Secretary Community Development Department DATE APPROVED: August 15, 1990 KIBS227146 Page 25 of 25 P & Z Minutes: July 18, 1990