Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
ST PAUL BOAT HARBOR SPIT TRACT - Exception
K0DlAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CASE FILE CHECK LIST Case File No. Assigned �—', Date Application Received /av/gz ~ Type of Application Date Site Plan Received ° `�/g5" '-� Date Fee Paid �50 Amount !/a^7 ls~ ^ Use Z for Zoning, Variances and Exceptions CUP for Conditional Use Permit LL for Land Leases V for Violations 0 for all Other cases • Receipt Number Person Accepting Appl. Name of Applicant Mailing Address / ��s���0s~/ o`/vrA`^en-> Name of Legal Owner Mailing Address 74(a Phone Legal description of Property: Lot(s) 5,24g4 Block Subdivision Square Footage or Acreage of Property is P & Z Public Hearing Date ;140.r Public Notices Mailed on 5 How Many? 19 �m Applicant Notified of P & Z Action on -7-^�/ Vas- Date Date Date Date Date Action Summary Approved Denied Tabled 1st Reading 2nd Reading P & Z 44,/8"G Assembly Ordinance No. Ordinance Drdinance Effective Date Al• (4a o0 July 31, 1985 Mayor and Councilmembers City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Exception Request Approval, CASE 85-004 - Kazim Company/Dischner Mathisen Partnership. Council Appeal of Decision Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: ' Your appeal hearing before the City COunci1 sitting as the Board of Adjustment has.. been: resChedUled to August 6, .1985, at 7 :30" .p.m. in . the Borough Assembly Chamber's-. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK. MARCELLA H. DALKE, CMC City Clerk 1110/nj cc: Samuel C. Cesko, J,, City Manager Mickie Miller, CMC, Borough Clerlt Linda Freed, Cormiunity Development Directori/ Melvin M. Stephens, II, City Attorney Kazim Company/Dischner Mathisen Partnership POST OFFICE BOX 1397, KODIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 4746)02. July 26, 1985 JUL 1985 EOM Mayor and Councilmembers City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Exception Request Approval,-CASE85-004.- Kaztm Company/Dischner- ' Nathisen Partnership. Council Appeal ofDecision Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: A hearing before the Kodiak City Council sitting as the Board of Adjustment is scheduled for Thursday, August 8,. 1985, at 7:30 pan. in the.Borough Assem- bly Chambers. This hearing is on your appeal of the Planning and Zoning Com- uission's approval of the above variance request. If there is any change in the scheduled date, you will be notified. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK 1 MARCELLA H. MIZE. CMC City Clerk MHD/nj cc: Samuel C. Gesko, Jr., City Manager Mickie Miller, CMC, Borough Clerk • Linda Freed, Conuunity Development Department Directory Melvin M. Stephens, II, City Attorney KazimCompany/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership POST OFFICE BOA 1397. kODIAI: ALMA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 7. Ms. Marcella Dalke City Clerk city-of Kodiak Box 1397. Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 ' KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 July 19, 1985 Re: Appeal of Case 84-004. The granting of an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-Industrial District, legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 (The Kazim Company/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership). Dear Marcella: On behalf of the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission, I would like to respond in writing to the written statement by the Kodiak City Council on the above appeal. In making their decision the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission did take into account.all the factors referenced by the City Council in their statement. Based on their review of these facts, the Commission determined that the granting of this exception for this specific site would not endanger the public's health, safety, or general welfare, or be inconsistent with the general purpose of this title, and not adversely impact other' properties or •uses in the neighborhood. Specifically in response to the points raised by the City Council: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission was well aware of the fact that the property in question is immediately adjacent to an operating seafood .processing plant. The Commission was also aware of the operating characteristics of this plant. However, a restaurant has been operated on the property in question for a number of years without any apparent conflict. In -addition, the Commission has found that there are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening, and positioning of a :- structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development. It is in fact these types of industrial uses that make this site attractive for a hotel.and the tourist industry. 2. The Planning and Zoning Commission was fully aware of the activities that take place on the spit area. These activities will not be impacted any differently by the development of this property for a hotel than they would be by the development of this property for an industrial use. Any development of this property•will impact the use of the. spit. Therefore, KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Marcella Dalke, City Clerk July 19, 1985 Page Two this concern is not directly related to the use of the subject property as a hotel. 3. As has been noted previously, the Planning and Zoning Commission was clearly aware that one side of the subject property is adjacent to the public seaplane floats. Again, any type of development on this property might impact this activity. Although it is more likely that a seafood processing plant with a docking facility, that is an allowed use in this district, would have a more significant impact on the seaplane floats. This objection to the development of this property does not directly relate to the use of the property as approved by the Commission. __- As stated earlier, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission believes that the development of a hotel at this specific location does not pose health and safety considerations and/or illustrate an adverse impact on adjoining property. The-proposed use is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan for the area. In addition, due to the site-specific location of the request, it is clear that no other types of industrial activities will be developed in the vicinity of the proposed hotel. As the Council points out, adjacent property consists of a fully developed seafood processing plant, and public land used for public purposes in support of the fishing industry. It is unlikely, if not improbable that this subject property would ever find itself adjacent to other uses permitted in the industrial district e.g. aircraft assembly, asphalt or concrete batch and mixing plants, gravel or sand extraction, sawmills, motor freight terminals, rock crushers, etc. Based on a review of all the facts the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission found that this exception request met all the requirements of the Kodiak Island Borough Zoning Code. Sincerely, Linda Freed, Director Community Development Department • cc: Case 85-004 IX COMMUNICATIONS A) LINDA FREED read a letter to the City of-Kodiak from the Community Development Department regarding the appeal of Case; 85 -004. B) Letter to the Petersons re: Parking of Rent -a -Heap vehicles on Lot 18, Sublot 7, Thorsheim Subdivision, in a B -- Business district. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT of the two communica- tions in their packet. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. X REPORTS A) Status Report from the Community Development Department. B) LINDA FREED noted that Gordon Gould started as the new Assistant Planner /Zoning Officer on Monday, July 15. C) LINDA FREED indicated that there would be a Parks Board meeting on Monday, July 22, 1985, at 7 :30 p.m. XI AUDIENCE COMMENTS TONY PEREZ mentioned that the Commission has put themselves in a box" regarding Case 85 -043, rezoning of Tract G, U.S. Survey 444, to B -- Business, because of the road situation. XII COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS MARLIN KNIGHT indicated that he is getting confused over the staff reports because Bud Cassidy recommended granting so many exceptions and Bob Pederson seems to be just the opposite. COMMISSIONER JAMES questioned traffic patterns concerning the Miller Point rezoning and suggested that perhaps Community Development Department staff could contact the Department of Transportation concerning lowering the speed limit on Rezanoff. CHAIRMAN GREGG questioned whether a formal interpretation of majority vote needed to be addressed. LINDA FREED informed him that the present interpretation will continue to be used and that the Commission will be provided with amended bylaws to delete the conflicting clause. XIII ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN GREGG adjourned the meeting at 12:15 p.m. ATTEST BY: KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION By: Ken Gregg, Chai Patricia Miley, lanning Secretary DATE APPROVED: 111'31 1 25" A TAPE RECORDING IS ON FILE AT THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P & Z Regular Meeting -16- July 17, 1985 July 5, 1985 ZeN, Ce\-, 421zwe40 Linda Freed, Director Community Development Department Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: CASE 85-004 - An Appeal from Planning and. Zoning Decision, Kazim Company/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership Dear Linda: Attached is a copy of the written statement from the Kodiak City Council on the above appeal. The Department now has fifteen days in which to respond in writing, if so desired. Following the expiration of that period or the filing of a statement, a hearing before the Council, acting as the Board of Appeals, will be scheduled. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELLA. H. DALKE, CMC City-Clerk 11-ID/ms CC: Kodiak Island Borough Clerk POST OFFICE BOA 1397. kODIMIC tilASICA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 July 5, 1985 City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of Exception Request Approval, CASE 85-004 - Kazim Com- pany/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership. Council Appeal of Decision Gentlemen: In accordance with Kodiak City Code 17.10.040, the Kodiak City Council sub- uits the following facts in support of its appeal of the above decision: Kodiak Island Borough Code 17.65.050(A) states: ..If it is the finding of the commission, after consideration of the investigator's report and receipt of testimony at the public hearing, that the use as proposed in the application, or under appropriate conditions or restrictions, will not endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare, or be inconsis- tent with the general purposes and intent of this title, and not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood, the commission shall approve the exception, with or without con- ditions..." It is the City Council's considered opinion that the Planning and Zoning Commission did not take a number of pertinent factors into account before granting approval of the exception. 1. The property in question is immediately adjacent to an operat- ing seafood processing plant with chlorine and ammonia tanks and escape valves on the side of the proposed hotel. In addi- tion, on the same side is the plant's fish waste holding tank and hopper which, in warm weather, can become extremely noxious. This could pose a health and/or safety problem. 2. For many years the public has. enioyed unimpeded access to the spit area in general, the float plane. ramps, Dock #2, the shuttle ferry dock, adjacent public boat launch, and cantingu- ous boat-trailer parking. While the City Council acknowledges that the public made use of portions of the subject property for these purposes, the Commission did not appear to take these existing uses into consideration. It was not until the Council filed the appeal and made this point an issue that the developer net with the City Council to discuss alternatives. POST OFFICE BOX 1397, ICODIAIC , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 City of Kodiak RE: 'Council Appeal - Case 85-004 Page 2 3. On the third side of the subject property is the public seaplane floats. The proposed siting of the hotel could impede plane traffic, thereby causing a safety hazard. While there has been discussion of moving the seaplane floats to Trident Basin, no action has been taken, nor would the existing floats necessarily be abandoned. The Council takes the position that the above facts pose health and safety considerations and/or illustrate the adverse impact on adjoining property. Kodiak Island Borough Code 17.24.005 states: "...The I industrial zone is established as a district in which the principal use of (the) land is for business, manufacturing, processing, fabricating, repair, assembly, storage, wholesaling, and distributing operations, which may create some nuisance, but which are not properly associated nor compatible with residential land uses..." A hotel is properly listed under the permitted uses in a business zone. While the permitted uses in an industrial zone, according to KIB 17.24.010, include all permitted uses in a business zone, the clear intent of the code is "to concentrate the industrial and business uses within designated areas to protect residential districts from noxious or noisy operations". The adjoining seafood processing plant is -- as are all other such plants -- a noisy, noxious operation. It is inappropriate, in the Council's opinion, to allow a residential-type use on the contiguous property. This becomes very apparent when reviewing the other permitted uses in an industrial zone; e.g., aircraft assembly, asphalt or concrete batch and mixing plants, gravel or sand extraction, sawmills, motor freight terminals, rock crushers, etc. The City Council's appeal is based on the foregoing facts and is the basis upon which the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission decision should be overturned. Sincerely JRP/mhd June 21, 1985 Mayor and Councilmembers City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 - Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of Exception Request Approval, CASE 85-004 - Kazim Company/ Dischner-Mathisen Partnership. Council Appeal of Decision Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: The City of Kodiak has received the Kodiak Island Boraugh's RECORD ON APPEALdn response to your NOTICE OF APPEAL. It is available in my of- fice for your review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.040 Written Statements, you may file a written statement summarizing the facts and setting forth pertinent points and authorities in support of the allegations contained in your notice of appeal not more than 15 days from the date of this letter, which shall be July 5, 1985. The bill for the verbatim transcript is enclosed. Please make your check payable to the Kodiak Island Borough and remit the $89.70 directly to me. We would appreciate your timely response and if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this, office. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELLA H. DALKE, CMC City Clerk FID/nj cc: City Manager Borough Comaunity Development Department Kazim Company/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership POST OFFICE BOX 1397, KODIAK . MAIM 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 Ms. Marcella Dalke, CMC City Clerk City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486.5736 June 20, 1985 Re: Appeal of Case 85-004. The granting of an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I--Industrial district, legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 (The Kazin Company/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership) Dear Marcella: Please find enclosed the record on appeal, as required by Kodiak City Code 17.10.030, for the case referenced above. The cost to the Borough for preparing the transcript for this case is as follows: Six hours x $14.95 per hour - $89.70 If you have any questions about the appeal record, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Case File CERTIFICATE THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT: The Public Hearing in the matter of: CASE 85-004, A REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION FROM SECTION 17.24.010 (PERMITTED USES) OF THE BOROUGH CODE TO PERMIT A HOTEL IN AN I--INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS CITY TIDELANDS TRACT N-18 (THE KAZIM COMPANY/ DISCHNER-MATHISEN PARTNERSHIP) was held as herein appears and this is the original verbatim transcript thereof. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Painela Barr, S cre ary PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 85 -004, A REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION FROM SECTION 17.24.010 (PERMITTED USES) OF THE BOROUGH CODE TO PERMIT A HOTEL IN AN I -- INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS CITY TIDELANDS TRACT N -18 (THE KAZIM COMPANY/ DISCHNER - MATHISEN PARTNERSHIP) The above -cited hearing was held on February 20, 1985 in the.Kodiak Island Borough Assembly Chambers, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska. The hearing was conducted by the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission, Mr. Ken Gregg, Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Item D. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010, Permitted Uses, of. Borough Code to permit a hotel in an Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 and generally located near the Kodiak Cafe. Any additional from staff? LINDA FREED: Just to let you know that 19 public hearing notices were sent out on this case. You have one that was returned in your packet, which you've already had a chance to see, and in addition, in the handout, there is one from the Elks. Their comment is that if the building blocks the current view from the second floor of the lodge, they object to the exception from the building code. And the other two handouts you have is one from Koniag supporting the request and a reduced site plan that you've all seen previously, but we wanted to give you a copy of that site plan in your packet. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Anything from the Commission? At this time we'll recess the regular meeting; open public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak for or against? Anyone wishing to speak for or against? Seeing none. Close public hearing. Reconvene the regular meeting. COMMISSIONER HILL: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Hill. COMMISSIONER HILL: Uh.. I went over staff's report a few different times. I have ..um personally I have a real problem with taking the industrial property from the waterfront and turning it into a hotel, and not kept for industrial uses, even though the structure that's on there right now the old Kodiak Western Building, one time it served, you know, its purposes, and after the Kodiak (?) moved out, a variety of other business have been in there, including a restaurant on the lower floor. I can't see taking the industrial property which could be used for other purposes in the fishing industry and now have the fishing industry turned into a tourist industry on the waterfront. That's my main objection. For what the Elks had, you know, for blocking their view, you could put in a three-story, four-story ..um ..uh cannery, and, you know, there's nothing that could be said about that at all. Since we're granting a variance for ..uh an exception, I think we should take that into consideration. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Any other comments? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: I think that ..uh with the way the fisheries are kind of dwindling, there isn't any real need for any more industrial space in Verbatim Transcript 1 Case 85-004 the fishing economy that I can see. Anything that's surplus is ( ?) now, and we're ..uh I think tourism is kind of a coming thing, and although some of us might not agree with having a bunch of tourists running around, ..um the economy could sure use it, and I think we got to look to our economy and.keep our community growing, and I think that it would be an excellent place for it, and I'm all for it. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Patterson. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: I essentially agree with Mr. Anderson. I think that this particular setup has been really well planned and thought out. In a way I do agree with Mr. Hill, but I think that the restaurant and the hotel would be very compatible with what we have on the waterfront, and we sure don't have anybody banging at our doors right now to use that particular industrial area. Maybe in ten years, might convert a hotel into a cannery, I don't know. I think it would fit well and do well, would enhance Kodiak overall. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Rennell. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: I guess we're sort of divided on this one. I think I ..uh sort of stated in the past I would like to see this, if it's zoned industrial, used as an industrial segment there, and at this point I don't see this use as industrial, and I'm not in favor of an exception at this point. I ..I think with the ... since I've been on the Commission there's been a lot of requests in front of us concerning industrial land and preserving it, and I think that ..uh when you think about this request you have to think about that, too, and ..uh I agree with some of the comments that right now, perhaps ..uh the fisheries are dwindling and there's a question about whether it would be used in that way industrial, but there are other industrial uses that perhaps would be appropriate in that area. COMMISSIONER JAMES: Uh.. Mr. Chairman. Uh.. I think the ..uh person with this ... who would have the biggest complaint would be the next door neighbor, Mr. Woodruff, and he doesn't seem to have much of a problem with it. There are also five vacant plant on the waterfront right now that ..uh, you know, if expansion was needed for a new processor to move Verbatim Transcript 2 Case 85 -004 in, ..uh, they could definitely take over one of those plants. I really have no problem with this. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Patterson. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Rebuttal for Mr. Rennell. I think that tourism is an industry. And it ..uh I don't mean to equate it to a crop that needs to be sheared every time they come through, but I think (undiscernible). It is something we're trying to encourage to get into Kodiak, and I think that this would definitely help the.- tourism industry, and it's ..uh looked on that way by the city and by the borough. I would equate it as an industry, tourism itself. COMMISSIONER HILL: Mr. Chairman. I not, you know, dead. set against, you know, having hotels and having the tourism in here and that, but, you know, I'm not saying that this property should be ..uh for setting up another cannery because I know other canneries have closed up and there are other places for canneries. I just think that there's other fisheries uses, you know, for the waterfront purpose, or another industry that might want to ..uh industrial uses for the property, and that, you know, could be used on the waterfront, and because a hotel wants to come in'on the waterfront right now, ..uh, you know, maybe the timing is right and maybe it's not. I just personally feel that ..uh it's not. I'm not comfortable with it, so, you know, I could never vote for it. Just because it's before us right now, you know, I like a little bit into the future. And to have a hotel go in, when on the other side on the island there are places which have been set aside for hotels. And why use this space right now, this industrial property, when the planning on Near Island for a hotel to be in over there, you now, wait a few years and put the hotel in over there. And don't take away this piece of property. Years ago we all used to do gear work out there on the property, and ..um since the Natives have basically blocked it off, you know, they don't want people on their property because they didn't know what they were going to do with it, they've had their own crab pots stored on there, that nobody has basically been able to use it as an open space, and I think that ..uh the ( ?) area is an asset to ..um the fishing, and if you put a hotel up there I think people are going to get in the way and, you know, for fishing I don't think that's going to be very comfortable. Verbatim Transcript 3 Case 85 -004 It's going to be pretty crowded out there, you know, with crab pots and trailers cruising by and that, and I don't ... I just don't think it's an appropriate place to put a hotel. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Any other comments? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: Mr. Chairman. In view of the fact that it is zoned industrial and it would be a business use, I think that ..uh I think it's a. business use. A hotel in that particular spot would be a better use than, say, some type of industry which would most likely create some sort of pollution, either noise or, you know, I think that a hotel would just be a lot more pleasant and better for the looks of the community, and ..uh as far as the ... being in the way of the guys working on their gear, ..um it's blocked off now, and you haven't been able to work on your gear there for a long time anyway, and most of it's going to be out over the water, so that area that's now blocked off and it's not available for use anyways would be converted to parking, so I think that ... I think it would be ..uh if the person has an industry to develop aside from the fisheries, which we know there is room for expansion in the fisheries, as Mr. James said, I think that ..uh there's other industrial land available that would be a little bit farther out of town and probably a better place for it as opposed to ..uh locating a hotel somewhere out of town. I think it's ideal. If I had to build a hotel here in town, that's where I'd want to build it. I mean, I think it's the best spot. That's my ... COMMISSIONER HILL: You say there's more parking, but, you know, it's basically private parking, and you can, you know, take a look at how the parking is right now and people that are going to be bringing in their ..um, you know, skiffs and trailers, and ..uh, you know, it's just going to be open parking instead of a private parking area for the restaurant, you know, for the lounge, or for the hotel, and it's going to be a public parking lot instead of a ..uh.a private parking lot. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: To park my boat trailer in there when there's nowhere else to park. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: A place to, you know, pull your net up. COMMISSIONER HILL: That's right. You know, do all your gear work right on the property there. Verbatim Transcript 4 Case 85-004 t) COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: But I really feel that ..uh since we're looking in the future on ..uh Near Island to have hotel space over there, I'd just as soon wait a while and keep this as an industrial property again. COMMISSIONER HILL: Put the hotel over there in a few years. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: I hope you're not waiting for Near Island. COMMISSIONER HILL: Never can tell. COMMISSIONER JAMES: We've also got several acres on Near Island and Uski and Gull Island that are proposed to be industrial, so we can argue that case also. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Rennell. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: I move to grant an exception from Section 17.24.010, Permitted Uses, of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an industrial district legally described as City Tidelands, Tract N-18, and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Second. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Can we have a roll call vote, please? PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Rennell. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: No. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Anderson. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: Yes. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Gregg. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Yes. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Hill. COMMISSIONER HILL: No. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. James. COMMISSIONER JAMES: Yes. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Patterson. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Yes. PATRICIA MILEY: Motion carries. CHAIRMAN GREGG: It would probably be wise... COMMISSIONER RENNELL: Can I make one comment? According to the Code, there's nothing in the industrial thing about tourists. If we want it designated as industry, perhaps we should think in terms of changing the Code. CHAIRMAN GREGG: To recognize tourism as an industry? Verbatim Transcript 5 Case 85-004 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: That is a good point. I haven't heard it ..uh it referred to as the tourism industry a lot of times, so it must be mentioned. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Could I get just a general feeling from somebody over there as to whether or not we would be prudent to adopt findings of fact, or do you feel this is ... LINDA FREED: It probably wouldn't hurt. If you ..uh felt it was appropriate, you could also direct staff to put findings of fact together for you for your next meeting, if you would like us to take from your comments. Um.. the only times you really need findings of fact is if there is possibly going to appeal on the case. How far an appeal would go, I don't know, since no one testified at your public hearing. There might be some question about the validity of an appeal of this case since no one bothered to testify. Uh.. but, yes, it wouldn't hurt, and we'd be happy to put together findings of fact for you for your next meeting. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Would appreciate it. Verbatim Transcript 6 Case 85 -004 May 3, 1985 19.tt)t-2, Dan Potash Alaska Management. Services 2261 Belmont Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99503 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception from KIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Used - Industrial District) - CASE 85-004 Dear Mr. Potash: It has come to my attention that Dischner/Mathisen's option on the "hotel" property has expired and Koniag has listed it with a local realtor. If this is in fact true, I would appreciate your withdrawal of the applica- tion for the exception to the Kodiak Island Borough Zoning Code. Since Mr. Ralph Eluska signed the application, he should also sign the with- drawal. This will allow me to close the file on the City's appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission's February 20 approval. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELLA H. DALKE, CMC City Clerk IvI1D/ms cc: S.C. Gesko, Jr., City Manager Linda Freed, Director, Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE BOX 1397. KODIAK ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3994 A discussion amongst the Comn1_�_loners, the Engineering staff and the Community Development Department staff ensued. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL of the subdivision of Lot 8C, Block 1, Shahafka Acres Subdivision, U.S. Survey 3218 to Lots 8C -1 and 8C -2. The motion was seconded and FAILED by unanimous roll call vote. A discussion ensued amongst the Commissioners. The Commission requested that the Engineering Department prepare findings of fact for this case and to present these findings of fact to the Commission at the April 17, 1985 Regular Meeting. VII OLD BUSINESS A) CASE 85 -004. Findings of fact for the approval of a request for and an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permitahotel in. an I--Industrial District legally described as';City Tidelands Tract N -18. (The Kazim Company /Dischner- Mathisen- Partnership).- _. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT.for the approval of a request—for and an exception-from-Sect/On 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough.Code to permit a hotel in an I-- Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract H -18 as follows: 1. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that this request meets the following requirements for granting an exception according to Section 17.65.050(A) of the Borough Code. A. The request as approved will not endanger the public's health, safety, and general welfare. This is exemplified by the lack of public testimony opposing the request during the public hearing. B. The request as approved is not inconsistent with the purposes and intent of this (zoning) title. 1. The proposed use of the site for a hotel and restaurant is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan that designates this lot for expansion of the City of Kodiak's central business district. C. The request as approved will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. 1. There are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening, and positioning of the structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development. It is in fact these industrial uses (boat harbor, gear storage and repair, processing plants, and channel activity) that make this site attractive for the tourist industry. ii. There currently exists a restaurant and office space adjacent to an operating fish processing plant without apparent conflict. iii. The applicants stated that an agreement would be signed with the adjacent property owner (Alaska Fresh Seafoods, Inc.) stating that no complaints would be made about the industrial operation in regards to noise and smell on the adjacent lot. 2. Presently, there is a weak demand for industrial -zoned land because of the economic downturn of the fishing industry. There also exists underutilized industrial -zoned waterfront property. This use will not compete economically with the existing industrial uses in the area. P & Z Regular Meeting -6- March 20, 1985 Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened: COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED TO GRANT FINAL SUBDIVISION of Parcel No. 1, Kodiak Low Rent Housing, Alaska State Housing Authority, U.S. Survey 2538AB to Parcels No. lA and 1B, and Hillside Drive Right -of -Way, Kodiak Low Rent Housing, Alaska State Housing Authority, U.S. Survey 2538AB with the following conditions: 1. that Mountain View Drive be changed to Hillside Drive; and 2. that the name of the street between Block 1 and Block 2 be changed to Gerasim Avenue, as currently signed by the City, on the Vicinity Map and plat. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. I) CASE S -85 -007. Preliminary Subdivision of Lot 1B, Block 1, Shahafka Acres Subdivision, U.,S. Survey 3218 to Lots 1B -1 and 1B -2. (Carl Erickson) DAVID CROWE indicated 26 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and none were returned. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: SCOTT ARNDT appeared before the Commission, expressed non - objection to the flag shaped lot and recommended the Commission approve this request as platted. TED ROGERS appeared before the Commission and expressed his support of this request. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened: A discussion amongst the Commissioners ensued. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL of the subdivision of Lot 1B, Block 1, Shahafka Acres Subdivision, U.S. Survey 3218 to Lots 1B -1 and 1B -2 with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant provide water and sewer service to Lot 1B -2 prior to recording (filing) of the final plat, in accordance with Kodiak Island Borough Code Section 16.24.020(A)(3) and (4); 2. that a note be placed on the plat requiring the developer of Lot 1B -2 to submit plans for protecting existing natural drainage before beginning improvements on the lot; 3. that a note be placed on the plat stating that no further subdivision of Lot 1B -2 will be allowed; and 4. that the front yard building setback line for Lot 1B -2 be measured from the rear lot line of Lot 1B -1 as shown on the preliminary subdivision map presented to the Commission. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by majority vote. Commissioners Knight and Rennell cast the dissenting votes. J) CASE S -85 -008. Preliminary Subdivision of Lot 8C, Block 1, Shahafka Acres Subdivision, U.S. Survey 3218 to Lots 8C -1 and 8C -2. (Craig H. Johnson) DAVID CROWE indicated 14 public hearing notices were mailed for this case and indicated that a letter was received this afternoon from Ian and Judy Fulp which Mr. Crowe read into the record. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: GREGG SPALINGER appeared before the Commission and voiced objection to this request. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened: P & Z Regular Meeting -5- March 20, 1985 The proposed developmen2- ri=wides an opportunity to expand and diversify the local economic base. The motion was seconded and;CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. B) CASE S -85 -006. Final Subdivision of Tracts B -2 and B =3, Woodland Acres Subdivision Third Addition, U.S. Survey 1682 to Woodland Acres Subdivision Sixth Addition, Lots 9 -13, Block 4; Lots 1 -9, Block 5; and Raven Circle. (John F. Rauwol£) A discussion ensued amongst the Commissioners and the Engineering Department staff. COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED TO GRANT FINAL SUBDIVISION of Tracts 5 -2 and B -3, Woodland Acres Subdivision Third Addition, U.S. Survey 1682 to Woodland Acres Subdivision Sixth Addition, Lots 9 -13, Block 4; Lots 1 -9, Block 5; and Raven Circle, with the following conditions: 1. that the applicant submit roadway and utility improvement plans and specifications for review and approval by the Borough Engineer and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation; and 2. that a note be placed on the plat limiting access to Lots 1 through 4, Block 5, either to Patrick Court or Puffin Drive. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. VIII NEW, BUSINESS LINDA FREED indicated there had been a request to investigate the rezoning of Miller Point Alaska Subdivision 1st Addition. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED THAT AN INVESTIGATION OF THE REZONING of Miller Point Alaska Subdivision 1st Addition be undertaken by the Community Development Department staff and presented to the Commission at their Regular Meeting on May 15, 1985. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. IX COMMUNICATIONS X REPORTS A) The February Status Report from the Community Development Department. B) LINDA FREED announced that Bud Cassidy has been hired as the new Resource Management Officer, beginning April 1, 1985. C) LINDA FREED indicated the City Council with a 3 to 2 vote did not uphold the appellant in the Hill Appeal of the Planning and , Zoning case variance for Perrozzi. At the same time the City Council did affirm the Commission's decision but did not uphold the Commission's reasons for granting the variance, by a vote of 3 to 2. XI AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no audience comments. XII COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS P & Z Regular Meeting -7- March 20, 1985 �XIII ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN GREGG adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m. ATTEST BY: Pi "' KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Patricia Miley. lanning Secretary DATE APPROVED: q_11. Qf A VERBATIM RECORD IS ON FILE AT THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P & Z Regular Meeting -8- March 20, 1985 0.! 01-A35LH SUE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE 431 NORTH FRANKLIN POUCH AW, SUITE 101 JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811-0165 PHONE: (907) 465-3562 Registered Mail Return Receipt Requested SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE 2600 DENALI STREET SUITE 700 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503-2798 PHONE: (907) 274-1581 , rDiScnneriMathisen Attention: Mr. Dan Potash 2261 Belmont' Drive Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Mr. Potash: March 20, SUBJECT: ST. PAUL HARBOR 30 STATE I.D. NUMBER AK850214-10A BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE POUCH AW JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811-0165 PHONE: (907) 465-3562 NORTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE 675 SEVENTH AVENUE STATION H FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99701-4596 PHONE: (907) 456-3084 1985 Kodiak Islond SFY8U6 Kodick,Mmka EitCEIVED k AR rl n'S m The Division of Governmental Coordination (DGC) has completed the consistency review of your project in which you propose to place approximately 25 steel or timber pilings in a 72 feet by 101 feet area to provide a piling foundation for a 3-story building located near Island Channel, 203 Marine Way, Kodiak, Alaska. The building would be used for a hotel, restaurant, and bar.. All sewage would be by public utility. Based on our review, the Division concurs with your consistency certification that the project is consistent with the Alaska Coastal Management Program. This conclusive consistency determination applies to the follow- ing State and federal authorizations as per 6 AAC 50: 1. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers - Section 10 Permit. 2. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation - Certificate of Reasonable Assurance. If changes to the original proposal are made during its implemen- tation, you are required to contact this office to determine if a review of the revision is necessary. By a copy of this letter we are informing the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers of our finding. Attention: Mr. Dan Potash 2 March 20, 1985 St. Paul Harbor 30 AK850214-10A Thank you for your cooperation with the Alaska Coastal Management Program. Sincerely, Robert L. Grogan Associate Director ack R. eesch .Regional Coordinator cc: Bob Flint Department of Environmental Conservation Meg Hayes Department of Natural Resources Judith Bittner Department of Natural Resources Lance Trasky Department of Fish and Game Jay Bergstrand Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Linda Freed Kodiak Island Borough Amy D. Kyle Division of Governmental Coordination Ruth Benbow U. S. Army Corps of Engineers co3/65A OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE 431 NORTH FRANKUN POUCH AW, SUITE 101 JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 -0165 PHONE: (907) 465 -3562 .APPLICANT: h41, r PROJECT TITLE: SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE 2600 DENAU STREET SUITE 700 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503-2798 PHONE: (907) 274 -1581 PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE POUCH AW JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 -0165 PHONE: (907) 465-3562 NORTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE 675 SEVENTH AVENUE STATION H FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99701 -4596 PHONE: (907) 456-3084 STATE I.D. NUMBER /REVIEWING OFFICE:' AK8cpa /�f - / ©A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ,p ry �.]� / . PROJECT LOCATION: COASTAL DISTRICT: ACTIVITY TYP FORMAT: ELECTION DISTRICT: PROVED PLAN _'_ YES NO a7 PENDING r FEDERAL APPROVALS /I.D. NUMBERS: STATE APPROVALS /I.D. NUMBERS: r• 1- 8.5'oo 64\ REVIEWER MILESTONES (Day 141n 197.61 REVIEW SCHEDULE: 30 -Day L -Day REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY: . COMMENTS DUE BY: PROJECT STATUS NOTIFICATION BY: PROJECT:COORDINATOR: 01 •A 3S LH • a/tejt,i41) ifes- Rev: 3 -20 -84 CLOSE -OUT DATES 1 i?•c O iQ ACTUAL t•OF DAYS IN REVIEW: TYPE, OF CLOSE -OUT: ACTION CODE: REVIEWER PARTICIPATION: • • - DNR tYES NO DFG • DEC L YES NO DCRA • DOTPF YES NO DCED LOCAL YES... NO LAW i COASTAL DISTRICTS YES YES YES YES YES EXTENSION REQUESTED BY: DNR DFG DEC NO NO NO NO NO COASTAL DISTRICT APPLICANT DGC PUBLIC HEARING: - REQUESTED YES `-'1;10 HELD YES NO FORMAL INFORMATION REQUEST MADE: YES 1 IF YES, CLOCK STOPPED FOR DAYS IEW COMPLETED AT: REGIONAL LEVEL DIRECTOR LEVEL COMMISSIONER LEVEL POLICY RENDERED BY COMMISSIONERS: MONITORING REQUIRED: YES 13'146J /pi /PERM NO YES • NO Kodiak Island Borough Dischner-Mathisen Partnership 2261 Belmont Anchorage, AK 99615 P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 March 21, 1985 Gentlemen: Re: CASE 85-004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 and generally located in the area of the Kodiak Cafe. The Planning and Zoning_Commission at their March 20, 1985 meeting adopted the following'findings of fact for the approval of the above exception request: 1. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that this request meets the following requirements for granting an exception according to Section 17.65.050(A) of the borough code. A. The request as approved will not endanger the public's health, safety, and general welfare. This is exemplified by the lack of public testimony opposing the request during the public hearing. B. The request as approved is not inconsistent with the purposes and intent of this (zoning) title. i. The proposed use of the site for a hotel and restaurant is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan that designates this lot for expansion of the City of Kodiak's central business district. C. The request as approved will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. i. There are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening, and positioning of the structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development. It is in fact these industrial uses (boat harbor, gear storage and repair, processing plants, and channel activity) that make this site attractive for the tourist industry. ii. There currently exists a restaurant and office space adjacent to an operating fish processing plant without apparent conflict. Dischner-Mathisen Partnership March 21, 1985 Page 2 iii. That the applicant stated that an agreement would be signed with the adjacent property owner (Alaska Fresh Seafoods) stating that no complaints would be made about the industrial operation and associated noise, smell, and lights. 2. Presently, there is a weak demand for industrial-zoned land because of the economic downturn of the fishing industry. There also exists underutilized industrial-zoned waterfront property. This use will not compete economically with the existing industrial uses in the area. 3. The proposed development provides an opportunity to expand and diversity the local economic base. Sincerely, oboe Bud Cassidy Assistant Planner/Zoning Officer Community Development Department pb cc; City of Kodiak - Clerk's Office Case 85-,004 Kodiak Island Borough Mr. Jack Heesch Office of Management and Budget Division of Governmental Coordination Southcentral Office 2600 Denali Street #700 Anchorage, AK 99503-2798 Dear Jack: P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 March 21, 1985 Re: St. Paul Harbor 30, State ID Number AK850214-10A The Kodiak Island Borough has reviewed the project to construct a pile- supported structure referenced above. We have no objection to the project as proposed. The Kodiak Island Borough recommends that this project be found consistent with the standards of the Alaska Coastal Management Program and the Kodiak Island Borough Coastal Management Program. For your information, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed this project and granted an exception from Title 17 (Zoning) of the Borough code to permit this project in an industrially zoned land use district. If you have any questions about these comments, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: D. Lloyd, ADF&G T. Rumfelt, ADEC M. Hayes, DNR R. Benbow, COE .06* 1,7 Kgdlatt Ls Ian Vloclic RECD1 OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR FEB 1 9A985 „ OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 0 IT 1,111;111-11c1t4;:kCIIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE 431 NORTH FRANKUN POUCH AW, SUITE 101 JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811-0185 PHONE: (907) 485-3562 .APPLICANT: PROJECT TITLE: SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE 2600 DENAU STREET SUITE 700 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503.2798 PHONE: (907)274-1581 PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE POUCH AW JUNEAU, ALASKA 998114165 PHONE: (907) 465-3562 NORTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE 875 SEVENTH AVENUE STATION H ' FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99701-4596 PHONE: (907) 456-3084 f. STATE I.D. NUMBER/REVIEWING OFFICE: AKI3g04,2iy--/O4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROJECT LOCATION: COASTAL DISTRICT: ACTIVITY TYP FORMAT: FEDERAL APPROVALS/I.D. NUMBERS: ELECTION DISTRICT: PROVED PLAN YES NO PENDIN STATE APPROVALS/I.D. NUMBERS: . REVIEWER MILESTONES (Day 1 d ./1) igif-C") REVIEW SCHEDULE: 30-Day .1---"---8-6--Day REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY: COMMENTS DUE BY: /1 PROJECT STATUS NOTIFICATION BY: ;72d.... PROJECT:COORDINATOR: aite16i)41.) /1e Rev: 3-20-84 CLOSE -OUT DATE: TYPE .OF - CLOSE -OUT: ACTION 'CODE: ACTUAL $ OF.DAYS IN REVIEW: • • REVIEWER PARTICIPATION: DNR YES NO DFG YES NO • DEC YES NO - ' DCRA ' YES NO .DOTPF YES NO DCED YES NO LOCAL YES NO LAW YES NO . COASTAL DISTRICTS YES NO EXTENSION REQUESTED BY: • DNR DFG DEC COASTAL DISTRICT APPLICANT DGC PUBLIC HEARING: REQUESTED YES NO HELD YES NO FORMAL INFORMATION REQUEST MADE: YES NO IF YES, CLOCK STOPPED FOR DAYS RF'•VIE�1. COMP- LETED -AT REGIONAL-LEVEL- - - - -- DIRECTOR LEVEL COMMISSIONER LEVEL POLICY RENDERED BY COMMISSIONERS: YES ' NO MONITORING REQUIRED: YES NO 13 "PROD /pi /PERM ISTRIBUTION LIST February 13, 1985 1] Mr. Jay Bergstrand, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Anchorage 613] Ms. Judith Bittner, Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage 256] Mr. John Clark, Department of Fish and Game, Juneau 3] Mr. Bob Flint, Department of Environmental Conservation, Anchorage 1671 Ms. Linda Freed, Kodiak 1220] Ms. Meg Hayes, Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage �+] Ms. Amy D. Kyle, Office of Management and Budget, Juneau 1028] Mr. Carlton Laird, Department of Commerce and Economic Development, Juneau 321] Mr. Tom Lawson, Department of Natural Resources, Juneau 200] Mr. Wayne Longaere, Department of Community and Regional Affairs, Juneau 287] Ms. Ione Norton, Kodiak 859] The Honorable Tom Peterson, Kodiak 1012] Mr. Jerome M. Selby, Kodiak 3711 Mr. Lance Trasky, Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage 268] Mr. Jack Wick, Kodiak • OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL C-OORDINATION SOUTHEAST 431 North*Franklin POuch AW, Suite 101 Juneau, AK 99811 Phone: (907) 465-3562 SOUTHCENTRAL 2600 Denali Street Suite 700 , Anchorage, AK 99501 'Phone: (907) 274-1581 BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE POUCH AW JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 PHONE: (907) 465 -3562 NORTHERN 675 Seventh Avenue Station H Fairbanks, AK 99701 ' Phone: (907) 456-3084 Certification of Consistency with the . Alaska Coastal Management Program... Section 307(c)(3) (A) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 as amended by 16 USC 1456 (c) (3) requires that appli- cants for federal permits to conduct activities affecting land . or water uses in Alaska's coastal -area must provide certification that the activities will comply with the standards of the Alaska Coastal Management Program. The proposed activity described in your federal permit application may require certification. By filling out the attached coastal project questionnaire you, together with the State's resource agencies, will not only determine the necessity for this certification, but you will also find out if other State approvals are needed before your proposed activity can proceed. This will also assist you in filling out your federal permit application. Upon receipt of the signed, dated certification, a public notice can be issued, and review of your' project can begin. For additional information on the Alaska Coastal Manage- . ment Program and project review procedures, contact one of the offices indicated on this letterhead. Please submit a signed certification and applicable State permit applications to the appropriate State agency indicated in the questionnaire. You must also submit a signed' certification to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers along with your U.S. Army Corps permit application. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, .: the proposed activity described in the Corps of Engineers permit application complies with the approved Alaska Coastal Management Program, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such program. Attached is a copy of a completed coastal project questionnaire. CLQ 1/2.9/134- Signature.of Applicant Date . fc/permit/coe Attachment COASTAL PROJECT QUESTIONNAIRE 9/1.9184 The State has a system for reviewing and processing resource - related permits, leases, and approvals for proposed projects in coastal areas of . Alaska. As a participant in this process, you are required to complete this questionnaire. The questionnaire will help you identify approvals required for your project (or . a ' specific phase of your project) from the Departments of Fish and Game, Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation. Attached is a list of regional agency contacts and a map of, the coastal area with the regions delineated. We urge you to contact the appropriate agency staff when you are answering that agency's questions. . If you need several approvals you must, submit the packet of applications for those approvals along with this questionnaire to the appropriate office in the -region where the proposed project is to occur. Your project cannot -be reviewed until all applications are received. Please use the following contacts for submittal: 1. Packets -•that include applications to more than one State agency and /or one or more federal agencies*: must- be. submitted 'to: "tile regional -Office of Management- and -B idg•et unless .fees or confidential information are included. 2. Packets that require. fees or confidential information must be . submitted to the resource agency with that. requirement. Packets that include application(s) for a: project requiring approval- from only one State resource agency must be submitted to that State resource agency. 4. The Annual Placer Mining,: Application must be. submitted to the. Department of Natural Resources instead of this questionnaire. If you have any questions concerning the process, please contact the .Office of Management and Budget, Division of - Governmental Coordination. .. • If you have general _ questions about local, State or federal permits,, both in and outside: the coastal area, you may wish to contact the Department- of Environmental Conservation Permit Information Centers - in Fairbanks (.452 - 2340). Anchorage (279- 0254) or Juneau (465- 2615). Collect calls are accepted. IF YOUR ANSWERS TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ARE NOT,. CORRECT AND COMPLETE AND AN AGENCY DETERMINES. THAT YOU DO NEED' ONE OF THEIR APPROVALS, THEY WILL NOTIFY YOU AND YOU WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ATTAINING THAT APPROVAL. HOWEVER, THIS WILL LIKELY CAUSE A DELAY - IN THE REVIEW OF YOUR PROJECT. TO AVOID THIS DELAY., :..WEr_EN COURAGE-- LY-OU•;TO• SEEK =ASSISTANCE- FROM -- AGENCY _STAFF IN COMPLETING THE -QUESTIONNAIRE: * * * * .* * ,* *. * .* * * * * * Applicant: Dischner /Mathisen Address: 2 2 61 Belmont Dr... Anchorage, AK. 99503 Phone (day): 907- 277 -4903 * * * Contact Person Dan Potash Address: 2261 Belmont Anchorage, AK Phone (day): . 907 -376 -4896 Brief description of project or activity: Construction of a 3- story restaurant /bar+ /lintl. Location of project: Kodiak, Alaska Tideland TR. N -18 • Twsp 27 South Rge 19 West Meridian Seward Section 32 USGS Map __ Is the project on: private. land X state land federal land municipal land • * * * * * * • • PART A i * ownership not known * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Yes No Do you currently have arty State or federal approvals /permits for this project? X Permit /Approval Type Permit/ Approval i Expiration date Will you be placing structures, or placing fills in any of the following: tidal waters, streams, lakes, wetlands? X If so, have you 'applied or do you intend to apply for a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit? (Indicate below.) X Have you applied or do you intend to apply for other permits from any federal agency? (Indicate below.) X Agency Permit /Approval Type Permit; Section 10 U.S. Army Corp. Date you submitted Application 1/29/85 of Engineers * * * * * * * * * * * * * * : * * * * * * * PART B DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 1. Is the proposed project on State -owned lands or will you need to cross State lands for access? X 2. Do you plan to use any of the following State -owned resources? a. Sand and Gravel Yes No X If yes, amount? Source? b. Water Yes No X If yes, amount? Source? c. Timber Yes No If yes, amount? d. Other Materials Yes No X If yes, what material? peat, ui ng stone, etc. • 3. Do you plan to drill a geothermal well? 4. Will you be exploring for or extracting coal? 5. 'Will you be harvesting timber from 10 or more acres? 6. Will you be investigating or removing historic or archeological resources on state -owned lands? Yes No X X IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO ALL THESE QUESTIONS, YOU DO NOT NEED APPROVAL FROM T' .ALASKA DEPARTMETr OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR). GO TO PART C. IF YOU ANSWERED YES TO ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS, CONTACT DNR TO IDENTIFY AND OBTAIN ANY NECESSARY APPLICATION FORMS. If you have already contacted DNR, are you now submitting application(s) for permits or approvals? If no, indicate the reason below: X ' b. (person contacted) told me on that no DNR approvals or permits were "required for this project. DNR regulations have no requirement for a permit or approval. c. Other. (date) PART C DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 1. Will you be working in a stream or lake (including in running water or on ice, within the gravel floodplain, on islands, the face of the banks . -or- the stream` tideflats down to mean low tide)? Name of stream or lake Yes No If no, go to. question number 3. 2. If yes, will you be doing any of the following: a) Building a dam or river training structure? b) Using the water? c) Diverting the stream? d) BIocking or damming the stream (temporarily or permanently)? e) Changing the flow of the water or changing the bed? f) Pumping water out of the stream or lake? g) Introducing silt, gravel, rock, petroleum products, debris, chemicals, or wastes of any type into the water? h) Using the stream as a road (even when frozen) , or crossing the stream with tracked or wheeled vehicles, -log-dragging or excavation equipment (backhoes, bulldozers, etc. )? i) Altering or stabilizing the banks? j) Mining or digging in the beds or banks? k) Using explosives? 1) Building a bridge (including an ice bridge)? m) Installing a culvert of other drainage structure? 3. Is your project located in a State Refuge or Critical Habitat? X IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO ALL THESE QUESTIONS, YOU DO NOT NEED A PERMIT FROM THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME (DFG) . GO TO PART D. 14 IF YOU ANSWERED YES TO ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS, CONTACT THE REGIONAL HABITAT DIVISION OFFICE TO IDENTIFY AND OBTAIN ANY NECESSARY APPLICATION FORMS. If you have already contacted DFG, are you now submitting an application for permit(s)? If no, indicate the reason below. a. (person contacted) told me on that- no DFG approvals or permits were required for this project. X b. DFG regulations have no requirement for a permit or approval. c. Other. (date) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PART D DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 1. Will a discharge of wastewater from industrial or commercial operations occur? Only into public utility. 2. Will your project generate air emissions from the following: a) Diesel generators totaling more than 1000 hp? b) Other fossil fuel -fired electric generator, furnace, or boiler totaling greater than 1000 hp? Asphalt plant? Yes No X X X X d) Incinerator burning more than 1000 lbs. per hour? e) Industrial process? 3. Will a drinking water supply be developed that serves more than a single - family residence? 4. Will you be processing seafood? Will food service be provided to the public or workers? 6. Will the project result in dredging or disposal of fill in wetlands or waterways? 7. Is on -lot sewage or greywater disposal involved or necessary? Will your project result in the development of a currently unpermitted facility for the disposal of domestic or industrial solid waste? 9. Will your project require offshore drilling or vessel transport of oil, or other petroleum products as cargo, or include onshore facilities with an effective storage capacity of greater than 10,000 barrels of such products? 10. Will your project require the application of oil or pesticides to the surface of the land? IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO ALL THESE QUESTIONS, YOU DO NOT NEED A PERMIT OR OTHER APPROVAL FROM THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATIO.: (DEC). IF YOU ANSWERED YES TO ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS, CONTACT THE DEC REGIONAL OFFICE TO IDENTIFY AND OBTAIN ANY NECESSARY APPLICATION FORMS. Yes X X No X If you have already contacted the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, are you now submitting an application for permit (s) ? X If no, indicate the reason below: (person contacted) told me on that no DEC approvals or permits were required for this project. . DEC regulations have no requirement for a permit or approval. Other. (date) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To the best of my knowledge, this information is accurate and complete. Signed Date cpga /PERMIT * * * * PLEASE ATTACH YOUR PERMIT APPLICATIONS * APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT (33•CFR 325) OMB APPROVAL NO. 0702 -0036 Expires 30 June 1986 The Department of the Army permit program is authorized by Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 103 of the Marine, Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act. These laws require permits authorizing activities in or affecting navigable waters of the United States, the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, and the transportation of dredged -naterial for the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters. Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Information in this application is made a matter of public record through issuance of a public notice. Disclosure of the information requested is voluntary; however, the data requested are necessary in order to communicate with the applicant and to evaluate the permit application. If necessary information is not provided, the permit application cannot be processed nor can a permit be issued. One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned. 1. APPLICATION NUMBER (To be assigned by Corps) 3. NAME, ADDRESS, AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT Dan Potash . 2261 Belmont Anchorage, AK 99503 Telephone no. during business hours A /c(907 ) 376 -4896 (Residence) 2. NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT Dischner /Mathisen 2261 Belmont Dr. Anchorage , AK 99503 Telephone no. during business hours A/C ( ) (Residence) A/C(907 ) 277 -4903 (Office) Statement of Authorization: I hereby Dan Potash designate and authorize. to act in my behalf as my upon request, agent in the processing of this permit application and to furnish, supplemental information in support of the application. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (./i4'1 -_d DATE / /z9J8 A /C( 907) 277 -4903 (Office) cu.2 -..._ 4. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY 4a. ACTIVITY Approximately 7,000 sq. ft. ground floor plan with two additional stories above. Construct on pile foundation with one half of the building over water. Steel construction. All sewage discharge will be by public utility. 4b. PURPOSE Construct a restaurant /bar /hotel facility. { 4c. DISCHARGE OF DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL Not applicable;-see application drawing. (Note: Since the fill area is above the mean high water line, the Sect. 404 permit is not required.) ENG FORM 4345, Apr 83 EDITION OF 1 OCT 77 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: DAEN- CWO -N) 5. NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, LESSEES, ETC., WHOSE PROPERTY ALSO ADJOINS THE WATERWAY West of property: City of Kodiak -- 710 Mill Bay Rd., Kodiak, AK East of property: Alaska Fresh Seafoods -- 105 Marine Way Rd., Kodiak, AK 6. WATERBODY AND LOCATION ON WATERBODY WHERE ACTIVITY EXISTS OR IS PROPOSED Near island channel; see application drawing. 7. LOCATION ON LAND WHERE ACTIVITY EXISTS OR IS PROPOSED ADDRESS; 203 Marine Way Kodiak, AK STREET, ROAD, ROUTE OR OTHER DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION COUNTY STATE ZIP CODE City of Kodiak and' Kodiak Island: Borough LOCAL GOVERNING BODY WITH JURISDICTION OVER SITE 8. Is any portion of the activity for which authorization Is sought now complete? Q YES [X,NO If answer Is "Yes" give reasons, month and year the activity was completed. Indicate the existing work on the drawings. 9. List all approvals or certifications and denials received from other federal, interstate, state or local agencies for any structures, construction, discharges or other activities described in this application. ISSUING AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL IDENTIFICATION NO, DATE OF APPLICATION DATE OF APPROVAL DATE OF DENIAL U.S. Army Corp. Permit - 1/29/85 Pending of Engineers Ak. St. Dept. of Environmental Conservation - 1/29/85 Pending 10. Application is hereby made fora permit or permits to authorize the activities described herein. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this application, and that to the best of my knowledge and belief such information Is true, complete, and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the proposed activities or I em acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant. A4^ �_ i z.91 S .- 1 2 9 €?.5- - SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE • The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly authorized agent if the statement in Block 3 has been filled out and signed. 18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of The United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false,fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. Do not send a permit processing fee with this application. The appropriate fee will be assessed when a permit is issued. 0-- ..crarimo ).1.12,102id -11427bretY .572itly1-72i5V4k4.:27 heilg ;r4;1".4v1.4.3fErAi;Vto'fir111/ • -11.41-1 11•101"11`ciiv1 1141- .";4 ti NALY(.1Nt1e, -2N 11 iel clok2zIel. 7:„ :11%,075 ,c* Nolj05 1Y,141g. •craziner4-2i _Lori SI -1-11"Mel gHl 11111 -2121W HRH Nmi,4 H.L. 'O WAY YaziY 111A 11-11 •a--ANI* 43161 1N1 Mal O 111414 I :22.1*1 Mdl tsteak.1 /2..•411)44 HIM _ -4/ 404 'MI- 7vm "Zi 04-2i .-11VW? Public Notice of Engineers of Application US AnnY CorPs Alaska District P.O. Box 898 for Perit Regulatory Branch m Anchorage, Alaska 99506-0898 OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET FEB 13 1985 GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION. Interested parties are hereby notified that an application has been received for a Department of the Army permit for certain work in waters of the United States, as described below and shown on the attached plan. PUBLIC NOTICE DATE: February 13, 1985 EXPIRATION DATE: March 13, 1985 REFERENCE NUMBER: 071-0YD-1-850064 WATERWAY NUMBER: St. Paul Harbor 30 APPLICANT: Dischner/Mathisen, 2261 Belmont Drive, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. LOCATION: Near Island Channel, 203 Marine Way, Kodiak, Alaska. WORK: The applicant proposes to place approximately 25 steel or timber piling in a 72'x101' area to provide a piling foundation for a 3-story building. PURPOSE: The building would be used for a hotel, restaurant, and bar. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: All sewage discharge would be by public utility. The applicant's representative for this project is Mr. Dan Potash, telephone (907) 277-4903. WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION: A permit for the described work will not be issued until a certification or waiver of certification as required under • Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (Public Law 95-217), has been received from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT CERTIFICATION: Section 307(c)(3) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended by 16 U.S.C. 1456(c)(3), requires the applicant to certify that the described activity affecting land or water uses in the Coastal Zone complies with the Alaska Coastal Management Program. A permit will not be issued until the Office of Management and Budget, Division of Governmental Coordination has concurred with the applicant's certification. PUBLIC HEARING: Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this application. Requests for public hearings shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. CULTURAL RESOURCES: The latest version of the National Register of Historic Places has been consulted and no properties listed on or known to be eligible for inclusion on the Register are located in the permit area. ENDANGERED SPECIES: No threatened or endangered species are known to use the project area. Preliminarily, the described activity will not affect endangered species, or their critical habitat designated as endangered or threatened, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (87 Stat. 844). This application is being coordinated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Any comments they may have concerning endangered or threatened wildlife or plants or their critical habitat will be considered in our final assessment of the described work. FEDERAL SPECIES OF CONCERN: None. FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT: Evaluation of the described activity will include conformance with appropriate State or local flood plain standards; consideration of alternative sites and methods of accomplishment; and weighing of the positive, concentrated and dispersed, and short and long-term impacts on the flood plain. SPECIAL AREA DESIGNATION: None. EVALUATION: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts . of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposals must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects thereof; among- these are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards,. flood plain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, ,water. supply and conservation, water. quality, energy needs, .safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. AUTHORITY: This permit will be issued or denied under the following authorities: (X) Perform work in or affecting navigable waters of the United States - Section 10, River and Harbor Act 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403). Comments on the described work, with the reference number, should reach this office no later than the expiration date of this Public Notice to become part of the record and be considered in the decision. If further information is desired concerning this notice, contact Mrs. Ruth E. Benbow at (907) 753-2712. A plan, Notice of Application for Certification of Consistency with the Alaska Coastal Management Program, and Notice of Application for State Water Quality Certification are attached to this Public Notice. District Engineer U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers Attachments rVAN H1?-I4 MCAN L%M414A' : I.d M :hN WhlE : loW Hic44 TIDE LINE. 1� i© FT ST. PAULHARBCR 30 r Lhi• . _.f- Gm:- TO -._.1 [ 1 T T it7-E p4 9 FT. { T TO._ScAt SEGr1 ©N r oro Q Pt'A N p wt\i PATIQN 1 7, PATE.. 1.... 0.= _ ;if. NAMK.F�ocrT Hl' t 'L. IAK:,h AT N i51.AND GkiANNE.L -, .tDi °f . z.�. Pave% OL f e-OMME44+AL/ APJAcENT t N o4NE� J 71 OF 2.1ZEI OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION STATE. OF ALASKA DIVISION OF .GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR POUCH AW JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 PHONE: 19071 465 -3568 Notice of Application for Certification of Consistency with the Alaska Coastal Management Program Notice is hereby given that a request is being filed with the Division of Governmental Coordination for concurrence, as provided in Section 307 (c)(3) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended [P.L. 94 -370; 90 Stat. 1013; 16 U.S.C. 1456•(c)(3)), that the project described in the ,Corps of Engineers Public Notice No.071- 0YD -1- 850064 , will comply with the Alaska Coastal Management Program and that the project will conducted in a manner consistent with that program. Any person desiring to present views pertaining to the project's compliance or consistency with the Alaska Coastal Management Program may do so by providing his views in writing to the Division of Governmental Coor- dination, Office of Management and Budget, Pouch AW, Juneau, AR 99811, within 30 days of publication of this notice. Attachment 2 D:STR/TIUTION --7(9/0 731..s 7-- 077 ob(77/6 STATE AGENCIES . DISTRICT m:t.NA • /2_z_o 37 2_56 67 3 FEDERAL AGENCIES COASTAL DISTRICTS K-.TVE PROFIT NATIVE ON-?ROFIT s-7 LOCAL GOVERNMENTS sTArrIl-wp-1= /0(2— . • or * dsc350/kDt1C- OTHER E ® }'A,.`� jUM state -of }.laska TO: Jack R. Heesch Regional Coordinator Div. of Governmental Coordination FILENO: 0385 -IV -60 Office of Management & Budget DATE: March 19, 1985 FROM: Dennis D. Kelso Deputy Commissioner Department of Fish and Game BY: Denby S. Lloyd \N Habitat Biologist Region IV Habitat Division Department of Fish and Game 02001 A(Rev. 10179) TELEPHONE NO: 267 -2346 SUBJECT: St. Paul Harbor 30 Disch_ner /Mathisen' SID AK850214 -10A The Alaska Department_ of Fish _and -__Game___(ADF &- G)_has reviewed the pilrig _ _installation /hotel- - construction' project referenced above. We have no objection to the project as proposed. Pursuant to 6 AAC 80.010(b), the ADF &G recommends that this project be found to be consistent with the Standards of the Alaska Coastal Management Program, By copy of this memorandum we are providing the Corps of Engineers with our comments and recommendations on this project pursuant to the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661- 666c). We appreciate the opportunity to comment. If you have any specific questions, please contact Denby Lloyd (267 - 2333). cc: Do Barrows, COE T. Rumfelt, DEC M. Hayes, DNR ✓L. Freed, Kodiak Island Borough Kodiak Island Borough Kodiak, Alaska RECEIVED MAR 2 2 985 M PM n i I March 14, 1985 Linda Freed, Director Community- Development Department Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception from KIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses - Industrial District) - CASE 85 -004 Dear Linda: At the February 28 City Council meeting, the Council requested an appeal of the above approval be filed. The Borough Assembly declined to sit as the Board of Adjustment in this case, therfore, the City's procedures must be followed. Please prepare the record on appeal per KCC 17.10.020.(6). Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCEL A H. DAIKE, CMC City Clerk MHD /nej cc: Kodiak Island Borough Clerk POST OFFICE BO)( 1397, ICODIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486 -3224 Kodiak Island Borough MEMORANDUM DATE: March 13, 1985 TO: Planning and Zoning Commissio4006 FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: Information for the March 20, 1985 Regular Meeting RE: ITEM VII(A) CASE 85-004. Findings of fact for the approval of a request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract H-18. (The Kazim Company/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership) The following findings of fact have been drafted for the commission's review and approval from comments expressed by commissioners after the public hearing for Case 85-004 (referenced above). 1. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that this request meets the following requirements for granting an exception according to Section 17.65.050(A) of the borough code. A. The request as approved will not endanger the public's health, safety, and general welfare. This is exemplified by the lack of public testimony opposing the request during the public hearing. B. The request as approved is not inconsistent with the purposes and intent of this (zoning) title. 1. The proposed use of the site for a hotel and restaurant is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan that designates this lot for expansion of the City of Kodiak's central business district. C. The request as approved' will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. i. There are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening, and positioning of the structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development. It is in fact these industrial uses (boat harbor, gear storage and repair, processing plants, and channel activity) that make this site attractive for the tourist industry. ii. There currently exists a restaurant and office space adjacent to an operating fish processing plant without apparent conflict. 2. Presently, there is a weak demand for industrial-zoned land because of the economic downturn of the fishing industry. There also exists underutilized industrial-zoned waterfront property. This use will not compete economically with the existing industrial uses in the area. 3. The proposed development provides an opportunity to expand and diversify the local economic base. Case 85-004 -2- March 13, 1985 r� 1, ai • omoson. By GORDON WEEKS Y ". . Staff Writer - Backed by , focal laborers, the City Council last night passed a resolution opposing "a House bill that would exempt small com- munities from,. the.: "tittle, Davis- Bacon Act." ' Several local workers spoke against House Bili." 176, which would exempt state - funded projects In areas with less than 5,000 population from the Davis - Bacon • Act, which mandates prevailing wages. 'The. bill is co- sponsored 'by,state, ,Rep. Dave Thompson. Bruce Fink, a Kodiak carpenter, said the state would be "opening up a big can. of worms" by allowing lower wages to be paid to laborers in., communities : under council 5,000. "If the State Legislature would ,, like to exempt communities by, populatlon4 we're 'looking at a statewide • change," he said. ':We're talking about making enough money �n the town you want to work." Sid Pruitt Jr., a local laborer, said ' the triil contained •' „no references to total hire. "The guys in the villages are just like us here -- they have to sit on the corner and watch guys, from Montana do their work*,”; he said. Pruitt alsa said the drop In wages would attract unskilled workers, and that such problems as faulty wiring would cost the state more z money to the tong run. The council also voted to appeal . (Please turn to Page h) (Continued from Page 1) the Planning and Zoning -Com• mission's acceptance of the hotel site at the harbor after Coun- cilman Jeff Stephan expressed concern over the lack of boat trailer space after construction. The six councilmen.: spilt on the appeal, with Mayor John Pugh casting the deciding vote for the appeal. - ' • Pugh stressed that the appeal was merely an opportunity for citizens and contractors to discuss public access to the water around the hotel site, which is situated next to the Kodiak Cafe. "We'd like dialogue between the city and developer to Iron It r. out," Pugh said. "The chances of winning an appeal are about one in 1,000." • ,t - Councilman 1` Dave '.,,' Crowe maintained that It was :.not the council's. business to ' take a position on the . matter; while Councilman Bob Brodie pointed out that the -public- had the op- ,. portunity to speak against' the zoning at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. . Crowe, Brodie and Councilman - Al Cratty voted against Me appeal; • • while Councilmen Dave Woodruff, Jim Ramagila: and Stephan voted for the measure. Stephan said the appeal was merely a chance "to talk about It ahead of the fact." In effect, the council appealed to Itself. • The council now will request that the Borough Assembly accept the appeal for a hearing, according to Borough Planning Director Linda Freed. In other council measures: —The Senior Citizens of Kodiak were awarded a permit to conduct bingo games and raffles. The center's application states that the proceeds will be used for the purchase of equipment and fur- nishings, as well as special parties for the members of the Senior Center. --The ownership of Warehouse Liquor's package store license was transferred from The Village Enterprises Inc:;: $ to. ' Kraft's Markets, Inc. —A Kodiak City Code was amended to extend exceptions to competitive bidding requlremetns. The amendment allows the city to participate In a cooperative agreement with other govern• mertal units, which would allqw Kodiak toenJoy a cost savings. • �G�,I1 I�IJif I�( Ihl1l1,„ KODIAK, ALASKA 12 PAGES .35 CENTS 2- KODIAK DAILY MIRROR— •Friday, March:.1,1985, 1. IV, MIMES OF TIE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF TIE CITY OF KODIAK HELD FEBRUARY 28, 1985 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER DRAFT Mayor Pugh called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. Councilmembers Brodie, Cratty, Crowe, Ramaglia, Stephan, and Woodruff were present and constituted a quorum. PREVIOUS MINUTES Councilmember Crowe MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Ramaglia, to approve the minutes of the regular February 14, 1985 neetiog. Councilmember Ramaglia added the following wording to the last sentence of the second to the last paragraph on the second page: "including the University's non-objection to a future boat harbor in Trident Basin and assuring the City that such development would not be incompatible with the Fishery Industrial Technology Center." The roll call vote on the corrected minutes was unanimously favorable. PERSONS TO BE HEARD :Planning and Zoning Commissioner ;Oannissioner Rennell reported that the Planning and Zoning Commission had approved 'three cubical content variances at its February 20 meeting. The application for ,a zoning exception to construct a hotel in an industrial zone had received no testi- mony other than a provisional non-objection from the neighboring property owner, :Alaska Fresh Seafood. The Commission discussed the application in detail and then :approved it. Councilmember Woodruff, owner of Alaska Fresh, said the non-objection was contingent on the developers giving prior written acknowledgement of cannery pro- duced conditions on the waterfront; e.g., boat lights, odors, etc. Upon question- ing, Commissioner Rennell stated the developers were planning to construct immedi- ately in hopes of operating the 26 room hotel this summer. He indicated he had voted 'against the application because of its location in an industrial zone. There was discussion on the parking requirements of the hotel and its effects on the public's use of the boat launch and boat trailer parking. Councilmember Woodruff indicated Ile:night file an appeal because the written acknowledgement had not been signed. OLD BUSINESS Near Island Title Transfer RE: Fishery Industrial Technology Center City Manager Gesko said at the February 14 Council meeting, University of Alaska officials presented a request for title transfer of 7.153 acres on the Trident Basin side of Near Island for the Fishery Technology Center. Following a lengthy discus- sion, the Council tabled the transfer of title to this meeting and directed the staff to draft a letter of intent to transfer the property. This action was to'allow the University to proceed with the FITC construction plans while providing an opportunity to meet informally at a worksession. The worksession was held February 19. The earliest the University staff could meet with the City staff to negotiate the condi- tions of the title transfer was Friday, March 1. Mt. Gesko asked the Council to again table the title transfer until the negotiations could be completed. Councilmember Crotty MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Crowe, to remove the Near Is- land title transfer from the table. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. The Council pointed out that the transfer could not take place until the University had an approved plat. The plat had not yet beer filed and the platting process took a minimum of 30 days. Councilmmber Crotty stated there was no conflict between the City and the University over the transfer of the 7.153 acres for Phase I. however the conditions for pledging the additional 16.821 acres needed clarification. Councilmember Crowe MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Ramaglia, to table the Near Island title transfer for the Fishery Industrial Technology Center until the first meting after the final negotiations were conplete. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. V. NEW BUSINESS a. First Readi , Ordinance Number 758 RE: Amending the Kodiak City Code Chapter 3.12 to Extend tae Exceptions to Competitive Bidding Requirements Mayor Pugh read Ordinance him 758 by title. Mr. Oesko cold the Council this ordi- nance was presented at Finance Director Deebel's request to amend KCC 3.12.070 by allowing the City to participate in a cooperative purchasing agreement with other governmental units whereby the City could enjoy a cost savings. Councilmember Cratty MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Crowe, to approve Ordinance Number 758 in the first reading. Councilmember Crowe indicated his intention to amend Ordinance Number 758, by de- leting subsection (d), following the public hearing in the second reading. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. b. Resolution Number 16-85 RE: Opposing House Bill 176 Pertaining to Exemptions from the "Little Davis-Bacon Act" Mayor Pugh read Resolution Number 16-85 by title. City Xanager Gesko said this resolution was presented at the request of Councilmember Brodie to represent the opposition of local construction workers to House Bill 176. This bill would exempt municipalities with a population of less than 5,000 from the provisions of the "Little Davis-Bacon Act". Councilmember Brodie NENED, seconded by Councilmember ,Cratty, to pass and approve Resolution Number 16-85. Councilmetber Brodie MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Ramaglia, to amend Resolution 16-85 by substituting the following for the fourth whereas: "Waereas, the effect of House Bill 176 would have an adverse economic impact on all of Alaska and would remove protections from substandard wages for rural Alaskan workers without promot- ing local hire,". The roll call vote on the amendment was unanimously favorable. At Councilmember Stephan's request, Councilmember Brodie explained that his reason for submitting the resolution for Council consideration was House Bill 176 would remove.the wage guaranties not only in municipalities under 5,000 population but also in service areas and public utilities serving less.than,5,00.0 population with- out promoting local hire. He was concerned this would give an unfair bidding ad- vantage to non-local firms that could bring in employees at lower wages than that required to support local workers. In some cases the wages could drop to the Fed- eral minimum of $3.75, a difference of as much as $25.00 depending on the craft. He said the intention of House Bill 176 was to promote local hire, but the bill - failed to address that issue. Because there were members of the audience wishing to speak to the issue, Mayor Pugh closed the regular meeting and opened it to public input. Bruce Finke spoke in favor of Resolution Number 16-85. Ile explained the process of establishing the prevailing wages by the Department of Labor and the history of the Davis-Bacon Act. He said the prevailing wage was not only different between the various crafts but also within each craft depending on the job. Ile predicted the 'effect of House Bill'176 would change the prevailing wage State-wide, which made the issue of State-wide importance not just in the smaller communities. Ile said the construction craftspeople desired to make wages adequate to allow them to live and work in the communities of their choice. Councilmember Stephan asked if anyone was aware of why the bill was sponsored by legislators from the Dillingham/Naknek, Bethel, and Nom areas. He knew they were conscientious and responsive to their constituency. He asked what advantage the bill would have to those communities. Sidney D. Pruitt. Jr. said the legislators thought it would encourage local hire, but there was no language in the bill referring to or malranting this result. Ile suggested the villages and other small connamities could enact local hire ordinances similar to the City's. He was concerned that should the wages fall too low, skilled craftspeople would not be available. In answer to Mayor Pugh, Mr. Pruitt said his craft had a training program to provide enough local skilled workers. He foresaw a problem with policing the requirements of the bill. Bill Beaty said the reasoning behind House Bill 176 was an effort to lower the con- struction costs in the smaller communities so they could continue needed public improvements within available funds. It was also an effort to retain some of the public construction money within those communities by encouraging local hire. How- ever, the form of this bill made the opposite more likely. Councilmamber Brodie IIMED, seconded by Councilmember Cratty, to amend Resolution Number 16-85, by correcting the original arrendment to read the fifth whereas, and to restore the wording of the fourth whereas. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. The roll call vote on the main motion, as amended, was unanimously favorable. c. Approval of Development Plan RE: B.P.O.Elks #1772 Lease Manager Lesko explained that on May 13, 1983, the City entered into a lease agree- anent with the Elks on the property lying south of Monashka Bay Road. Section 10 of the lease stated that any "development plan rust be approved by the Council prior :to,construction. The Elks Youth Land Committee had submitted a development plan which provided for trails, camp sites, latrines, an activities area, a dining area, and a picnic area. In conjunction with the development plan, the Elks were request- ing permission to cut approximately 12 uprooted and/or leaning trees. CoUncilmenber Cratty MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Ramaglia, to approve the Feb- ruary 19, 1985, development pion as submitted by the B.P.O.Eiks #1772; and to approve the cutting of approximately 12 uprooted and/or leaning trees; said trees to be cut for use in the development plan. ,The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. d. Games of Chance and Contests of Skill RE: Senior Citizens of Kodiak, Inc, Mr. Lesko said under the applicable State Statutes, the City was given the opportu- nity to object to the 1985 applications for games of chance and contests of skill. The Senior Citizens of Kodiak, Inc., had applied for a bingo and raffles permit. Councilmember Ramaglia MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Wbodruff, to voice non-objed- tion,to the 1985 Games of Chance and Contests of Skill permit application submitted by the Senior Citizens of Kodiak, Inc. .• The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. e. Liquor License Transfer RE: Warehouse Liquor City Manager Lesko told the Council the City had received an application to transfer the ownership of the Warehouse Liquor package store license from The Village Enter- prises, Inc., to Krafts Markets, Inc. The Police Department had no objections and the sales taxes were current. Councilmember Cratty MOVED, seconded by CouncilmeMber Crowe, to voice non-objection to the transfer of the ownership of the Warehouse Liquor package store license from The Village Enterprises, Inc., to KraftsoMarkets, Inc. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Gesko distributed a draft letter to the University of Alaska stating the City's intention to transfer title to the 7.153 acres needed for Phase I of the Fishery Industrial Technology Center following completion of the negotiations for the agreement. Included was a letter from Governor Sheffied commending the City for its support of the FITC and indicating that construction funding may not be available this year. MAYOR'S CLIVEZIS Resolution Number 17-85 RE: Supporting Senate Bill 160 Which Would Make an Appro- priation for Construction ot a Pioneers' Home in Kodiak Mayor Pugh said this resolution was presented by Councilmember Ramaglia and himself following a public request. Resolution Number 17-85 would supp,aa: Senate Bill 160 which would make an appropriation of S7,280,000 for construction of a Pioneers HOffle in Kodiak. Councilmember Ramaglia MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Crowe, to pass and approve Resolution Number 17-85. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. Executive Session RE: Personnel Matters At the Mayor's request, Councilmember Crowe MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Ramaglia, to recess into an executive session on personnel matters following the end of the published agenda. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. VIII. COUNCIL CCHIDITS Councilmember Woodruff reported a number of telephone calls on the quality of the City's water. He suggested the State Sanitarian, Everett Stone, be asked to take a number of samples for testing by the State laboratory. He stressed that he did not believe there was a problem, but was making the request to put any fears the public might have to rest. He suggested the samples be taken at the intake, res- ervoir, and spillway. The City Manager pointed out that the chlorination process was some distance from those areas and it might be better to test after the chbr was added. Councilmember Stephan suggested that to allay any public concern, aspects of the system should be tested. Public Works Director Beukers said the was no problem with having Mr. Stone do the testing. Councilmember Woodruff said the water undoubtedly had small micro organisms in it, but seriously doubted there was anything harmful. (COuncilmember Stephan expressed concern that the new hotel would preclude parking !by the boat launch ramp and felt the City should do something. Councilmember Cratty said the City could not stop anyone from developing their own property. 'Councilmember Ramaglia said an option would be to appeal the approval of the zoning exception to the Borough to allow an opportunity to bargin with the developers. Mayor Pugh wondered if the long use of the property by the public granted any pre- scriptive rights. Councilmember Wbodruff expressed concern about the access to the float plane ramp and wondered if the pilots had the opportunity to comment on the ,hotel's location; he said it appeared that the corner of .the proposed structure would intrude, into the turning radius. Councilmember Cratty said the same concern , was voiced when industrial dock construction had taken place a number of years ago, however, the float plane pilots adjusted without any problems. Councilmember Ramaglia said anyone developing private property has the right to construct any use allowed under the zoning regulations. ;Appeal from February 20 Planning & Zoning Commission Approval RE: Case 85-004 Hotel City Tideland Tract N-18 CoUncilmember Stephan MOVED to appeal the February 20, 1985, Planning and Zonip7. • Commission's approval of a zoning exception for the construction of a hotel on, 'City Tideland Tract.N-18, commonly known as the Kodiak Western property; said , appeal to be subject to possible withdrawal following discussion with the developers on,the City's concerns. Counciloumber Stephan said the basis for his notion was the lack of public testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the lack of the requested agreement with Alaska Fresh Seafoods, seaplane pilot access, the effect on public use of the boat launch rang and boat trailer parking, the imtinenE deadline for appeal, and the need for dialogue with the developers. The MOTION was seconded by Councibmapber Woodruff. Councilmember Crowe said the City had the opportunity to respond followirc the Public notice and the issue had been discussed at a worksession, where the Council did not feel it necessary to object. Councilmember Ramaglia said he had not been aware of the possible ramifications of the construction during the worksession dis- cussion. Councilnrsnber Brodie said he understood the Council's responsibility to safeguard public use, however, he had trouble dictating the use of private property. Councilmember Woodruff said the public was not aware of the possible conflicts and the City must look out for public interests. The roll call vote was Councilmembers Ramaglia, Stephan, and Woodruff in favor and CoUncilmembers Brodie, Cracty, and Crowe opposed. Mayor Pugh broke the tie in favor of the motion and the motion passed. The Mayor instructed the Clerk to file the appeal and petition the Borough Assembly f to,hear the appeal because of the conflict of the Council hearing its own appeal. She was also instructed to ask the City Attorney to look into any prescriptive 1 rights there may be due to the long- established public use of a portion of the property. The staff was to prepare drawings of the actual effect on the adjacent public land. Mayor Pugh acknowledged this action was late in the process, but stated his affirmative vote was primarily to allow an opportunity to discuss the ,matter with the developers. Councilmember Ramaglia asked that the maps illustrate the&public use of the private property. Councilmeraber Stephan said he realized 'the :requi.red public notices had been published, but doubted the public's awareness of the effects of the project. He said he is frequently asked in cases of this type, ,why the City allowed "this" to happen. Change Order j3 RE: Pier 1II Improvements Councilnaiber Ramaglia MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Cratty, to approve Change Order #3 to LASH Corporation in the amount of $167,171.70 to extend the construction of additional van storage at Pier III to a full 520 feet (100 van stalls); finds to be transferred from Cargo Terminal Fund retained earnings to, and expended from, the Cargo Pier Construction Fund 36,55.65 PIER III - REPAIRS, CONSTRUCTION. Councilmember Brodie asked the staff to look into extending the new van storage area to 700 or 800 feet. Councilmember Woodruff said that much storage would not be needed until the bottomfish industry was on -line. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. Councilmember Ramaglia wished Councilmember Stephan Happy Birthday and Mayor Pugh gave him a card signed by all the Council. He also gave a belated card to Council - member Brodie, whose birthday occurred on January 20th when he was out of town. Councilmember Crafty asked the status of the computer needs analysis. City Manager Lesko said the two suppliers' reports should be in within a few days. Councilmember Brodie requested a report on the bid process status for the newly formed assessment districts. He also wished to direct the staff to prepare a tenta- tive plat of Near Island, illustrating road locations and possible lot lines. He asked that this be available to the public prior to a hearing which he wished held at the first meeting in April. Councilmember Ramaglia asked that the topic of cable TV franchising be cancelled for the March 7 worksession and instead scheduled as the subject of a public hearing at the March 14 regular meeting. The Council agreed, and the Clerk was instructed to publicize the change and notify both I:OTV and XVOK. IX. AUDIENCE CalMENIS Bruce Finke said the purpose of franchising cable TV was to better serve the public. He stated that recent Federal Communication Commission regulation changes had taken public input out of the process. Mayor Pugh asked that he attend the March 14 public hearing and submit his views at that time. Sidney D. Pruitt, Jr. thanked the Council for its action on Resolution Number 16 -85 and complimented it for strengthening contact with the community. RECESS' The Council recessed into the executive session on personnel matters, following which the meeting reconvened with the announcement that no action would be taken on the subject of the session. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:56 p.m. ATTEST: 111YOR CITY Cu:RK Marcella H. Dalke, CMC Clerk, City of Kodiak P. 0. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Dear Marcella.: Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 March 4, 1985 co NAR 1985 ic\DI PrIllifill ... \ 0 IL ... c., o-, , , ...? Please be advised that your request of March 1, 1985 that the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly sit as a Board of Adjustment in lieu of the City Council is hereby denied. Kodiak Island Borough Code Title 17.80.010 (a), specifically sets the rules for the Boards of Adjustment as follows: "The Borough Assembly is the board of adjustment ouside the boundaries of the city of Kodiak and for any municipality in the borough which does not exercise this power. The Kodiak city council is the board of adjust- ment within its boundaries." The Borough Assembly has in the past exercised. this power without any conflict of interest arising. A copy of your request was forwarded and discussed with the Borough Manager and he concurs with the above. If you have any questions, please let us know. Sincerely, Mickie Miller, CMC Borough Clerk mm cc: Manager Comunity Development Dept KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH MEMO TO: Borough Manager FROM: Borough Clerk SUBJECT: Appeal: City of Kodiak DATE: March 1, 1985 Attached, please find a copy of an appeal letter addressed to Mayor Peterson from the City of Kodiak. •As per our Borough Code, Title 17.80.010 (a), the Borough Assembly sits as the Board of Adjustment for appeals outside the city boundaries and the City of Kodiak would sit as the Board of Adjustment for an appeal within it's boundaries. Therefore, I feel that we would be in direct conflict with our own codes, should the Assembly grant this request. Please take this request into consideration and let us know what action we should take. Thank you. March 1, 1985 The Honorable Thomas H. Peterson, Mayor Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception from KIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses - Industrial District) - CASE 85-004 Dear Mayor Peterson: At the regular February 28 Council meeting, the above Planning and Zoning Commission approval of an exception permitting a hotel to be constructed in an industrial district was discussed. As reflected in the attached letter, the Council felt there were adequate grounds to appeal the Plan- ing and Zoning Commission decision. A paradox arises since both the Borough and City Codes require that appeals of this nature are heard by the City Council sitting as the Board of Adjust- nent. In this case that means the appealing party is appealing to itself. Therefore, the Council respectfully requests the Kodiak Island Borough Assem- bly hear this appeal to avoid the obvious conflict of interest. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact ire. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELLA H. DALKE, CMC City Clerk MMus Enclosure A M Kodiak Island roe h Kodiak, Alaska RECEIVED MAR - 11986 "111111-P110111flq1c1 POST 0I� BOA 1397, KODIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 Qca March 1, 1985 c1( A.? RAR Remo Mrs. Marcella Dalke, CMC, City Clerk City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception from NIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses - Industrial District) - CASE 85-004 Dear Mrs. Dalke: The Kodiak City Council is hereby appealing the February 20, 1985, Plan- ning and Zoning approval of the Kazin Company/Dischner and Mathisen Part- nership application for an exception to KIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) to permit a hotel in an Industrial District on City Tidelands Tract N-18. This appeal is authorized under KKC 17.10.010(b) which provides for appeals from Planning Commission final approval of requests for special exceptions. The basis of the appeal is the Council's opinion that this development will adversely impact the adjoining public boat launch ramp, boat trailer parking area, and seaplane floats. In addition, there is concern that this use of an Industrial District immediately adjacent to an operating seafood processor will create conflicts between the two uses; e.g., odors, bright lights, etc. KIB 17.65.050 (Approval or Denial) requires the Commission to determine that 'the proposed use will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. The February 20 decision appears to be in conflict with this Kodiak Island Borough Code requirement. Respectfully, CITY OF KODIIAK, ' SAMUEL C. GESKO, City Manager SCG:MEID/ms POST OFFICE BOX 1397, 140DIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 March 1, 1985 The Honorable Thomas H. Peterson, Mayor Kodiak Island •Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception from NIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses - Industrial District) - CASE 85-004 Dear Mayor Peterson: At the regular February 28 Council meeting, the above Planning and Zoning Commission approval of an exception permitting a hotel to be constructed in an industrial district was discussed. As reflected in the attached, letter, the Council felt there were adequate grounds to appeal the Plan- ing and Zoning Commission decision. A paradox arises since both the Borough and City Codes require that appeals of this nature are heard by the City Council sitting as the Board of Adjust- ment. In this case that means the appealing party is appealing to itself. Therefore, the Council respectfully requests the Kodiak Island Borough Assem- bly hear this appeal to avoid the obvious conflict of interest. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MAROBEIA, H. MINE, �C City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure . POST OFFICE BOX 1397, KODIAK , ALMA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 QE, March 1, 1985 Mrs. Marcella Dalke, CMC, City Clerk City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception fromEIB 17.24.010-(Permitted Uses - Industrial District) - CASE 85-004 Dear Mrs. Dalke: The Kodiak City Council is hereby appealing the February 20, 1985, Plan- ning and Zoning approval of the Kazin Company/Dischner and Mathisen Part- nership application for an exception to KIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) to permit a hotel in an Industrial District on City Tidelands Tract N-18. This appeal is authorized under KKC 17.10.010(b) which provides for appeals from Planning Commission final approval of requests for special exceptions. The basis of the appeal is the Council's opinion that this development will adversely impact the adjoining public boat launch ramp, boat trailer parking area, and seaplane floats. In addition, there is concern that this use of an Industrial District immediately adjacent to an operating seafood processor will create conflicts between the two uses; e.g., odors, bright lights, etc. KIB 17.65.050 (Approval or Denial) requires the Commission to determine that the proposed use will not adversely impact other properties or use in the neighborhood. The February 20 decision appears to be in conflict with this Kodiak Island Borough Code revirement. Respectfully, CITY OF KOD 7 SAMUEL C. GESKO, z City Manager SCG:MHD/ms POST 04.ICE BOA 1397, kOD1,114 ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 r Y Weather ri Occasional sno light and tomorrow with-winds out of the nori west to 15 mph:`` °Low temperature tohlght,= '.25; higliAOrnerrow, 32. ;Fi, Record high and low for this' date are 52, set In 1944, and 10;Set,ln 1976.$`k' Sunset tonight all): 23 p m1, eunrleetomorrow-, 8:23 a .m. it. VOL. 45 NO. 37 '" THURSDAY, February. 21, 1985 "' KODIAK, ALASKA 1e PAGES 35 CENTS Jy LEE CARNEY7t s said the' property coatdd..;ba usedby � Commissioner °Mike Ar arson ',,: Staft•Wrtter`' Ax is the fishing industry. 0.4 t4 4 r:, ,:'was quick to note he benefits of ,Following 'L:a `voiceless 0pebllc 5 • "1f you put a hotel up, there 1 the, hotel project "Weve got to hearing, the Planning erid toning think people ere going to get In the `book to our economy and keep our ;, Commission agreed last night to :'"way," said Hill. • "1 just- don'tthink ,,,community` going," he''eald. permit a hotel in the atea' of the t It's an approprlate place to pu •` t a '`'There Isn't any more need for Kodiak Cafe'' 'Tlo.tt,*6 lie" h: hotel. "' Hill "''suggested that ;Industrial'.space ,in;the• fishing 'The' commission" Shared `some discussion stage' plane fora hotel economy. "'+ ' �' • discussionIb 'eforecondludingwith r' on Near island sometime In the "' Commissioner.: Fred' Patterson a -4 =2 vete. k';'1 t (1::_ : t4.1,1;4011 future made more sense. 4' `'' ?` said: the ,project would "enhance ;' "Personally, .1 ° have a, real - 'Steve. Rennell also opposed the `` °Kodlak.overall `We certainly don't:;. problem 'with Making lntfuetrial .r' permit motion: " 1SlnceI've`been ; have.. aitybodyi begging at our property on the waterfront Arid not oh the commission there's' been a , doors to use the industrial. area " ` f • '?using It for Industrial ur'oees," lot of concerh` about Industrial He i said'''tourism itgelf''isf_''th� said Commisloner Tim HIIL'. ie `eland andconserving It," he said r (Please turn Peg to e3 n•a st..ka Bay alanoff: By LEE CARNEY ' - r ' { jectives s plan guidelines '' ' The'`" growl • t Staff Writer " � ,t: The unelected group has been, generated a questionnaire' .t • The' Monashka Bay.- ,Planning't'meetIng weekly since, last duneto7 determine, the = opinions, , 0 Group presented a comprehenelve complete the draft; .plan,,.in . an F,Monashka Bay residents. • ,,';'plan to the Planning' and toning effort ': to `' shape 'the .urea's a' 'The plan's land use goals point. Commission last night, outlining development beyond the to maintaining residential.quality corm unity .4-0 development'; ob- borough's 1908 lcomprehensive it" calls for ` "low intensity developments that preserves the 't, :.‘,15.'-';11,4 ` 'land ' use Integrity ' of the ;residential'" areas and '" don- .centrates ` commercial and In•'.r dustrial development In. strategic :,locations." ~ ' According ',to ' Elayne Rennell chairman : •of "the Monashka Bay • Planning. Group, the `Issue.` of gravel • • extraction has caused - controversyirt.the past. A sawmill;:'; ,operation' In ''the';: area and 'the ``landfill :site. have'` also;. generated .r esidentlalconcerns. < According to the questionnaire" survey,' about 50 percent of the residents - are -opposed t� gravel extractions' The planning group. recommends that If .gravel ex- traction- must .occur-• "that- at be planned for an area that Is well;` • buffered and clearly not In conflict With present and future residential;> areas:"** Rennet said gravel ex- traction Is "very very noisy you can hear...lt,all,over.he Monashka. area" " The draft' plan' calls for (Please tam to Page 3),a .:1 Thursday, February 21,1985= KODIAK DAILY MIRROR`- • ; (Continued from Page 1) .. ;; designation of..a watershed area In k; ;the- highland's' At last : night's Is meeting; Scott . Arndt questioned ::; the location,. and need :_for that watershed. is; ,;;,..: , ' •.;rl , >.;..; , Several . people used the ;public hearing to. voice support<,of. comprehensive•. _plan. •''Nancy• =' Missal said the plan:. was • "well recelvedby residents and, at their • ; January` public hearing :;',"Most eople seemed . pretty I, positive _oat - ' Marsha Oswalt safd .that, tike ` the Majority-:of `people; "she .was basically In favor of the plan, but xs. hat "there were " people at the • meeting that. objected td the idea of the. plan. ". She., said ;she,was concerned that "eventually people'_ :will need more;'.money, and more finished .kinds-;Of ..housing; than;, =. •many of us when, we began,'. as a result of the pian.11 have empathy for people 'Who might be able•. to • ..get together the money fort. the ;_land," but, not enough to cornpiete,:,. construction all at once, she said. ;The. planning `Commission will Old 'ssecond public - :hearing regarding the Monashka °'': Bay omprehenslve ,plan • Marche 20..: ' Copies of- the..plan are avallable at the `Planning Department In the <. .Borough Building k• "We would really, like people to.come and testl(yf.teald Ran, ° ' ' '"1 " -" ntlnued from Page 1 dustry" of sorts �n t Commissioner: `Dan'`James noted "There are also five Vacant plants " on the.' waterfront "right 9 now,' that could be revived If...the industrial interest was there.# g�` i Operating ;a7-hotel on property': :;adjacent YAW. an ` active;.•fish processing 'plant, AAlaska •`.Fresh .,, '( Seafood) '. will involve'. • Inherent ; "';. P roblems that the tannin department has considered. ".But consensus last, night was that i;I. '' dealing With'. the plant's lights, 'F noise and, When was a business • :risk, not a planning'and, zoning ^The Kazim- Company /Dishchner and Mathisen Partnership plans to ,.construct a three-story, 26 -room facility. Kodiak Cafe will operate a bar,'restaurant and coffee shop on://' ,, :the premises. .. "Basically it gives us an opportunity to get Into some ..: . dinner business we rdidn't have before," said owner Joe Perrozzi. Uwa Gross, general_ manager of Koniag Inc. ' which { owns the property involved, said the target • II date to begin construction Is Nov. 1.. The hotel is scheduled .ta open }' on March.,1 •1986. Grose said the building that stands '4on property will remain only un new building Is up, �: Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 -1246 PHONE (907) 486.5736 February 21, 1985 Dischner /Mathisen Partnership - 2261 Belmont . Anchorage, AK 99615 Re: CASE 85 -004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted. Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in -an I- Industrial district. .Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. Gentlemen: The Planning and Zoning Commission at their February 20, 1985 meeting approved your request for an exception. This action becomes, final ten (10) days after the date of the Commission's decision to permit any aggrieved party the opportunity to appeal this decision. The approval of an exception is valid for a period of 12 months, but expires should you fail to exercise it within this timefranee. Please bring this letter in with you when applying fDr a building permit. Should you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Bud Cassidy v Assistant Planner /Zoning Officer pb cc: !Case _8 -Q04 Kazim Company Phillip E. Ferris Dave Woodroff City Clerk John Sullivan, Public Works COMMISSIONER PATTERSON MOVED ` RANT A VARIANCE from Section 17.36.070(C) (Nonconforming S -tures). to permit the remodeling of a home including a one -story addition that increases the cubical content of the structure, and from Section 17.19.040(B) (Side Yards) to permit construction of a parking deck that encroaches 6.5 feet into the required 6.5 foot side yard setback on the right side of the structure. Lot 72, Block 8, Erskine Subdivision, 421 Mill Bay Road. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. D) CASE 85 -004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted = Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as^City - Tidelands- Tract ■N -18 -and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. (Kazim Company /Dischner and Mathisen Partnership) LINDA FREED indicated that 19 public hearing notices were sent out for this case; 2 notices were returned; one from Alaska Fresh Seafoods (Dave Woodruff) and one from the Elks. Also included in the "additional handouts" is a letter from Koniag supporting the request and a site plan. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: Seeing none. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened: COMMISSIONER HILL expressed concern, allowing a hotel in the waterfront industrial district and he would prefer to keep the property available for industrial uses associated with the fishing industry. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON expressed the need to enhance the local economy with additional tourist industry monies. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON expressed his opinion that this particular plan has been well thought out and that the local economy could benefit from the tourist industry. He stated that the restaurant and hotel would be very compatible with what exists on the waterfront and would enhance Kodiak overall. COMMISSIONER RENNELL stated that he would like to see this used for the industrial segment as it is zoned industrial. COMMISSIONER JAMES noted that the person with the biggest complaint would be the next -door neighbor, Mr. Woodruff, and he doesn't seem to have much problem with it. There are also five vacant processing plants on the waterfront presently and if expansion was needed for a new processing plant one of the vacant plants could be utilized. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON expressed his opinion that tourism is an industry and that this project would help develop the tourism industry in Kodiak. COMMISSIONER HILL again expressed his concern with allowing a hotel on the waterfront in an industrial zoned district and pointed out that the Near Inland development plan sets aside land the could be used for hotel purposes. He also indicated that traffic associated with the fishing industry on the spit would conflict with traffic associated with the hotel and indicated he felt this exception request to be an inappropriate use of the property. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON indicated that a business use of this property would be preferable to an industrial use as pollution such as noice or discharge would detract from the community and that a hotel would enhance the community's downtown appearance. COMMISSIONER JAMES indicated that there are portions of Near Island, Uski, and Gull Islands reserved for industrial purposes. P & Z Regular Meeting -3- February 20, 1985- COMMISSIONER RENNELL MOVED TO GRANT -AN EXCEPTION from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted-Uses) of,,.-1,° Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. ally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally_loca ! _.__ in_the -area _of.Kodiak Cafe. The .s motion was seconded and ` •;CARRIED by a 4 -2 vote. =Commissioners Hill and Rennell cast the Opposing votes. COMMISSIONER RENNELL indicated that the code does not indicate "tourism" as an industry and that perhaps an amendment to the code is in order. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON concurred with COMMISSIONER RENNELL on this point. COMMISSIONER GREGG requested staff to prepare "Findings of Fact" for this case from comments expressed by the Commissioners and to submit the "Findings of Fact" at the next regular meeting. LINDA FREED acknowledged the request. E) CASE 85 -005. Monashka Bay Comprehensive Plan. (Monashka Bay Planning Group /Community Development Department) LINDA FREED indicated there were no individual public hearing notices sent out on this case, however the Kodiak Daily Mirror published a notice separate from the legal ad indicating this item would be on the agenda for this regular meeting. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: ELAYNE HUNTER - RENNELL, Chairman of the Comprehensive Planning Committee (CPC), stated the goals of the CPC were to make a plan for future development in the Monashka area consistent with the existing residential development and consistent with the contours of the land. The CPC also tried to preserve the quality of the residential areas that presently exist and reduce the future possibility of conflicting uses of land. In July, the CPC surveyed all the land owners in Monashka Bay and the results of the survey are present in the Comprehensive Plan. In January all landowners were sent a written notice of a public meeting, as well as a published advertisement in the Kodiak Mirror, announcements on the radio, and an advertisement on the scanner. More than forty people were in attendance at that meeting and one -by -one the CPC reviewed all the goals and objectives of the plan and revised them according to the feelings of the people there, taking a vote on any items of lengthy discussion. NANCY MISSAL expressed her support of the Monashka Bay Comprehensive Plan. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON asked if at the public meeting there were any objections to the plan expressed and how was the plan received by the community. NANCY MISSAL indicated that overall, "no," though in particular there were some objections expressed and that at that time the item was reviewed and revisions made and a vote was taken. Most people at the meeting seemed positive about the plan. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON asked if there was a good reception for the concept of a comprehensive plan. NANCY MISSAL felt there was a good reception. DEBORAH BURGY expressed her support of the Monashka Bay Comprehensive Plan. MARSHA OSWALT expressed her support of the concept of the Monashka Bay Comprehensive Plan. She also expressed her concern with the changes in the area, essentially that people will need more money and more finished kinds of housing in order to live in Monashka Bay than many who moved there in earlier years. She suggested that members of the Planning and Zoning Commission take into consideration the exception process, remembering that if there is a worthy exception to an ordinance then that should be considered. SCOTT ARNDT expressed his problems with the Plan. His comments regarding the classifications: (1) Watershed. He questions the location and also the need for such a classification, personnally he does not feel it is necessary nor in the logical place. Presently there is extensive watershed in the Monashka Bay area P & Z Regular Meeting -4- February 20, 1985 protect my property but to proy._\t my access to my house through this request. / Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened: COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED TO GRANT a final vacation of Lot 39 and a portion of Lot 40, Block 19, Kodiak Townsite Alaska, and replat to Lots 39A and 40A, Block 19, Kodiak Townsite Alaska, U.S. Survey 2537 -B with the following corrections: (1) correct the spelling of Fillmore wherever it appears, and (2) correct the spelling of Henry wherever it appears. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. VII OLD BUSINESS There was no Old Business. VIII NEW BUSINESS There was no New Business. IX COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communications. X REPORTS A) The January Status Report from the Community Development Department. B) The Monashka Bay Planning Group can meet with the Commission at the regularly scheduled Work Session for February 27. C) A Joint Worksession with the City Council has been scheduled for March 4, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Conference Room; therefore the Wednesday work session is cancelled for that week. D) Last evening the Community Development Department met with the Women's Bay Community. Roughly 40 -50 people were in attendance. One of the main issues that the Community Development Department talked about was zoning enforcement and the procedures that are currently in effect. There was no concensus among the community about how they would like to see enforcement done out there. It was felt that the majority would like to see enforcement continue on a complaint basis as opposed to either more active enforcement or no enforcement at all. It was also suggested that perhaps members of the Community Development Department could go out to the firehouse and be available to the community once a month or bi- monthly to answer questions and provide zoning compliance for projects. The Women's Bay Community Council will consider this. A discussion ensued concerning the availability of the Borough Code. It was determined that the zoning section of the Borough Code be made available to the local libraries (including the Chiniak Public Library) and the firestation at Bells Flats. E) The Women's Bay Community Council is working on their Phase II Comprehensive Plan and it should be before the Commission in the next three or four months. XI AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no audience comments. XII COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS COMMISSIONER JAMES pointed out that in regards to the hotel exception,',1 the main reason why I voted the way I did -was because I looked -on it -' as an expansion of a business use. I realize that it would be a new building but the property is being used commercially presently and I do not see how the hotel is going to affect the area much differently. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON asked if the Commission had put the stipulation for the four conditions on the motion for Case S -85 -002. The Commission and staff indicated they were'included in the motion. P & Z Regular Meeting -8- February 20, 1985 - COMMISSIONER GREGG asked if ; ould have any objections to any of the four conditions conta____= in the Engineer's memo. PAM BAGLIEN indicated she would have no objections to these conditions. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON asked how long the existing driveway had been in use. PAM BAGLIEN replied "about ten years." COMMISSIONER PATTERSON asked if she foresaw any problems in moving that driveway into the flag stem. PAM BAGLIEN indicated there was nothing that precludes moving it over. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON asked if that would make it steeper than it already is. PAM BAGLIEN replied "not at all." RON MOORE (who is interested in one of the lots) encouraged the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve the subdivision. He felt there was no problem with the driveways there and expressed his opinion that the driveway could be built on either of the lots. Public Hearing Closed. Regular Session Opened: COMMISSIONER ANDERSON indicated that he had made an on -site inspection of the subject subdivision and in response to Mr. Crowe's concern about the steepness of the driveways, Lots 6A and 6B both have a natural place to just peal off the main road and go right on up. Mr. Anderson felt that a person could put in a very good driveway at a shallower grade than the legal maximum grade. For Lot 6C there appears to be no problem whatsoever with grade due to the width of it. The existing driveway is almost entirely within the flag stem area presently and to move it would not increase the grade. The relocation of the driveway presents no problem. The driveway is fairly steep but since the driveway has been in use for ten years and they want to keep on using it I have no objection. COMMISSIONER HILL indicated that he had been to the site also and that he sees no problem with the subdivision. COMMISSIONER RENNELL indicated that he also had been to the site and that he appreciates Mr. Crowe bringing the driveway to the Commission's attention but that this proposed subdivision meets the pertinent requirements. COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED TO APPROVE CASE 5 -85 -002, preliminary subdivision of Lot 6, Block 1, Bells Flats Alaska Subdivision, to Lots 6A, 6B, 6C, and 6D, Block 1, Bells Flats Alaska Subdivision with the following conditions: (1) applicant to obtain ADEC sanitation approval; (2) applicant to construct new driveway within flag stem prior to recording plat; (3) applicant to relocate existing electrical service prior to recording plat; and (3) show Pamela J. Delys as the owner in the Ownership Affidavit and Notary's Acknowledgement. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. H) CASE S -85 -003. Preliminary vacation of Lot 39 and a portion of Lot 40, Block 19, Kodiak Townsite Alaska, and replat to Lots 39A and 40A, Block 19, Kodiak Townsite Alaska, U.S. Survey 2537 -B. (Kip W. Fillmore) Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: KIP FILLMORE, being the petitioner, requested the Commission to look favorably upon this request. My intent is not only to P 6 Z Regular Meeting -7- February 20, 1985 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH M E M O R A N D U M ITEM VI -D DATE: February 8, 1985 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission. FROM: Community Development Departmentt4 SUBJ: Information for the February 20, 1985 Regular Meeting RE: CASE 85 -004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. (Kazim Company /Dischner and Mathisen Partnership) Nineteen Public Hearing Notices were sent on February 1, 1985. 1. Applicant: The Kazim Company /Dischner and Mathisen Partnership, 2261 Belmont, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. 2. Land Owner: The Kazim Company, Box 746, Kodiak, Alaska 99615. 3. Request: Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. 4. Purpose: To construct a hotel including a restaurant, bar and coffee shop in an Industrial District. 5. Existing Zoning: I- Industrial District. 6. Zoning History: The 1968 Comprehensive Plan identifies the zoning of this lot as "Industrial." Departmental files show no additional Commission action. 7. Location: No physical address assigned. Adjacent to the Boat Harbor and generally located in the vicinity of the Kodiak Cafe. City Tidelands Tract N-18. 8. Lot Size: 37,421 square feet. 9. Existing Land Use: The existing structures on the lot contain multiple business uses; generally office space and a restaurant. 10. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: City of Kodiak, Harbormaster Building and Parking Lot. Zoning PL; Use PL. South: Near Island Channel. East: City Tidelands Tract N -14. Zoning I; Use I. West: City of Kodiak breakwater and dock. Zoning PL; Use I. Case 84 -004 1 February 8, 1985 11. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area.as part of the "Central Business District." 12. Applicable Regulations: Chapter 17.24 (I- Industrial Zone), Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) permits "all uses permitted in the B- Business zone except residential. The Planning and Zoning Commission at their January 16, 1985 Regular Meeting made a determination that hotels, motels, and apartments shall be considered as "residential" uses in the industrial district. COMMENTS 1. Proposal The applicants' proposal is to construct a three - story, 26 room, hotel with a restaurant, bar and coffee shop, on the channel. A portion of the building will actually be situated over the water, on pilings. The upland area not utilized by the structure will be landscaped and used to fulfill the structure's parking requirements. 2. Zoning Although the current zoning of the lot is Industrial, the Comprehensive Plan designates this lot as part of the "central business district." 3. Uses This parcel of land was deeded from the City to a private landowner in the early sixties and has historically served as the location for a number of business uses. Even during the height of the king crab seasons, when new fish processing firms were looking for water oriented industrial zoned land for onshore processing plants, this site remained in business use. 4. Potential Problems There are many inherent problems associated with use of the site for a hotel. The hotel will be adjacent to a fish processing plant. The bright lights of the boats and associated noise of loading, unloading and other dock and processing activities may be loud 24 hours a day and at certain times of the year there are also strong odors associated with the industry of fish processing; not just the smell of seafood but possibly ammonia used for cleaning and diesel fuel. 5. Kodiak's Economy As the fishing industry struggles, Kodiak's local economy struggles. A method of building a stable economy is to diversify the economic base. Tourism appears to be one way of diversifying Kodiak's economy. The tourism industry though more business oriented than heavy industry can be a major contributor to strengthening the local economy. Case 84 -004 2 February 8, 1985 6. Appropriateness of the Proposed Use. The lack of business-zoned •waterfront property in the central business district is a shortcoming of the long-range planning for the City of Kodiak. Kodiak planning has been developed based-on single industries. There is vacant industrial land both near the municipal airport and proposed in the various Near Island plans. Gull and Uski Island are also currently zoned industrial. With the exception of the International Seafoods plant, new processors have generally bought existing plants. 7. Analysis The potential problems of a business use located adjacent to an industrial use can be mitigated somewhat by the proper positioning and design of the structure as well as adequate buffering. A restaurant and other businesses have been located in the general area for as long as the processors have been located there with no apparent problems. There may be a risk that tourists may not want to stay in this hotel because of potential conflicts with the adjacent industrial use but that is a business risk rather than a land use decision. In order for the Commission to approve an exception request the following conditions must be satisfied: 1. That the use as proposed in the application or under appropriate conditions or restrictions will not endanger the public's health, safety or welfare or be inconsistent with the general purpose of this title. The location of the proposed hotel adjacent to a fish processing plant may create difficulties but these difficulties can be mitigated through building design and screening. Interestingly enough, it is anticipated that some of these same industrial activities are factors that draw people (tourists) to Kodiak in the first place. The hotel will not be inconsistent with the purposes of the industrial district because it is on the fringe of the industrial zoned land and the central business district and scheduled to become part of the business district. 2. That the use proposed in the application will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. A hotel use in an industrial area will not have an adverse impact on the adjoining property. It should be clearly understood that the primary use of the surrounding area is industrial. Case 84-004 3 February 8, 1985 RECOMMENDATION Staff believes that for this case, all the required conditions have been met in order for the Commission to grant an exception; therefore staff recommends approval of the request. APPROPRIATE MOTION Should the Commission agree with the staff recommendation, the appropriate motion for this case is specified below: Move to grant an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. Case 84-004 4 February 8, 1985 15.44A,Lt- etl'Asr FLen,R- 6) Imo-tviti' VICANIIY MAP' a-6.11PAI- i;NTA _ meAN ION WM-IL:74 MrAN LAM KA-MK: 1.0 MEAN Lag,. lo 1410iff.X. I42Ta: &INC-e PILL AA ArtZia THE. MEAN HIcINHATnz- ,/ 1.11.1E, ‘66-*T. 40+ rEgivirr 15 1-101- lzr-Q1,11KE-P. sr.cnow 5CAL-E.: 1"r- 40' fIzarOP flLIN4 POI.IN !AMON I _ VATe- I"Ze- NATEArizoNT HfL AT HeAg- 151-,AND 01ANN1., or( -I KIAK. , A PP I iternAki pi4 • ovs.e 141.1P1.17_ / MATHiSk1 Pur-FVW 131.-rxr.rouwpa-rm4- un-iMgircAL./ggs. APAcf-NT naprexv rt) e_rri ICDMAit *-•%4•11.14,..! ; • ' -- - ; - A..ff .• 937- •• 1 VSS 444 4 •: K TOwNsi-T-SS 19 1011 Earl Tudor Bond Suite 290, Tudor Bush: Anchorage, Alaska 995 Phone:19011210-5212 KONIAG, INC. HARBOR VIEW COMPLEX P.O. Box 746 Alaska C J IVED FEB '141985 ITEM VI—D (907) 486, 4147 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 Executive & Land Office 3300 'C' Street, Suites 212 & 213 ° Anchorage, Alaska 99503 ° (907) 561-2668 February 12, 1985 Kodiak Island Borough Planning & Zoning,CommiSSion P..O. 1246 Kodiak, Alaska. 99615-1246 Reference: Case 85-004 Dear Sirs: As the Ownerof the subject tklelands tract N-18 Koniag, Inc. and Kazim strongly support the-request for an exception to the industrial zoning now existing. • We make this request for the'following-t,easons: 1. We do not believe that such a development is in reality in conflict with industrial uses in this specific setting. 2. We feel that in the atmosphere of the nearby small boat harbor, the seaplane- base, plus the ferry dock, the con- tinuing boat-travel through the channel would all combine to make a potentially outstanding tourist attraction hotel facility., 3. Such a development, if done properly, will do far more to enhance the tax base of the Borough than will the current fadility or yet another fish plant. ULG: jfp Very truly yours, KON I U.LfGr.s Chief xecutive Officer Cc: Dan Potash/Alaska Management Services KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH - jmunity Development Departments 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 ITEM VI -D PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1985 CASE NUMBER: 85 -004 An application for an exception was filed with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Department by: The Kazim Company /Dischner and Mathisen Partnership. The application requests: an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of -- -- -- _ -tfie Kodiak Cafe:` - . -- — - - — --- - -- - -- - The Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on this request at their regular meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday., FEBRUARY 20, 1985 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska. The Commission will also review all items on their agenda for the regular meeting on the preceding Wednesday at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough,,Conference Room. This meeting is open to the public. You are being notified because you are a property owner in the area of the request. This is the only scheduled PUBLIC HEARING on the request at this time, and you are invited to appear before the Commission to express your opinion. If you cannot attend this PUBLIC HEARING and wish to comment on the request, fill in the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Department, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska, 99615. Your returned comment should be received PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. A vicinity map showing the property involved is.,included on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please feel free to call our office, the Community Development Department, at 486 -5736. YOUR NAME: BPO Elks #1772 ADDRESS: Box 846 Kodiak. AK 99615 YOUR PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: please see other side COMMENTS: If height of building blocks current view from second floor of lodge, we object to this exception in the building code. C I4rED FEB 15 198' r 14.211' I` f! -►ti4► B.O.T. Chairman Philip E. Ferris itof h,110001111° 0• wo r:4�010!00IPr; `1 711 . WEI J \ w + tv\ ti 4.4 \t LOWER ..t r. . y. * : : : 3t1► Itt v� it • : • "' 5M KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH munity Development Department r FEB ® 4 9985 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 ITEM VI- Kodiak fsland Dorourh Kodiak, Alaska 1713?;CEIVED PUBLIC HEARING NOTI NOTICE DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1985 CASE NUMBER: 85 -004 An application for an exception was filed with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Department by: The Kazim Company /Dischner and Mathisen Partnership. The application requests: an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of the Kodiak Cafe. The Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on this request at their regular meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, FEBRUARY 20, 1985 2 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska. The Commission will also review all items on their agenda for the regular meeting on the preceding Wednesday at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough, Conference Room. This meeting is open to the public. You are being notified because you are a property owner in the area of the request. This is the only scheduled PUBLIC HEARING on the request at this time, and you are invited to appear before the Commission to express your opinion. If you cannot attend this PUBLIC HEARING and wish to comment on the request, fill in the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Department, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska, 99615. Your returned comment should be received PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. A vicinity map showing the property involved is included on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please feel free to call our office, the Community Development Department, at 486 -5736. YOUR NAME: YOUR PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS: 6 /'Z. PAl SM t trap VSS 444 q¢ C crss Tr KTn'.._ 4. Y � ' Q(//LLV#6 0/A4 ¢AMATrc f //t5r FLooA APPRoX LEVEL .W/ 1,44R/WE R °•1 ova. /6" .*, 4Bv✓E L. L.T. .BU/Lop/(, 0/.46R 14 AT IC- P,Rs,' FA. AAPRof LEVEL 4 / MARiN o.}D at Jo' =.A8 o✓E M. . 'r . koPoSED., To U RI•5T R OTO RRT 1<00/A -K HAR54r? • 1 '. •KOO/A -K, ALASKA EARL O. . MA-Ry JANE HILLS- Tk,4ALA 7461P/57 si hloleAGE-/Ai- k4 / DEC /9G3 Sheet-2 of 1. WATERFI!�NT HOTE row 1D16CHNJE.R. / MATH I scN .1<cvii , AL AA •. '. . ; I.! 42. • deettale23 ,.F#2.61477 *,-.-:...tep,:te \ elf! 2&•te2..'.;0'424tVP;Oe , (").:„...,,7:07 • . • :, ‘ -(71--; i_... : ;4...7...,./.- . • ii Vi.-\,, ,... ■ .,,t A ''' :,.... / I \•1 1 ', ../ , 5- - - f....--' , :,.. . . . . ." . , • „e• - 1< .(..; ,.--' .1:.",K A% t.,..)','-Z-4 ‹ ;=,“ .:.-. e- ...,,•'';„0- !.=?:•)):::.. C.,'!ti:1-1-1t:;:. lYi:NT1 1 ' , :# . 473‘'•• .• _ .: ._.•}'' i';;/ • 6..1.•L i":4,g... k..1 ... • .1.??.%9,..)i 1.;..t:'.1;' /-1147,'Ail.; -...-,e4'7.1:7: "0:./ /• - • • / • 16. • .0° Te" 11$°' • l• • • • A:: Of, ' It/ L.. 41i9A$AION *400 ,PLA JNERS tAI ts. SUBJECT: +•s °tita ors b. Board of Adjustment Hearing RE: Council Appeal of the February 20, 1985, Decision Granting an Exception Request To Permit. Construction of Hotel on City Tidelands Tract N -18 SUMMARY: The Council is sitting as the Board of Adjustment to hear its appeal of the Planning & Zoning Commission's February 20, 1985 decision granting an exception to permit construction of a hotel in an industrial area on City Tidelands Tract N -18. The hearing will begin with a presentation by the Community Development Deaprtment Director. Next, the Council will present its argument. Only the information available to the Planning & Zoning Commission at the time of its decision nay be considered by the Board of Adjustment. ,Ac- cording to KCC 17.10.060(c), only one argument can be presented by or on . behalf of each party. After hearing both parties, the Board of Adjustment may affirm or reverse the decision of the Planning & Zoning Conaission, in whole or in part, and must give the reasons for its decision. Pertinent sections of the Kodiak Island Borough Code are included for the Board's convenience. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROPRIATE COUNCIL MOTION PURSUANT TO RECOMMENDATION: Move to grant the relief requested by the Kodiak City Council's appeal of the Planning & Zoning Commission's February 20, 1985 decision to grant an exception to permit construction of a hotel in an industrial area on City Tidelands Tract N -18. NEXT AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO ra�i�� T,N:;:;'rel ;fd'aw;. •t,�,, `4 �, ,r..f. f;''.> K,1 r , � +t' T� "r..a.S i �.;.1 �1! .N�i:`:�s'f. rY"i.,YPY .h::X`+ti A� :'l .:x'�! •�,":f r� fi: 'a4t. p�llti:•l•;J[I .1,1 K- � a �.fti,h +:+. COUNCIL APPEAL OF KODIAK 'SIAM BOROUGH PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION'S FEBRUARY 20, 1985, DECISION GRANTING EXCETTION REQUEST TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF HOTEL ON CITY IIDEL4NDS TRACT N -18 TABLE OF CONTENTS KIB 17.65.050 KIB 17.24.010 Board of Adjustment Procedures Notice of Appeal KCC 17.10.020(a). Record on Appeal KCC 17.10.030 Decision of 02 -20 -85 Findings of Fact 03 -20 -85 Verbatim & Minutes - 02 -20 -85 Meeting Minutes - 03- 20- 85.Meeting General Staff Report - 02 -08 -85 Staff Report - 03 -13 -85 Public Hearing Notice & Responses Minutes - 01 -16 -85 Meeting (Established Need for Application for Exception Written Statement (Appellant) KCC 17.10.040 Written Statement (Borough) KCC 17.10.040 Notice of Hearing KCC 17.10.050 26 27 28 31 34 35 36 31 42 46 47 Exception)51 52 53 54 55 BOROUGH CODE EXCEPTION RE Chapter 17.65 EXCEPTIONS Sections: 17.65.010 Authority and purpose.. 17.65.020 Application. 17.65.030 Investigation. 17.65.040 Public hearing and notice. 17.65.050 Approval or denial. 17.65.060 Conditions. 17.65.070 Effective date. 17.65.080 .Cancellation. .17.65.090 Appeals. 17.65.100 Stay pending appeal. 17.65.010 Authority and purpose. The planning'commission shall review and act upon applications for exceptions. Excep- tions are provided for by this chapter for the purpose of proViding consideration of land uses which are not specifically permitted by zoning district, regulations. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2 (part), 1983). 17.65.020 Application. An application for an exception may be filed by a property owner or his authorized agent. The application shall be made on a form provided by the community development office and accompanied by the required fee and site plan. A11 applications shall be available for public inspection. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2(part), 1983). 17.65.030 Investigation. An investigation of the exception request shall be made and a written report provided to the planning commission by the community development office. Specific items to be addressed in the report are the anticipated effects of the proposed use on the public's health, safety and general welfare and anticipated impact on other properties or uses in the neighborhood. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2(part), 1983). 17.65.040 Public hearing and notice. The planning commis- sion shall hold a public hearing on each properly submitted application for an exception within thirty days after the filing of the application. The applicant shall be notified of the date of such hearing. The community development office shall send to each owner of property within a minimum distance of three hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the lot or parcel of land described in the application, notice of the time and place of the public hearing, a description of the property involved, its street address and the action requested by the applicant. For the purposes of this chapter, "property owner" means that land owner shown on the latest tax assessment roll. Notice shall also be provided in accordance with state law by legal publication in local newspapers. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2(part), 1983). lul IMP 17.65.050 Approval or denial. Within forty days after the filing of an application, the planning commission shall . render its decision unless such time limit has been extended by common consent and agreement of the applicant and the commission. A. Approval. If it is the finding of the commission, after consideration of the investigator's report and receipt of testimony at the public hearing, that the use as proposed in the application, or under appropriate conditions or restrictions, will not endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare, or be inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of this title, and not adversely impact other properties or'uses in the neighborhood, the commission shall approve the exception, with or without conditions. B. Denial. If the commission finds, after consideration of the investigator's report and receipt of testimony at the ..public hearing, that the proposed use will tend to endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare in any way or produce results inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of this title, or adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood, the commission shall deny the exception. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2(part), 1983). 17.65.060 Conditions. The commission, in approving an . exception, may establish conditions under which a lot or parcel of land may be used or a building constructed or altered; make requirements as to architecture, height of building or struc- ture, open spaces or parking areas; require conditions of operation of an enterprise; or make any other conditions, requirements or safeguards that it may consider necessary to prevent damage or prejudice to adjacent properties or detrimental to the borough. When necessary, the commission may require guarantees in such form as deemed proper under the circumstances to insure that the conditions designated will be complied with. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2(part), 1983). . . 17.65.070 Effective date. The decision of the planning commission to approve or deny an exception shall become final and effective ten days following such decision. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2(part), 1983). 17.65.080 Cancellation. Failure to utilize an approved exception within twelve months after is effective date shall cause its cancellation. (Ord. 83-40-0 52(part) , 1983). 17.65.090 Appeals. An appeal of the planning commission's decision to grant or deny an exception may be taken by any person or party aggrieved. Such appeal shall be taken within ten days of the date of the commission's decision by filing with the board of adjustment through the city or borough clerk a written notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereon. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2(part), 1983). 17.65.100 Stay pending appeal. An appeal from a decision granting an exception stays the decision appealed from until there is a final decision on the appeal. (Ord. 83-40-0 §2 (part), 1983). 17.24.005--17.24.010 USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONE (Borough Code) 17.24.005 Description and intent. The I industrial zone is established as a district in which the principal use of and land.is for business, manufacturing, processing, fabri- cating, repair, assembly, storage, wholesaling, and distri- buting operations, which may create some nuisance, but which are not properly associated nor compatible with resi- dential land uses. .For'the industrial zone, in promoting the general purpose of this title, the specific intentions of this chapter are: A. To encourage the construction of and the continued use of the land for business and industrial purposes; B. To prohibit all residential uses of the land not associated with industries and any other land use which would substantially interfere with the development, continuation or expansion of industry in the zone; . C. To concentrate the industrial and business uses within designated areas to protect residential districts from noxious or noisy operations; and. D. To encourage the discontinuance of existing uses that would not be permitted as new uses under the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 81-40-0 §2(part), 1981). 17.24.010. Permitted uses. The following uses of the land are permitted in the industrial zone: • A. Al]. uses permitted in B business zones, except residential; B. Aircraft, automobile and truck assembly or remodeling; C. Asphalt batch and mixing plant, manufacturing or re- fining; D. Assembly of music and vending machines; E. Auction business; F. Beverage manufacturing; G. Boat building, repair and storage; H. Cabinet shops; I. Concrete mixing batch plants; J. Coal storage yards; K. Dwelling units for a watchman or caretaker on the premises; L. Dyeing plants; M. Gravel or sand extraction; N. Junkyards, wrecking, salvage or scrap metal operations; O. Lumber mills and sawmills; P. Lumberyard, building material manufacture or sales; Q. Machine or blacksmith shops; R. Manufacturing, servicing or repair of light consumer goods, such as appliances, batteries, furniture and garments; S. Metal working or welding shops; T. Motor freight terminals; U. Outdoor storage; V. Paint shops; 109 (Kodiak Island Borough 12/81) 17.24.020--17.24.040 W. Public uses; X. Rock crushers; Y. Seafood processing establishments and 'their dor- mitories; Z. Sewage treatment plants; AA. Slaughterhouses; BB. Steel fabrication shops or yards; CC. Vehicle impound lots; DD. Vocational or trade schools; EE. Utility installations; FF. Warehousing within an enclosed structure; and GG. Other land uses which are similar to the permitted uses listed herein, in the type of manufacturing accomplished, in the number of persons employed, in the number and type of vehicles attracted to the premises, and in the effect upon adjacent areas, as determined by the planning and zoning commission after proper notice and public hearing. (Ord. 81-40-0 §2(part), 1981). 17.24.020 Conditional uses. The following uses may be:permitted by obtaining a conditional use permit from the planning and zoning commission after proper notice and public hearing: A. Acetylene gas manufacture or storage; B. Ammonia, bleaching power or chlorine manufacture; C. Cement, concrete, lime and plaster manufacture; D. Chemical bulk storage and sales; E. 'Garbage disposal sites, dumps and sanitary land- fills; and F. Petroleum or flammable liquid production, refining or storage. (Ord. 81-40-0 §2(part), 1981). 17.24.030 Lot requirements. A. Lot Area. The minimum lot area required is twenty thousand square feet. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width required is seventy- five feet. (Ord. 81-40-0 §2(part), 1981). 17.24.040 Yards. A. Front Yards. 1. There shall be a front yard of not less than thirty feet. 2. The front yard, when facing a State Highway, shall be not less than fifty feet. B. Side Yards. 1. There shall be a side yard on each side of a principal building of not less than twenty feet, except that approved fire wall installations between adjoining structures provides for construction on the lot line. C. Rear Yards. 1. There shall be a rear yard of not less than twenty feet, except that approved fire wall installations between adjoining structures provides for construction on the lot line. 110 • (Kodiak Island Borough 12/81) z7 TITLE 17 ZONING Chapter 17.10 Board of adjustment procedures Section 17.10.010 17.10.020 17.10.030 17.10.040 17.10.050 17.10.060 17.10.070 17.10.080 17.10.090 17.10.100 17.10.110 aRAFTER 17.10 Appeals to the board of adjustment Notice of appeal Record on appeal Written statements Notice of hearing Hearing New evidence or changed circumstances Scope of review Decision Judicial review Definitions BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PROCEDURES 17,10.010--17.10.020 17.10.010 Appeals to the board of adjustment. The city council, sitting as a board of adjustment, shall hear and decide the following matters arising within the city: (a) Appeals regarding alleged errors in enforcement of zoning ordinances and building codes; (b) Appeals from decisions of the planning commission regarding concept or final approval of requests for special exceptions or conditional uses; or (c) Appeals from the decisions of the planning commissions on requests for variances from the terms of the zoning ordinance which are not contrary to the public interest, when a literal enforcement would deprive a property owner of rights conmenly enjoyed by owners of other properties in the same district. (Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.020 Notice ofppeal. (a) An interested person may initiate an appeal to the boarJoftment by filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk within ten days after the action or decision appealed from and paying a filing fee of $50.00. (b) The city clerk shall transmit a copy of each notice of appeal re- ceived to the borough clerk and the planning department or other administra- tive officer of the borough involved in the action appealed within five work- ing days of the receipt of the appeal. At the time of transmitting such notice, the city clerk shall request the borough to prepare the record on appeal which shall be prepared within forty-five days of the date of the notice. 17-01 (Kodiak 07/84) 17•10.030-17.10.050 (c) The notice of appeal shall identify the action appealed, shall con- tain a clear and concise statement of the grounds alleged for the appeal, and shall state appellant's name and address. (d) If a charge or bond is required by the borough of Kodiak Island for the preparation of the record, appellant shall be notified of that charge, fee, or bond, and appellant shall be responsible for satisfying any such borough requirements. (Ord. 720 §1, 1984: Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.030 Record on appeal. (a) The record on appeal shall consist of the following: (1) A verbatim transcript of the proceedings before the administrative body from which an appeal has been taken, if those proceedings were taped or otherwise recorded in their entirety. If the proceedings were not re- corded, copies of any approved minutes, summaries or other records of the proceedings; (2) Copies of all memoranda, exhibits, correspondence, recommendations, analyses, maps, drawings, and other documents submitted to the administra- tive body prior to the decision from which the appeal is taken; (3) A copy of the written decision of the administrative body, includ-. ing its findings and conclusions; .and (4) A list of the.names and addresses of all persons appearing as wit- nesses at the hearing. (b) When the record has been completed, it shall be transmitted from the borough to the city clerk. Upon receipt of the record, the city clerk shall, within five working days, send a copy of the notice of appeal, by regular mail, to all persons appearing as witnesses in the hearing of the administrative action being appealed, and advise them that the record has been prepared. The city clerk shall, within five working days, also notify appellant of receipt of the record and make the record available to the appellant and any other interested persons for review. A copy of the rec- ord shall be provided to any person on request upon payment of reproduction costs. (Ord. 720 §2 & §3,.1984: Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.040 Written statement. The appellant may file a written statement summarizing the facts and setting forth pertinent points and authorities in support of the allegations contained in the notice of appeal not nure than fifteen days after the clerk has given notice of conpletion of the record. The borough staff and any interested party wishing to file a writ- ten statement in opposition to the appeal may do so within fifteen days after expiration of the time for the filing of appellant's stateaant. Statements filed by any person shall be available for inspection in the city clerk's office. (Ord. 720 §4, 1984: Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.050 Notice of hearin,q. The clerk shall set a date for the hearing of the appeal at'a regular or special meeting of the council, or at a meeting of the council sitting as a board of adjustment, to be held not less than ten nor more than twenty-one days after expiration of the time for filing 17-02 (Kodiak 07/84) ( 17.10.060-17.10.080 of briefs. Notice of the hearing shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation, and shall)oe mailed by regular mail to the appellant and all other persons filing statements or appearing at the hearing of the administrative action being appealed, not less than five days before the hearing date. (Ord. 720 45, 1984: Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.060 Hearing. (a) The board of adjustmeht hearing may be conducted at any regular or special meeting of the council, by meeting as a board of adjustment or by recessing the council meeting and convening the council as a board of adjustment to hear the appeal. The meeting of the board of ad- justment, including any deliberations, shall be open to the public and a ' record shall be made of the meeting. (b) The hearing shall be conmenced with a presentation by the staff of the borough planning department summarizing the nature of the decision being appealed to the board of adjustment, the pertinent facts produced at the hearing from which the appeal is taken, and applicable legal principles. Arguments shall then be presented by the appellant, if the appellant is a party other than the borough, and any other person submitting a brief within the time limits prescribed by section 17.10.040 of this chapter. The argu- ments shall discuss the facts in the 'record and the application of those facts to applicable provisions of law, but shall not be in the form of testi- mony, and persons making such presentations shall not be under oath. (c) Only one argument shall be presented by or on behalf of each party or interested person, and the council may establish a time limit for each argument to be presented. (d) If a transcript of all substantial'portions of the record is not available and the council determines that the available summary of that tes- timony is not adequate, the council may elect to receive testimony relating to any issue specified on the appeal for which the record is deficient. Such testimony shall be received only from persons who presented similar testimony at the hearing from which the decision is being appealed. The testimony shall ro be limited to matters discussed at the previous hearing, and no new evidence will be received. (e) The hearing of the board of adjustment may be recessed and recon- vened from time to time as determined to be necessary by the board. (Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.070 New evidence or changed circumstances. Appeals alleging new evidence or changed circumstances shall not be heard by the board of adjust- ment. A notice of appeal based upon new evidence or changed circumstances shall be transmitted by the clerk to the borough planning staff for possible rehearing. (Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.080 Scope of review. (a) The board of adjustment shall hear appeals solely on the basis of the record established before the lower administrative body, the notice of appeal, briefs submitted prior to the hearing, and argu- ments at the hearing. 17-03 (Kodiak 07/84) 17.10.090--17.10.110 (b) The board of adjustment may exercise its independent judgement on legal issues raised by the appeal. Legal issues are those matters that re- late to the interpretation or construction of ordinances or other provisions of the law, or the application of case law to the facts as presented. (c) Action of the board of adjustment on the appeal shall be based upon facts which are supported in the record by substantial evidence. "Substan- tial evidence" means the record provides a substantial basis from which the fact in issue might be reasonably inferred. (Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.090 Decision. (a) The board of adjustment may affirm or reverse the decision of the lower administrative body in whole or in part. (b) Any variance granted by the board of adjustment shall be the mini- mum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, build- ing, or structure which is equivalent to, but not exceeding, the use of similar lands, buildings or structures permitted generally in the same use district. The board of adjustment may reduce the extent of a variance re- quested or previously granted. (c).The board of adjustment may not grant a variance because of special conditions caused by actions of the person seeking relief or for reasons of pecuniary hardship or inconvenience, nor may the board grant a variance which would permit a land use in a district in which that use is prohibited. (d) A decision of the board of adjustment to affirm or reverse action of a lower administrative body shall be based upon findings and conclusions adopted by the board. Such findings shall be reasonably specific so as to provide the community, and, where appropriate, reviewing authorities, a clear and precise understanding of the reasons for the board's decision. The findings, conclusions, and decision shall be reduced to writing, either during or subsequent to the hearing, signed by the mayor, and filed with the city clerk. (e) A decision shall be based on a notion to grant the relief requested by the appealing party, and the concurring vote of four members of the board shall be necessary to reverse any order, requirements, decision, or deter- mination of the planning commission. (Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.100 Judicial review. A decision or order of the board of adjustment may be appealed to the superior court by a municipal officer, a taxpayer, or a person jointly or severally aggrieved, pursuant to the provisions of rule 45 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure of the state of Alaska. Notice of appeal shall be filed in the superior court within thirty days from the date that the order or decision appealed from is mailed or delivered to the appealing party. The order or decision of the board of adjustment shall not be reversed if the findings upon which that order or decision is made are supported by substantial evidence in the record. (Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17.10.110 Definitions. As used in this Chapter: (a) "Interested person' means a municipal officer or other person di- rectly or indirectly affected by the decision being appealed. 17-04 (Kodiak 07/84) (b) "Party" means a person who has filed notice of appeal or a brief in the appeal under consideration by the board of adjustment. (Ord. 528 §1 (part), 1978) 17 -05 (Kodiak 07/84) 30 fit ) ccaeo March 14, 1985 Linda Freed, Director Community Development Department Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception from KIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses - Industrial District) - CASE 85 -004 Dear Linda: At the February 28 City Council meeting, the Council requested an appeal of the above approval be filed. The Borough Assembly declined to sit as the Board of Adjustment in this case, therfore, the City's procedures must be followed. Please prepare the record on appeal per FCC 17.10.020(b). Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARIE rA H. DAI1E, CMC City Clerk MiD /nej cc: Kodiak Island Borough Clerk POST OFFICE DO?' 1397, k0DIAk . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 March 1, 1985 Mrs. Marcella Daike, CMC, City Clerk City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception from KIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses - Industrial District) - CASE 85 -004 Dear Mrs. Daike: The Kodiak City Council is hereby appealing the February 20, 1985, Plan- ning and Zoning approval of the Kazim Company /Disckner and Mathisen Part- nership application for an exception to KIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) to permit a hotel in an Industrial District on City Tidelands Tract N -18. This appeal is, authorized under KKC 17:10.010(b) which provides for appeals from Planning Commission final approval of requests for special exceptions. The basis of the appeal is the Council's opinion that this development will adversely impact the adjoining public boat launch ramp, boat trailer parking area, and seaplane floats. In addition, there is concern that this use of an Industrial District im ediately adjacent to an operating seafood processor will create conflicts between the two uses; e.g., odors, bright lights, etc. KIB 17.65.050 (Approval or Denial) requires the Commission to determine that the proposed use will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. The February 20 decision appears to be in conflict with this Kodiak Island Borough Code requirement. Respectfully, CITY F KODIAK g''%fi. /O(/ SAMUEL C. GESKO, City Manager SCG:MHD /ms POST OFFICE DO?( 1397. kODIAk . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486 -3224 March 1, 1985 The Honorable Thomas H. Peterson, Mayor Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of February 20, 1985, Approval of Exception from NIB 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses - Industrial District) - CASE 85-004 Dear Mayor Peterson: At the regular February 28 Council meeting, the above Planning and Zoning Commission approval of an exception permitting a hotel to be constructed in an inchictrial district was discussed. As reflected in the attached letter, the Council felt there were adequate grounds to appeal the Plan- ing and Zoning Commission decision. • A paradox arises since both the Borough and City Codes require that appeals of this nature are heard by the City Council sitting as the Board of Adjust- ment. In this case that means the appealing party is appealing to itself. Therefore, the Council respectfully requests the Kodiak Island Borough Assem- bly hear this appeal to avoid the obvious conflict of interest. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK • MARCELLA H. DALKE, CMC City Clerk MEDVas Enclosure , POST OFFICE D01( 1397. )(ODIN . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3294 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: - DATE: Borough Manager Borough Clerk Appeal: City. of Kodiak March 1, 1985 Attached, please find a copy of an appeal letter addressed to Mayor Peterson from the City of Kodiak. As per our Borough Code, Title 17.80.010 (a), the Borough Assembly sits as the Board of Adjustment for appeals outside the city boundaries and the City of Kodiak would sit as the Board of Adjustment for an appeal within its boundaries. Therefore, 1 feel that we would be in direct conflict with our own codes, should the Assembly grant this request. Please take this request into consideration and let us know what action we should take. Thank you. Marcella 71. Dalke, CMC Clerk, City of Kodiak P. O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Dear Marcella: Kodiak Island Borough P.O. SOX 12■6 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615.1246 PHONE (907) 466.5776 March 4, 1985 Please be advised that your request of March 1, 1985 that the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly sit as a Board of Adjustment in lieu of the City Council is hereby denied. Kodiak Island Borough Code Title 17.80.010 (a), specifically sets the rules for the Boards of Adjustment as follows: "The Borough Assembly is the board of adjustment ouside the boundaries of the city of Kodiak and for any municipality in the borough which does not exercise this power. The Kodiak city council is the board of adjust- ment within its boundaries." The Borough Assembly has in the past exercised this power without any conflict of interest arising. A copy of your request was forwarded and discussed with the Borough Manager and he concurs with the above. If you have any questions, please let us know. mm cc: Manager Comunity Development Dept. Sincerely, Mickie Miller, CMC Borough Clerk Kodiak Island Borough Dischner /Mathisen Partnership 2261 Belmont Anchorage, AK 99615 P.O. sox 124t KODIAK, ALASKA 90615.1246 PHONE (907) 41E4774 February 21, 1985 Re: CASE 85 -004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. Gentlemen: The Planning and Zoning Commiaaion at their February 20, 1985 meeting approved your request for an exception. This action becomes final ten (10) days after the date of the Commission's decision to permit any aggrieved party the opportunity to appeal this decision. The approval of an exception is valid for a period of 12 months, but expires should you fail to exercise it within this timeframe. Please bring this letter in with you when applying Ear a building permit. Should you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT aie Bud Cassidy Assistant Planner /Zoning Officer pb cc: Cass 85 -004 .f Kazim Company Phillip E. Ferris Dave Woodroff City Clerk John Sullivan, Public Works Kodiak Island Borough Dischner-Mathisen Partnership 2261 Belmont Anchorage, AK 99615 Gentlemen: P.O. 60x 1216 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615.1246 PHONE (907) 406.5736 March 21, 1985 Re: CASE 85 -004.1 Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of the Kodiak Cafe. The Planning and Zoning Commission at their March 20, 1985 meeting adopted the following findings of'fact for the approval of the above exception request: 1. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that this request meets the following requirements for granting an exception according to Section 17.65.050(A) of the borough code. • A. The request as approved will not endanger the public's health, safety, and general welfare. This is exemplified by the lack of public testimony opposing the request during the public hearing. B. The request as approved is not inconsistent with the purposes and intent of this (zoning) title. i. The proposed use of the site for a hotel and restaurant is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan that designates this lot for expansion of the City of Kodiak's central business district. C. The request as approved will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. i. There are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening, and positioning of the structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development. It is in fact these industrial uses (boat harbor, gear storage and repair, processing plants, and channel activity) that make this site attractive for the tourist industry. i1. There currently exists a restaurant and office space adjacent to an operating fish processing plant without apparent conflict. Dischner- Mathisen Partnership March 21, 1985 Page 2 iii. That the applicant stated that an agreement would be signed with the adjacent property owner (Alaska Fresh Seafoods) stating that no complaints would be made about the industrial operation and associated noise, smell, and lights. 2. Presently, there is a weak demand for industrial -zoned land because of the economic downturn of the fishing industry. There also exists underutilized industrial -zoned waterfront property. This use will not compete economically with the existing industrial uses in the area. 3. The proposed development provides an opportunity to expand and diversity the local economic base. Sincerely, Bud Cassidy Assistant Planner /Zoning Officer Community Development, Department pb cc: City of Kodiak - Clerk's Office Case 85-004 SS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION C E R T I F I CAT E PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 85 -004, A REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION FROM SECTION 17.24.010 (PERMITTED USES) OF THE BOROUGH CODE TO PERMIT A HOTEL IN AN I-- INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS CITY TIDELANDS TRACT N -18 (THE KAZIM COMPANY/ DISCHNER - MATHISEN PARTNERSHIP) The above -cited hearing was held on February 20, 1985 in the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly Chambers, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska. The hearing was conducted by the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission, Mr. Ken Gregg, Chairman. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT: The Public Hearing in the matter of: CASE 85 -004, A REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION FROM SECTION 17.24.010 (PERMITTED USES) OF THE BOROUGH CODE TO PERMIT A HOTEL IN AN I-- INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS. CITY TIDELANDS TRACT N-18 (THE KAZIM COMPANY/ DISCHNER - MATHISEN PARTNERSHIP) was held as herein appears and this is the original verbatim transcript thereof. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH la Barr, P ela Barr, S cretary CHAIRMAN GREGG: Item D. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010, Permitted Uses, of Borough Code to permit a hotel in an Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 and generally located near the Kodiak Cafe. Any additional from staff? LINDA FREED: Just to let you know that 19 public hearing notices were sent out on this case. You have one that was returned in your packet, which you've already had a chance to see, and in addition, in the handout, there is one from the Elks. Their comment is that if the building blocks the current view from the second floor of the lodge, they object to the exception from the building code. And the other two handouts you have is one from Koniag supporting the request and a reduced site plan that you've all seen previously, but we wanted to give you a copy of that site plan in your packet. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Anything from the Commission? At this time well recess the regular meeting; open public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak for or against? Anyone wishing to speak for or against? Seeing none. Close public hearing. Reconvene the regular meeting. COMMISSIONER HILL: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Hill. COMMISSIONER HILL: Uh.. I went over staff's report a few different times. I have ..um personally I have a real problem with taking the industrial property from the waterfront and turning it into a hotel, and not kept for industrial uses, even though the structure that's on there right now the old Kodiak Western Building, one time it served, you know, its purposes, and after the Kodiak (2) moved out, a variety of other business have been in there, including a restaurant on the lower floor. I can't see taking the industrial property which could be used for other purposes in the fishing industry and now have the fishing industry turned into a tourist industry on the waterfront. That's my main objection. For what the Elks had, you know, for blocking their view, you could put in a three-story, four-story ..um ..uh cannery, and, you know, there's nothing that could be said about that at all. Since were granting a variance for ..uh an exception, I think we should take that into consideiation. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Any other comments? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: I think that ..uh with the way the fisheries are kind of dwindling, there isn't any real need for any more industrial space in Verbatim Transcript 1 Case 85-004 the fishing economy that I can see. Anything that's surplus is (?) now, and we're ..uh I think tourism is kind of a coming thing, and although some of us might not agree with having a bunch of tourists running around, ..um the economy could sure use it, and I think we got to look to our economy and keep our community growing, and I think that it'would be an excellent place for it, and I'm all for it. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Patterson. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: I essentially agree with Mr. Anderson. I think that this particular setup has been really well planned and thought out. In a way I do agree with Mr. Hill, but I think that the restaurant and the hotel would be very compatible with what we have on the waterfront, and we sure don't have anybody banging at our doors right now to use that particular industrial area.' Maybe in ten years, might convert a hotel into a cannery, I don't know. I think it would fit well and do well, would enhance Kodiak overall. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Rennell.' COMMISSIONER RENNELL: I guess we're sort of divided on this one. I ,think I ..uh sort of stated in the past I would like to see this, if it's zoned industrial, used as an industrial segment there, and at this point I don't see this use as industrial, and I'm not in favor of an exception at this point. I ..I think with the ... since I've been on the Commission there's been a lot of requests in front of us concerning industrial land and preserving it, and I think that ..uh when you think about this request you have to think about that, too, and ..uh I agree with some of the comments that right now, perhaps ..uh the fisheries are dwindling and there's a question about whether it would be used in that way industrial, but there are other industrial uses that perhaps would be appropriate in that area. COMMISSIONER JAMES: Uh.. Mr. Chairman. Uh.. I think the ..uh person with this ... who would have the biggest complaint would be the next door neighbor, Mr. Woodruff, and he doesn't seem to have much of a problem with it. There are also five vacant plant on the waterfront right now that ..uh, you know, if expansion was needed for a new processor to move Verbatim Transcript 2 Case 85-004 S7 in, ..uh, they could definitely take over one of those plants. I really have no problem with this. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Patterson. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Rebuttal for Mr. Rennell. I think that tourism is an industry. And it ..uh I don't mean to equate it to a crop that needs to be sheared every time they come through, but I think (undiscernible). It is something we're trying to encourage to get into Kodiak, and I think that this would definitely help the tourism industry, and it's ..uh looked on that way by the city and by the borough. I would equate it as an industry, tourism itself. COMMISSIONER HILL: Mr. Chairman. I not, you know, dead set against, you know, having hotels and having the tourism in here and that, but, you know, I'm not saying that this property should be ..uh for setting up another cannery because I know other canneries have closed up and there are other places for canneries. I just think that there's other fisheries uses, you know, for the waterfront purpose, or another industry that might want to ..uh industrial uses for the property, and that, you know, could be used on the waterfront, and because a hotel wants to come in on the waterfront right now, ..uh, you know, maybe the timing is right and maybe it's not. I just personally feel that ..uh it's not. I'm not comfortable with it, so, you know, I could never vote for it. Just because it's before us right now, you know, I like a little bit into the future. And to have a hotel go in, when on the other side on the island there are places which have been set aside for hotels. And why use this space right now, this industrial property, when the planning on Near Island for a hotel to be in over there, you now, wait a few years and put the hotel in over there. And don't take away this piece of property. Years ago we all used to do gear work out there on the property, and ..um since the Natives have basically blocked it off, you know, they don't want people on their property because they didn't know what they were going to do with it, they've had their own crab pots stored on there, that nobody has basically been able to use it as an open space, and I think that ..uh the ( ?) area is an asset to ..um the fishing, and if you put a hotel up there I think people are going to get in the way and, you know, for fishing I don't think that's going to be very comfortable. -.58 Verbatim Transcript 3 Case 85 -004 It's going to be pretty crowded out there, you know, with crab pots and trailers cruising by and that, and I don't ... I just don't think it's an appropriate place to put a hotel. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Any other comments? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: Mr. Chairman. In view of the fact that it is zoned industrial and it would be a business use, I think that ..uh I think it's a business use. A hotel in that particular spot would be a better use than, say, some type of industry which would most likely create some sort of pollution, either noise or, you know, I think that a hotel would just be a lot more pleasant and better for the looks of the community, and ..uh as far as the ... being in the way of the guys working on their gear, ..um it's blocked off now, and you haven't been able to work on your gear there for a long time anyway, and most of it's going to be out over the water, so that area that's now blocked off and it's not available for use anyways would be converted to parking, so I think that ... I think it would be ..uh if the person has an industry to develop aside from the fisheries, which we know there is room for expansion in the fisheries, as Mr. James said, I think that ..uh there's other industrial land available that would be a little bit farther out of town and probably a better place for it as opposed to ..uh locating a hotel somewhere out of town. I think it's ideal. If I had to build a hotel here in town, that's where I'd want to build it. I mean, I think it's the best spot. That's my ... COMMISSIONER HILL: You say there's more parking, but, you know, it's basically private parking, and you can, you know, take a look at how the parking is right now and people that are going to be bringing in their ..um, you know, skiffs and trailers, and ..uh, you know, it's just going to be open parking instead of a private parking area for the restaurant, you know, for the lounge, or for the hotel, and it's going to be a public parking lot instead of a ..uh a private parking lot. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: To park my boat trailer in there when there's nowhere else to park. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: A place to, you know, pull your net up. COMMISSIONER HILL: That's right. You know, do all your gear work right on the property there. Verbatim Transcript 4 Case 85 -004 COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: But I really feel that ..uh since were lookin the future on ..uh Near Island to have hotel space over there, I'd just as soon wait a while and keep this as an industrial property again. COMMISSIONER HILL: Put the hotel over there in a few years. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: I hope you're not waiting for Near Island. COMMISSIONER HILL: Never can tell. COMMISSIONER JAMES: We've also got several acres on Near Island and Uski and Gull Island that are proposed to be industrial, so we can argue that case also. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Mr. Rennell. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: 1 move to grant an exception from Section 17.24.010, Permitted Uses, of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an industrial district legally described as City Tidelands, Tract N -18, and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Second. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Can we have a roll call vote, please? PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Rennell. COMMISSIONER RENNELL: No. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Anderson. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: Yes. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Gregg. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Yes. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Hill. COMMISSIONER HILL: No. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. James. COMMISSIONER JAMES: Yes. PATRICIA MILEY: Mr. Patterson. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: Yes. PATRICIA MILEY: Motion carries. CHAIRMAN GREGG: It would probably be wise... COMMISSIONER RENNELL: Can I make one comment? According to the Code, there's nothing in the industrial thing about tourists. If we want it designated as industry, perhaps we should think in terms of changing the Code. CHAIRMAN GREGG: To recognize tourism as an industry? Verbatim Transcript 5 Case 85 -004 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: That is a good point. I haven't heard it ..uh it referred to as the tourism industry a lot of times, so it must be mentioned. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Could I get just a general feeling from somebody over there as to whether or not we would be prudent to adopt findings of fact, or do you feel this is ... LINDA FREED: It probably wouldn't hurt. If you ..uh felt it was appropriate, you could also direct staff to put findings of fact together for you for your next meeting, if you would like us to take from your comments. Um.. the only times you really need findings of fact is if there is possibly going to appeal on the case. How far an appeal would go, I don't know, since no one testified at your public hearing. There might be some question about the validity of an appeal of this case since no one bothered to testify. Uh.. but, yes, it wouldn't hurt, and we'd be happy to put together findings of fact for you for your next meeting. CHAIRMAN GREGG: Would appreciate it. Verbatim Transcript 6 Case 85 -004 -7 COMMISSIONER RENNELL MOVED TO GRANT AN EKCEPTIONLfrom Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an L- Industrial district. :ally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally locat..,lp, the area of Kodiak Cafe. The motion vas seconded and CARRIED ))r''4- 2;vot.J Commissioners Hill and R•nnsll cast the opposing votes. COMMISSIONER RENNELL indicated that the code does not indicate "tourism" as an industry and that perhaps an amendment to the code is in order. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON concurred with COMMISSIONER RENNELL on this point. COMMISSIONER GREGG requested staff to prepare "Findings of Pact" for this case from comments expressed by the Commissioners and to submit the "Findings of Fact" at the next regular meeting. LINDA FREED acknowledged the request. E) CASE 85 -005. Monashk• Bay Comprehensive Plan. (Monaahka Bay Planning Group /Community Development Department) LINDA FREED indicated there were no individual public hearing notices sent out on this case, however the Kodiak Daily Mirror published a notice eeparate from the legal ad indicating this item would be on tha agenda for this regular meeting. Regular Session Closed. Public Hearing Opened: ELAYNE BUNTER- RENNELL, Chairman of the Comprehensive Planning Committee (CPC), stated the goals of the CPC were to make a plan for future development in the Monashka area consistent with the existing residential development and consistent with the contours of the land. The CPC also tried to preserve the quality of the residential .areas that presently exist and reduce the future poesibility'o£ conflicting uses of land. In July, the CPC surveyed all the land owners in Monashka Bay and the results of the survey are present in the Comprehensive Plan. In January all landowners were sent a written notici of a public meeting, as well as a published advertisement in the Kodiak Mirror, announcements on the radio, and an advertisement on the scanner. More than forty people ware in attendance at that meeting and one -by -one the CPC reviewed all the goals and objectives of the plan and revised them according to the feelings of the people there, taking a vote on any items of lengthy discussion. NANCY MISSAL expressed her support of the Monaehka Bay Comprehensive Plan. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON asked if at the public meeting there were any objections to the plan expressed and how was the plan received by the community. NANCY MISSAL indicated that overall, "no," though in particular there were some objections expressed and that at that time the item was reviewed and revisions made and a vote was taken. Most people at the meeting seemed positive about the plan. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON asked if there was a good reception for the concept of a comprehensive plan. NANCY MISSAL felt there was a good . reception. DEBORAH BURGY expressed her support of the Monaehka Bay Comprehensive Plan. MARSHA OSWALT expressed bar support of the concept of the Monasbka Bay Comprehensive Plan. She also expressed her concern with the changes in the area, essentially that people will need more money and more finished kinds of housing in order to live in Monaahka Bay than many who moved there in earlier years. She suggested that members of the Planning and Zoning Commission take into consideration the exception process, remembering that if there is a worthy exception to an ordinance then that should be considered. SCOTT ARNDT expressed his problems with the Plan. His comments regarding the classifications: (1) Watershed. He questions the location and also the need for such • classification, personnally he does not feel it is necessary nor in the logical place. Presently there is extensive vaterehed in the Monaahka Bay area P & Z Regular Meeting. 1{0 February 20, 1985 protect my property but to protect my access to my house through this request. Public Hearing Cloned. Regular Seeeioa Opened: COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED TO GRANT a final vacation of Lot 39 and a portion of Lot 40, Block 19, Kodiak Townaite Alaska, and replat to Lots 39A and 40A, Block 19. Kodiak TovnsLta Alaska. U.S. Survey 2537 -B with the following corrections: (1) correct the spelling of Fillmore wherever it appears, and (2) correct the spelling of Henry wherever it appears. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. VII OLD BUSINESS There was no 01d Business. VIII NEW BUSINESS There was no New Business. IK COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communications. X REPORTS A) The January Status Report from the Community Development Department. 8) The Monaehka Bay Planning Group can mast with the Commission at the regularly scheduled Work Session for February 27. C) A Joint Workaession with the City Council has been scheduled for March 4, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Conference Room; therefore the Wednesday work asasion 1e cancelled for that weak. D) Last evening the Community Development Department mat with the Woman's Bay Community. Roughly 40 -50 people were in attendance. One of the main issues that the Community Development Department talked about was zoning enforcement and the procedures that are currently in affect. There was no coneeneue among the community about how they would like to see enforcement done out there. It van felt that the majority would like to -see enforcement continue on a complaint basis as oppoaed to either more active enforcement or no enforcement at all. It vas also suggested that perhaps members of the Community Development Department could go out to the firehouse and be available to the community once a month or bi- monthly to answer questions and provide zoning compliance for projects. The Woman's Bay Community Council will consider this. A discussion ensued concerning the availability of the Borough Cods. It wan determined that the zoning section of the Borough Coda be made available to the local librariee (including the Chiniak Public Library) and the flreatation at Bella Flats. E) The Women's Bay Community Council is working on their Phaea II Comprehensive Plan and it should be before the Commission in the next three or four months. KI AUDIENCE COMMENTS Thera were no audience comments. KII COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS COMMISSIONER JAMES pointed out that in regards to the hotel exception,' the main reason why I voted the way I did vas because I looked on it as an expansion of a business use. 'I realize that it would be a new building but the property is being used commercially presently and I do not ads how the hotel is going to,affact the area much differently. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON asked if the Commission had put the stipulation for the four conditions on the motion for Casa S -85 -002. The Commission and staff indicated they ware included in the motion. P 4 Z Regular Misting February 20. 1985 A discussion amongst the Comm. •oners, the Engineering staff and the Community Development Department staff ensued. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL of the subdivision of Lot 8C. Block 1, Shahafka Acres Subdivision, U.S. Survey 3218 to Lots 8C -1 and 8C -2. The motion was seconded and FAILED by unanimous roll call vote. A discussion ensued amongst the Commissioners, The Commission requested that the Engineering Department prepare findings of fact for this case and to present these findings of fact to the Commission at the April 17, 1965 Regular Meeting. VII OLD BUSINESS A) CASE 85 -004. Findings of fact for the approval of • request for. and an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-- Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18. ;(The Karim Company /Dischner- Mathiaao Partnership). COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT For the approval of a request for and an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Coda to permit a hotel in an I-- Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract H -18 as follows: 1. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that this request meets the following requirements for granting an exception according to Section 17.65.050(A) of the Borough Code. A. The request as approved will not endanger the.public'a health, safety, and general welfare. This is exemplified by the lack of public testimony opposing the request during the public hearing. B. The request as approved is not inconsistent with the purposes and intent of this (zoning) title. i. The proposed use of the site for a hotel and restaurant is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan that designates this lot for expansion of the City of Kodiak's central busineea district. , C. The request as approved will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. i. There are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening. and positioning of the structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development. It is in fact these industrial uses (boat harbor, gear storage and repair. processing plants, and channel activity) that make this site attractive for the tourist industry. ii. There currently exists a restaurant and office space adjacent to an operating fish processing plant without apparent conflict. iii. The applicants stated that an agreement would be signed with the adjacent property owner (Alaska ' Fresh Seafoods, Inc.) stating that no complaints would be made about the industrial operation in regards to noise and smell on the adjacent lot. 2. Presently, there is a weak demand for industrial -zoned land because of the economic downturn of the fishing industry. There also exists underutilized industrial -zoned waterfront property. This use will not compete economically with the existing industrial uses in the area. P 6 Z Regular Me -6- March 20, 1985 3. The proposed development r.ovidee an opportunity to expand and diversify the local economic base. The motion was seconded and CARRIED.b unanimous roll call vote. 8) CASE S -85 -006. Final Subdivision of Tracts B -2 and 8 -3, Woodland Acres Subdivision Third Addition, U.S. Survey 1682 to Woodland Acres Subdivision Sixth Addition, Lots 9 -13, Block 4; Lots 1 -9. Block 5; and Raven Circle. (John F. Rauwolf) A discussion ensued amongst the Commissioners and the Engineering Department staff. COMMISSIONER HILL ROVED TO GRANT FINAL SUBDIVISION of Tracts B -2 and B -3, Woodland Acres Subdivision Third Addition, U.S. Survey 1682 to Woodland Acres Subdivision Sixth Addition, Leta 9 -13, Block 4; Lote 1 -9. Block 5; and Raven Circle, with the following conditions: 1. that the applicant submit roadway and utility improvement plans and specifications for review and approval by the Borough Engineer and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation; and 2. that a note be placed on the plat limiting access to Lots 1 through 4, Block 5. either to Patrick Court or Puffin Drive. The motion vas ascended and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. VILI NEW BUSINESS LINDA FREED indicated there had been • request to inveatigats the rezoning of Hiller Point Alaska Subdivision 1st Addition. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED THAT AN INVESTIGATION OF THE REZONING of Miller Point Alaska Subdivision 1st Addition be undertaken by the Community Development Department staff and presented to the Commission at their Regular Meeting on May 15, 1985. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. IX COMMUNICATLONS X REPORTS A) The February Status Report from the Community Development Department. H) LINDA FREED announced that Bud Cassidy has been hired as the new Resource Management Officer. beginning April 1, 1985. C) LINDA FREED indicated the City Council with a 3 to 2 vote did not uphold the appellant in the H111 Appeal of the Planning and Zoning case variance for Parrozzi. At the same time the City Council did affirm the Commission's decision but did not uphold the Commission's reasons for granting the variance, by a vote.of 3 to 2. XI AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no audience comments. XII COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS P 6 2 Regular Meeting March 20. 1985 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH DATE: T0: FROM: SUBJ: RE: M E M O R A N D U M • February 8, 1985 Planning and Zoning Commission Community Development Department Information for the February 20, ITEM VI -D 1985 Regular Meeting CASE 85 -004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a'hotel in an I- Industrial.district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. (Kazim Company /Dischner and Mathisen Partnership)' Nineteen Public Hearing Notices were sent on February 1, 1985. 1. Applicant: The Kazim Company / Dischner, and Mathisen Partnership, 2261 Belmont, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. • 2. Land Owner: The Kazim Company, Box 746, Kodiak, Alaska 99615. 3. Request: Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. 4. Purpose: To construct a hotel including a restaurant, bar and coffee shop in an Industrial District. 5. Existing Zoning.: I- Industrial District. 6. Zoning History: The 1968 Comprehensive Plan identifies the zoning of this lot as "Industrial." Departmental files show no additional Commission action. 7. Location: No physical address assigned. Adjacent to the Boat Harbor and generally located in the vicinity of the Kodiak Cafe. City Tidelands Tract N -18. 8. Lot Size: 37,421 square feet. 9. Existing Land Use: The existing structures on the lot contain multiple business uses; generally office space and a restaurant. 10. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: South: East: Nest: Case 84 -004 City of Kodiak, Harbormaster Building and Parking Lot. Zoning PL; Use PL. Near Island Channel. City Tidelands Tract N -14. Zoning I; Use I. City of Kodiak breakwater and dock. Zoning PL; Use I. 1 February 8, 1985 11. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as part of the "Central Business District." 12. Applicable Regulations: Chapter 17.24 (I- Industrial Zone), Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) permits "all uses permitted in the 8- Business zone except residential. The Planning and Zoning Commission at their January 16, 1985 Regular Meeting made a determination that hotels, motels, and apartments shall be considered as "residential" uses in the industrial district. COMMENTS 1. Proposal The applicants' proposal is to construct a three - story, 26 room, hotel with a restaurant, bar and coffee shop, on the channel. A portion of the building will actually be situated over the water, on pilings. The upland area not utilized by the structure will be landscaped and used to fulfill the structure's parking requirements. 2. Zoning Although the current zoning of the lot is Industrial, the Comprehensive • Plan designates this lot as part of the "central business district." 3. Uses This parcel of land was deeded from the City to a private landowner in the early sixties and has historically served as the location for a number of business uses. Even during the height of the king crab seasons, when new fish processing firms were looking for water oriented industrial zoned land for onshore processing plants, this site remained in business use. 4. Potential Problems There are many inherent problems associated with use of the site for a hotel. The hotel will be adjacent to a fish processing plant. The bright lights of the boats and associated noise of loading, unloading and other dock and processing activities may be loud 24 hours a day and at certain times of the year there are also strong odors associated with the industry of fish processing; not just the smell of seafood but possibly ammonia used for cleaning and diesel fuel. 5. Kodiak's Economy As the fishing industry struggles, Kodiak's local economy struggles. A method of building a stable economy is to diversify the economic base. Tourism appears to be one way of diversifying Kodiak's economy. The tourism industry though more business oriented than heavy industry can be a major contributor to strengthening the local economy. Case 84 -004 2 February 8, 1985 6. Appropriateness of the Proposed Use. The lack of business -zoned waterfront property in the central business district is a shortcoming of the long -range planning for the City of Kodiak. Kodiak planning has been developed based on single industries. There is vacant industrial land both near the municipal airport and proposed in the various Near Island plans. Cull and Uski Island are also currently zoned industrial.' With the exception of the International Seafoods plant, new processors have generally bought existing plants. 7. Analysis The potential problems of a business use located adjacent to an industrial use can be mitigated somewhat by the proper positioning and design of the structure as well as adequate buffering. A restaurant and other businesses have been located in the general area for as long as the processors have been located there with no apparent problems. There may be a risk that tourists may not want to stay in this hotel because of potential conflicts with the adjacent industrial use but that is a business risk rather than a land use decision. In order for the Commission to approve an exception request the following conditions must be satisfied: That the use as proposed in the application or under appropriate conditions or restrictions will not endanger the public's health. safety or welfare or be inconsistent with the general purpose of this title. The location of the proposed hotel adjacent to a fish processing plant may create difficulties but these difficulties can be mitigated through building design and screening. Interestingly enough, it is anticipated that some of these same industrial activities are factors that draw people (tourists) to Kodiak in the first place. The hotel will not be inconsistent with the purposes of the industrial district because it is on the fringe of the industrial zoned land and the central business district and scheduled to become part of the business district. 2. That the use proposed in the application will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. A hotel use in an industrial area will not have an adverse impact on the adjoining property. It should be clearly understood that the primary use of the surrounding area is industrial. Case 84 -004 3 February 8, 1985 RECOMMENDATION Staff believes that for this case, all the required conditions have been met in order for the Commission to grant an exception; therefore staff recommends approval of the request. APPROPRIATE MOTION Should the Commission agree with the staff recommendation, the appropriate motion for this case is specified below: Move to grant an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. Case 847004 4 February 8, 1985 4. ' •, • '44 A Y gib. 0 ! 'r I \„ 1 vo• •:‘,8-e..V Oss 4`t4 7,-P' 4 mss 2 rr c ++'lli� •�C•° ��ZS •._. V 1�+4- •- �,yF +mil 6•0 '►0►.�r! 0r. ak ...v silk 40 ,16tea K TO wNSIT 99 , ``:a �c : /Ss X + . '' \NATEF;rf ITT- HME' K:.) AK ALA',7KA FGA G�I� HNPF. h1A.T}IIEj'IV • V; TA, t54rt11 ,6 • rays .v a/ dust 04.'• t„ ITEM VI -E) 1 0 c iTEL� .7 NrI. T'5LAND CHnNWI•1� 1011 140 Ts*. 11.-d 11014 ad• trnr, 0000 11A .l mr. ,..1.10 .+1.1111111 C) iV -vexY i L T14. 0.trIN 0 Tz. N•r} ONNER'. ALASKA FEE `-UfrOPS 1) VICINITY MAP L XATfcN 4 517E NIAP �i4L0: U.5 G.'4 G. 5. Tom- _ Mr-MI HI*H NKTER :-7.6, MEAN Lout k Tr: la MEAN L4FJER..Leh) WATER; �bTC: Tile PILL AEA IS /� A1''Vt; THe MEAN HIGH NATCK LINJC, THE 51?GT. '1cf PE1,M:i 15 NoT RezzLileED. PILE' 1`ft1CAL SEGTIoIJ PLAN F1LINC'r FOUNUATIG'N } 72. PAM: I -7,e- or m- NATE .FKONT HOTEL PL1ltir : cLmf. WuNcomer4- LoMMErcIA AT NEAA ISLAND.LWANNa -, GIs( I AK. /pACENT fr_ar 1Kr( opir,Jejzs. ' gg V6 Kodiak Island Borough ITEM VII(A) M E M O R A N D U M DATE: March 13, 1985 TO: Planning and Zoning Commissiot�(( FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: Information for the March 20, 1985 Regular Meeting RE: CASE 85 -004. Findings of fact for the approval -o£ a request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract H -18. (The Karim Company /Dischner - Mathisen Partnership) The following findings of fact have been drafted for the commission's review and approval from comments expressed by commissioners after the public hearing for Case 85 -004 (referenced above). 1. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that this request meets the following requirements for granting an exception according to Section 17.65.050(A) of the borough code. A. The request as approved will not endanger the public's health, safety, and general welfare. This is exemplified by the lack of public testimony opposing the request during the public hearing. B. The request as approved is not inconsistent with the purposes and intent of this (zoning) title. i. The proposed use of the site for a hotel and restaurant is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan that designates this lot for expansion of the City of Kodiak's central business district. C. The request as approved will not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. i. There are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening, and positioning of the structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development. It is in fact these industrial uses (boat harbor, gear storage and repair, processing plants, and channel activity) that make this site attractive for the tourist industry. ii. There currently exists a restaurant and office space adjacent to an operating fish processing plant without apparent conflict. 2. Presently, there is a weak demand for industrial -zoned land because of the economic downturn of the fishing industry. There also exists underutilized industrial -zoned waterfront property. This use will not compete economically with the existing industrial uses in the area. The proposed development provides an opportunity to expand and diversify the local economic base. _Case 85 -004 March 13, 1985 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Climunity Development Department ITEM VI- Dkodtak'41_,.d »... ,1 B 0 4 1985 1..0 710' 11111 Bay Road rn•.iak, Ak ko FEB Alaska 99615 t; u C E I V E D PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IP . P NOTICE DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1985 CASE NUMBER: 85 -004 An application for an exception was filed with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Department by: The Kazim Company /Dischner and Mathisen Partnership The application requests: an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- Industrial district. Legally described as city Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of the Kodiak Cafe. The Planning and Zoning Commiasion will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on this request at their regular meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, FEBRUARY 20, 1985 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 710 Hill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska. The Commission will also review all items on their agenda for the regular meeting on the preceding Wednesday at 7 :30 p.m. in the Borough, Conference Room. This meeting is open to the public. You are being notified because you are a property owner in the area of the request. This is the only scheduled PUBLIC HEARING on the request at this time, and you are invited to appear before the Commission to express your opinion. If you cannot attend this PUBLIC HEARING andvieh to comment on the request, fill in the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development . Department, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska, 99615. Your returned comment should be received PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. A vicinity map shoving the property involved is included on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please feel free to call our office, the Community Development Department, at 486 -5736. YOUR NAME: 7/9 M r 47e.J 5� pe.�SD!)R'SS: /� s' -y .,u;- 4 YOUR PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: / / COMMENTS: �� a/ / $ .'r. e9. 2/2/1/./FZt i' azAA .' / « 7 IY iii ...... X837 - SM .w� OS 444 .7 4 71- c C1,5' S / � v:►-,, -'- ,:tea%• TOWNSIT 2537 8 �--'� '�"�►:,;',:+► + *: L K 44 44A KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH _..im::nity Development Department 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 ITEM VI -D PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1985 CASE NUMBER: 85 -004 An application for an exception was filed vith the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Department by: The Karim Company /Dischner and Mathisen Partnership The application requests: an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I- industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in the area of the Kodiak Cafe. The Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on this requeet at their regular meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, FEBRUARY 20, 1985 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska. The Commission will also review all items on their agenda for the regular meeting on the preceding Wednesday at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough,Conference Room. This meeting is open to the public. You are being notified-because you are a property owner in the area of the request. This is the only scheduled PUBLIC HEARING on the request at this time, and you are invited to appear before the Commission to express your opinion. If you cannot attend this PUBLIC HEARING and irieh to comment on the request, fill in the bottom of thie notice and return it to the Community Development Department, 710 Hill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska, 99615. Your returned comment should be received PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. A vicinity map shoving the property involved ie included on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please feel free to call our office, the Community Development Department, at 486 -5736. YOUR NAME: BPO Elks #1772 ADDRESS: YOUR PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: please see other side COMMENTS: ,If height of building blocks current view from second floor of lodge, we object to this exception in the building code. FEB t5;. B.O,T. Chairma Philip E. Ferris KOMAG,INC. HARBOR VIEW COMPLEX .1;1' er.. ''fz.., ..• * ,4 ‘_•,`.., -.14,,,,, d's _.= ''.. ITEM VI—D FEB 1 41985 .. A ..4 r ,"" . 1. '" ":..2:1.,.......:. ., P.O. Box 746 (907) 486 - 4147 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 Executive Si Land Office 3300 'C' Street, Suites 212 & 213 ° Anchorage, Alaska 99503 ° (907) 561-2668 February 12, 1985 Kodiak Island Borough Planning & Zoning Commission P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, Alaska 99615-1246 Reference: Case 85-004 Dear Sirs: As the owner of the subject tidelands tract N-18 Koniag, Inc. and Kazim strongly support the request for an exception to the industrial zoning now existing. We make this request for the following reasons: 1. We do not believe that such a development is in reality in conflict with industrial uses in this specific setting. 2. We feel that in the atmosphere of the nearby small boat harbor, the seaplane base, plus the ferry dock, the con- tinuing boat travel through the channel would all combine to make a potentially outstanding tourist attraction hotel facility. 3. Such a development, if done properly, will do far more to enhance the tax base of the Borough than will the current facility or yet another fish plant. Very truly yours, KON 1 r2 U. LGrps Chief xecutive Officer ULG:jfp CC: Dan Potash/Alaska Management Services COMKISSIOIiit BILL MOVED TO 4CEE0 AID RECEIPT of this 1 The motion vas seconded sad CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. E) Latter from Jean E. Alvert. Buccaneer Enterprise.. COMfZSSIONU gra MOVED To ACEROVLIDCE RECEIPT of this 1 The motion vas seconded and CARRIED by uaaalaoua voice vote. TV* Memoranda$ from Community Development Department Staff requesting j 1' interpretation of• "permitted uses' (17.24.010) in the Industrial.' District. LINDA FWD indicated that currently the Industrial District states that "all uses permitted in a B- Business Zone are allowed except those that are residential are permitted in the Industrial District." 'There is no specific definition of "residential" in Title 17 and therefore ve request clarification from the Commission. A discussion ensued amongst the Commissioners. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TEAT FOR IRE PURPOSE OF INTERPRETATION of the Industrial District that apartments, hotels and Hotels are residential uses and therefore disallowed as a use in the industrial zone. The motion vas seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voics vote. I REPORTS A) Deesabei Status Report from the Community Development Department. 8) The City Police Department has indicated it will enforce the "no left turn" sign at the exit of McDonald's on to Lover Mill Bay Road. C) A Joint Borough Parka and Recreation Committee and Borough Assembly meeting is scheduled for January 24, 1985. at 7:70 p.m. in the Borough Conference Room and the Commission is invited to attend. II AUDIENCE CO100' tS , Thera vere no audience comments. III COMMISSIONERS' COMMINTS COMMISSIONER ENICHT requested the Chairman axcuee his as ha will be on vacation at the time of the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings scheduled for February 17, 20, 27. March 6 and 13. CHAIRMAN GREGG • excused COMMISSIONER EMIGHT. COMMISSIONER HILL indicated that he attended the last City of Kodiak Council meting and received their endorsement to pursue • "view" ordinance. LINDA FREED indicated it was one of the items to be considered during the upcoming zoning revision re -write which will be presented to the Commission in future. IIII ADJOURNMENT CBAIRKA, GREGG adjourned the seating at 10:00 p.m. =DIAL ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND 20NING COMMISSION ATTEST Bt: Miley. el By: Patricia Secretary DATE APPROVED: 1 6 E Regular -10- January 16. 1984 • N6OLAK 131J43 COACUGH POST OFFICE BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 ( ),Conditional Use Permit (Yr Exception ( ) Variance ( ) Zoning Change: From: To: CODE SECTION INVOLVED: 17. act 010 (0612.tylrnE9 Lkloc,Z) NOTE: The application fee for all items covered by this form is 550. Conditional Use Permits, Exceptions, and Variance Applications also require the submission of a site plan. APPLICANT: 17 ICC/M/4'1r/ /14 2 77— 5'7413 Name • Home Telephone Z / 2 7 - 2 9 7 Address Work Telephone ,crve1/.0/C4,4 4C4- 993'22_3 City, State, Zip PROPER 7794.69ND 77r. N— i P: Lot Block Subdivision Name koP/41•4c, 44,7s/4.X United States Survey # Section, Township, Range, S.M. PRESEilT USE OF PROPERTY: PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY: /7'07-EZ --ee_57%4L.,4'4W,.-- 27.4W I have been{ti.r4 ) "h'd)ArccaLauras iii.alvaa with this request and have "-F _._. received a cde i t.eedp-propriate raT.u.atiens. ) Authorized Aci.ent - • • • • • ■ . • • e4:41(1.41/414 • Ca:a Pr/zerty Owner Data Application Acceetea: 4.4LY Daie Q July 5, 1985 City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Appeal of Exception Request Approval, CASE 85-004 - Kazim Can- pany/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership. Council Appeal of Decision Gentlemen: In accordance with Kodiak City Code 17.10.040, the Kodiak City Council sub- mits the following facts in support of its appeal of the above decision: Kodiak Island Borough Code 17.65.050(A) states: "...If it is the finding of the Commission, after consideration of the investigator's report and receipt of testimony at the public hearing, that the use as proposed in the application, or under appropriate conditions or restrictions, will not endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare, or be inconsis- tent with the general purposes and intent of this title, and not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood, the commission shall approve the exception, with or without con- ditions..." It is the City Council's considered opinion that the Planning and Zoning Commission did not take a number of pertinent factors into account before granting approval of the exception. 1. The property in question is immediately adjacent to an operat- ing seafood processing plant with chlorine and ammonia tanks and escape valves on the side of the proposed hotel. In addi- tion, on the same side is the plant's fish waste holding tank and hopper which, in warm weather, can become extremely noxious. This could pose a health and/or safety problem. 2. For many years the public has enjoyed uniupeded access to the spit area in general, the float plane ramps, Dock #2, the shuttle ferry dock, adjacent public boat launch, and contingu- ous boat-trailer parking. While the City Council acknowledges that the public made use of portions of the subject property for these purposes, the Commission did not appear to take these existing uses into consideration. It was not until the Council filed the appeal and node this point an issue that the developer met with the City Council to discuss alternatives. POST OFHCE DOA 1397.140DIN . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 City of Kodiak RE: Council Appeal - Case 85-004 Page 2 3. On the third side of the subject property is the public seaplane floats. The proposed siting of the hotel could impede plane traffic, thereby causing.a safety hazard. While there has been discussion of moving the seaplane floats to Trident Basin, no action has been taken, nor would the existing floats necessarily be abandoned. The Council takes the position that the above facts pose health and safety considerations and/or illustrate the adverse impact on adjoining property. Kodiak Island Borough Code 17.24.005 states: "...The I industrial zone is established as a district in which the principal use of (the) land is for business, manufacturing, processing, fabricating, repair, assembly, storage, wholesaling, and distributing operations, which may create some nuisance, but which are not properly associated nor compatible with residential land uses..." A hotel is properly listed under the permitted uses in a business zone. While the permitted uses in an industrial zone, according to KIB 17.24.010, include all permitted uses in a business zone, the clear intent of the code is "to concentrate the industrial and business uses within designated areas to protect residential districts from noxious or noisy operations". The adjoining seafood processing plant is -- as are all other such plants -- a noisy, noxious operation. It is inappropriate, in the Council's opinion, to allow a residential-type use on the contiguous property. This becomes very apparent,when.reviewing the other permitted uses in an industrial zone; e.g., aircraft asseMbly, asphalt or concrete batch and mixing plants, gravel or sand extraction, sawmills, motor freight terminals, rock crushers, etc. The City Council's appeal is based on the foregoing facts and is the basis upon which the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Cammission decision should be overturned. Sincerely JRP/mhd Ms. Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 7246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE(907)486.5736 July 19, 1985 ° 4 4:2 CV 1985 RECEIVED ,00 cnyoucuorsol ofuncE Re: Appeal of Case 84-004. The granting of an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-Industrial District, legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 (The Kazim Company/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership). Dear Marcella: On behalf of the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission, I would like to respond in writing to the written statement by the Kodiak City Council on the above appeal. In making their decision the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission did take into account all the factors referenced by the City Council in their statement. Based on their review of these facts, the Commission determined that the granting of this exception for this specific site would not endanger the public's health, safety, or general welfare, or be inconsistent with the general purpose of this title, and not adversely impact other properties or uses in the neighborhood. Specifically in response to the points raised by the City Council: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission was well aware of the fact that the property in question is immediately adjacent to an operating seafood processing plant. The Commission was also aware of the operating characteristics of this plant. However, a restaurant has been operated on the property in question for a number of years without any apparent conflict. In addition, the Commission has found that there are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening, and positioning of a structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development. It is in fact these types of industrial uses that make this site attractive for a hotel and the tourist industry. 2. The Planning and Zoning Commission was fully aware of the activities that take place on the spit area. These activities will not be impacted any differently by the development of this property for a hotel than they would be by the development of this property for an industrial use. Any development of this property will impact the use of the spit. Therefore, KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Marcella Dalke, City Clerk July 19, 1985 Page Two this concern is not directly related to the use of the subject property as a hotel. As has been noted previously, the Planning and Zoning Commission was clearly aware that one side of the subject property is adjacent to the public seaplane floats. Again, any type of development on this property might impact this activity. Although it'is more likely that a seafood processing plant with a docking facility, that is an allowed use in this district, would have a more significant impact on the seaplane floats. This objection to the development of this property does not directly relate to the use of the property as approved by the Commission. As stated earlier, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission believes that the development of a hotel at this specific location does not pose health and safety considerations and/or illustrate an adverse impact on adjoining property. The proposed use is consistent,with the adopted comprehensive plan for the area. In addition, due to the site-specific location of the request, it is clear that no other types of industrial activities will be developed in the vicinity of the proposed hotel. As the Council points out, adjacent property consists of a fully developed seafood processing plant, and public land used for public purposes in support of the fishing industry. It is unlikely, if not improbable that this subject property would ever find itself adjacent to other uses permitted in the industrial district e.g. aircraft assembly, asphalt or concrete batch and mixing plants, gravel or sand extraction, sawmills, motor freight terminals, rock crushers, etc. Based on a review of all the facts the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission found that this exception request met all the requirements of the Kodiak Island Borough Zoning Code. Sincerely, Linda Freed, Director Community Development Department Pm car Casa 85-004 July 26, 1985 Mayor and Coumcilmembers City of Kodiak. P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Exception Request Approval;' CASE' 85 -004 - Kazan Company/Dischner- Mathisen Partnership. Council Appeal of Decision Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: A hearing before the Kodiak City Council sitting as the Board of Adjustment is scheduled for Thursday, August 8, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Assem- bly Chambers. This hearing is on your appeal of the Planning and Zoning Com- mission's approval of the above variance request. If there is any change in the scheduled date, you will be notified. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELZA H. DA1KE. CMC City Clerk MHD /nj cc: Samuel C. Gesko, Jr., City Manager Mickie Miller, CMC, Borough Clerk Linda Freed, Community Development Department Director Melvin M. Stephens, II, City Attorney Kazin Company /Dischner- Mathisen Partnership POST OFFICE DOA 1397. ItODIAK , ALASk1 99615 PHONE (907) 486 -3224 July 26, 1985 NOTICE OF HEARING The Kodiak City Council will sit as the Board of Adjustment to hear its appeal of the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission's February 10, 1985 decision granting a request for an exception to permit construction of a hotel in an Industrial District described as City Tide- lands Tract N -18. The appeal will be heard during the regular City Council meeting of August 8, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Assembly Chambers. Marcella H. Daike, CMC, City Clerk Publish: August 1, 1985 Publish: Publish: Bill to: August 1, 1985 Kodiak Daily Mirror August 1, 1985 Kadiak Times -2- Marcella H. Daike, CMC, City Clerk City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 ss July 31, 1985 Mayor and Councilmembers City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Exception Request Approval, CASE 85-004 Kazin Conoany/Dischner Mathisen Partnership. Council Appeal of Decision Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: Your appeal hearing before the City Council sitting as the Board of Adjustment has been rescheduled to August 6, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Assembly Chambers. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELLA H. DAIKE, CMC City Clerk PliD/nj cc: Samuel C. Cesko, Jr., City Menager Mickie Miller, CMC, Borough Clerk Linda Freed, Community Development Director Melvin M. Stephens, II, City Attorney Kazin Company/Dischner Mathisen Partnership POST OFFICE BOX 1397. 140DIAlf . !RAW 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3(294 July 31, 1985 DISPLAY AD will BORDER CITY COUNCIL MEETING RESCHEDULED The August 8, 1985, regular meeting of the Kodiak City Council has been rescheduled to August 6. The meeting will be held in the Borough Assembly Chambers. The agenda for the meeting will be published Monday, August 5. Marcella H. Dalke, CMC, City Clerk Publish: August 5, 1985 Publish: August 5, 1985 Kodiak Daily Mirror Bill to: Marcella H. Dalke, CMC, CIty Clerk City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 I. Am 1985 [Year MINUTES OF THE REGULAR, RESCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OF THE CITY OF KODIAK - HELD AUGUST 6, 1985 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER .- . •.. - Mayor Pugh called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Councibrembers • Brodie, Cratty, Crowe, Ramaglia, and Stephan were present and consti- tuted a quorum. Councilmemberhbodruff was absent. - The Mayor asked for, and received, Council approval to amend the order of business and act on Resolution Number 44-85 immediately.following approval of the minutes. ' ' • - PREVIOUS MINUTES • Councilmember BrodiellOVED, seconded by Councibuember Ramaglia, to approve the minutes of the July 25, 1985, regular ueeting. Council- menher Brodie made a correction to the vote on New Business, item i. •The roll call vote an the corrected minutes was unanimously favorable. Resolution Number 44-85 RE: Commending the State Champion Junior American Legion Baseball Team . _ City Manager Gesko said this resolution was presented to =nand the. Jack Allman Post 17 Junior American Legion Baseball Team. These players had captured the title of "STATE JENTORANERICAN LEGION CHAMPIONS - 1985." A sign commemorating their achievement would be placed at the entrances to town. Mayor Pugh read Resolution Number 44-85 in its entirety. Councilmember Crowe MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Brodie, to pass and approve Resolution Number 44-85. - -- • • roll call vote was unanimously favorable. : - - :: • - Mayor Pugh distributed individual presentation copies of the resolution to all the team neuters. Pals= To rE mem . - a PLersiimg and Zoning Commissioneel: • Commissioner Marlin Knight asked if the Council had any questions about the cases caning before the Commission at its August 21 meeting, Council- uember Ramaglia asked about Case 85-053, a Borough land disposal, Mr. Knight said the Commission was to consider a recommendation on the dis- posal of Block 5 of the proposed Lakeside Subdivision for residential: use. Upon further questioning, Mr. Knight said the sale did not involve any of the lakeshore lots and would be a negotiated sale to the Kodiak Island Housing Authority. Councilmember Brodie asked about Case 85-043; an application to rezone property on Alder Lane. .Mr, Knight said the • . . . ' case had been tabled to allow the City to submit written input on the matter. Following a short discussion, the Council instructed the staff to submit a letter based on City Engineer Nboroe's August 6 nerrorandum. - - - - - _ - b. Board of Adjustment Searing RE: Council 'Appeal of the February 20, 1985, Decision Granting an Eiception Request To Pet-Cnnstruction of a Hotel on City Tidelands Tract N-18 Mayor Pugh recessed the-regular meeting and opened the Board of Adjust- ment hearing. City Manager Gesko said the Council was sitting as the Board of Adjustment to hear its appeal of the Planning & Zoning Commis-. sion's February 20, 1985 decision granting an exception'to permit con- struction of a hotel in an industrial area on City Tidelands Tract N-18. The hearing would begin with a presentation by the Community Development Department Director. Next, the Council_would present its argument. Only the information available to the Planning & Zoning Commission at the time of its decision could be considered by the Board of Adjustment. Accord- ing to KCC 17.10.060(c), only one argument could be presented by or on behalf of each party. After hearing both parties, the Board of Adjustment . would affirm or reverse the decision of the Planning & Zoning Commission, in whole or in part, and give the reasons for its decision. • Boardmember Ramaglia MOVED, seconded by Boardmember Cratty, to grant the relief requested by the Kodiak City Council's appeal of the Planning & Zoning Courrission's February 20, 1985 decision to grant an exception to permit construction of a hotel in an industrial area on City Tidelands , Tract N-18. • • •••• Linda Freed, Director of the Borough Cartamity Development Department,' said her presentation had been prepared according to Kodiak City Code 17.10.060(b). The decision being appealed was the approval of an excep- tion by the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission. The -- approved exception permitted a hotel on City Tidelands Tract N-18, which is zoned industrial. The pertinent facts produced at the hearing from whidh the appeal was taken included: • - 1. The request was consistent with the CoMprehansive Plan which designated this area as part of the "central business district"; 2. Other businesses, notably a restaurant, had operated successfully on the propery for several years without observable conflict with other land uses in the area, specifically the adjacent seafood processing plant; . 3. There were no direct objections to the request submitted at or prior to the public hearing on the request, • - r - The applicable legal principles were taken from Borough Code Section --- • 17.65.050 which stated: - = "If it is the finding of the commission, after consideration of the - 'investigator's report and receipt of testimony at the public hearing. that the use as proposed in the application, or under the appropriate conditions or restrictions, will not endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare, or be inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of this title, and not adversely impact other properties-or uses in the neighbor- hood, the commission shall'approve the exception, with or without condi- tions." The Planning and Zoning Commission found the request net the requirements set out in the Borough Code, and therefore, the Commission ,-■ 'S-1! 5. Viewing the record as a whole, we find that granting this excep- tion, so as to permit a residential use of industrially-zoned land in an area which is immediately adjacent to properties which have actually been developed for .industrial use, will tend to endanger the public's health, safety, or general welfare. 6. We also find that granting this exception would be inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of Title 17 of the Kodiak Island Borough Code in that it would be contrary to the orderly development of the limited amount of waterfront property in the downtown area." The roll call vote on the findings of fact was Boardmembers Brodie, Catty, Ramaglia, and Stephan in favor, and Boardmenber Crowe opposed. The notion passed. Mayor Pugh closed the Board of Adjustment hearing and reconvened the regular meeting. c—Zoard,ofAdlustment Hearii RE: Quaccia APPeal.of ;the May 15, 1985, Decision Granting a Variance Request To Permit Zero-Lot Line Development L�6. Biock 7v:1716,Lynden WaV,Illderberry Heiglita Alaska Subdivision JMourthAddition , , Mayor Pugh recessed the regular meeting and opened the Board of Adjustment hearing. Councilmember Ramaglia declared a conflict of interest in this matter as he owned two lots in the immediate vicinity of the property in question. The City Manager said the Council was sitting as the Board of Adjustment to hear Marilyn Quaccia's appeal of the Planning & Zoning Com- mission's May 15, 1985 decision granting a variance to permit zero-lot line development at 1617 Lynden Way, as requested by Scott Arndt. The hearing would begin with a presentation by the Community Development De- partment Director. Next, M. Quaccia would present her argement. Only the information available to the Planning & Zoning Commission at the time of its decision could be considered by the Board of Adjustment. Accord- ing to KCC 17.10.060(c), only One argument could be presented by or on behalf of each party. After hearing both parties, the Board of Adjustment would affirm or reverse the decision of the Planning & Zoning Commission, in whole or in part, and give the reasons for its decision. Linda Freed, Director of the Borough Community Development Department, said her presentation was prepared according to Kodiak City Code 17.10,060(6). The decision being appealed was the approval of a variance by the Kodiak Island Planning and Zoning Commission granting relief from the maximum lot depth to width ratio contained in Kodiak Island Borough Code 17,34.0308. The pertinent facts produced at the hearing from which this appeal was taken includPd: 1. Zero-lot line development was a permitted use in this zoning dis- trict; 2. The granting of this variance would not increase the allowed density in this zoning district; and 3. The granting of this variance did not decrease any of the required building setbacks in this zoning district. The applicable legal principals were taken from Borough Code Section 17.66.050 which stated: "If it is the finding of the commission, after consideration of the investi- gator's report and receipt of testimony at the public hearing, that the use proposed in the application, or under appropriate conditions or re- strictions, meets all of the following, the variance shall be granted." The Commission determined that the request met all six conditions set out in the Borough Code. Therefore, the Commission was required by the Code to grant the variance. She referred the Board to the findings of the commission as found in the minutes of the Commission's May 8, 1985, regular meeting. Board Chairman Pugh asked for and received an explana- tion of the apparent ambiguity of the Commission granting the variance and later, in the same neeting, approving a subdivision of the lot in question. Boardmember Brodie received clarification of the timing of i original subdivision plat and the rezone to R2, and of the minima lot width and 3-to-1 ratio requirements. Marilyn Quaccia, the appellant, said she would respond to the six points required for approval of a variance. 1. In order to comply with the-3-to-1 ration, an imaginary line was drawn across the back of the lot making it a rectangle instead of a trapezoid and thereby making it conform to the width to length ratio. In her opinion this did not constitute a "physical condition" to support the evidence. 2. It was stated that "strict application of the provisions" of the Borough Zoning Title would create a hardship on the applicant, but Mrs. Quaccia felt it was time the strict applications of the Code were enforced. She said it was as easy to get a variance as "it is to predict rain." She said some zero-lot line developments were completed and sold prior to re- ceiving approval. This fostered a confidence in the Code loopholes for approval of whatever the developers and builders were developing. The R2 zone on Lynden Way allowed duplexes. A duplex could be built on the property providing the same number of units without a zero-lot line devel- opment. The only reason the developer wanted a zero-lot line approval was because there was not a big market for duplexes. He was only interested in a quick profit. 3. The Planning and Zoning Commission believed that granting the variance would not result in damage or prejudice to other properties area. She stated that zero-lot line developments were geared to morgiq buyers. She was a sociology, economics major in college and understood, . need for affordable housing, however, she didn't feel that zero-lot line development should be scattered all over town. She said her neighbors were already having a hard time selling their homes below appraisal and people in a marginal housing market did not expend cash for upkeep and painting. This devalued a neighborhood. 4. She said it was hard to say just what the objectives of the Com- prehensive Plan were. R2 and zero-lot line development had very liberal interpretations. Even the May 15 Commission meeting had discussion on the 'last minute" changes in the zero-lot line ordinance. This type of development needed to be looked at at some length. She personally felt that zero-lot line development should be restricted to separate zones. 5. and 6. There was implied consent that the applicant had not caused special conditions from which relief was being sought and that the variance did not permit a prohibited use in the district involved. RECESS There was a short recess. Boardmember Crowe MMED, seconded by Boardmember Cratty, to grant the re- lief requested by Ms. Quaccia's appeal.of the Planning & Zoning Commission's '3 IV. May 15, 1985 decision to grant a variance to permit zero-lot line devel- opment on Lot 6, Block 7, 1617 Lynden Way, Elderberry Heights Alaska Sub- division Fourth Addition. The roll call vote was Boardmanber Stephan in favor, and Boardmanbers Brodie, Cratty, and Crowe opposed. The motion failed. Boardmember Crowe MOVED, seconded by Boardmanber Brodie, to adopt the following finding of fact: The record reflects substantial evidence supporting the basis upon which the Planning and Zoning Commission based its decision to grant this exception; therefore, the appeal is denied. Boardmenber Brodie said the only reason the variance was needed was the ambiguity in the 3 -to -1 ratio requirements. He hoped the current revi- sion of the Borough zoning and subdivision laws would correct this and other problems in the Code. The roll call vote was Boardembers Brodie, Cratty, Crowe, and Stephan in favor. Mayor Pugh closed the Board of Adjustment hearing and reopened the regular meeting. OLD BUSINESS a. Second Reading and Public Hearing, Ordinance Number 772 RE: Provid- ing Designated Handicapped- Parking Spaces and the Regulation Thereof Mayor Pugh read Ordinance Number 772 by title. City Manager Gesko said this ordinance was presented at the request of the Police Department to allow regulation of handicapped- parking spaces in the City of Kodiak. The provision to paint the handicapped symbol on the parking space was to discourage parking in those handicapped spaces that had had the signs removed or destroyed by vandals. Only those vehicles displaying a State issued sticker, license plate, or permit would be allowed to park in designated - handicapped parking spaces. The State initiated the desig- nated- handicapped parking program and left it to the municipalities to regulate. At this time there was no authority to cite anyone misusing the signed spaces. Ordinance lumber 772 would require painting the symbol on the spaces now signed. The Council passed this ordinance in the first reading July 25, 1985. Councilmember Cratty MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Brodie, to approve Ordinance Number 772 in the second reading, The Mayor closed the regular meeting, opened and closed the public hearing when no one came forward to testify, and reopened the regular meeting. Councilmember Brodie asked how many new handicapped spaces would be estab- lished and where they would be installed. Mayor Pugh said this would be considered by the Council at a later date. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. b. Second Reading and Public Hearing, Ordinance !umber 773 RE: Amend- ing Chapter 16 of tFie Personnel Rules and-Regulations Relating to Fire Department Shift Personnel V. Mayor Pugh read Ordinance Number 773 by title. The City Manager said this ordinance was presented to clarify the regulations for Fire Depart- ment Personnel in accordance with the U.S. Supreme Court's February 19, 1985, decision Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority. The Court held the Fair Labor Standards Act minimum wage and overtime provisions applicable to states and municipalities. Ordinance Number 773 was amended and approved in the first reading July 25, 1985. Councilmember Cratty MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Stephan, to approve Ordinance Number 773 in the second reading. Councilmember Crowe MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Cratty, to amend Ordinance Number 773 by the addition of a new Section 6, Schedule of Pay Ranges for 68 Hours in Any 9 -Day Work Period, and renumbering the subsequent section. The roll call vote on the amendment was unanimously favorable. The Mayor announced that copies of the amendment were available to the audience. He then closed the regular meeting, opened and closed the public hearing when no one came forward to testify, and reopened the regular meeting. The roll call vote on the main motion, as amended, was unanimously favor- able. NEW BUSINESS a. Resolution Number 44 -85 RE: Commending the State Champion Junior American Legion Baseball Team This agenda item had been acted upon earlier in the meeting following the approval of the minutes. b. Resolution Number 45 -85 RE: Rescinding Resolution Number 73 -83 and Resolution Number 05 -84 and Abolishing the Tourism Advisory Board Mayor Pugh read Resolution lumber 45 -85 by title. City Manager Gesko said this resolution was presented at the request of the Council following the incorporation of the Kodiak Island Convention and Visitors Bureau. The Council wished to thank the citizens who volunteered and served on the Tourism Advisory Board for their services. Councilmember Crowe MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Cratty, to pass and approve Resolution knmber 45 -35. The Council invited Wayne Haerer, Chairman of the Tourism Advisory Board, to speak to the resolution. Mr, Haerer said the Board was not taking a position on the resolution but wished the Council to be aware of the fact that the Board had been nominated for two State Alaska Visitor Associa- tion awards. The awards, if received, would be presented at the AVA Convention in late October. The Board expressed its appreciation to the Council and City staff, particularly City Clerk Dalke, for the cooperation afforded the Board throughout the process, and for the confidence placed in the Boardmembers. The Council commended the Board for its work on behalf of the City and community. It was clarified, should any one have thought otherwise, that the abolishment of the Board was only because of the fine cork it had done and the fact that it had completed its task. Several Councilmem- bers expressed concern over abolishing the Board while the awards were pending. Councilmember Ramaglia MOVED, seconded by Councilmenber Stephan, to table action on Resolution Ntsrber 45 -85 until the first meeting in November. The roll call vote was Councilmembers Ramaglia and Stephan in favor, and Councilmembers Brodie, Cratty, and Crowe opposed. The motion failed. The roll call vote on the main motion was Councilmembers Brodie, Cratty. and Crowe in favor, and Councils nbers Ramaglia and Stephan opposed. The motion failed. c. Resolution Number 46 -85 RE: Rescinding Resolution Lhanber 58 -84 Which Created a Special Assessment District for Improvements on Selig Street The Mayor read Resolution Number 46 -85 by title, City Manager Gesko said this resolution was presented at Council request following deletion of the FY86 budget line item for Selig Street Improvments because the prop- erty owners on Selig Street petitioned not to proceed with the planned improvements. Resolution Number 46 -85 would rescind the creation of the Selig Street Assessment District approved by' Resolution Nurnber 58 -84. This resolution, should it pass, would be recorded so as to remove the notation from the property titles, Coincilnianber Cratty MOVED, seconded by Cauncilnrenber Crowe, to pass and approve Resolution Number 46 -85. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable, d. Renewal of Lease and Dock License Agreement RE: Pier I - Ferry Terminal The City Manager said this annual Lease and Lock License Agreement had been modified to provide additional rental for the increased, improved ferry terminal offices in the new building at Pier I, Other than that change to Section 4, and correction of the legal description and deletion of a stevedoring company by name, the agreement was identical to prior years. At the time of packet publication, the State had not indicated its concurrence with the increase in rent. Councilmember Brodie MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Crowe, to approve the FY36 Lease and lock License Agreement between the City and the State of Alaska, Alaska Marine Highway System, for the Pier I Ferry Terminal and to authorize the City Manager to execute same on behalf of the City. There was considerable discussion on various points of the agreement. The understanding was that if the State Marine Highway System did not agree with the increase, the matter would be brought back to the Council. A number of suggestions for succeeding agreements were made, including charg- ing each vehicle crossing the dock when loading or unloading from a ferry, and revising Section 5 on parking requirements. VI. J�? The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. e. Consideration of Funding Request RE: Alaska Legal Services Mr. Gesko said representatives from Alaska Legal Services Corporation presented a $6,000 funding request at the May 23, 1985, Federal Revenue Sharing public hearing. The allocation of contributions to community service organizations, approved in conjunction with the FY86 budget, did not include Alaska Legal Services. The organization then net with the Council at the July 9 worksession. Consideration of Alaska Legal Servic for funding was scheduled for this meeting when all Councilmembe+,. could be present. Councilmenber Brodie MOVED, seconded by Councilnember Cratty, to contri- bute $3,000 to the Alaska Legal Services Corporation for an estimated 107. of the cost to serve City residents, with funds coming from General Fund Non - Departmental account 20.51.74 CONTRIBUTIONS. The Council invited Alan Schmitt to present the Alaska Legal Services Cor- poration request. He reviewed the statistical summary of cases for resi- dents of the City and explanatory notes dated August 5', 1935. He also reviewed the eligibility income guidelines, eligibility information, and case acceptance prioities (as of June 1, 1935). Councilre ber Stephan, while acknowledging the service provided to the community by the organi- zation, asked why it was the responsibility of the City to partially fund the Legal Services. Mr. Schmitt recounted the history of the organiza- tion from formation by the U.S. Congress and the shortfall funding under the present administration. He said that many cities in Alaska were rec- cognizing their obligation and funding the offices in their communities. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. f. Games of Chance and Contests of Skill Applications RE: Filipino- American Association of Kodiak and Kodiak Rotary Club Under the applicable State Statutes, the City was given the opportunity o, to object to applications for games of chance and contests of skill per- mits. The City had received permit applications for raffles and lotteries from the Filipino- American Association of Kodiak and the Kodiak Rotary Club. Councilmember Cratty MOVED, seconded by Counciljttmber Crowe, to voice non- objection to the 1985 Games of Chance and Contests of Skill permit appli- cations submitted by the Filipino- American Association of Kodiak and the Kodiak Rotary Club. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None. VII. MAYOR'S MENUS Mayor Pugh requested worksessions be scheduled for discussion on the Police Advisory Board's reconmendation on loading zones and on Senator Edna B. DeVries letter on election campaign reporting. 5 VIII. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmanber Ramaglia asked for a report on'the status of developing Lot 2, Block 17, into a public parking lot. Mr. Lesko said the engi- neering staff was working up cost estimates. Resolution Number 44 -85 RE: Rescheduling Consideration Councilmember Ramaglia MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Stephan, to re- schedule consideration of Resolution Number 44 -85 at the first regular meeting in November. The roll call vote was Councilmenbers Stephan and Ranaglia.in favor, and CounciLnembers Brodie, Cratty, and Crowe opposed. The notion failed. Rescind Prior Action RE: Port of Kodiak Stevedoring Operations and Lease of Pier II Warehouse Councilmember Ramaglia MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Brodie, to rescind the July 25 Council action awarding Alternate #3 to Sea -Land Service, Inc. for the Port of Kodiak stevedoring operations and the lease of the Pier II .warehouse. Mayor Pugh passed the gavel to Deputy Mayor Ramaglia as he had a conflict of interest on this topic. The roll call vote was Brodie, Ramaglia, and Stephan in favor, and Coum- cilmembers Cratty and Crowe opposed. The motion failed. Deputy Mayor Ramaglia returned the gavel to Mayor Pugh, Councilmember Crotty asked for a status report on City computerization. Mr. Lesko said that Price, Waterhouse had completed a needs assessueait the prior week and he anticipated the report within the next few weeks. Councilmember Brodie said he thought the City should be represented at the Southeast Conference Advisory Board to the Alaska Marine Highway System meeting in Juneau on September 18. He also suggested the City develop a comprehensive plan for cemetery improvements so that as the various civic organizations express an interest in contributing labor, etc., an orderly course of action could be followed. He suggested signs listing City population be placed at the street entrances to town and plaques be installed on the streets named after local individuals de- scribing the individuals' accomplishments. Rescind Prior Action RE: Wastewater Treatment Plant Screening Design Councilmember Brodie MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Stephan, to rescind the July 25 Council action awarding a professional services agreement to Arctic Engineers for the design of the screening facility at the Sewage Treatment Plant in an amount not to exceed $87,000, within a time frame not to exceed eight weeks; with finds coming from Sewage Treatment Plant - Plant tbdification Step II account 41.52.31 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. The roll call vote was Coincilmcmbers Brodie and Stephan in favor, and 6 X. Councilmembers Cratty, Croce, and Ramaglia opposed. The notion failed. Councilnember Ramaglia commuted on the recent "Market Basket Survey" printed in Council Information, He asked that the continuation of the local pricing be placed on the worksession schedule. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Joe Perrozzi spoke on the Board of Adjustment Hearing on the Dischner/ Mathisen exception for construction of a hotel on City Tidelands Tract N -18. He said he operated a restaurant every day on the property and never had any problem with ammonia or other noxious odors from the adjoining seafood processing plant. He said the hotel project might be a moot point with Dischner/Nathisen's dropping the project, but a lot of Honey had been spent pursuing the concept. The Council responded that a day -time business use (restaurant) was different from a 24-hour resi- dential use like a hotel. It was the Council's considered opinion that a residential use was not compatible to industrial uses and did not be- long in.an Industrial Zone. Following additional discussion, Mr. Perrozzi asked what the City's plans were for the St. Paul Harbor spit area, He requested the Council's feedback. Linda Freed said she wanted to clarify the answer to Councilmember Ramaglia's question on the Planning and Zoning Commission's considera- tion of Case 85 -053, land disposal. She said the consideration was on recommending disposal of four blocks in the preliminary Lakeside Subdivi- sion. None of the blocks bordered Beaver Lake, The blocks consisted of approximately 40 residential and 11 or 12 industrial lots, ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:03 p.m. ATTEST: CITY CLERK MAYOR C) Appeal of CASE 85-031. The granting of a variance from Section 17.34.030B (Lot Width) of the Borough Code to permit the construction of a zero-lot-line dwelling on a lot in an R2--Two-family Residential District that exceeds the three-to-one depth-to-width ratio., Lot 6, Block 5, Elderberry Heights Alaska Subdivision Fourth Addition; 1617 Lynden Way. (Applicant: Scott Arndt) COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT of a letter from Marcella H. Daike, CMC, City Clerk, dated August 6, 1985, addressed to Linda Freed. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. D) Appeal of CASE 85-004. The granting of an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I--Industrial District, legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18. (Applicant: The Kazim Company/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership) COMMISSION JAMES MOVED TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT of a letter from Marcella H. Daike, CMC, City Clerk, dated'August 7,_1985, addressed to Linda Freed. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. _ _ X REPORTS A) Status Report from the Community Development Department. B) COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED TO ACCEPT THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR CASE 85-050. Request for a variance from Section 17.19.030 (Area Requirements) of the Borough Code to permit a two-family dwelling to be located on a lot that does not meet the minimum area requirements of 3,600 square feet per dwelling unit; and Request for a variance from Section 17.36.030 (Nonconforming Lots of Record) of the Borough Code to permit a two-family dwelling to be located on a nonconforming lot of record instead of a single-family residence only in an R2--Two-family Residential District. Lot 3 of the resubdivision of Lot 3, Paul's Subdivision; 1120 Mission Road. (Marlin Knight) A -- for the request for construction of a duplex on a nonconforming lot of record, and B -- for the request for variance to the minimum lot size for a two-family dwelling unit, as follows: 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. A -- This substandard lot is the smallest in Paul's Subdivision. Even with a purchase of a portion of the "Rabbit Reserve," the size of the lot would be t4,985 square feet, which is still below the 7,200 square foot minimum lot size for a duplex. B -- This substandard lot is the smallest in Paul's Subdivision. Even with a purchase of a portion of the "Rabbit Reserve," the size of the lot would be ±4,985 square feet, which is still below the 7,200 square foot minimum lot size for a duplex. 2. Strict application of the zoning ordinances would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships. A -- The strict application of the zoning ordinance would only allow a single-family residence to be constructed on the lot. This is not an unnecessary hardship because the lot is 2,215 square feet less than the minimum required lot size. B -- The strict application of the zoning ordinance would only allow a single-family residence to be constructed on the lot. This is not an unnecessary hardship P & Z Regular Meeting -17- August 21, 1985 Kazim Company Box 746 Kodiak, AK 99615 Gentlemen: Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 August 14, 1985 Re: CASE 85-004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I--Industrial Distric€ legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 and generally located in the area of the Kodiak Cafe. Enclosed please find copies of the materials reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their regularly scheduled packet review session held last evening. If'you have any questions or comments, please contact the Community Develop- ment DepartMent. Sincerely, • Patricia Miley, Secretary Community Development Department pb Enclosures ti Dischner /Mathisen 2261 Belmont Anchorage, AK 99503 Gentlemen: Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 -1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 August 14, 1985 Re: CASE 85 -004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-- Industrial District legally described as City Tidelands Tract N -18 and generally located in= the area of the Kodiak Cafe. Enclosed please find copies of the materials reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their regularly scheduled packet review session held last evening. If you have any questions or comments, please contact the Community Develop- ment Department. Sincerely, Patricia Miley, Secretary Community Development Department pb Enclosures August,7, 1985 Linda Freed, Director Community Development Department Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 ITEM IX—D 7/. 4 rs. A 110 1985' RIM RE: Exception Request Approval, CASE 85-004 - Kazim Ccapany/Dischner- Nathisen Partnership. Council Appeal of Decision Dear Linda. At the August 6, 1985, Board of Adjustment Hearing, the Council, sitting as the Board of Adjustment, made the following findings in the above case: 1. The record fails to reflect substantial evidence supporting the Planning and Zoning Commission's finding that approval of this re- quest will not endanger the public's health, safety, and general wel- fare. In particular: A. Two out of three written comments submitted to the Commission opposed or conditionally opposed the exception. One of those comments (Alaska Fresh SeAfoods) indicated concern that offensive smells, loud noises, and bright lights emanating from its adjoining seafood proces- sing plant would be offensive to customers of the proposed hotel. B. The staff report presented to the Commission, while recommend- ing approval of the exception, acknowledged "many inherent problems associated with use of the site for a hotel" including "not just the smell of seafood but possible ammonia used for cleaning and diesel fuel." 2. The record fails to reflect substantial evidence supporting the Com- mission's finding that "There are mitigating measures such as buffering, screening, and positioning of the structure on the lot that will lessen potential conflicts between the existing industrial uses in the area and the proposed development." Not only is it unclear how any such mitigat- ing measures would address problems such as offensive odors, but this exception was granted without any conditions requiring such measures. 3. The Commission's finding that 'Presently, there is a weak demand for industrial-zoned land because of the economic downturn of the fish- ing industry" is not only unsuppported by substantial evidence in the record, but it is of questionable relevance to the present application which seeks an exception to the zoning laws, not a rezoning of this property. Temporary fluctuations in the economic cycles associated with different industries should not be used to justify the granting of exceptions to the zoning laws. POST OFFICE DOA 1397, kODIAI( ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 Linda Freed CASE 85-004 August 7, 1985 Page 2 4. The record fails to contain substantial evidence supporting the Commision's finding that "There ... exists under-utilized industrial zoned waterfront property." 5. Viewing the record as a whole, we find that granting this excep- tion, so as to permit a residential use of industrially-zoned land in an area which is immediately adjacent to properties which have actually been developed for industrial use, will tend to endanger the public's health, safety, or general welfare. 6. We also find that granting this exception would be inconsistent with the general purposes and intent of Title 17 of the Kodiak Island Borough Code in that it would be contrary to the orderly development of the limited amount of waterfront property in the downtown area. Therefore, the Board of Adjustment granted the relief requested by the appellant. Sincerely, CITY OF KODINK \\NGA,Utaa.c5,..- MARCELLA H. DALKE, CMC City Clerk NEW= cc: Kazin Company/Dischner-Mathisen Partnership nutes, November 28, 1963 its and future plans:; •ns on the property so'. irse and that Resolut bility. Deveau then stated that Ole Johnson and he had measured the ce from the standard to the breakwater in the boat harbor, and that insufficient room for Mr. Hillstrand's proposed building without ding the breakwater. Mr. Hillstrand then replied that they could eRthe width .of the building to accommodate the restriction, and also ' [e!had checked with the Corps of Engineers whose informal opinion was the building would strengthen the breakwater. Dr. A. Holmes Johnson, g for the Planning and Zoning Commission, asked about parking space; Ilr.,Hillstrand stated that he had provided for the required spaces bras 20 for the hotel and 10 for the apartments. Eddie Franklin :that a restaurant required extra parking, and discussions followed, Hillstrand stating he would comply with appropriate city ordinances g 'parking.. rol over planned hotle of hotel builders, towards an apartment leas in writing for ' ;e stated that they woui •eviously requested b PatTCannon asked about the web lockers which had been mentioned on ou5'•occasions, and Mayor Deveau stated that the tidelands would be d- .up'by bid only, and that the city was not entering the real estate , Frank Irick then voiced his opinion that parking space should e furnished by the city and that Mr. Hillstrand should provide his this own expense. Mayor Deveau then asked Hillstrand about his ted cost of land, fill and parking space and Mr. Hillstrand stated to the floor joists, they figured approximately $45,000.00. Highways, was present. traffic survey made in I that he is here for new methods of purcha ther routes nor rates' any ideas that they mid :yor Deveau then called their ideas, but they Mayor Deveau stated t. hamber of Commerce, who • discussion, Mr. Gee 1 •ket, also king and dung service is of paramour Manager Poland stated that there was a considerable distance from posed Hillstrand parking lot to the present parking lot, and that ;Will undoubtedly be requests for use of the intervening land. Mr. ;;further stated that this should be discussed now, as applications cnndoubtedly be received. Mr. Hillstrand said he would have no . a tions to another development there. ':s' Association had beef, Mr. Berg stated that; { • had contacted one rant s many beef if the fer eity'Attorney 'Roy Madsen, stated that the tidelands ordinance requires for acquisition of tidelands and that a misconception exists that the qil will sell to Mr. Hillstrand without this condition-being met. Mr. d`c'then stated that this meeting is to firm up Mr. Hillstrand's request, bt;to dispose of the land. Councilman White then stated that facilities be•`provided for tourists, and that the Council had asked for one week to der Mr. Hillstrand's request. Councilman•White then moved that the Council Ve construction of the proposed building in the boat harbor and that . eFehce be given Mr, Hillstrand as having pioneered this idea. Councilman . .seconded, and voice vote was unanimously favorable. Mr. Hillstrand sted a $50,000.00 deposit be made with application for this area, whereupon:. Brechan moved that the purchaser of the hotel —motel site put up 000.00'as a performance bond, and after construction has started that this turned. Councilman Lester seconded and.voice vote was unanimously {able. Resolution No. 12 -63 was read, authorizing the City Manager to make application to the Bureau of Land Management for the sale or lease of U.S.S. 3099, for use as a d:y dump site.' Councilman White moved that ution No. 12 -63 be adopted; Councilman Brechan seconded, and adoption was ous by roll call vote. Mayor Deveau explained the proposed operation of ump, as formulated by the City Manages, and Gil Jarvela asked that signs stalled, prohibiting dumping of wet garbage; and also asked that the dump" oped towards the water. Ralph Jones Chen asked for better control of the fill garbage site to prevent scattering of garbage, also that signs be •tedr:and that the road be better maintained. d $40 rate on cars wo, the Southeastern ferri •st of the refrigerated- and time should be spa of street lights in the qund his area, saying t en submitted to the Ci -k Jensen. of Washington of shrimp peelers cha I on the Gulf Coast. Hey Wing a peeler, but that erposed that rentals ha informed also that the c. scar Dyson, had been a large boat grid wit departure for Juneau etter was read from Union Oil Co. stating their, intention to take up ption on the property in December of 1964; also an opinion by the City iiiey was read as to the validity of this agreement, which is dated Dec. 949. Councilman White suggested that the City Manager study this'problem. the validity, and the :procedure necessary to validate. VicdNITY MAP ) TIDAL- PATA AN H1601 14qt14,174 MN 149P1 VIATr-K: 1.0 MEAK1 LOWEik KIM= -n-fa FILL- AEA Arazi The. MEAN HlrH WATER. . LINE, THE 40+ rEgrivr i$ NoT getRi,jigap. Plat, SEGIION 54A1.5.: I "=40' 5CA I"4o' vlArre.g. • fizore7P rILIN4 FaLINIATIoN 72' 11-1. wftio-KFizoNT HfL NeAg. 1%14v GliANN, ceirf 4 KerlIAK , AK. APPLICATION ef-f 171(.4-11,4a4z/ 1.1ATHia,1 e•fr$0• g' 1- Par. POW PAT 10 - 40mmarr-IALigg. ApAcegr frPregv oviKiNesl e-rrY 4 roviAlc. Kodiak Island Borough 1. Dischner and Mathisen Partnership 2261 Belmont Anchorage, AK 99503 Gentlemen: P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615.1246 PHONE (907) 48675736 February 1, 1985 Re: CASE 85-004. Request for an exception from Section 17.24.010(Permitted' Uses) of the Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-Industrial district.' Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 and generally located in the area of Kodiak Cafe. Please be advised that your application for exception has been scheduled for review and action by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their February 20, 1985 Regular Meeting. This meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska. Your attendance at this meeting is recommended. One week prior to the Regular Meeting, Wednesday, February 13, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Conference ROM, the Commission will hold a work session to review the packet material for the regular meeting. You are •cordially invited to attend this worksession in order to respond to any questions the Commission may have regarding your request. The Community Development Department will be happy to provide you with any additional information. Sincerely, Patricia Miley Planning Secretary Community Development Department cc: Case File pb COMMISSIONER PATTERSON indicate '''-'gat cul -de -sac definition also included the number of resident the area to determine the traffic. loads. Stating that he tied walked the area, he felt an . easement would be mover suitable for the area. COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED TO GRANT A FINAL SUBDIVISION of Lot 11, U.S. Survey 3103 to Lots 11A and 118, U.S. Survey 3103 per the memo of January 9, 1985, and item number 2 being that an access and utility easement be required of 30 feet. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by majority roll call vote. Commissioners Rennell and Patterson dissented. VII OLD BUSINESS A) CASE 84 -128. Findings of Fact for the denial of_a request for an exception from Section 17.17.020 (Permitted Uses) to permit the removal of approximately 101,000 cubic yards of rock from an RRI- Rural - Residential One lot for the purpose of site develop- ment; generally located across from Bayside Fire Station and adjacent to an existing gravel pit. Lot 3, Block 3, Miller Point Alaska Subdivision COMMISSIONER GREGG indicated there were five findings of fact outlined in the memo from staff. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED. TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT as outlined in the memorandum from the Community Development Depart- ment dated January 9, 1985. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by majority roll call vote. Commissioner Patterson abstained. CASE S -84 -051. Final Subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, Bells Flats Alaska Subdivision to Lots 2A, 2B, and 2C, Block 1, Bells Flats Alaska Subdivision. COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED TO GRANT FINAL SUBDIVISION of Lot 2, Block 1, Bells Flats Alaska Subdivision to Lots 2A, 2B, and 2C, Block 1, Bells Flats Alaska Subdivision per the memo of January 9. 1985 by the Borough Engineer. The motion was seconded and CARRIED unanimous roll call vote. C) CASE S -84 -056. Final Subdivision of Tract D -1, U.S. Survey 1682 to Woodland Acres Subdivision, 5th Addition: Lots 3 -9, Block 7; Lots 1 -15, Block 8; Lots 1 -6, Block 9; Lots 7 -12, Block 10; and Teal Way and the extension of Gull Drive. COMMISSIONER HILL was excused due to a possible conflict of interest. COMMISSIONER JAMES indicated that number one needed more clarification, suggesting• "place covenant on the plat restricting access to Lots 12 -15, Block 8 to Teal Way." LINDA FREED inquired if Lots 1 and 2, Block 9 ought to have the same restriction. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL to this subdivision subject to the conditions in the memorandum from the Borough Engineer dated January 9, 1985, with the following changes made to condition number one: place a covenant on the plat restricting access to Lots 12 -15, Block 8 and Lots 1 and 2, Block 9 to Teal Way. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. VIII NEW BUSINESS There was no New Business. IX COMMUNICATIONS LINDA FREED indicated three communications: (A) a letter of appeal from Alagnak Associates; (8) a letter from Jean E. Alwert; and (C) a memorandum from Staff requesting interpretation. A) Letter of Appeal - Alagnak Associates. P-6 Z Regular Meeting -9- January 16,-1984 COMMISSIONER HILL MOVED, TO ACKNC, fGED RECEIPT of this latter. The motion was seconded sad CARRIED by Unanimous voice vote. Letter from Jean E. elver:, Buccaneer Enterprises. COMMISSIONER' HILL MOVED TO ACT1 0WLEDGE RECEIPT of this latter. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. C) Memorandum from Community Development Department Staff requesting - -- int rpritation of "permitted - uses" (17.24.010).in- -the Industrial__ District. LINDA FREED indicated that currently the Industrial District etates.that "all uses permitted in a B- Buainsaa Zone ars alloyed except those that are residential are permitted in the Industrial District." There is no specific definition of "residential" in Title 17 and therefor* we request clarification from the Commission. A discussion ensued amongst the Commiasionsre. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERPRETATION of the Industrial Diatrict that apartments, hotels and motels are residential uses and therefore disallowed as a use in the industrial zone. -The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. X REPORTS A) December Status Report from the Community Development Department. B) The City Police Department has indicated it will enforce the "no left turn" sign at the exit of McDonald's on to Lower Mill Bay Road. C) A Joint Borough Parka and Recreation Committee and Borough Assembly meeting is scheduled for January 24, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Conference Room and the Commission is invited to attend. XI AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no audience comments. BII COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS COMMISSIONER KNIGHT requested the Chairman excuse him as ha will be on vacation at.the time of the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings scheduled for February 13, 20, 27, March 6 and 13. CHAIRMAN GREGG excused COMMISSIONER KNIGHT. COMMISSIONER HILL indicated that he attended the last City of Kodiak Council meeting and received their endorsement to pursue a "view" ordinance. LINDA.FREED indicated it was one of the items to be conoidered.during the upcoming zoning revision re -write which will be preeented to the Commission in future. XIII ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN GREGG adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION By: Ken Gregg, airma ATTEST BY: ty`u'iA)` Patricia Miley, Plan Ong Secretary DATE APPROVED: Hg( P & Z Regular Meeting -10- January 16, 1984 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 • iL . • • : . • ; `■-•J ' 1..•; I T L_.. - __ r-• ---114,-.=.1- _ __, 4t, ."--- o 0 t n / d,,q' Nt- /r.'444.--, - AilT..7f.-friffA—TS 7fi FEB - 1'85 ey, :7' 1., t . - '---- 2 0 i.-. p I,./:.,-,,,, t ‘-..., Alaska S ,e Housing Authority Box 179 V),, Anchorage, ',(iPaska 99501 / it 1 r, f?/ . ' 61 • • - 1 / KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH iunity Development Department 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 ITEM VI -D PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1985 CASE NUMBER: 85-004 An application for an exception was filed with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Department by: The Kazim Company/Dischner and Mathisen Partnership- . The application requests: an exception from Section i7.24.010 (Permitted Uses) of tM"Borough Code to permit a hotel in an I-Industrial district. Legally described as City Tidelands Tract N-18 and generally located in the area of the Kodiak Cafe. The Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on this request at their regular meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, FEBRUARY 20, 1985 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska. The Commission will also review all items on their agenda for the regular meeting on the preceding Wednesday at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough,Conference Room. This meeting is open to the public. You are being notified because you are a property owner in the area of the request. This is the only scheduled PUBLIC HEARING on the request at this time, and you are invited to appear before the Commission to express your opinion. If you cannot attend this PUBLIC HEARING and wish to comment on the request, fill in the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Department, 710 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak, Alaska, 99615. Your returned comment should be received PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. A vicinity map showing the property involved is included on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please feel free to call our office, the Community Development Department, at 486-5736. YOUR NAME: ADDRESS: YOUR PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS: Yj • 1Y PriPv fiat � i0 :40�j" "fit - A4141 Ogd 1044#81 %lir imantis i / R( SM US C 2537 K Tn1.,.8 C �S -OoSz A/69-nom //al/es- 72/ 7"zy ®ice 6- ocr: g NE7c1 * (-or / to / aaooKoo /o a d.,, S VU _��- 70 Luc 9) A/ l&t2 R LDT SCR /SR 7 ILL 3 / .- A it 0000co 5 o A)44/ k rva� op l on000 41a0 !2 1/ ooaoo a 3/ .d"Db 000-7 v V /1 00000 1-7o s ' / Al / 5 / A. l r oCOO©-7 OO fr— ryiDeury 70 lioK / 7? , 41 . _fgsal g do� 9 % /o /aaov o /oV m c/ OF- fo a,A-/c /0 (-/ 6 - -(q3.8 1387 Ne ri- ( ),Conditional Use Permit (1Exception ( ) Variance ( ) Zoning Change: From: NODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH POST OFFICE BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 To: CODE SECTION INVOLVED: r7. a f. 'OW O C Wit r, fx) (J Z) NOTE: The application fee for all items covered by this form is $50. Conditional Use Permits, Exceptions, and Variance Applications also require the submission of a site plan. APPLICANT: Name Z 21 / '/Vi- Address !¢A/c/-/a/r4 /' 99.3'473 City, State, Zip PROPERT2 77,P4.51 /V/ 5}ND 7l� • Z77— 9'7473 Home Telephone 274'--224'7 Work Telephone Lot Block Subdivision Name lc 0P /4,/ / G /IS/4n United States Survey - Section, Township, Range, S.M. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY: %FE57`/�[J/�,¢ /fir/ PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY: I have been advised received a co o. t .p 21(42 s...i::.Vl -r.d :pith thi s 1orp1 late re'u tires. request and have Authorized Da: . Date Application Acceptee: �3 " 3Y: perty 0wner Date RECEIVED FROM CASH RECEIPT l Kodiak Island Borough 700 UPPER MILL BAY ROAD P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 406 -5736 Po ash 5794 - 000 - 1o1 -10 - oo CASH PROPERTY TAX REAL ., x {-:�' ;ai:;:i ,t l!.e+..•3bltLlM _I Kc " �� �•Ci� }'• f .CCC.r VII ? W >'t,L , •I IT i .� S f I. c,} Go+t>� 1.1 Til +,71: 3, fit t. 010 - 000 - 105 - 01 - 00 010 - 000 - 105 - 06 - 00 PROPERTY TAX, PERSONAL 'x 11i -ops T.�' ;.:p„)t'rCi..•a. 4 - -1. iE'," (':, 040 - 000 - 371 - 11 - 00 LAND SALE, PRINCIPAL it`:• 1-F.._ 040 - 000 - 371 - 12 - 00 LAND SALE, INTEREST 010 -000 - 322 - 11 - 00 BUILDING PERMITS iN.r.:TZ: i i7 010 - 000 - 322 - 17 = 00 ZONING PERMITS , 010 - 000 - 341 - 50 - 00 SALE OF MAPS {3.10..•±, , 010 - 000 -.341 - 51 - 00 SALE OF COPIES Aj yy€ ,ti 010 - 000 - 111 - 61 - 00 PROPERTY TAX, LIENS c�y_y •,,,, PER ATTACHED )twyra �3Lrag.Gj +, y i }� Y'3.✓>t'7 a �„� I it! SO CONDITIONS OF CHECK PAYMENTS TOTAL M► PAYMENTS TENDERED BY CHECK FOR OBLIGATIONS DUE TO -- I,' (. 1 THE BOROUGH ARE SATISFIED ONLY UPON THE CHECK BEING HONORED. RETURNED CHECKS FOR ANY REASON RESTORES THE OBLIGATION AS UNPAID AND SUBJECTS THE PAYER TO ANY CHARGES, FEES OR OTHER LEGAL LIABILITIES AS MAY BE APPLICABLE. PAYOR (j PAYMENT MADE BY El CHECK NO CASH El OTHER FM0B- 511815 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Item IX(C) MEMORANDUM DATE: January 14, 1985 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Community Development Department SUBJ: Information for the January 16, 1985 Regular Meeting RE: Requestrfor Interpretation _ -,.7Permitted- Uses (17.24.010) in the Industrial- bistrict The purpose of this memo is to ask the Commission for an interpretation of permitted uses in the Industrial District. Subsection,A of Section 17.24.010 states that "all uses permitted in B business zones, except residential," are permitted in the industrial zone. There is no specific definition of "residential" in Title 17. Due to potential future developments staff is requesting an interpretation by the Commission of the use of the word residential in this context. Staff believes that the following uses permitted in B business zones might be interpreted as "residential" uses: - -- apartments - -- hotels --- motels Staff would like clear direction from the Commission as to which of these uses should be considered residential for the purposes of this section of the code. For purposes of official action the Commission could, 114 MOVE to interpret "residential" in Section 17.24.010 A of the-Borough Code to mean... • "Via6u#160....t-s, Lot-L. 1v (0..cMpUts. owor esta„mmui...t ■:. 1; • cc: James Dalton Clark Dan Potash ■ BUILDING DEPARTMENT — CITY / BOROUGH OF KODIAK Applicant to fill in between heavy lines. APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT AND CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BUILDING ADDRESS CLASS OF WORK NEW DEMOLISH LOCALITY ALTERATION REPAIR NEAREST CROSS ST. ADDITION MOVE BUILDING PERMIT NO DATE ISSUED USE OF BUILDING w Z 0 NAME SIZE OF BUILDING MAIL ADDRESS NO. OF ROOMS CITY TEL. NO. NO. OF FLOORS NO. OF BUILDINGS VALUATION S BLDG. FEE PLAN CHK. FEE TOTAL U w H w Z NAME NO. OF BUILDINGS NOW ON LOT BUILDING PLUMBING ELECTRIC ADDRESS NO. OF FAMILIES SIZE OF LOT FOUNDATION FRAME ROUGH ROUGH SEPTIC TANK FINISH CITY USE OF BLDG. NOW ON LOT SPECIFICATIONS PLASTER FLUES SEWER FIXTURES GAS STATE LICENSE NO. FOUNDATION • FINAL FINISH MOTORS FINAL CONTRACTOR NAME MATERIAL EXTERIOR, PIERS WIDTH OF TOP ADDRESS WIDTH OF BOTTOM CITY ; ��.•_ - DEPTH IN GROUND R.W. PLATE (SILL) STATE LICENSE NO SI 71 SPA SPAN SUBDIVISION LOT NO. - BLK. DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE 1. Type of Construction I, II, 111, IV, V, VI 2. Occupancy Group A, B, E, H, I, M, R Div. 1, 2, 3, 4 3. Fire Zone 1 2 3 4 GIRDERS JOIST lsl. FL. JOIST 2nd. FL. JOIST CEILING EXTERIOR STUDS INTERIOR STUDS ROOF RAFTERS BEARING WALLS COVERING EXTERIOR WALLS I ROOF INTERIOR WALLS REROOFING FLUES FIREPLACE FL. FURNACE KITCHEN WATER HEATER FURNACE GAS OIL I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application and state that the above is correct and agree to comply with all City Ordinances and State Laws regulating building construction. Applicant :'1"14, L. Cr `+ I % j: 3N11 Al2i3dOt1d PLOT PLAN 3N11 Al2i3dO dd I SETBACK STREET PLANNING & ZONING INFO. ZONING DISTRICT TYPE OF OCCUPANCY NUMBER OF STORIES TOTAL HT. AREA OF LOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM PROP. LINE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM PROP. LINE REAR YARD Approved: CHIEF BUILDING OFFICAL Approved: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR By: By: Vv„ • - • i-'4• 44, . ?''. • n:),/ it‘ .11" 439 40 • 41,0. /4/ 224. /3s- x zz- 66 A' 68-5; `11/0- we?=-..)66;‘-35-0:1 FoK 215c1-INCIZ- MATEit5E.N KorNAK. ALA5KA FE.15 7343 ?Or:. 7,13 0 • .." • Nv • / S.-71T)T. I •"' • Al k N. • • '• ES DALTON LAIC AilcurrEcrs & FLA Nk:KS DP 1011 E4.1 Todot Rout ; Suite, no, Tudor &b Cent.. Anchorego. Aiosku 995 • ' 1,1,4 :s3,-,:r3.13.4 • ; = t•ft,3,: .F33.3). S'N — ........ 74.3i ........ I-1'N. ... . ( ii'c..1.133. tta34...arh::-,:a.,:. _ .,I .;3. itl • .i: * t, ,..,,,,,,TA:= ' 5 . I/ • (1 I.: .1- rc..• 4.,5 .2° ;311 : 17F1 ; 31- — — — '1.',.;ree:• H 33 • -3, : ' - I : r°T.3175._ I -3; . Of , 1 „.... .„....,..4 v .s. 431 "111.:0..•,-41=1:117.i.:1121 • 1.1.4.11`41-, • 1: • • • • • • • 7/ Y ' r ./,'' .,(-). ...,.5. :„... , , ,;,. --e- -. / • i ,.- .:•.;•--? './ ... ,7 .....--,,::.____........_,,,,/ 41 -- --.,.‘-, . . • ,/ • \ ./ ee' • K "ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS • . ;•4.71WiiiTL.521,40S . . • . . . 2 1011 Rut Tudor Road Soda 290: Tudor Bogner. Cont Anchorage, Alaska 99509 Phone: (907) 216.53113 • 4 ••-„,?g, *\•-• el.. ris . • , : • . %Ie.". • • 2Fa4.00' �^�•��iwi0•.F�f•�: .. G"':5•'�`r� vo vim" .}'�; •-��: 1 Kodiak Island Borough. P.O. BOX 1246 • KODIAK, ALASKA 99615: 1.246• • '1113> 7u.s.pliSJACE.:i iA '� .. R '. •,. A �.R. 2�. it. i, Y ' Alaska N_ ee Housing Authority Box179 -' Anchorage,;, :'aska 99501 -d 0 Y11 CT O 0 O Ca Cr, U 0 O 0 < f.'\! N C► N c^f — + r-+ Q c4 c4 --I 1.- u. z M 0 O Ul P■4 CD • riN- UJ c0 J Z ▪ X < 0 0 1 cY • H w w o 0 • Z • C7 e LH-t1 Y AK 99615 Y ti r_ •a ' < 0 OD --- J X < 0 Z Q 0 < 1-4 • H !" O O < • 0 Z 4 Y 9/P • .0DAP INC P.O. BOX 1308 FAIRBANKS KODAP INC P.O. BOX 1308 FAIRBANKS KODAP INC P.O. BOX 1308 FAIRBANKS KODAP INC P.O. BOX 1308 FAIRBANKS R122008 AK 99707 R1220080020 AK 99707 R1220080030 AK 99707 R1220080040 AK 99707 R1220080050 BISHOP,WM/BLAIR,ROBT/ WILLIAMS,NORMAN P.O. BOX 848 KODIAK AK 99615 R1220050060 BISHOP,WM/BLAIRIROBT/ WILLIAM5vNORMAN P.O*BOX 848 KODIAK AK 99615 R1220080070 BISHOPIWM/8LAIR,ROBT/ WILLIAM,NORMAN P.O. BOX 848 KODIAK AK 99615 oc';tisi ELKS CLUB V-1772 P.O. BOX 846 R1220100010 AI" R1100000090 WESTERN ALASKA FISHERIES 1111 3RD AVE SUITE 1201 UA nomn, R1100000231 KODIAK SWIFTSURE CORP P.Q.BOX 746 KODIAK AK 99615 KODIAK KING CRAB P.O. BOX 1457 KODIAK P1100000070 AK 99615 R1100000200 ALASKA FRESH SEAFOODS INC P.O. BOX 647.