USS 2537B & USS 562 TR A-1 - Variance (3)KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. V-78-058
A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COM-
MISSION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT 55 ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED DWELLING UNITS
ON A SITE WHICH WOULD ACCOMODATE 40.7 CONVENTIONAL DWELLING UNITS. (SUNSET
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY).
WHEREAS, a petition was received from Sunset Development Company
requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 17.21.040, minimum lot
area, of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances, and use of a building
containing 55 dwelling units for elderly and handicapped persons on a site
which will accomodate 40.7 conventional dwelling units. And,
WHEREAS, notice was published, notices were mailed and a public
hearing was held, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found the individual dwelling unit design
required to meet federal elderly and handicapped housing needs limits the num-
ber of persons per dwelling unit to less persons than would be allowed in a
. more conventional apartment building, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found the proposed site is ideally located
to provide the community services and facilities necessary to support the hous
ing needs of elderly and handicapped persons, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found the total site density generated by
55 dwelling units would be equal to or less than that generated by 40.7 con-
ventional dwelling units, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found the petitioners owned a 1,600 +
square foot parcel of land immediately adjacent to Tract "A" which could be in-'
corporated into the proposed site.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Kodiak Island Borough Planning
and Zoning Commission that this request for a variance is granted subject to th0
following condition:
1. That the 1,631 square foot portion of Lot 30, Block 1, Erskine
Subdivision, owned by Mr. Fred Brechan and Mr. Lou Iani, be sold to Sunset De-
velopment Corporation and included into Tract "A" within 30 days.
ADOPTED this 19th day of November , 1978.
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH
PLANNING AND Z NG COMMISSION
8.N
Chairman
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. V-78-057
A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 17.18.040 AND
17.21.050, TO PERMIT A BUILDING TO ENCROACH APPROXIMATELY SEVENTY-FIVE (75')
FEET INTO A REQUIRED SIDE YARD. (SUNSET DEVELOPMENT COMPANY).
WHEREAS, a petition was received from Sunset Development Company
requesting a variance from the requirements of Sections 17.18.040 and 17.21.050
(minimum side yards of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances), to permit
a building to encroach approximately seveRtyrfive,(75 ) feet into required
side yard, and
WHEREAS, notice was published, notices were mailed and a public
hearing was held, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found the site design and building location
for this use provided the best utilization of the lands, thus eliminating the
need for a 75' side yard on the west side of the building, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found that granting this request 'was con-
sistent with the actions the Commission felt it had taken in 1976, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found the proposed use consistent with the
objectives of the zoning ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Kodiak Island Borough Planning
and Zoning Commission that the request for a variance is approved.
ADOPTED this 19th day of November , 1978.
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. V-78-056
A RESOLUT ON OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH .PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM THE OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS OF SEC-
TION 17.57.010 OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH CODE OF ORDINANCES ( SUNSET DE-
VELOPMENT COMPANY).
WHEREAS, a petition was received from Sunset Development Company
requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 17.57.010 (off-street
parking requirements) of the Kodiak Island Borough. Code of Ordinances to pro-
vide only 26 of the 55 required parking spaces, and,
WHEREAS, notice was published, notices were mailed and a public
hearing was held, and, -
WHEREAS, the Commission found approximately 34% of the' elderly and
handicapped persons residing in the Borough own a motor vehicle, and,
WHEREAS, the Commission found the Senior Citizens of Kodiak Asso-
ciation own's and operates two mini-buses for the exclusive, purpose of provid-
ing transportation for the elderly, and, •
WHEREAS, the Commission found the off-street parking need of the
proposed use were sufficiently different to warrant a variance, and,
WHEREAS, the Commission found reducing the parking requirements
from 55 to 37 spaces would be consistent with the needs of the occupants, and
the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Kodiak Island Borough Planning
and Zoning Commission that a variance to reduce the off-street parking require-
ment from 55 to 37 spaces is hereby granted subject to the following condition:
1. The Planning Official shall from time to time check the site to
insure that 37 spaces are adequate. If it is found that additional spaces are
needed, he shall report the need to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The
Commission may then if they deem it necessary, change the variance to require
all or part of the parking spaces required.
ADOPTED this 19th day of November , 1978.
ATTEST:
ecre
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
•
PHONE (907) 486 - 3224
P.O.BOX 1397
KODIAK, ALASKA 99615
Mr. Harry Milligan'.
Planning Director
Kodiak, Island 'Borough
P.O. Box 1246
Kodiak,. Alaska .99615..
Dear Mr. Milligan:
Enclosed is Lorraine Dayton's 'zoning appeal to .the City Council.. Please
prepare- the Planning and Zoning Commission's-record, so - that a date can •
be set . for' the appeal.. Thank 'you for your cooperation.
, Very truly yours,
CITY OF KODIAK,
r . ,
Libby Presnall
City Clerk
LP /yb
Enclosure
Irmirr
sue; •
1 "be
GEORGE A. DICKSON
M. P. EVANS
BEN J. ESCH
M. GREGORY PAPAS
KELLY C. FISHER
TO:
>
DICKSON, EvANs, Es H & PAPAS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
880 H STREET, SUITE 200
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501
NOTICE OF APPEAL
City Council of Kodiak sitting
as Board of. Adjustment
City Clerk, City of Kodiak
Box 1397
Kodiak, Alaska 99615
FROM: Lorraine Dayton (Appellant)
DATE: October 26, 1978
. TELEPHONE -
EL9 07
276.
A
RE: Lot area, side yard, and parking space
variances granted to.Sunset Development
• COmpany for. the Kodiak Elderly Housing
Project on October 19, 1978, by the
Kodiak Island Borough.
Dear Council Members:
• Pursuant to Chapter 17.10 of the ordinances of the
City of Kodiak, Lorraine Dayton, by and through her attorneys,
DICKSON, EVANS, ESCH & PAPAS, appeals the action of the
Planning and Zoning Commission of the Kodiak Island Borough
on. October 19, 1978, which:
• 1. "Clarified" a lot area variance to Sunset
Development Company for the Kodiak Elderly Housing Project;
2. "Clarified" a parking space.varianc.e for the
Kodiak Elderly Housing Project and;
3. "Clarified" a side yard variance for the
Kodiak Elderly Housing Project.
Appellant, Lorraine'Dayton's address is P.O. Box
287, Kodiak, Alaska.
Before addressing the points of appeal, Lorraine
Dayton requests that you stay hearing of this appeal until
the Superior Court of the State of Alaska makes a decision
on Sunset Development Company's Motion to Stay Proceedings
To: City Council of Kodiak
Re: Notice of Appeal
Date: October 26, 1978
Page: Two
in the Civil Case No. 3AN78-3988, which is related to this
matter. Lorraine Dayton opposes Sunset Development Company's.
Motion to Stay in that proceeding because the afore-mentioned
clarification of variances is contingent upon the zoning of
Lot 39 of the Elderly Housing Project site and on the status
of the 1974 height limitation on Tract A of the Elderly
Housing Project site. If, as Lorraine Dayton contends in
that suit, Lot 39 has not been rezoned from R-3 to business,
then "clarification" of the variances by the Borough and
subsequently by the City of Kodiak will have no effect.
These variances have been clarified by, the Planning and Zon-
ing Commission on the assumption that Lot 39 is in fact
zoned B. Lorraine Dayton is presently asking the Court to
consider the issue of whether or not Lot 39 is in fact
properly zoned B.
Another reason to postpone the hearing of this
appeal is that if the Court finds that Mr. Iani's promise in
1974 to limit building heights on Tract A to one story above
Rezahoff Drive is still in effect, that height limitation
will substantially effect the use of the Kodiak Elderly
Housing Project.'Sunset.Development Company has not asked
Kodiak Island Borough or the City of Kodiak to waive the
height limitation. This action should be postponed until
judicial resolution of the zoning and height limitation
issues. Lorraine Dayton's opposition to Sunset Development
Company's Motion to Stay Proceedings is attached as Exhibit
icAn.
If the City Council decides to proceed at this
time with Lorraine Dayton's appeal, please inform,us of what
is,the exact nature and effect of the clarification of •
variances granted to Sunset Development Company. Also,
.pleae inform us of what is the jurisdictional for the
clarification actions so that we may make concise and well-
:reasoned-statements.of points on appeal.
The reason for this appeal can be divided into
procedural-jurisdictional questions and into substantive
points of law: This Notice of Appeal will state briefly the
points of appeal. Lorraine Dayton will submit supplemental
briefs to the City Council-fifteen days after the Clerk has
her Notice of Completion of the Record, of Appeal. See
City of Kodiak Ordinance No. 17.10.040.
To: City Council of Kodiak
Re: Notice of Appeal
Date: October 26, 1978
Page: Three
A. PROCEDURAL-JURISDICTIONAL POINTS OF APPEAL.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Commission failed
to provide written notice to all property owners
within 300 feet of the Kodiak Elderly Housing
Project as required by the Kodiak Island Borough
Code.
(2) Mr. Erwin, a member of the Planning and
Zoning Commission, failed to disqualify himself on
the basis of conflicts of interest and ex-parte
contacts with the senior citizens group of Kodiak.
The Senior Citizens Association undeniably has an
interest in completion of the Elderly Housing Pro-
ject.
(3) The Planning and Zoning Commission con-
ducted private debate on the substance of this
public matter of clarification of the variances
for the Elderly Housing Project; This private
debate apparently occurred during an "executive
session" of the Planning and Zoning Commission
held on October 19, 1978. The absence of real and
meaningful debate, apart from the comments of Mr.
Baker, on the difficult issues raised in Sunset's
requests for clarification of variances, indicate
that this public matter had been discussed in
private and that the Commission members made up
their minds based on these private discussions.
(4) Providing a.staff-report to the Commission
and to the public.on the second night of the
hearing, October 19, 1978, after announcement on
October 18 that the public hearing was closed, did
not give the Commission members or the public with
sufficient time to evaluate the merits of that
report. This shortcoming violated,the spirit of
the law which states that public hearings shall be
held prior to granting variances.
(5) Petitioner for the clarification of the
variances, Sunset Development Company, failed to
verify its application as required by the Kodiak
Island Borough Code.
To: City Council of Kodiak
Re: Notice of Appeal
Date: October 26, 1978
Page: Four
(6) Sunset Development Company withheld in-
formation_pertinent to its application for the
variances from the public prior to October 18,
1978, in violation of the spirit of the public
hearing and the requirements of the Kodiak Island
Borough Code.
(7) Notice to the publiq-of the scheduled
public hearing was confusing in that it did not
state precisely what was to be considered by the
Planning and Zoning Commission; therefore the
notice was inadequate.
(8) The Planning and. Zoning Commission does
not have jurisdiction to clarify previous action
which, have never took place. Neither the Kodiak
Island Borough nor the City of.Kodiak can grant
variances by implication; therefore, no side yard,
lot area or parking space variances have been
previously granted to Sunset Development Company
for the Elderly Housing Project. Because these
variances were not previously granted, the Planning
and Zoning Commission had nothing to clarify. The
Planning and Zoning Commission's attempt to clarify
previous, non-existent, variances was without
effect.
B. SUBSTANTIVE POINTS OF APPEAL.
The petitioners for "clarification of variances"
failed to meet their burden of proof which is set out in
§17.66.090 et seq. of the Kodiak Island Borough Code. • The
impact of the variances permitting a building which exceeds
the lot area requirements by fifteen dwelling units, exceeds
the side yard requirements by approximately 73 feet, and
lacks 18 of the required parking spaces, substantially
injures Lorraine Dayton's use and enjoyment of her home on
Erskine Avenue and substantially reduces her property, value.
There are no physical or geographic hardships which necessitate
clarification or. granting of these variances. The variances
as clarified are contrary to the objectives of Comprehensive
plan in that they permit a building which is not compatible
with surrounding residental areas. If the strict application
and the provisions of the Kodiak Island Borough Code Land
Use Regulations do result in,, impractical difficulties or.
hardships to,i_Sunset Developmenteampany, those hardships and
To: City Council of Kodiak
Re: Notice of Appeal
Date: October 26, 1978
Page: Five
difficulties arise only because of the project selected and •
built by Sunset Development Company does not comply with the
land use requirements of the Borough. There are no excep-
tional physical circumstances or physical conditions which
preclude all types of commercial development of this property
and thereby necessitate •issuance or clarification of these
variances.
Lorraine Dayton feels that the standard of review
of the Board of Adjustment as established in City of Kodiak
Ordinance No. 17.10.090 will necessitate that the decision
of the Planning and Zoning Commission be reversed. The
variances clarified permit so great a deviation from the
requirements of the Kodiak Island. Borough Code that they are
a use variance prohibited by the city ordinance. Further,
the Planning and Zoning Commission was substantially influenced
by reasons of pecuniary hardship and inconvenience of Sunset
Development Company caused by the actions of that company.
Reading City of Kodiak ordinance §17.10.020(D), it
is not clear to Lorraine Dayton how the costs for preparing
the record of appeal will be distributed. Please inform us
at your earliest convenience how these costs will be met.
Thank you for your attention to thesepoints of
appeal. If you would like further discussion from us on the
question of whether or not this appeal should be stayed
pending legal action in the Superior Court, we will be happy
to brief that issue in a separate memorandum before you make-
your decision on that point.
GAD/kpo •
cc: Richard Garnett, III
cc: Bob Mahoney
ely
e A. ick tkci`j"
1
Attorney for Lorraine Dayton
• •-
IN TUE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE.STATE.OF ALASKA
.
:THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE;
OROUGH
Defendant...
Case No. 3AN- 78- 3988.
MEMORANDUM ' IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S.
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION.TO STAY-. PROCEEDINGS
The issues raised in plaintiff'_s complaint and addressed
in her Motion for Partial.Sunanary.Judgment contest the zoning
status of the defendants',. land.which is the site for the Kodiak
Eldering Housing Project... Defendant Sunset Development Company's
"Petition for Clarification"..submitted,to Kodiak cannot resolve
he.issues in this suit.becausa,it.,is. based on only one of several-
- - ••
. possible resolutions of the. issues, in.this.suit regarding zoning
of.the property.
I. THE ZONING :.STATUS
-Kodiak Planning and Zoning.Commission acted on de -.
fendants' petition for clarification in..a meeting on October 18,
1978.-" Commission Chairman .Dan .Busch ruled, .and was 'supported by
a vote of the commission,. that .Lot 39..is ..zoned . °.B" Plaintiff
contends that Lot 39 is ..zoned .R -3 because :an .earlier attempt in
1976 to rezone the property;was void,for.:lack -of jurisdiction
:because of lack of adequate notice of the required public hearin
At..the October 18, 1978..meeting,.the.Rodiak Planning and Zoning
commission proceeded to consider variances which would legalize
the Eldering dousing. Proj.ect'.sviolation of.the Kodiak Island
Borough Code. .Each of the variances was .evaluated and granted on
the contingency that Lot 39 Is, .,in _fact, zoned .for . business. If
the Court at•a later timq ,..upholds..Lorraine.Dayton's contention
that Lot 39 is zoned R -3;. then all administrative actions in ...; _
regard to variances will-be nullified because.they.were based on
a` 'zoning classification. for :the .property. , which .does not, In fact,
exists R.
•
°If.Lot 39 is zoned for residential uses, Sunset's
building is illegal and the purported. variances asked for in the
defendant's Petition for.,Clarification are without effect...
Kodiak Planning and Zoning Commission did not take any
new action on the zoning status .of ,.Lot ,39_. ,That . Commission chose
not to delve into the zoning „issues .raised .in ..Lorraine Dayton's
complaint. In response_ to.the.Petition..for Clarification,,
..Lorraine Dayton requested.that.the Commission..either.(a)_ begin
rezoning from "R' to ")3p,: or . (b) sidestep the issue :altogether.
..The Planning and Zoning_Commission.chose : the.later route, finding
that lots were zoned "B "4- ,This..finding was.not based on.investi-
gation of the facts or even .on:a.pretense of. interfering with a
- judicial resolution on the questiona.of.zoning status raised by
Lorraine Dayton. ��_, r:vCr� +z .:: :a:
Kodiak is only-.empowered to rezone or to zone afresh.
See Kodiak Island Dorough Code,. .Title 21. The Planning and
Zoning Commission of Kodiak has.no,power.to clarify the land use
classification by summary ,action of _a ruling by .,the Chairman of
the Commission. The chairman's actions..in.no way resolves the
issues raised in Lorraine .Dayton's .suit .about notice for the
__
public hearing for rezoning of .Lob.. 39.... , .,.
Lorraine Dayton's questions on. the.. zoning status
of Lot
39 should be resolved before both parties waste:time.and legal
fees pursuing variances. in the abstract,:as proposed by Sunset's
"Petition for Clarification , stay .of .proceedings will not
•
prevent a piecemeal 'approach-to the . iasues raised by .Lorraine
•
Dayton. Rather, because of ...the contingent and .abstract nature of
the Petition for Clarification „and .of the Planning and zoning,.
Commission's action thereon, ..further•.aftinistrative action will '
only encourage a piecemeal ..approach , to _they legal issues- involved
in this suit.
II. 1974 HEIGHT LIMITATION:-
Lorraine Dayton's complaint alleges that a height limi-
tation exists on Tract B ,of the Kodiak Eldering Housing Project
by virtue of a stipulation.and promise made by Louis Tani in the
1974 rezoning of that• parcel.,..Defendant Sunset Development
has failed to petition _Kodiak - for ..removal of that .height
limitation. If the height ,limitation is .binding as plaintiff.:
asserts, lot area variances .requested by the ,defendant ,Sunset
Development Company will have no real :effect in permitting -a:..
structure which rises more :than _one story above Rezanoff Drive..
Plaintiff alleges that one affect.and. purpose of Y.odiak's lot
area /dwelling unit ratio „is that „this ratio .limits the height of
the Kodiak Eldering Housing.Project -to one story above Rezanoff-
Drive. • The 1974 height limitation and ,promise has the
effect. w pA. •44F i•p -.
•
Defendant should not be permitted . to `petition for. -,.-,.
removal of the height limitatio,n .without ..admitting that the limi-
tation in -fact exists. Again, ,the Kodiak Land Use Code and .state
law do not authorize land use regulation in the
failing to petition at, the earliest possible. time for removal of
he .1974 height limitation ,,on , Tract :A, .Sunset ,waives .~its .-right to
further- delay -a judicial ,proceeding an that .question.
• • III. . VARIANCES..
-Sunset petitioned for wclarificationW_of variances. .1..
There is no record that defendant Sunset has ever obtained
variance on the lot area :and ,parking .spaces .requirements of :the .
Kodiak Island Borough Code, .Title ,.21.,.., •.See :Plaintiff's Exhibit
"B". Further, plaintiff.alleges.that Sunset.never obtained any
side yard variances from .the .Borough.:.; -.:; .; • . ° ., r:
There are no outstanding variances to be, clarified.by.:
.. ...N. w' -.- ...may. ,-. 4 ... ;-:..•.?- •
the defendant's request. ;,.The only .possible .administrative .:':
action which could resolve ,the_matter..expeditiously while avoiding
a piecemeal approach is_for Sunset,.after. properly rezoning the:,..
property'to "B" without. any height.. limitation,. to admit that .the
defendant •has obtained no variances .for .the property and
petition-Kodiak for lot, area, .parking .space -and side
variances
•
' Sunset has not chosen to .ask .for ,variances
Sunset's petiton, (see plaintiff ! s Exhibit . ",A ".) . at page
stated:- `., ...
This petition is presented.as a means of
removing any question regarding.the effect ....
of earlier Commission and Assembly acts
toward the legality of the project. It is
not.to be construed as a waiver .of any .
defenses or causes of action existing or
-hereafter arising against.any individual,
corporation, city or borough regarding thi
project..
-As pointed out in Lorraine ,Dayton's .responsa to.Sunset's
•
Petition for Clarification (P.laintiff'.s ,,Exhibit.., "A".) ,. Kodiak
Island Borough Code does .not .authorize .:exercise of public land •
use controls in the abstract .as requested by .Sunset. . .Sunset's_..- s
Petition:for Clarification .and..oral_arguments made to the Kodiak
Planning and Zoning Commission on ,October .18th and 19th outline
a theory that variances. were, granted by implication when Kodiak.
issued a building permit for the project. This assertion is not.-
the laws Erroneously issued building permits are null and void
and do net authorize zoning violations.. Kodiak Island Borough..
Code, 517.75.060 and S17.03.060(0.—
r
Sunset's Petition for Clarification.ofVariances -is=
not adequately based on the-.facts and ,.is not .author ized by law.-
Further administrative procedure will •_only ,waste time and
•
sources of both parties..,. The legal issues which are raised in
Lorraine. Dayton's complaint must be resolved before - Rodiak's :' :-
action can be truly effective..,
} ` DATED thisa3 .day of
Alaska. .
•
r-
THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE .STATE OP ALASKA_
TUIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE
ORRAINE DAYTON
-
• .Plaintiff,. •
.XODIAK ISLAND BOROUG
et ala,
Defendant ,
Case No. 3AN -78 -3988 .
'OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT SUNSET. DEVELOPMENT._:;
COMPANY'S S MOTION FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS.
•:, y
Pursuant to Civil Rule 77, .Plaintiff,- Lorraine Dayton,
replies to Defendants Louis Iani,_Fred Brechan, Ruth S. Brechan,
Francis S. Tani and Neil.& Company,.Inc. d/b /a. Sunset Development
Company's Motion for Stay..of Proceedings. by. requesting.the Court
to deny the . motion so that ..the .partios . can .proceed ' to litigate
this matter on the basis ..of - Lorraine Dayton's .Motion For Summa
"Judgment. This answer is supported. by.an.Affidavit.of George
Dickson . and Memorandum of Law and the attached exhibits.
Pursuant to Civil Rule 77(d),. plaintiff, Lorraine
`Dayton, requests oral argument on .the Motion.. Notice of Hearing
-is i s attached to this Reply. -
DATED this 23rd day o
October,..1978, .at Anchorage
George A. Dickson
•
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR STATE OF ALASKA
THIRD JUDYCIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE
vs
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH, •
et al• ►..._ •..
Defendant...
AVIT
STATE OF ALASKA
.. .....,, .� ss.`.`. - _ ' ?a•.. _
THIRD - JUDICIAL DISTRICT._ ;�. _ w a ?i r; r•.i y` u v
GEORGE A. DICKSON, first duly
.deposes and saysi�:
1. .That he isathe attorney ,for the plaintiff in
above- entitled action.
That he has examined the .laws of the Borough of
Kodiak, State of Alaska, and, finds no authorization for the
•
actions taken by the- Kodiak .Planning ,and .Zoning Commission on
October .18th end• 19th, 1978 ..
3. That further delay and .judicial consideration of
ter will prejudice :the•plaintiff,.- Lorraine_Dayton, because ~:
it ,permits further construction of the project and possibly - -_ • '- • -
• shifts' equities against Lorraine Dayton by creating the potential
of an- increasingly greater. financial.loss,to the defendant which,
•may be balanced against t -the interests of Lorraine Dayton.:.
•
.FURTHER YOUR APPIANT SAYETH .NAUGHT.
ay of October, 1978, at Anchorage, AK..
George A. Dickson
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before .me this cA3 day of
1978:: ,: t :.},;; : ,.`;M a� :::� �•�
AF.Y PUBLIC IN AND FOR ALASKA
COMMISSION EXPIRES:
s r,�7 : ...... _ : r,:^' }� ..... .. - . ,...,... it ^. J:1..'sr _ ;�4e,b :. . '.t :.'.:.,..•`t
a
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA
THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE
Case No. 3AN -78 -3988
•
ORDER..
BASED'on the attached Reply_, Affidavit,, Memorandum an
Exhibits, it is hereby
- ORDERED that the defendants, Sunset Development Company's
Motion to Stay Proceedings is . hereby ..denied ,and defendant
ordered_,to answer plaintiff'.s.Motion. for Summary Judgment within
ten (10)
days. .
DATED this
_1978, at Anchorage,
•Alaska.-"
•
Ig
FOR USE ON CONSIGNEE'S COUPEN-7'FLT. NCB
WeeAt AIR ALASKA WO ROUTES EXPEDITED SMALL PACKAGE
SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS ON ONLY SERVICE TICKET
BACK OF CONSIGNEES COUPON
SHIPPER'S NAME
lC.%>4 7%! /1/— 7/ 15-
,:SHIPPER'S SIGNATURE
r
ORIG. CITY
CONSIGNEE NAME / /
;�, ,r
.CONSIGNEE SIGNATURE
PTED BY WC AGENT
CPN 1
EXCESS VALUATION•OECLARED $
NO EXCESS V "'
a 2:`ir5L n!' 4J
DESCRIPTION:
3106-02-
isi if I +1001
_2190. 4040_ 4
Li
lmgin C
CASHJII I
j WI EN evi I it
'CREDIT CARD
DECLARED VALUE.
MAXIMUM $50.00
UNLESS INSURED
FOR MORE,
�DEST(.""_
AIR CHARGES
) TAX 11Sne. •J
%INSU
NGE ='
1TOTALi
on
ts'
'DATE AND PLACE t,. „iSOE
FORMiOF PAYMENT:3AWIEN,CREDIT1CARD imprint of name
'and 'addres`s 'of party'to`be 'billed9f "air freight to bill)..
fis t9 .l; {`,'.r •ltd4c '}oq at. t;+
nocli
// C C.--.
TICKCT HUMBER I CK
Mr. David Wolf
TO ;
• 9097.West 9th AVenue-
1 • Anchorage AK 99501
FROM KODIAK ISLAND BQROUG!
P. 0. BOX 12464..1,4::
KODIAK, ALASKA 041615 -
.._5118JEOCOURT SUMMONS
DATE June:, 0,-i 1978.'1
Dear Mr. Wolf:
‘1 •
--.Enclbsed you will find a copy of a court summons served on the borough this.'da"te,i-Y,
.regarding Lorraine Dayton, Plaintiff vs. Kodiak Island Borough and Louis
and Fred Brechan, dba Sunset,Development„ Defendant (s). No. 3AN-78 3988 cu. :I
We are sending this to your attention for appropriate response.
Pi:EASEREPLY TO .SIGNED
1 • t
aa&tiRachel Clutter, Manager's Office
DATE
SIGNED
1
RETAINED BY SENDER
• /
KSON, EVANS,
;CH & PAPAS
ORNEYS AT LAW
SRO H STREET
JORAGE, AK 99501
J07) 276-2272
IN THE. SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA
THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE ,
LORRAINE DAYTON,
Plaintiff,
VS. •
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH; and
LOUIS IANI and FRED BRECHAN,
dba SUNSET DEVELOPMENT CO.,
Defendants.
case No. 3AN-78- 59V?
COMPLAINT
COMES NOW Plaintiff, LORRAINE DAYTON, by and through
her attorneys, Dickson, Evans, Esch & Papas, and alleges as
follows:
AVERMENTS
Lorraine Dayton is a resident of the Kodiak Island
Borough, Alaska.
The KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH is a municipal corporation of
the State of Alaska and exercises zoning and police powers con-
ferred on it by Title 19 of the Alaska Statutes.
LOUIS IANI and FRED BRECHAN are residents of Alaska,
doing business as SUNSET DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, which is the devel-
oper of the Kodiak Elderly Housing Project.
IV
On January 23, 1974, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning
and Zoning Commission considered rezoning Lots Forty (40) through
orty-five (45), Block Two (2); and Lot Twelve (12), Block One
(1); Erskine Subdivision from R-3 to B. In, response. to concerns
xpressed by Commissioners and neighboring residents about
• • '
f'
the potential height of buildings on the lots, Mr. Louis
Iani, an owner of the lots, agreed that any future building
on these lots would not rise over one and one-half (1 1/2)
stories above Rezanoff Drive, an adjacent street.
V
On March 7, 1974, the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly
approved the rezoning of Lots Forty (40) through Forty-five (45),
Block Two (2); and Lot Twelve (12), Block One (1); Erskine Subdi-
vision, from R-3 to B. Mr. Iani's promise to limit the height of
future buildings, so as not to obstruct the view of residents
north of Rezanoff Drive, was a significant factor in the decision
to approve the rezoning. See Ordinance 74-5-0.
VI
On July 1, 1976 the Kodiak Island Borough attempted to
rezone Lot Thirty7nine,.,(39), Block Two (2), Erskine Subdivision
from R-3 to B.
VII
On July 28, 1976, Mr. Louis Iani, acting for Sunset
1b0pmeit Company, wrote a letter to the Borough requesting an
4•1(
(4 "exception" from the side yard and height requirements of the 13
tH zone for the property known as "U.S. Survey 2537B, Tract A and
aer'
Lot 39, Erskine Subdivision, U.S. Survey 562.
VIII
At its August 4 and 10 1976 meetings, the Planning and
, a
Zoning Commission did not treat Sunset Development Company's
/r/ZrY" request for an exception as a request for a variance.
IX
At the August 4 and 10, 1976 meetings of the Planning
and Zoning Commissidn, the Commission did not actually consider
or approve a height exception or variance.
fiz 1.1./-".(„5>
CKSON. EVANS.
'SCH & PAPAS
TORNEYS AT LAW
BOO H STREET
HORACE. AK 99501
19071 276.2272
Page Two
Complaint
X
During the course of the August 4 and subsequent August
10, 1976 Planning and Zoning Commission meetings, the Commission
did not engage in the-detailed factual analysis required by the
/
fdi
Kodiak Island Borough code for granting a variance. See Kodiak
Island Borough Code §§ 17.66.130, .140, and .150.
XI
The Planning and Zoning Commission failed to give
proper notice necessary to conduct a public hearing, which is a
prerequisite for granting a variance. See Kodiak Island Borough
Code § 17.66.100.
XII
The Sunset Development Company did not obtain a height
variance for the elderly housing project.
1//,,,/,/- The height of the elderly housing project building
c12
;-exceeds the fifty—foot (50') maximum permitted in B zones.
XIII
't?
frviv ,
XIV
At its August 10, 1976 meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission granted a side yard "exception" only. for
vision Tract A U.S. 562 Sunset Development." Tract
"Erskine Subdi-
A does not
include Lot Thirty-nine (39), Block Two (2), Erskine Subdivision,
where the side yard violation occurs.
XV
The Sunset Development Company did not obtain a side
yard variance for the elderly housing project.
DICKSON, EVANS.
ESCH & PAPAS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
050 H STREET
■NCHORAGE. AK 99501
(907) 276-2272
XVI
On August 30, 1977 the Kodiak Island Borough issued a
building permit for the construction of a fifty-five (55) unit
elderly housing project to be built on Lots Thirty-nine (39)
through Forty-five (45), Block Two (2); and Lot Twelve (12),
Block One (1); Erskine Subdivision, in Kodiak. The building
ermit was issued to Sunset Development COmpany of Kodiak.
age Three
omplaint
XVII
During December, 1977 Lorraine Dayton perceived that.
the framing of the upper stories of the elderly housing project'
rose to a height well above one and one-half (1 1/2) stories over
Rezanoff Drive, significantly impairing the scenic view of nearby
residents, including Lorraine Dayton,
XVIII
On January 5, 1978 Lorraine Dayton sent a letter to
Sunset Development Corporation informing them that the elderly
housing project under construction was in violation of the
Kodiak Island Borough Code. She further informed the developer
that she would institute an action to force the builders to con-
form to the Borough Code.
XIX
By January 5, 1978, Defendant Sunset Development Com-
pany was notified of Lorraine Dayton's allegations and her inten-
tion to force compliance with the Kodiak Island Borough Code.
XX
By January 23, 1978 Kodiak Island Borough was informed
of Lorraine Dayton's allegations and her intention to force com-
pliance with the Borough Code.
1
(SON. EVANS.
CH & PAPAS
)RNEYS AT LAW
SO H STREET
)RAGE. AK 99501
)7) 276-2272
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Plaintiff realleges all the averments.
On March 3, 1974 the Kodiak Island Borough, hereinafter
eferred to as "Borough", rezoned Lots 40-45, Block 2; and
t 12, Block 1, Erskine Subdivision, from R-3 to B.
On July 1, 1976 the Borough attempted to rezone
ts 23, 24, 26 and 39, Block 1, Erskine Subdivision from R-3 to B.
age Four
omplaint
11.07r
area to permit business commercial uses was incompatible with
existing uses in the area and was illegal spot zoning.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Plaintiff realleges all the averments and the allegations
n all previous causes of action.
This rezoning of small parcels of land in a residential
On.August 30, 1977 the Kodiak Island Borough issued a
;building permit for the elderly housing project, permitting
construction of a building over fifty (50) feet above the ori-
ginal landscape of Lots 39 and 40, which building extends well
over one and one-half (1 1/2) stories above Rezanoff Drive.
f,
1CKSON. EVANS.
ESCH & PAPAS
TTORNEYS AT LAW
SOO 11 STREET
CHORAGE. AK 99501
(907) 276-2272
The construction of the elderly housing project by
Defendant Sunset Development Company violates the 1974 agreement
by Louis Iani to limit the height of buildings on the lots
in Erskine Subdivision so that they do not impair the view
of residents north of Rezanoff Drive.
C771- THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Plaintiff realleges all the averments and the allegations
in all previous causes of action.
Pursuant to attempting to rezone Lot 39 from R-3
to B in July 1976, the Borough Assembly failed to give
proper notice of the required public hearing.
Zoning amendments passed.without proper public
hearing are void because of lack of jurisdiction.
Page Five
Complaint
ICKSON. EVANS.
ESCH & PAPAS
.TTORNEYS AT LAW
BOO H STREET
CHORAGE, AK 99501
(907) 276-2272
fl
IV
Thus Lot 39 is still zoned R-3; the elderly housing
project exceed the Thirty-Five (35) foot height restrictions' for
buildings in the R-3 zone.
V
The Borough has not issued a variance from the R-3
height requirement to the builder.
VI
The building permit for the elderly housing project is
not in compliance with the Kodiak Island Borough Code, and is
.therefore null and void. Kodiak Island Borough Code,
(c).
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
§ 17.03.060
Plaintiff realleges.all the averments and the allegations
in all previous causes-Of action.
Measured from the footing level below grade, the
height of the building exceeds the fifty foot (50') maximum
permitted in B zones.
The Borough issued a. building permit for a. structure not
in conformance with the Borough code; therefore the building
permit is void. Kodiak Island Borough Code § 17.03.060(c).
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Plaintiff realleges all the averments and the allegations
in all previous causes of action.
Page Six
Complaint
The elderly housing project has fifty-five (55) units.
DICKSON. EVANS,
ESCH & PAPAS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ORO 14 STREET
■NCHORAGE, AK 99501
(907) 276-2272
The.Kodiak Island Borough Land Use Code requires One
Thousand (1,000) square feet of lot per dwelling unit when a
structure has over four. (4) dwelling units.
IV
The lot for the project, as listed on the building
permit, is 43,100 square feet in area.
V
The density requirement is violated. The building
permit is in violation' of a Kodiak Island Borough Code and
therefore is null and void. Kodiak Island Borough Code 17.03.
060(c).
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Plaintiff rdalleges all the averments and the allegations
in all previous causes of action.
The elderly housing project has fifty-five (55) units.
The Kodiak Island Borough Code requires one parking
space for each unit.
IV
The final site plan for the project shows only twenty-
six (26) parking spaces.
V
The building permit approved on the basis of the final
site plan is null and void, because the parking space require-
ments are violated. Kodiak Island Borough Code § 17.03.060(c).
Page Seven
Complaint
'CKSON. EVANS.
;SCH & PAPAS
rTORNEYS AT LAW
eeo H STREET
:HORAGE. AK 99501
(907) 276-ZZ72
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Plaintiff realleges all the averments and the allegations
in all previous causes of action.
The West gable end of the elderly housing project ,
building does not meet the side yard requirements for commercial
buildings adjacent to residential areas.
The Kodiak Island Borough has not granted the devel-
opers of the project a variance from the side yard requirements.
IV
The Kodiak Island Borough issued the building permit in
conflict with the provisions of Title 17 of the Kodiak Island
Borough Code and therefoie the building permit is null and void.
Kodiak Island Borough Code § 17.03.060(c).
WHEREFORE, based on all these counts, the Plaintiff
prays for the following relief:
That the Court permanently enjoin the Kodiak Island
Borough, ordering it to issue a stop work order prohibiting
further construction of the elderly housing project.
That the Court permanently enjoin Kodiak Island Borough,
ordering it to order removal of the top portions of the elderly
housing project, so that that project protrudes only one and one-
half (1 1/2) stories (15 feet) above Rezanoff Drive.
That the Court's injunction otherwise require the
Borough to withhold permission to construct and withhold the
Page Eight
Complaint
•
•
ICKSON. EVANS.
ESCH et PAPAS
TTORNEYS AT LAW
500 H STREET
CHORAGE, AK 99501
(907) 276.2272
certificate of occupancy until the elderly housing project is
entirely in comiSliance with the Kodiak Island Borough Code.
IV
That Defendants Louis Iani and Fred Brechan, d/b/a
Sunset Development, be enjoined from constructing the elderly
housing project on Lots 40-45, Block 2; and Lot 12, Block 1,.
Erskine Subdivision, in excess of one and one-half (1 1/2) stories
above Rezanoff Drive.
V
That Sunset Development Company be enjoined from con-
tinuing construction of the elderly housing project until all the
requirements of the Kodiak Island Borough Code are met.
VI
That the Plaintiff be awarded all reasonable costs, in-
cluding a reasonable attorney's fee.
VII
That the Plaintiff may have such other and further
relief as this Court deems just and equitable.
DATED at Anchorage, Alaska this 4L day of June, 1978.
Page Nine
Complaint
DICKS EVANS ESCH & 'AP ,S
By:
ckson
IN THE TRIAL COURTS FOR THE STATE OF ALAS
THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
)
)
LorK*a*n, )
)
Plaintiff(s),
)
1 vs. )
)
)
)
)
)
Defendant(s). )
)
No.
TO:
SUMMONS
AW,1
flWiI island borough
KODIAK, Al.ATA
RECEIVE)
JUN 20 1978
118 igh1101121314i516
Defendant.
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to serve upon the
court and a copy upon
Plaintiff's attorney, whose address is
Sui t:
1
an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you
within twenty (20)* days after the service of this summons
upon you,.exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do
so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the
relief in the complaint.
(COURT SEAL)
DATED:
Clerk of the Trial Courts
By: '
Deputy Clerk
* If the State or an office or agency thereof is a defendant,
the time to be inserted as to it is forty (40) days.
ASC-1
Rev. 1/77
IN THE TRIAL COURTS FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA
THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
)
Plaintiff (s) , )
)
VS. )
)
)
)
)
)
)
Defendant(s). )
)
No.
TO:
SUMMONS
, Defendant.
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to serve upon the
court and a copy upon
Plaintiff's attorney, whose address is
1
an .answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you
within twenty (20)* days after the service of this summons
upon you,,exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do
so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the
relief in the complaint.
(COURT SEAL)
DATED:
Clerk of the Trial Courts
By:
Deputy Clerk
• * If the State or an office or agency thereof is a defendant,
the time to be inserted as to it is forty (40) days.
ASC-1
Rev. 1/77
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, KO i DIAK ISLAND BOROUGH
August 4, 1976
1 CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairman Bill Williams at 7:42 p.m. in
the Borough Meeting Room.
II ROLL CALL
Present: Donald Brenteson
Gene Erwin
Dan Ogg
Bill Williams
Absent: Dan Busch (excused)
Tom Hayden (excused)
Harold Heglin (excused)
There were twenty people in the audience.
111 MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS
A. Mr. Ogg moved to accept the minutes of the previous regular meetings of
June 16, 1976 and July 21, 1976. Seconded by Mr. Brenteson. Motion passed
with a unanimous vote.
IV MINUTES OF OTHER MEETINGS
A. Minutes of the regular Assembly Meeting, July 1, 1976; minutes of the special
Assembly Meetings June 17, June 19, July 22, and July 31, 1976. Minutes of C.C.S.
meetings of May 19, May 26, June 1, June 9, June 16, June 30, July 7, and
July 14, 1976. No comment made by Commission members.
V COMMUNICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE
A. Preparation of Townhouse Ordinance for KIB. No comment.
B. Comprehensive Plan, Port Lions. Can up date their own with the help of the
Borough Planning Director.
C. Purchase of 20' street easement from KIB (Duane Freeman). Discussion. Mr. Ogg
suggested contacting the Borough Planning Director for advise as to best procedure.
D. Purchase of 25' for access to proposed road (James Pearson). Mr. Ogg
recommends going to Code before making formal request.
VI PUBLIC HEARING
None
VII ZONING ITEMS
E. Taken out of order due to Mr. Pages's previous appointment. Request for
tb15.6siii&s.s; Ldt2, Bidck€71 7, 'Rem/ S6bidivisF6'n (Roger Page
Requests rezoning from R3. Will be living quarters in building. Mr. Brenteson
recommended a public hearing. Mr. Ogg moved to rezone property commercial
from R3. Mr. Brenteson seconded. Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
Request for Exception; Erskine Subdivision, Tract A, USS 562 (Sunset
evelopment Co.) Asking for easement on west gable side only. Question of
utilities lines crossing property raised by Mr. Brenteson. Mr. Brechan states
they have satisfied Federal requirements. Mr. Erwin moVed that exceptions be
granted. Mr. Brenteson seconded. Question called. Motion failed with the
following roll call vote: Jr. Erwin YES; Mr. Ogg NO; Mr. Brenteson NO;
Mr. Wiiliams YES. Referred to public hearing.
B. Request for Exemption (changed to additional use for a 2-year permit); Lots 36
& 37, Block 12, Aleutian Homes Subdivision, (Sandra T. Kavanaugh). Wishes to
establish ceramics shop in residential building. Mr. Ogg moved to deny request
because it is residential property and would be using entire building as a ceramic
shop and would not fit into the additional use classification in our Code Book.
Seconded by Mr. Brenteson. Question to size of shop; will someone be living
there? Mrs. Kavanaugh states someone will live there if necessary for approval.
Motion restated. Question. Motion failed with the following roll call vote:
Mr. Brenteson NO; Mr. Erwin NO; Mr. Oqq YES; Mr. Williams NO. Motion for
denial failed 3 to 1. If approved will go to public hearing. Will use a portion of
house for business and have someone living there. Motion for approval by Mr.
Brenteson for additional use. Seconded by Mr. Erwin. Motion passed with the
following roll call vote: Mr. Erwin YES; Mr. Brenteson YES; Mr. Oqq NO; Mr.
Williams YES. Will be referred to public hearing.
C. Request for additional use; Lot 12A, Block 1, Island Lake Subidivision,
USS 3219 (Lloyd P. McBride). Wants to build home and use existing trailer for
a business-not to commence before August 1, 1977-date of separation from Coast
Guard. Moved by Mr. Ogg to accept for additional use permit. Mr. Erwin seconded.
Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote. Referred to public hearing.
D. Request for rezoning to business; Lot #Tract E1-A (Gary M. Gilbert). Mr.
Gilbert not present at meeting. Wants to establish an electrical shop and tool
storage. Mr. Ogg stated this would be spot zoning. Moved by Mr. Ogg to deny
request. Seconded by Mr. Erwin. Question called. Motion passed with the
following roll call vote: Mr. Brenteson NO; Mr. Erwin YES; Mr. Ogg YES;
Mr. Williams YES.
F. Request for setback variance; Lots 13 & 14, USS 1873, Urdahl Subdivision
(Danny & Ellen Graham). One lot is too small to be sold separately. Suggested
they ask for a variance for two years and make additional request at the end of
that time. Moved by Mr. Brenteson. Seconded by Mr. Ogg. Question called.
Motion passed with the following roll call vote: Mr. Erwin NO; Mr. Brenteson YES;
Mr. Ogg YES, Mr. Williams YES.
G. Request for setback variance; Lot 8, Block I, Russell Estates; (Larry L.
Stephens) . Requested a 4-inch setbakc variance on the front of the property.
Mr. Brenteson moved in favor of setback variance request. Mr. Erwin seconded.
Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
H. Request for setback variance; Lot 3A, Block 1, Mission Subdivision, USS 2843
(Wm. T. Weyer). Motion made for denial made by Mr. Ogg. Mr. Brenteson
seconded. Question called. Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
Acting Chairman Wiliiams asked for recess at 9: 50 p.m. Meeting reconvened at
9: 57 p.m.
VIII SUBDIVISIONS, PRELIMINARY & FINAL
A. Tideland Tract N-; (City of Kodiak) A report from Mr. R. A. Jones, Consulting
Engineer, was read. Mr. Ogg moved to table for further information. Question.
Mr. Brenteson seconded. Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
B. SubctiN;iio'n of Lot :1, Block Acres Subdivision', USS 321b, (Car)
Erickson;)-. ReipOiztrfrOM Jones, COrisultirig Engineer-, 'States &meets
requirements with minor changes. Mr. Brenteson moved to table the matter until
the next meeting. Mr. Erwin seconded. Question called. Motion passed by
unanimous roll call vote.
C. Vaction of Lot 1, Woodland Acres Subdivision, First Addition and a portion of
the old Mill Bay Road R.O.W., shown as Sunset Drive on the plat of Woodland Acres
Subdivision, First Addition. Replat of Lot 1A, Woodland Acres Subdivision (Mrs.
B. E. Nachweih. Motion made by Mr. Brenteson to approve inclusion of Sunset
Drive officially on the Woodland Acres Subdivision, First Addition, plat. Seconded
by Mr. Ogg. Question called. Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
D. Subdi-vision of Lot 12, Block 7, Bells Flats Alaska Subdivision (Anne Russell).
The plat meets Borough requirements with the exception of minor errors which can
!Jae corrected by the preparer of the plat. Motion to approve made by Mr. Erwin.
Seconded by Mr. Brenteson. Question called. Motion passed by unanimous roll
call vote. Mr. Oqg YES; Mr. Erwin YES; Mr. Brenteson YES; Mr. Williams YES.
IX SUBIDIVIONS, FINAL
A. Subdivision of Lot 4, Russian Creek, Alaska Subdivision (Robert Blair).
There is no utilities easement. Glacier State Telephone Co. finds the proposed
plat acceptable; also meets Borough requirements. Mr. Ogg moves to accept.
Mr. Brenteson seconded. Question called. Motion passed unanimous roll call vote.
B. Subdivision of Lot 5A, Block 4, Bells Flats Alaska Subidivison (Arthur W. &
LoHama W. Schaeffer) . Plat meets Borough requirements as stated by Mr. R. A.
Jones, Consulting Eingineer. Motion by Mr. Bresnteson to approve. Mr. Ogg
seconded. Question called. Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
X OLD BUSINESS
A. Naming of Streets as of proposal by Carolyn M. Brisco & Property Owners.
Request had been made by P.& Z. Commission for proposed names for two other
streets. No reply to date. Mr. Ogg moved to table the matter until next
meeting. Seconded by Mr. Brenteson. Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
B. Request for Vacation * Rep lat for deletion of utility easement, Block 4, Island
Vista Subdivision (Charles Davidson & Property Owners). Glacier State Telephone
Co. has reviewed the drawing and finds it acceptable. K.E.A. does not object if
reasonable access is provided. Mr. Brenteson moves to table for further input.
Seconded by Mr. Erwin. Question called. Motion failed with the following roll call
vote: Mr. Brenteson YES; Mr. Erwin YES; Mr. Ogg ABSTAINED; Mr. Williams YES.
XI PLANNING AND STAFF ITEMS
A. Memo=Ownership of Land. Discussion.
B. Memo=Rezoning of area to business from R3. Discussion and information to P&Z.
C. Ordinance No. 76-16-0 Minimum Street Requirements and Platting Requirements.
Did not pass. Will place it as a work shop item.
D. Justification of Ordinance for underground utilities. Letter from Mr. Brenteson
read recommending said Ordinance. Hope to submit to Borough in Ordinance form
using as guide lines experiences of others and research by Dr. Denslow, Borough
Planning Director.
E. Comprehensive Plan, Kodiak Island Borough. Discussion. Motion in favor of
endorsing the Mayor's letter ofJuly 30, 1976, inviting P&Z to informal discussion with
representative of DCRA. Motion made by Mr. Ogg. Seconded by Mr. Brenteson.
Motion passed by unanimous voice vote. (Meeting set for 2:30 p.m. in the Borough
Meeting Room.
F. Rezoning from R3 to R2-Russell Estates, Block 3. This should come up under
zoning items at next meeting. Mr. Brenteson moved to send to Borough Assembly.
G. Zoning Map for KIB and zoning map of Bells Flats to be approved. They have
been okayed by Mr. Eklund. Mr. Brenteson moved to accept the new zoning maps.
Seconded by Mr. Ogg. Question called. Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
XII AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Mr. Ogg read a letter from Karl Armstrong asking if there is an official map for the
entire Borough. Discussion brought out that this should be included in the
Comprehensive Plan work.
XIII ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
SUBMITTED: APPROVED:
Borough Secretary Chairmanration from Coast