Loading...
LEITE ADD BK 2 LT 18 - Appeal0% V 6x � o:\ \ siECe% &D OCT tZ®til... COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. L [ND -P"''7,1-,2r.1..1-041a3 10* '49Tw :air® 0 a.. ..gti•.•......•.....•.i :� E, Roy A, Ecklund io:0 N9 NO. 1639 -S S 00 #2�i0 .+m, `O,„°••........ -;..,,,o -,.,-., a %�aoFEssiOtl Al L ‘9®a®alb' Scale: / // s 20' • •_/i fs ,4/3 cause a., , " 9/ rr/di- I hereby certify that I have surveyed the following described property: , 4,e?- LO6 B,Ci LA7ON, U. S W/PvEyT//69/C4Car prram/ -e�- 8Oa/k/45 P. /R • and that the improvements situated thereon are within the property lines and do not overlap or encroach on the property Tying adjacent thereto. that of improvements on property lying adjacent thereto encroach on the premises in question and that there are no roadways, transmis- sion lines or other visible easements on said property except as indi- cated hereon. r Dated this � anal ti ROY A. ECKLUND Registered Land Surveyor 1Drawn by: 'Date: 3 - 03 - 80 19 BO (J( Kodiak Island Borough Mr. and Mrs. Rasmus Anderson P.O. Box 2793 Kodiak, AK 99615 P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Anderson: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. 'Ba'sed on a -review of_-the_appeal-record., the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation'; should not.be enforced:" Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROOGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Ronald K. Melvin Attorney for Mr. Anderson KODIAK ISLAND'BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CASE FILE CHECK LIST Case File No. Assigned 83-133 Date Application Received 9/21/83 Type of Application Variance Date Site Plan Received Date Fee Paid Receipt Number Amount Person Accepting Appl. Linda Freed Use Z for Zoning, Variances and Exceptions CUP for Conditional Use Permit LL for Land Leases V for Violations 0 for all Other cases Name of Applicant Anderson/Rassmuson & Emilia Mailing Address P.O. Box 2793, Kodiak, AK Phone Name of Legal Owner same Mailing Address Phone Legal description of Property: Lot(s) PT 18B Block 2 Subdivision Leite Addition Square Footage or Acreage of Property is Bldg = 760 s.f. 4-CcLot = 3,746 s.f. P & Z Public Hearing Date October 19, 1983 Public Notices Mailed on October 7, 1983 Applicant Notified of P & Z Action on Now Many? 55 Action Summary P & Z Assembly Ordinance No. Date Date.., Date Approved Denied Tabled Date Date 1st Reading 2nd Reading Ordinance Effective Date Borough Planning and Zon %Linda Freed P.Q. Box 1246 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Evert & Donna Schmelzenbach P.O. Box 1920 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 December 7, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An appeal from .ministrative Decision (17.68.020). PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition, owned by Mr. Rasmusson Anderson To Whom It May Concern: We are writing this letter to protest the decision made in the above case. (Please note that we received notice of the decision yesterday, and today is the last day for appeal.) We are not surprized by the decision as, realistically, we cannot expect the Commission to take on a law suit they would probably lose; since the city inspector essentially gave Mr. Anderson permission to build his "shed" illegally. Consequently, this is not an appeal; but for the record we want to state that we, as property owners, will pay through decreased property value and increased fire risk for the inspectors incompetence. There are three more items concerning Mr. Anderson's property and the Planning and Zoning Commission that We would like to bring to your attention again: 1) The Commission has ignored the fact that Mr. Anderson's '!shed" has a 160 square foot deck which is illegal and for which he never got a building permit. (Though, of course, the inspector did tell him the deck was "just fine.") 2) There is another illegal shed on Mr. Anderson's property built.about the same time as the "shed" in question, but without a building permit. It is attached to the presnt dwelling and the fence on the side property line. 3)_ We believe that the "shed" in Case 83-133 was built to be lived in. No one on the commission who heard the case and saw the structure was convinced that it was not meant to be a house. It's ridiculous to believe that people, like the Andersons, who have a limited income and live in inadequate housing are going to spend $12,000 (an estimate of the cost of the "shed" as it now stands) just for a place to store their belongings. The other shed on their property (mentioned in #2 of this letter) was built of scrap lumber and cost probably $30., The main reason we complained about the "8hed''was that we think we have another dwelling just five feet off our property line on a lot too small for the house that was already there. So, the question is what is the Borough Planning and Zoning Commission going to do when the "shed" is, in fact, occupied as a dwelling? Sincerely, Donna Schmelzen ch Kodiak Island Borough 710 MILL BAY ROAD KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 ti 1984 10 4' Christi P.O. Kodiak, 9615 A ,, ikoff 1,1 ,a , U.S. POSTAGE;: pcgteile ,. 2 0 ((�ppsntx)i lU.926133L Ji Kornai ta�ad gu,. yodiak, i augh -1-4 CELE DEG 1 1 12,1 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 2, December 3, 1984 Christine Kvasnikoff P.O. Box 76 Kodiak, AK 99615 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Ms. Kvasnikoff: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered andmade a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered bythe Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOR UGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing buildiag materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice .411 not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. - 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. _ If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Sidney M. Omlid P.O. Box 1161 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. Omlid: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 . feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, 2 Linda Freed Director Community Development Department i pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Charles L. and Linda Staley P.O. Box 799 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615.1246 PHONE (907) 686.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Staley: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above—referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based an a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director • Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Bryce and Olive Gordon P.O. Box 2698 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1446 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gordon: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that thele is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and RISC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Andersen is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Dennis and Patricia Murray P.O. Box 2029 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Murray: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Lloyd and Avis Sharratt P.O. Box 881 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 406.5776 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sharratt: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in -height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Kodiak Island Borough Evert and Donna Schmelzenbach P.O. Box 1920 Kodiak, AK 99615 P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Schmelzenbach: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page '2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Arthur and Arlene Zimmer P.O, Box 1582 Kodiak, Ak 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486.5796 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Zimmer: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials - and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Kristjan and Clara Helgason P.O. Box 546 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5796 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Helgason: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." - Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Owen and Nancy Tarr P.O. Box 2902 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 406.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Tarr: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and isseven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates &IBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Bonnie J. Breckberg P.O. Box 993 Kodiak, AK 99615 ( 1, Kodiak Island Borough P.O. a0)( 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mrs. Breckberg: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates RISC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department Pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak .r Ralph and Cornelia Collins P.O. Box 3347 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615.1246 PHONE (907) 486.5786 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Collins: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. � I KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you'must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, J � Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak ! • Kodiak Island Borough Eric and Tessa Manzer P.O. Box 2687 Kodiak, AK 99615 P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 406.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Manzer: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case,the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Janet A. Brenteson P.O. Box 2863 Kodiak, AK 99615 i Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 4865736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Ms. Brenteson: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Christine Kvasnikoff P.O. Box 76 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Ms. Kvasnikoff: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Wayne Murphy P.O. Box 2171 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486.5706 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Lelte Addition Dear Mr. Murphy: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his .property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 • feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Kodiak Island Borough Wilber and Catherine Carlson P.O. Box 2844 Kodiak, AK 99615 P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Carlson: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Eugene and Eileen Meuller P.O. Box 466 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Meuller: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings andthe entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Edward G. Panamaroff P.O. Box 2710 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. Box 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 4E6-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. Panamaroff: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates RISC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Marie Omlid P.O. Box 2746 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615.1246 PHONE (907) 406.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mrs. Omlid: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. 3. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. --,ySincerely, ``1 - Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak James and Ella Torgramsen P.O. Box 115 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. sox 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Torgramsen: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 9. December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak ., Robert and Nancy Main P.O. Box 1575 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 406.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Main: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above—referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Leon A. David P.O. Box 2667 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.O. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615.1246 PHONE (907) 486.5726 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. David: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet 1n size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH r' - December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, 11 Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak John Sullivan c/o City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1307 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak Island Borough P.Q. BOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486-5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2,. Leite Addition Dear Mr. Sullivan: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. 2. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and Zoning Commission, decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak Kodiak Island Borough David V. and Sandra M. Tucker P.O. Box 182 Kodiak, AK 99615 P.O. sox 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486.5736 December 3, 1984 Re: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Tucker: The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission has recently reconsidered and made a decision in the above -referenced case. This case was reconsidered by the Commission on the basis of the appeal record only. The case was before the Planning and Zoning Commission as the result of an appeal before the Kodiak City Council, who vacated the Commission's decision and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. You are being sent this letter because you provided written and verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's original hearing on this case. The purpose of the letter is to notify you of your right to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent decision for this case. Based on a review of the appeal record, the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission "acknowledged that there is a violation associated with this case and that, due to the circumstances surrounding the case, the violation should not be enforced." Findings of Fact 1. The accessory building constructed on Mr. Anderson's lot is eighteen (18) feet in height and is seven hundred and sixty (760) square feet in area. Based on these findings, the accessory building on Mr. Anderson's lot violates KIBC 17.51.040 and KIBC 17.51.050. 2. A building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on June 6, 1983. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. Mr. Anderson constructed a storage shed 16 feet x 25 feet in size. The building constructed by Mr. Anderson is within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. .r KODIAK ISLAND BORO J uH December 3, 1984 Page 2 4. Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment by purchasing building materials and constructing the storage shed. 5. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official prior to or during construction that his building permit was invalid. Conclusions of Law 1. Mr. Anderson reasonably relied to his detriment on the building permit issued to him. The interest of justice will not be served by the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. The storage shed built by Mr. Anderson meets all the building requirements of the City of Kodiak and therefore is not a health or safety hazard. If you choose to appeal this Planning and. Zoning Commission decision, you must do so by 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 1984. Your written notice of appeal must specify the grounds thereof and should be filed with the City Clerk. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department pb cc: Marcella Dalke City Clerk City of Kodiak >r development, which generally do not a,. ;to other properties in the same land use district. - B. Strict application of the zoning ordinances would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships, C. The granting of the variance will not result in material dame es or .re udice to other •ro.erties in the vicinit nor be detrimental to the public's health, safety, and welfare. The addition will not be detrimental to other properties by interrupting views because of the condition placed by the Commission on the approval. D. The_granting of the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan; 2. Mixed testimony at the public hearing demonstrated there was no clear consensus by the public on the proposal; 3. The proposed addition would be constructed inside the required setbacks; and 4. The construction of the proposed addition would eliminate an existing accessory building that currently encroaches onto an adjacent property. The motion was seconded and CARRIED with Commissioners Anderson and Hill abstaining. B) , CASE 83-233./ Consideration of an appeal from an administrative 'decision' based on a decision by The Board of Adjustment on July 26, 1984 to vacate and remand the Planning and Zoning Com- mission's decision for this case. Lot Pt. 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition, 1515 Mission Road. (Rasmus Anderson) COMMISSIONER JAMES,MOVED TO ACKNOWLEDGE that there was a violation in Case 83-133 but because "of the circumstances involved, the zoning ordinance should not be enforced. The motion was -secdnded'and CARR1ED-; by unanimous roll call vote. -'- --. -- - - ' - COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO ADOPT AS FINDINGS OF FACT: t 1. Mr. Anderson's building is 18 feet in height; 2. The accessory building is 760 square feet; 3. The lot is 3,746 square feet in area; 4. Therefore, Mr. Anderson's structure violates KISC 17.51.040 and RIBC 17.51.050; 5. A building permit was issued to Mr. Rasmus Anderson to allow construction of an accessory building on his property on 6/6/83; 6. The building permit authorized the construction of a storage shed 16'x25', a total of 400 square feet; 7. The actual building constructed was two-story, 18 feet in height, 16'6" wide, by 25'6' long; 8. Mr. Anderson completed construction of the accessory building before discussion was brought up on the Planning and Zoning level; 9. Mr. Anderson was never informed by a responsible official during construction that his permit was invalid; 10. Mr. Anderson was never told by a zoning officer or another official responsible for enforcement of zoning ordinances that his construction could not continue; 11. Mr. Anderson did rely on the validity of the building permit to his detriment and that he did buy materials and construct the structure in reliance on that building permit; 12. Construction was completed prior to a stop work order; 13. The Commission has determined that this structure does not violate health or safety regulations or the building code. 14. In the interest of justice the zoning ordinances should not be enforced for Mr. Anderson's accessory building. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. C) CASE S-84-049. Finalvacation of Lots 20A and 203-1, Phillips resubdivision, U.S. Survey 3100; and replat to Lots 20A -I, 20A-2, 20A-3, 20A-4, 20A-5, and 208-2, Phillips Resubdivision, U.S. Survey 3100. (Nick Goossen and W. R. Heinrichs) COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL to vacation of Lots 20A and 20B-1, Phillips Resubdivision, U.S. Survey 3100; and replat to Lots 20A-1, 20A-2, 20A-3, 20A-4 and 208-2, Phillips Resubdivision, Regular Meeting November 21, 1984 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH M:E M 0 R A N D U M ITEM VII($) DATE: November 13, 1984 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Community Development Departmeno'4. SUBS: Information for the November 21, 1984 Regular Meeting RE: CASE 83-133. Consideration of an appeal from an administrative decision based on a decision by the Board of Adjustment. Background This case first came before the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission at the regular meeting on October 19, 1983. The case came to the Commission as an appeal from an administrative decision that required that the structure in question be brought in compliance with the Borough's zoning code (Title 17). The violations created by this building were brought to the Borough's attention by the complaints of numerous neighbors. In appealing the administrative decision, the appellants requested variances to allow the building to remain as it had been constructed. At the October 19, 1983 regular meeting the Commission affirmed the adminis- trative decision that the subject structure be brought into compliance with the Borough Code. No relief was granted to the appellant. On October 26, 1983 the appellant appealed the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision to the Kodiak City Council, sitting as the Board of Adjustment. At the Board of Adjustment hearing, held July 26, 1984, recessed and reconvened August 9, 1984. The Kodiak City Council sitting as the Board of Adjustment made the following finding in this case: The record of the proceedings before the Planning and Zoning Commission fails to reflect the adoption of reasonably specific findings and conclusions as required by Kodiak Island Borough Code 17.68.020; and it is not obvious or apparent from the record as a whole on what findings or conclusions the Planning and Zoning Commission rested its ruling; and that based on this finding, the Planning and Zoning Commission decision be vacated and this matter be remanded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate findings and conclusions. As a result of the Board of Adjustment's decision and information provided by the Borough attorney, it was decided at the Commission's September 1984 regular meeting to decide this case on the "record". The case was then scheduled for the Commission's November 1984 regular meeting and the appel- lant and his attorney were notified. Recommendation Attached to this memo is a copy of a letter from the Borough attorney dated September 4, 1984. This letter provides guidelines to the Commission for making a decision in this case. Regardless of the ultimate decision, it should be emphasized that the Commission should formalize findings of fact for the decision. Case 83-133 November 13, 1984 COPMISS. HILL MOVED TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL of ta,. .cation of a portion 61-6pruee Street, Lots 7 through 9 of Block 8, and Lots 2 through 4 of Block 9, and resist to Tract J; and subdivision of an unsubdivided portion of Tract E, creating Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11, Lots 1 through 8 of Block 12, Elderberry Street and the extension of Third Street; all within Old Harbor Townsite, U.S. Survey 4793, Alaska. The motion was seconded and CARRIED with Commissioner Knight abstaining. G) CASE S-84-032. Sitkalidnk Strait View Subdivision, Old Harbor Townsite: a portion of Tract E. U.S. Survey 4793, creating a park tract, Lots 1 through 8 of Block 1, Lots 1 through 10 of Block 2, Sitkalidak Drive and the extension of Elderberry Street. (Kodiak Island Housing Authority) COMMISSIONER CROWE MOVED TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL of Sitkalidak Strait View Subdivision, Old Harbor Townsite; a portion of Tract E, U.S. 4793, creating a park tract, Lots 1 through 8 of Block 1, Lots 1 through 10 of Block 2, Sitkalidak Drive and the extension of Elderberry Street with the following corrections to be made: 1. The Vicinity Map needs to be revised to show clearly the location of this subdivision with relation to Old Harbor. 2. The Legal Description needs to be revised to define by metes and bounds the exterior boundary of the subdivision, in accordance with RIB 16.16.0200. 3. Provide slope easements on the final plat as necessary for for the construction of Elderberry. In addition, the following items need to be completed before the final plat is recorded: 1. Utility construction plans must be submitted for approval by the Borough Engineer and ADEC. 2. Final roadway construction plans must be submitteddfor approval by the Borough Engineer. 3. State Plane Coordinates be shown on the final plat for all primary subdivision monuments in accordance with 1(16 16.16.020C. The motion was seconded and CARRIED unanimous roll call vote with Commissioner Knight abstaining. VIII NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. IX COMMUNICATIONS A. COMMISSIONER CROWE MOVED TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT of Case 83-133. a Rasmus Anderson, Record on Appeal. ,-The motion was -seconded -and -- .-CARRIED"by unanimous voice vote. B. Mr. Cassidy explained the review of Timber Harvest on Marmot Island is for consistency with Borough Code and the Coastal Management Program. COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ADOPT the viewpoint of voicing objection to the logging of Marmot Island. The motion was seconded and CARRIED with Commissioner Patterson voting no. COMMISSIONER CROWE MOVE TO REFER THIS ITEM to the. Kodiak Island Borough Assembly noting that the subject proposal appears to be consistent with the Kodiak Island Borough Zoning Code and with the Kodiak Island Borough Coastal Management Program subject to the following policies: 1. Sustained Yield; and 2. Habitat Protection. The motion was seconded and CARRIED by unanimous voice vote. X REPORTS There were no reports. Regular Meeting October 17, 1984 XI AUD IEN1 14ENTS TOM PETERSON introduced himself and informed the Commissioners that he looked forward to working with them this upcoming year, and supported them in their efforts in their duties as Planning and Zoning Commissioners. He stated that his personal agenda as Borough Mayor, in order to support this Commission, as well as other advisory hoards and committees to the Borough, is to assist in the developments in regards to updating the comprehensive plan, developing a Borough land management program; things that.will help them in the long run to keep up with consistency in planning and ,zoning for the community. SCOTT ARNDT expressed 111 feelings on two of the subdivisions. He doesn't agree with the proposal to connect Bunnell Way and carry it on down to Mr. Perez's property; he doesn't believe the Borough should try to force this subdivision on different people who may not want it. He also does not concur with the way the road is going to be widened, taking fifteen feet now, and another fifteen feet from another subdivision later. TONY PEREZ doesn't feel that he has to supply access to anyone ease's subdivisions but his own; and he objects to being told be has to move his lot line for a road that doesn't even exist. He feels that Mr. Christie should also contribute to the widening of Bunnell Way. Mr. Perez believes that Tone Circle is a historical name, and wants proof if it isn't historically correct. TIM HILL commented on Case 84-108 (Joe Perrozzi), claiming that the addition will "interrupt' views; it took away 507. of his view, devalued his property and is detrimental to the hillside. X11 COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS The Commissioners expressed their pleasure in working with Mrs. Crowe for the past several years. XIII ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN GREGG adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m. KODLAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting -10- October 17, 1984 October 8, 1984 Kodiak Island Borough Rasmusson and Emilia Anderson P. O. Box 2793 Kodiak, AK 99615 P.O. DOX 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615-1246 PHONE (907) 486.5736 Re: Case 83-133. An appeal from an Administrative Decision (17.68.020), Part of Lot 188, Block 2, Leite Addition. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Anderson: The purpose of this letter is to let you know that your case has been scheduled before the Planning and Zoning Commission for its November 21, 1984 regular monthly meeting. I apologize for the delay in scheduling this case. We were waiting for infor- mation from our attorney'prior to any scheduling. Based on the information provided by our attorney,the Planning and Zoning Commission, at its Septem- ber 19, 1984 regular meeting, made a decision to decide this case and formulate findings of fact based on the previous record. Your case will be an item of Old Business on the Planning and Zoning Comission agenda of November 21, 1984. If you have.any questions about this case or the procedure being followed, please call me. For your information, I will be out of town from October 12, 1984 to November 2, 1984. In my absence, please con- tact Bud Cassidy, Assistant Planner. Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .Linda Freed Director pds cc: .n Melvin, Attorney �� 0tc±' "�"J" .b :•ud Cassidy, Assistant Planner 6 9 .3t4- -c1(0-1-9= 11-� LA V t o Ork 1 V031 -'..r„ ��� \thiLav . > C`‘ ITEM IX(C) MEMORANDUM DATE: September 11, 1984 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Community Development DepartmenLg*' SUBJ: Information for the September 19, 1984 Regular Meeting RE: Rasmus Anderson & Amelia P. Anderson Planning and Zoning Commission Proceedings Please find attached a letter from the Borough attorney responding to questions about the Rasmus Anderson appeal (Case 83-133) and a letter from the City of Kodiak remanding the case to the Commission. This appeal will be scheduled for the November Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The Commission needs to decide if the case should be heard again as a public hearing, or if the Commission feels comfortable deciding the case based on previous record. JAMIN & BOLGER ATTORNEYS AT LAW POST OFFICE BOX 193 KODIAK. ALASKA 99615 (9071 486-6061 JOEL H. BOLDER MATTHEW O. JAMIN September 4, 1984 Linda' Freed Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Rasmus Anderson & Amelia P. Anderson Planning & Zoning Commission Proceedings Dear Linda: Kodiak Island Borough Kodiak, Alaska RECEIVED SEP f r��I•II IA 11) This letter is in response to your request for advice concerning the proceedings before the Planning and Zoning Commission involving Rasmus Anderson. From my review of the materials you submitted it appears that the City Council has remanded Mr. Anderson's appeal to the Planning and Zoning Commission for specific findings of fact concerning the Com- mission's decision to affirm the administrative decision that an accessory building constructed by Mr. Anderson was in violation of Kodiak Island Borough Code 17.51.040 and 17.51.050. The fol- lowing are my suggestions on questions the Planning and Zoning Commission may wish to consider in making its decisions on findings of fact. Apparently the City of Kodiak's board of adjustment decision does not limit the Planning and Zoning Com- mission as to how it was to formulate these findings. The Com- mission is free to make its findings based on the previous record or to hold an additional public hearing if it finds that the evidence previously presented is inadequate to make the required determinations. The first finding which is necessary is a determination of whether or not there is a zoning violation. It is apparent from the record that this proceeding is based on an alleged violation of the area and height limits for accessory buildings contained in KIBC 17.51.040 and 17.51.050. The Commission's findings could be phrased as follows: the accessory on Mr. Anderson's lot is feet in height. The accessory building in Mr. Anderson's lot is square feet in area. Mr. Anderson's lot is square feet in area. Based on these findings of Letter TO: Linda Freed, KIR RE: Rasmus Anderson Proceedings DATE: September 4, 1984 Page 2 fact there are the following possible conclusions of law: the structure on Mr. Anderson's lot does (or does not) violate RISC 17.51.040. The structure on Mr. Anderson's lot does (or does not) violate RISC 17.51.050. The record also indicates that Mr. Anderson was issued a building permit to allow the construction of an accessory build- ing on his property. Under these circumstances the Planning and Zoning Commission should address the question of whether or not the Kodiak Island Borough is estopped from enforcing any zoning violation. There are several questions for determination. First the Commission should determine whether or not a building permit was issued to Mr. Anderson to allow an accessory building on his property. Commission findings on this question could be phrased as follows: a building permit was issued to Mr. Rasmus Anderson to allow the construction of an accessory building on his property on the following date: Secondly the Commission should determine the question of whether the actual construction is within the terms of the per- mit. Possible Commission findings on this question are as fol- lows: the building permit authorized the following construction: . Anderson actually constructed the following building: The building which was constructed by Mr. Anderson is (or is not) within the terms of the building permit which was issued to him. Next the Commission should determine if Mr. Anderson relied on the validity of the building permit to his detriment. Rele- vant to this question are determinations of whether or not Mr. Anderson bought materials and constructed a structure in reliance on the permit. Possible Commission findings on this question are as follows: Mr. Anderson began construction on his accessory building on the following date: Mr. Anderson bought materials for construction of his accessory building on the following date: Mr. Ander- son completed construction of his accessory building on the following date: If Mr. Anderson did rely on the validity of the permit to his detriment then the Planning and Zoning Commission should determine whether or not his reliance was reasonable. One rele- vant question would be whether Mr. Anderson was every informed by a responsible official prior or during construction that his permit was invalid. Likewise it would certainly be relevant if he was told that his construction could continue by a Zoning Letter TO: Linda Freed, RIB RE: Rasmus Anderson Proceedings DATE: September 4, 1984 Page 3 Officer or another official responsible for enforcement of zoning ordinances. The Commission also should consider whether or not Mr. Anderson's construction was completed prior to the date of the stop work order. It would clearly be unreasonable for him to continue to build his accessory building after the stop work order had been received. Finally the Commission should determine whether or not the interest of justice requires the enforcement of the zoning ordinances if Mr. Anderson has reasonably relied on a building permit. The Commission should determine whether or not the structure violates health or safety regulations or the building code. The Commission may also want to consider whether or not the structure is seriously out of character with present struc- tures in the area. If the structure is in substantial violation of health or safety regulations or the building code or if the structure is seriously out of character with otherstructures in the area the Commission may wish to consider enforcement of the zoning ordinances even if Mr. Anderson has reasonably relied upon the building permit which he received. Feel free to write or call if you have any questions from the Commission concerning this letter. I will write to you as soon as possible concerning your separate question of whether new members of the Planning and Zoning Commission could consider this matter on the written and tape recorded record submitted so far. Sincerely yours, JAMIN & BOLGER Joel H. Bolger Attorney JHB/vkb ;1984 '' (a August 10, 1984 oaQe40 Kodiak Island Borough Kodiak, Alaska RECEIVED - AUG 101GP PM %I 0) l$It'Iuli Linda Freed, Director Comic ity Development Department Kodiak Island Borough 710 !4111 Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case Number 83-133 - An Appeal from Administrative Decision Rassmus Anderson Dear Ms. Freed: At the Board of Adjustment Hearing held July 26, 1984, recessed and recon- vened August 9, the Council sitting as the Board of Adjustment made the following finding in the above case: The record of the proceedings before the Planning and Zoning Commission fails to reflect the adoption of reasonably specific findings and conclusions as required by Kodiak Island Borough Code 17.68.020; 'and it is not obvious or apparent from the record as a whole on what findings or conclusions the Planning and Zoning Commission rested its ruling; and that based on this finding, the Planning and Zoning Commission decision be vacated and this matter be remanded to the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion for further proceedings and the entry of appropriate find- ings and,conclusions. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELLA DALKE, CMC City Clerk WD/ms cc: Rassmus and Emilia P Anderson, Appellants Ronald K. Melvin, Attorney for Appellants POST 0P ICE DOM 1397, kODIAI( , ALAWA 99615 PHONE (907) July 12, 1984 al'i JUL 1984 RIPEN' Mr. and Mrs. Rasmus Anderson P.O. Box 2793 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case Number 83-133. An appeal from an Adn¢nistra PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr, and Mrs. Anderson: A public hearing with the Kodiak City Council sitting as the Board of AdjusUIrut is scheduled for Thursday, July 26, 1984, at 7:30 p:m. in the Borough Assembly Chambers. This hearing is on your appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission's October 19, 1983 decision affirming the adminstrative decision that your accessory building must be brought into compliance with Borough Code. You will be notified if there should be any change in scheduling. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARE UA DALKE, CMC City Clerk NHD/nj cc: City Manager City Building Official Borough Clerk Director, Community Development Department Ronald K. Melvin, Attorney POST 0410E B0)S 1397. KODIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Telephones 486-5736 - 486-5737 — Box 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 July 10, 1984 Ms. Marcella Daike City Clerk City of Kodiak Box 1397 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Dear Marcella: Re: ✓Case Number 83-133. An Appeal from an Administrative Decision, Rasmus Anderson Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the written statement from Ronald K. Melvin, attorney for the appellant in the above - referenced case. I take exception to Mr. Melvin's statement that, "At each stage of construction, the Andersons called for and received inspection of the building by City and Borough inspectors." I do not agree that this and related facts "are all reflected in the record herein." The record does show that the Borough received com- plaints about the construction of the building, but I do not believe that there is any evidence that the Borough ever inspected the building. Mr. Melvin also states "that the Commission's decision shall be based on findings and conclusion reasonably specific enough so as to provide a clear and precise understanding of the reason for the decision." Although, perhaps not specifically labeled as findings and conclusions, I believe it is clear from the record on appeal that the Commission affirmed the zoning officer's decision because the structure in question was indeed both larger in square footage and in height than what is allowed under Borough Code. As to the granting of the variance, I also believe that it is reasonably clear from the record on appeal that the Commission did not grant the variance because, based on public testimony, the granting of the variance would "result in material damage or prejudice to other properties in the vicinity" and would "be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare." (Section 17.66.050A of the Borough Code.) Page Two Ms. Marcella Dalke July 10, 1984 If you have any questions about this response, please contact me. Please notify me of the hearing date for this appeal so I can make myself available to answer any questions the City Council, sitting as a board of adjustment, may have regarding this case. Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Linda L. Freed Director cmk cc Ronald K. Melvin June 25, 1984 OtY Min tot ) Qis Linda Freed, Director Community Development Department Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case_Number 83-133 - An Appeal from Administrative Decision, Rasmus Anderson Dear Linda: " Attached is a copy of the written statement from Ronald, K. Melvin, attorney for the above appellant. The Department now has fifteen days in which to response in writing if -so desired. Following the expiration of that period, a hearing before the Council acting as the Board of Appeals will be scheduled. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK _ MARCELIA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms POST OFHCE DO?( 1397. ICODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Rasmus Anderson and ) Emilia P. Anderson, ) Appellants, ) ) v. ) ) Kodiak Island Borough Planning ) and Zoning Commission, ) ) Appellee. ) Case No. 83-133 APPELLANTS' BRIEF COME NOW Rasmus Anderson and Emilia P. Anderson, Appellants, and provide the following Brief on appeal to the Board of Adjustment in case numbe.r 83-133 before the Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission. Appellants are the owners of a portion of Lot 18, Block 2 of the Leite Addition, City of Kodiak. On June 6th, 1983, Rasmus Anderson applied for a permit to build a two story storage shed on the said property. Building permit number 5088 was issued on said date by the Borough and City of Kodiak for the construction of the specified accessory building, and said permit was approved by Morris L. Lee, Chief Building Official for the City of Kodiak, and Will Walton, zoning administrator. c4o/sv Andersons thereafter constructed, in conformance with the issued permit, an accessory building on their property. At each stage of construction, the Andersons called for and received inspections of the building by City and Borough inspectors. The building was inspected five time at various stages of construction, and each time Mr. Anderson communicated to the inspector his plans to proceed with the building, and each time the inspector gave his approval to such continued construction. The inspectors gave their express approval, in turn, for construction of the second story and for construction of the roof of said building. The preceding facts are all reflected in the record herein, and support the requested variance to the requirements of KIBC section 17.51.040 and 17.51.050, as recommended by the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Department. See Memorandum dated October 12, 1983, to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The October 19, 1983 decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission affirmed the administrative decision of October 6, 1983, that the Appellant's accessory building must be brought into compliance with the above specified Borough code. The Commission's said decision does not comply with KIBC 17.68.020, which specifies that the Commission's decision shall be based on findings and conclusions reasonably specific enough so as to provide a clear and precise understanding of the reason for the -2- decision. The Commission failed to provided such findings and conclusions, especially with regard to whether the Appellants had satisfied the requirements for the granting of a variance under KIBC 17.66.050. Accordingly, the subject decision of the Commission is in violation of Borough Code and must be remanded to the Commission. Fields v. Kodiak City Council, 628 P.2d 927 (Alaska 1981). Accordingly, the subject decision should be vacated and case 83-133 should be remanded for further proceedings before the Planning and Zoning Commission. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 22nd day of June, 1984. RONALD K. MELVIN Attorney for Appellants -3- 3-' iSet November 29, 1983 Mr. and Mrs. Rasmus Anderson P.O. Box 2793 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Anderson: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to your NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is available in the City Clerk's office for 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 the notice of appeal, not less than 15 days after the Clerk has given notice of completion of the record, which will be December 14, 1983. We would appreciate your. timely response and if you have any questions, please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCS LA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms CC: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Canna ity Development.Department Ronald K. Melvin, Attorney for Mr. Anderson POST OFFICE DOM 1397. KODIAK .ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 'laaaC CA November 29, 1983 Dennis and Patricia Murray P.O. Box 2029 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 " RE: Case 83-133.. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Murray: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51..050 Area. • If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, OF KODIAK MARCELLA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department • POST OFEICE DOA 1397. kODIAk . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 November 29, 1983 Christine Kvasnikoff P.O. Box 76 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, 'eke Addition Dear Ms. Kvasnikoff: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testiuony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK \ MARCEL A DALKE City Clerk MID/ms Enclosure n+ cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 Qoard November 29, 1983 Janet A. Brenteson P.O. Box 2863 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), P1 Lot 188, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Ms. Brenteson: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's'NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(8) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony • at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. And rson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELA DALKE City Clerk WD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-32Q4 November 29, 1983 Eric and Tessa Manner P.O. Box 2687 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PP Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Manzer The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail= able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony • at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELIA DALR6 City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 November 29, 1983 Ralph and Cornelia Collins P.O. Box 3347 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Collins: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.-030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided'written testimony . at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request. for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. • If you have any questions on this matter please contact ne at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCEL A DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure ep cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community ty Development, Department POST OFFICE DOM 1397, KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 gilascot November 29, 1983 Bonnie J. Breckberg P.O. Box 993 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal fLuin Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mrs. Breckberg: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail:- Able vail-able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17..51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK \Q�s� MARCELLA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE DOM 1397. kODIAk . ALASVA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 November 29, 1983 Owen and Nancy Tarr P.O. Box 2902 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133., An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mfrs. Tarr: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B), Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCE T A D LK City Clerk MD/ms Enclosure iy cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 November 29, 1983 Kristjan and Clara Helgason P.O. Box 546 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Helgason: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough' RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal becauseyou provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on thismatter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELIA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFHCE BOX 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 November 29, 1983 Arthur and Arlene Zimmer P.O. Box 1582 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Zimmer: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting On Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions an this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE BOX 1397, kODIAk . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 November 29, 1983 Evert and Donna Schnelzenbach P.O. Box 1920 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Schrnelzenbach: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided verbal and written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CTTY OF KODIAK MARCELA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Coimtnity Development Department POST OFFICE BOX 1397, KODIAK , ALMA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 q� ©G a000 IS November 29, 1983 Lloyd and Avis Sharratt P.O. Box 881 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sharratt:.•.. The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided verbal and written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact ue at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELIA DALKE City Clerk 410/ms Enclosure '3 cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community ty Developmxmt Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397. ICODIAk , ALASIO1 99615 PHONE (907) 486.3244 4.7 November 29, 1983 Bryce and Olice Gordon P.O. Box 2698 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), . PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gordon:_ The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided verbal and written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Cormission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact ue at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELTA DAT.KE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager. Mayor and Council Borough Connnmity Development Department POST OFFICE BO}( 1397. KODIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486.3224 sefi 9 ' November 29, 1983 Charles L. and Linda Staley P.O. Box 799 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Staley: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided verbal and written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact re at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK a MARCELLA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure =� cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Ccurau ity Development Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 November 29, 1983 Sidney M. Omlid P.O. Box 1161 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. 'An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), riot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. Omlid: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Cuumission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK �n�,9n�r�oo MARCELJA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397. KODIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486.3224 Novanber 29, 1983 David V. and Sandra M. Tucker P.O. Box 182 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: rase 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Ieite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Tucker: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice. of Appeal because you provided written testimony . at the Pla using and Zoning Comnission's,meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KDDLAK MARCELLA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager "` • Mayor and Council Borough Community Development. Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397, ICODIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486.3224 November 29, 1983 John Sullivan c/o City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1307 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. Sullivan: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Copmission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELLA DALKE City Clerk IIHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE BOK 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 0 470 ed e November 29, 1983 Leon A. David P.O. Box 2667 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), Y1 Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. David: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(13) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided verbal testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height T.imit and 17.51,050 Area.. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAKar..1%4 MARCELA DALKE City Clerk 141D/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE D0)( 1397,,KODIAK , ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 % November 29, 1983 Robert and Nancy Main P.O. Box 1575 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr: and Mrs. Main: • The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE. OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224 Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELLA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Commnity Development Department POST OFFICE BOX 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486.3224 November 29, 1983 James and Ella Torgrauaen P.O. Box 115 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Tette Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Torgramsen; The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony - at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCE TA DALKE City Clerk MED/ns Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE DO)( 1397. ItODI W . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 4117 CD C11 November 29, 1983 Marie Omlid P.O. Box 2746 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mrs. Omlid: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony . at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF' KODIAK A MARCE T A DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE BOX 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3994 November 29, 1983 Edward G. Pana^aroff P.O. Box 2710 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. Panamaroff: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meeting on Mt. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224 Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARC L A DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure 5/ cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department PQSf OFFICE DOA 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 4 sit* 47 12.1 ) November 29, 1983 Eugene and Eileen Mueller P.O. Box 466 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Teite Addition Dear Mr. and Mrs. Feller: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice.of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's Meeting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MA CEL A DALKE City Clerk MMus Enclosure cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development 1epartment POST OFHCE BOX 1397, KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3244 November 29, 1983 Wayne Murphy P.O. Box 2171 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. Murphy: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact m at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCELA DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure -r cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE DOA 1397, kODIdk . ACASkA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 November 29, 1983 Wilber and Catherine Carlson P.O. Box 2844 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Case 83-133. An Appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), PT Lot 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition Dear Mr. and NEs. Carlson: The City of Kodiak has recently received the Kodiak Island Borough's RECORD ON APPEAL in response to Rasmus Anderson's NOTICE OF APPEAL, and it is avail- able in the City Clerk's office for review. In accordance with City Code 17.10.030(B) Record on appeal, you are being sent the attached Notice of Appeal because you provided written testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission's meting on Mr. Anderson's request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area. If you have any questions on this matter please contact me at 486-3224. Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK MARCEL A DALKE City Clerk MHD/ms Enclosure 7 cc: City Manager Mayor and Council Borough Community Development Department POST OFFICE BOX 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Telephones 486-5736 - 486-5737 — Box 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 November 28, 1983 Ms. Marcella Dalke, City Clerk City of Kodiak P.O. Box 1397 Kodiak, AK 99615 Dear Marcella: RE: Case 83-133.. An appeal from Administrative Decision (17.68.020), Rasmus Anderson's appeal from Planning Commission decision (17.68.010A). Per your request of October 26, 1983, the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Department has prepared the record on appeal as required by Kodiak City Code 17.10.030. The record on appeal has been prepared for .Case 83-133, an appeal from an administrative decision (Borough Code 17.68.020) by Rasmus Anderson. The administrative decision was affirmed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and Mr. Anderson is appealing the Commission's decision to the City Council. Section 17.68.0108 of Borough Code requires that a "report concerning each case appealed to the Board of Adjustment shall be prepared by the Community Development Office and filed with the City Clerk. Such a report shall state the decision and recommendation of the Commission together with the reasons for each decision and recommendation." In this case, the decision of the Commission was to affirm the administrative decision that an accessory building constructed by Mr. Rasmus Anderson was in violation of Sections 17.51.040 and 17.51.050 of Borough Code. The Commission based their decision on the information provided by the record and testimony at the public hearing. Enclosed with this letter is the record on appeal as required by Kodiak City Code 17.10.030A. I believe you will find it complete. If you have any questions regarding the record on appeal, please -contact me. Sincerely, c Linda SindaF ed Director Community Development Department cc: Ronald K. Melvin, Attorney for Mr. Rasmus Anderson /Case 83-133. Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. 339 Enclosure II. tine/TES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL ltteING OF THE CITY OF KODIAK HELD OCIOBFR 27, 1983 MEETING CAMEO 10 ORDER DRAFT Mayor Pugh called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. Councilmembers Cratey, Crowe, Gilbert, and Romagna were present and constituted a quorum With the Council's concurrence, tfayor Pugh deviated from the published agenda to introduce Dale Fox, Executive Director of the state-wide Alaska Visitors Association. Mr. Fox congratulated the Council on taking a positive step in promoting tourism by instituting the hotel/hotel five percent sales tax. Ile eaid'visiror ptuiution was a complex effort and took the [suited effort of all related groups; i.e., Chamber of Commerce, local chapter of the AVA, visitor's information, etc. Each group's individual efforts were fragmented and overlapped. One group - %nether it was the City or other organization - had to take the leadership role and coordinate all interested individuals and groups. He said to keep in mind that advertising agencies only place advertisements and get 157. remissions frau the publishers in addition to the fees collected from the client. while public relation films.charge by the hour the same as attorneys whether they are just typing, lists of attractions or actively praoting Kodiak. He said the City world be eligible for grants to praote visitors: $2,000 for signing, etc., matched by volunteer labor; $2,000 . for visitor information center inprovenents, matched by volunteer labor; $50,000 for brochures, etc., could be matched 500% by the state if advertised outside Alaska; and $12,500 for administrative coordination. The Council requested Mr. Fax send his remarks to the City in letter form, PREVIOUS MINUIFS Coumcihrember Ramaglia MDV®, seconded by Coumcibreaber Crowe, to approve the minutes of the special meeting of October 11 and the regular meeting of October 13, 1983. The roll call vote was tkaniauusly favorable. III. PERSONS TO BE HEARD a, Planning and Zoning, Commissioner r Cdb.idssioner DaniJames said a variance request from Rasmus Anderson had been denied at the October 19 meeting because of the crowded conditicns in that area of ' the City and thepossible fire hazard. At the sane meting the CC -mission had - "approved rezoning a portion of the Killarney Hills Subdivision and tabled action on a rezoning request submitted by Pearleen Hunter. b. Special Award RE: Alan J. Beardsley Mayor Pugh introduced former Mayor Alan Beardsley by ccmplim rating him on his well -tun tenure in office. Mayor Pugh presented an engraved plaque reading; 'Pre- sented to Alan J. Beardsley in appreciation and recognition for your outstanding, dedicated service to the cannmity while serving an Mayor of, the City'of Kodiak. October 8, 1979 - October11, 1983." In lieu of the standard aerial photograph of the City, Mr. Beardsley received a Alaskan Mint engraving of a Kodiak bear and her cub. Mr. Beardsley said he bad enjoyed his fouryears as Mayor and had felt fortunate to have bad the cooperation of the Council and the support of the City staff. IV. OLD BUSINESS a. First Reading Ordinance Number 701 ,RE: Hording 'Nuerical UUsrine of Class Titles with Pay Ranges" in the Personnel Rules and Regulations Mayor Pugh read Ordinance Number 701.by title. CityMeager Lesko said the ordi- nance was presented and tabled at the October 13 meeting pending the October 18 worksession, The ordinance would revise the titles and job descriptions for Admin- istrative Corrections Officers I, II, and III, and create the position of Support Services [tanager. Funding for the Support Services Manager was approved in the FY84 budget and would befilled by Gary Gibbons. Mare of the proposed changes would increase the present number of Police Department mployees. The Personnel Board had reviewed the ordnance and reported no objections. V. Camcilrember Crowe MOVED, seconded by Councilmnber Cratty, to remove Grdinan Number 701 from the table. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. Coutciltamber Crowe MOVED, seconded by Cotmcibrtsrber Romaglia, to approve Ordi- nance Hamer 701 in the first reading. The roll call vote was m nanhiously favorable. b. Ordinance Number 702 RE: Emergency Services The Mayor read Ordnance Ntztr 702 by title. Mr. Gesko said the ordinance was approved in the first reading September 22 and the required public hearing was held October 13. It was then tabled pending the October 20 Joint worksession with the Borough Assembly, Ordinance Number 702 would repeal and reenact chapter 2,32 of the Kodiak City Code and.provide procedures to be followed in the event oL a major disaster. Section 2 of the ordinance stipulates the passage of an identi- cal ordinance by the Borough. The seond reading and public hearing on Borough Ordinance Number 83-68-0 was scheduled for November 8 "Ir Gesko rem -mended re - tabling Ordinance Number 702 to the first meeting in November after the Borough would act on their oniinatce, to allow the Council to =end the City's should the Assembly change theirs. Councilor Cher Cratty MOVED, seconded by CotmciIraiter Crowe, to remove Ordinance Number 702 from the table The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. Cameilmember Gilbert MOVED, seconded by Camcilnember Crowe, to table Ordinance Number 702 to the November 10 regular Council meeting. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. c. Second Reading and Public Hearin. Ordinance Number 703 RE: Changing the Residency Requirement for Senior Citizen Sales Tax Exerpcim Mayor Pugh read Ordinance Number 703 by title. City Manager Gesko said the ordi- nance was presented at the request of a Cotmcilmember and would change the residc requirements for senior citizens sales tax exe prion certificates frac one year to thirty days. Ordinance Number 703 had been reviewed and approved as to form by City Attorney Stephens, and was approved in the first reading on October 13. Co nciluerber CrattyMDVFD, seconded by Councibiember Crowe, to approve Ordinance Number 703 in the second reading. Mayor Pugh closed the regular meeting, opened and closed the public hearing when no one came forward to testify, and reopened the regular meeting. He stated the City Clerk had received a telephone call from Esther Encelewski in favor of the ordi ance. Mrs. Encelewski lived in the Senior Center and was unable to attend the meeting. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. NEW BUSINESS a. First Reading, Ordinance Renter 704 RE: Setting Ehployment Qualifications for the Fire Depart rot Mayor Pugh read Ordinance Number 704 by title. The City Manager said the ordi- nance was requested by Chief Magnusen to correct a section of the Kodiak City Code written when it was an all -volunteer Fire Department. This ordinance world give a legal basis for departmental policy regulations pertaining to standby duty requirmmts. The ordinance had been reviewed by City Attorney Mel Stephens. Councibrember Gilbert }MED, seconded by Ccamcilmmeaber Crowe, to approve Ordinance Number 704 in the first reading. WsntLbnanbet Gilbert MOVED, seconded by Camcilmnnber Crowe, to amend Ordinance Number 704, section 1, by substituting the following wording for the first sen- tence of KCC 2.12.130: "The emergency personnel of the department shall consist of such able-bodied persons as gay be hired by the chief. Anyone accepting regular employment with the department shall establish residency within the corporate limits of the city within 180 days following the date of hire and shall maintain telephone service within their residence." The roll call vote on the arendrent was tmsnisxusIy favorable. The roll call vote on the main motion as amended was unanimously favorable. b, Resolution Number 60-83 RE: Accepting a Grant from the State Department of Environmental Conservation for Water and Sewer Lines on Ismailov Street Mayor Pugh read Resolution Number 60-83 by title. The City Manager said that in accordance with AS 46.03.030, Governor Sheffield and the Department of Environ- mental Conservation had offered a grant of $281,478 toward the construction of approximately 2,500 feet of water line and 730 feet of sewer line on Ismailov Street. The resolution would accept the grant and authorize the City Manager to execute the grant documents., Councilmtber Crowe MOVED, seconded by Comcilmtber Cratty, to pass and approve Resolution Number 60-83. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. c. Resolution Number 61-83 RE:' Requesting Funding fi® MT/FF for the Hill Bay ' Road Sidmallc The Mayor read Resolution Number 61-83 by title. CityManager Ceske said the resolution was presented at the request of Grants P±dnistrator Gould to comply with the Department of Transportation's letter of September 22. Upon receipt of the signed transfer of responsibility agreement and this resolution, DDT/PF would send a fully executed copy of the agreement and transfer the $70,000 to the City. While this amount was not adequate to completely fund the construction, and an additional $50,000 was being sought, the City could realize interest on the $70,000 in the interim. Mfr. Gesko :said these funds were originally awarded to the Borough in the amount of $100,000 for a pedestrian overpass.at the Mill Bay/ Birch intersection. When the transfer to the City took place the amount was de- creased by $30,000. Councilmenber Cratty MOVED, seconded by Councilmember Ramaglia, to pass and approve ResolutionNttber 61-83. The roll call vote was mnanhmously favorable. d. Request for Exception to Bid Process RE: "Jaws of Life" - Extrication Equip - merit Mr. Lesko said the item was presented by Fire Chief Magnusen to request an excep- tion to the bid process as allowed under Kodiak City Code 3.12.070(A) to purchase "unique goods". The manufacturers of extrication equipment were limited and of the two proposals received; the low bidder, Safety, Inc. (Furst), had ouch the RECESS Letter product. The staff recommended approval of the request. Co,ncil:member Ramaglia MOVED, seconded by Councilnember Crowe, to authorize an exception to the bid process and to authorize expenditure to Safety, Inc. for Hurst extrication equipment in the amount of $11,852.65; funds to be expended frau Fire Department account 15.51,64 MAi2DNERT & EQUIPMENT. The roll call vote was =ominously favorable. e. Bid. Award RE: Selief Mini -Park Mr. Ceske said a bid opening for the Selief Mini -Park project was held in his office on October 12. Bids were received from Northern Exploration & Equionnt - $56,717.50 and (adenau & Caipany - 586.997.25. The engineer's estimate was ,65,120. Staff recamerded award to the low bidder. Councilmember Gilbert MOVED, seconded by Councilmaitber Crowe, to award the bid for the Selief Mini -Park to Northern Exploration & Equipment Company in the amount of $58,717.50, with funds to be expended frac 11UD Black Grant Fund account 40.54.65 CHILDREN'S MINI -PARK CONSTRUCTION, after transferring $5.015,50 fromHUD Black Grant Fund account 40.54.31 CHILDREN'S MINI -PARK PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. f. Resolution Mather 63-83/Transfer of Funds/Bid Award RE, Teen Center City Manager Gesko said a bid opening was held in his office on October 14 for the Teen/Recreation Center. Even through thirty sets of bid documents had been requested by contractors the only bid received was from L.G. Schneider & Sons in the amount of $549,161. The Engineer's estimate was $507,990. This bid proposal was a new concept for the City being a design/construction package. The Archi- tectural Review Board's first recanrendation was to award the project as'proposed if funds could be located. The project had been budgeted at $334,420. City Engineer Monroe reported on negotiations with the bidder which resulted in a possible reduction of the total dimension of the building by reducing the size of the lobby, kitchen, and restrooms by two feet artd reducing the basic bid price by $2,160; by possibly completing the auditorium, kitchen, and rest -roans and providing only a shell" for the balance of the building resulting in a reduction of $33,142; or deleting. the "package finish" for the racquet ball courts and substituting concrete floors and plastic laminate covered plywood walls which would -educe the cost by $15,549. CityEngineer Monroe answered various technical questions frail the Council, after which Councilaember Gilbert MOVED, seconded by Counciliember. Crowe, to pass and approve Resolution Number 63-83 authorizing the reallocation of 5140,000 in excess entitlement funds Fran Baranof street construction to the Teen Center renovation project. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. Cotncibnember Gilbert MOVED, seconded by Councibmember Crotty, to transfer 517,000 frac HUD Block Grant Fund account 40.60.31 TEEN man PROFESSIONAL SERVICES and $140,000 from Non -Departmental account 20.51.43 CONTINGENCY to HUD Block Grant Fund account 40.61.65 IZEM CENTER CONSTRUCTION. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. Concilnrsnber Gilbert MOVED, seconded by Councibrember Cratty, to award the contract for the Teen/Recreation Center construction project to L.G. Schneider & Sons in the aoimt of $549,161 for the entire project as proposed with all additives; funds to be expended from HUD Block Grant Fund account 40.60.65 TEEN (E TER CON- STRUCTION. The roll call vote was unanimously favorable. The Council clarified for the record that the facility would still be primarily a teen center, however the general public would have access/use under secondary schedu]ing. There was a short recess. g. Acceptance of Proposal RE: Sewer Pipe Mr. Gesko said Public Works Director Peukers had received a proposal for sewer pipe to be used for service line hookups. The request for quotation had specified Johns-Mlanville pipe because it was more durable than other brands for conditions found in Kodiak. Mr. Beukers recannended acceptance of the proposal from Western Utilities Supply Company. This would be a reimbursable expenditure as the pipe is sold to property -owners requesting hookup. Councilme:bet Crotty MOVED, seconded by Co icilmarber Rommaglia, to accept the pro- posal for 4 -inch and 6 -inch sewer pipe Iran Western Utilities Supply Caipany in the amount of $5,380; funds to be expended from Water & Sewer Inventoryaccount 48.14.10 REThBURSABLZ The roll call vote was tmadnausly favorable. October 26, 1983 Linda Freed, Director Crmmmity Development Department Kodiak Island Borough P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Application for Variance - Case No. 83-133 Rasmus Anderson Appeal of Denial Dear Linda: On October 25, the City, received an appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of the variance request f ow the above applicant. Please prepare the record on appeal as required by Kodiak City Code subsection 17.10.020(B). Sincerely, CITY OF KODIAK Marcella Dake City Clerk MBD/ms cc: Mickie Miller, CMC, Borough Clerk Ronald K. Melvin, Attorney for Appellant Rasmus Anderson POST OFFICE BOX 1397. KODIAK . ALASKA 99615 PHONE (907) 486-3224 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Telephones 486-5736 - 486-5737 — Box 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 October 25, 1983 Mr. and Mrs. Rasmus Anderson P.O. Box 2793 Kodiak, AK 99615 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Anderson: Please be advised that the Planning and Zoning Commission, at their October 19, 1983 meeting, affirmed the administrative decision that your accessory building must be brought into compliance with Borough code. As it was stated at the meeting, an appeal from this decision of the Planning Commission may be taken by any person or party aggrieved. Section 17.68.010(A) of the Borough Code further states that such an appeal shall be taken within ten days of the date of such action or decision by filing with the Board of Adjustment; in this case, through the city clerk a written notice of appeal. I have spoken with Marcella Dalke, City Clerk, and your written notice of appeal must be received by the City no later than 5 p.m. on October 28, 1983. If you have any questions, or if I can provide any assistance, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department cc: Marcella Dalke, City Clerk Ronald Melvin, 921 W. 6th, Anchorage, AK 99501 Case 83-133, PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. Rassmus Anderson P.O. Box 2793 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 October 19, 1983 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 RE: Request For Variance From Sections 17.51.040 and 17.51.050 of the Borough Code. Supplementary Letter. Dear Mrs. Freed: This is a supplement to our letter of October 13, 1983, appealing your decision and requesting a variance. We wish to point out that our storage shed, as built, does not cause any damage or prejudice to other property in the vicinity and the requested variance would not be contrary to the objective of the comprehensive plan. The shed does not change the character or liveability of the neighborhood, nor does it obstruct any scenic view, or present any hazards. If anything it upgrades the vicinity. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully Yours, Rassmus Anderson MS. CATHY CORDRY spoke before the Commission as a concerned citizen, was neither for nor against the request, but questioned the worth of an additional access road for just two years. MR. BOB SCOTT, another concerned citizen, questioned additional proposed leasing in the same area and stated he had no objection to the request. MR. SHAWN BILLION presented his objections to having any further dealings with Timberline due to alleged past lease violations and expressed his concern over possible pollution of the area from the dump site. MS. NANCY 14ISSAL also appeared before the Commission, having no objections to the additional road access and against the "swap" of land. MR. HILL closed the Public Hearing and opened the Regular Meeting. A discussion ensued among the Commissioners. MRS. CROWE MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE BOROUGH ASSEMBLY that the Timberline lease be modified to adjust the boundary of the leased area with no change in acreage on ADL 44355, the change of which is called out in the memo of 10/12/83, with the following recommen- dations: 1) that the greenbelt be established in the changed area; 2) that the Assembly consider the justification for rent increase; 3) that no additional access road be added to the leased area; and 4) that Timberline assume the expense for the modification of this lease. Mr. Rennell seconded the motion and the question was called. ROLL CALL VOTE: Mrs. Crowe, yes; Mr. Gregg, yes; Mr. Hill, yes; Mr. James, yes; I4r. Rennell, yes; lir. Briggs, no. The motion CARRIED. Mr. Hill reminded the applicant of the appeal process as the Commission only granted one of the requests. �6.` PUBLIC HEARING -ON CASE 83-133, a request fora variance from -Borough. Code 17.51.040, Height Limit, and 17.51.050, -.Area., originating,f,rom_the ' Rausmusson Anderson Building-Pe`rmit question. Mr. Hill stated for the record that this was an appeal of an adminis- trative decision and that any decision made could be appealed to the City Council by any person or party aggrieved by the decision. Mr. Hill closed the Regular Meeting and opened the Public Hearing. Three parties appeared before the Commission in support of the Andersons: FIR. AND MRS. SHARRATT, who felt that something should have been done prior to the completion of the building; and MR. LEON DAVID, retired school teacher, who spoke on behalf of the Andersons stating that the building did not obstruct the neighbors' view and that the destruction of the building would adversely affect other buildings in the city of Kodiak. MRS. OLIVE RUTH GORDON, wife of the building. inspector adjacent to the Anderson's property, read a letter of protest submitted to the Commission and mentioned several people had referred to the building as a "home." Mrs. Gordon had contacted both City and Borough officials in an attempt to stop the con- struction of the building in question. MR. AND MRS. SCHMELZENBACH, adjacent property owners, stated their object- ions to granting the variance. Their main concern was that the building was too high, too close, and presented a fire hazard. MR. AND MRS. STALEY, Lot 19, Leite Addition, stated that the structure had been found to be illegal based on current City and Borough building restrictions, with objections to maximum height and ground area and distances between structure and property lines. The fire hazard concern was mentioned. Mr. Staley submitted a petition signed by 22 property owners in the area and some pictures of the structure. MR. STD OMLID, spoke in behalf of his mother, Marie Oinlid, who lives on Lot IBA in front of the Anderson's house, and submitted a copy of the plat and some pictures of the structure. He stated that not only was the building in excess on the ground floor (area), but in excess to a greater degree on the second story, plus a deck was being added. He expressed concern for fire hazard and with the way the building permit was issued. Regular Meeting October 19, 1983 e • MR. AND MRS. ANDERSON spoke in defense of the construction that had already occurred, felt they were in conformance with the laws, and did not understand how their building could be considered a fire hazard as they were not living in the building. MR. JOHN SULLIVAN, city building inspector, stated that Mr. Anderson had obtained what they felt to be a legally -zoned building permit and had called the city offices twice during the building process to check compliance with building restrictions. Mr. Sullivan discussed with the Commissioners the two -fold process necessary to obtain a building permit, that it is done in conjunction with the City, and that these were zoning violations in question. FIR. HILL closed the Public Hearing and opened the Regular Meeting. He read into the minutes a memo of October 12, 1983, to the Commission from the Community Development Department, regarding the facts to be considered on the appeal. MS. FREED clarified for the Commission what action might be taken: the Commission could affirm the administrative decision and the building would have to be brought into compliance; or the Commission could reverse the admin- istrative decision, in whole or in part, and grant relief in the form of a variance for the portions of the structure in violation. OIRS._CROWE MOVED TO AFFIRM THE ADMINISTRATIVE.DECISION as outlined in Ms. Freed's letter to Mr. and Mrs. Anderson dated October 6, 1983. Mr. Rennell seconded the motion and the question was called. ROLL CALL VOTE: All the Commissioners voted'"yes" except for Mr. James who voted "no." The motion -CARRIED.- MR. HILL CALLED A TEN-MINUTE RECESS AT 10:15 P.M. The meeting resumed at 10:27 p.m. 7. PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 83-118. A request to rezone Tract R-1, Killarney Hills Subdivision, U.S. Survey 3218, from RR1 to R2 and Business, submitted by the Archdiocese of Anchorage and TABLED from the September 21, 1983 meeting. MR. HILL stated that due to the conflict of interest at the last meeting and the resulting public opinion when he remained as Chairman, he would declare conflict of interest in this case and step down from the chair. He turned the meeting over to Mrs. Crowe. MRS. CROWE then stated for the record that the Commission was in error at the last meeting in not declaring Mr. Hill in conflict of interest. There were no further comments. Mrs. Crowe closed the Regular Meeting and opened the Public Hearing. MR. HILL explained that Tract R -1C is proposed for Business zoning and the lot lines had been moved; Tract R-16 is proposed to remain at RR1 zoning; Tract R -1A will remain RR1 zoning; and Block 3 and 4 are proposed for R2 zoning. There was no further public input and Mrs. Crowe closed the Public Hearing and opened the Regular Meeting. MR. GREGG MOVED TO REMOVE FROM THE TABLE Case 83-118. Mr. Rennell seconded and the -motion CARRIED by unanimous voice vbte. MR. BRIGGS MOVED TO APPROVE the rezoning of Blocks 3 and 4 of Killarney Hills Subdivision to R2 and Tract R -1C to Business. Mr. Gregg. seconded the motion and the question was called. The motion CARRIED by unanimous roll call vote. 8. PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE S-83-038. Preliminary Subdivision of a portion of Tract R-1, Killarney Hills Subdivision, U.S. Survey 3218, creating: Lots 7-19, Block 3; Lots 2-12, Block 4; and Tract "X," Killarney Hills Sub= division, U.S. Survey 3218, submitted by the Catholic Arch -Bishop Corporation/ Saint Mary's Parish and TABLED from the September 21, 1983 meeting. PIR. CROWE gave an additional staff report and a discussion ensued among the Commissioners to clarify the stipulations on the subdivision. Mrs. Crowe closed the Regular Meeting and opened the Public Hearing. As there were no audience comments, Mrs. Crowe closed the Public Hearing and opened the Regular Meeting. Regular Meeting October 19, 1983 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OCTOBER 19, 1983 REGULAR MEETING VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT Case 83-133. Rausmusson Anderson Building Permit Question. ITEM #6: PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 83-133, a request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040, Height Limit, and 17.51.050, Area, originating from the Rausmusson Anderson Building Permit question. MR. HILL: (Speaking to Commissioners.) We do have a few handouts if you would like a few minutes to look them over, if you haven't already. MRS. CROWE: Are we going to address the variance request rather than the appeal? Or, are we going to address the appeal? MR. HILL: The City is going to deal with the appeal... MRS. CROWE: No, we are the appellant body for... (Some discussion among the Commissioners spoken too softly to be heard.) MR. HILL: Then this will be an appeal of the administrative decision; and, that any decision that we make can be appealed to the City Council by any person or party that is aggrieved by our decision. Does anyone have any comments? Then, at this time, I will close the Regular Meeting and open it to a Public Hearing. Anyone wishing to speak "for"? MRS. AVIS SHARRAT: I live in the area. I am for...I am supporting Mr. and Mrs. Anderson for the reason that this building was put up in not a short time, and it was allowed to be put up and a roof put on. It is a nice building, a very nice building. And, I think that if there were objec- tions, that they should have been made at the time. I understand the inspector was there. I don't know the rules and regulations, but I feel that if an inspector came, I would never question his...I mean, he said. So, I would then (be in favor of granting the request) because the building is already up. MR. HILL: Thank you. MR. LEON DAVID: I am Leon David, retired school teacher, once a member of the School Board, ah, School Advisory Board, a member of the Senior Citizens Advisory Board, and other positions I have held in the state of Alaska as a member of the State Advisory Council for the state of (could not understand the name of the state). I am speaking in favor of Mr. Rausmusson Anderson in the construction of his home because I just think that if this will not push through, it will adversely affect other buildings that have been constructed in the city of Kodiak. Because I see and I have gone to that area, and I have seen it and it seems to me that it does not destroy the scenic view of that area. It does not do any obstruc- tion to the neighbors, and if this happens that it will be objected or it will be demolished, it will also affect other constructions that have already been constructed in the city of Kodiak. There are higher buildings that havebeenconstructed in the city, so I don't think there is any objections to the construction of the building of Mr. Rausmusson Anderson. He has submitted to this assembly lots of evidences and lots of people who had shown their objections, and I hope that the assembly (meaning the Commission) has received all those objections of other people like me objecting to that destruction of...or of...having objections, I mean, having objections in the destruction of that building, I mean. Not objections to that construction. So, I believe that 10 people like me understand the beauty of a bigger homes or high buildings because they are to add beauty to a city when we have bigger and taller buildings. They really don't destroy, or they really don't obstruct things in that area. Mr. Anderson has written a letter to the Assembly, and I hope you have it in your possession and that will explain exactly what he intends to say because Mr. Anderson could hardly express himself well enough to be understood. So, probably, that was one of the causes of misunderstandings between the neighbors, because they do not really understand each other because of his lack of, probably, clarifying himself with the neighbors. I am quite sure that it must have been only a cause of misunderstanding about the case that has been brought regarding his property and building con- struction. The letter of Mr. Anderson, dated October 13, I think the Assembly has that and other letters that they have submitted. I think he has all of them in his files. 50, I think those things are enough to explain the ideas about this case. I hope that they are and you will have a better consideration of the reasons of Mr. Anderson. Also, of the other evidences that have been given in connection with this case for the Assembly to decide the case of Mr. Anderson. Thank you very much. MR. LLOYD SHARRATT: I am just going to add to what my wife had to say. As long as the building was all approved, the inspector approved the building, I think you should have stopped the building before. You should have noticed the building was too high, if that was their objection. And, I am sure that right next door, not more than twenty feet, there is a borough inspector living there. He could have seen that something was wrong with the building at that time. Thank you. MR. HILL: (There were loud noises coming from the hallway.) Will someone please close that door? Anyone else in the audience wishing to speak "for"? Anyone "against"? MRS. OLIVE RUTH GORDON: My name is Olive Ruth Gordon, and I am the building inspector's wife adjacent from his property. And, I notice that Mrs. Sharratt spoke of Mr. Rausmusson's "house," and I also notice that the gentleman referred to Mr. Rausmusson Anderson having a better "home." I really do believe his building permit, finally, that he decided on keeping, was for a "shed." You have my letter. Is it necessary for me to read it for the benefit of the audience? MR. HILL: If you'd like. Case 83-133/Anderson 2 Verbatim MRS. GORDON: (Reading letter.) Alright. "The ground coverage of the second floor...second story on that shed that Mr.. Rausmusson Anderson built is 695 square feet, 180 square feet being a deck. Decks that are over 30 inches from the ground are counted as ground cover. This one is at least 10 feet off the ground with supporting foundation posts set in concrete. The first story covers 427 square feet, giving a total of 942 square feet of floor space, when it should be 344 square feet. It is on the permit that Lot 18, Block 2, Leite Addition contains 380 square feet of computed coverage, which includes a 392 square -foot driveway on a flag -shaped lot. According to my figures, they have overbuilt by 351 square feet. I stated last meeting that the permit issued for the addition on January 7, 1983, was not approved with addition to his house. Now, I understand from Mr. Walton that it was Mr. Anderson who changed his mind and wished to build a shed. Mr. Anderson has built an addition to his residence this summer. No building permit was issued for this. The addition enclosed the complete northeast side yard of his house. It has two doors. Again, I am so sorry that things have progressed to this stage, but I tried to draw attention of those in authority to avoid this situation. Olive Gordon. (End of letter.) Thank you. MR. HILL: Any questions? (There were no questions.) Anyone else in opposition? MRS. DONNA SCHMELZENBACH: I am Donna Schmelzenbach, and we live directly behind Mr. Anderson. I would agree with the woman who said that it, you know, that it doesn't seem fair that we should...that now the building is up, that we should raise our objections. But, I would like to point out to those in the audience, I think the Commission knows that we have been trying since the earliest stages of the construction to get somebody to stop him because it was being overbuilt, and we were aware of that. It is right out my back door. He calls it a shed. I think there will be some pictures here tonight to show you. If it is a shed, he has put a great deal of money into finish work and windows and doors, and it seems like it wouldn't justify that for just a storage shed. But, even if we accept the fact that it is going to be only a shed and they are not going to live in it, then it needs to be pointed out that it is way overbuilt for a shed. I think Mrs. Gordon pointed that out. It is like the lot is 50 feet wide and the shed is 35 feet wide, if you count the deck. The deck alone is 4.6 percent of the lot area. The whole shed is only supposed to be 10 percent. Well, she gave the figures. It is way overbuilt for a shed in area and then it is 4 feet too high. Four feet doesn't seem like too much except that 4 feet means an entire second story. It is also too close to his present residence. I feel like it was like he couldn't...the lot that he has now is not large enough for the dwelling that is on it. It's an undersized lot and it seems like we are saying, well, he couldn't...it's too small for one house, so we will put two on it. Case 83-133/Anderson - 3 - Verbatim Again, I am really sorry that it got this far. We don't mean to be badgering neighbors, but we tried to stop it before now. It seems like it isn't fair that he could build so illegally and then just change the lot to make it legal. It is a fire hazard, and it's just way too much building for the lot. And, it is also way too close to our property line. I mean, if it is a resi- dence, as his friends claim, say that it is, and it certainly looks like one, it is way too close to our property line. We had to build 20 feet off our property line with our house, and I think that certainly, if it is a house, that he should have to do that. MR. HILL: Thank you. Any questions? MR. RENNELL: I have a question. You are in opposition, in other words, of his request? MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: Yes, I am. MR. RENNELL: So, um, you'd like the building to be torn down, in other words? Is that what you are saying? MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: Something should...it should have been stopped before now. I mean, it's...the City or borough inspector... MR. RENNELL: I agree with you 100 percent, but we are at this stage now, so that is my question. MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: Torn down? Can it be brought into variance? Can it be shortened? MR. RENNELL: Brought into compliance, excuse me. MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: Brought into compliance? MR. JAMES: To be brought into compliance, it would have to be shrunk by 60 square feet and 4 feet down. MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: Well, I think that it is your problem that it is too big. I mean, because the inspectors came, and we kept telling them, and they kept coming back, and we kept telling them it is wrong. We were gone. We were outside for six weeks. Before I left, they were putting in the foundation, and we were already complaining. MRS. CROWE: Give us some dates for our information. It doesn't have to be a pinpointed date, but so that we see... MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: Okay. I don't know exactly when he started building it. MRS. CROWE: Give us a ball -park figure. MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: But, it was like some time in July, I would say. Case 83-133(Anderson - 4 verbatim MRS. CROWE: June 6 is when the permit was issued, I believe. MRS. GORDON: (Speaking from the audience) I think I called about June 10. MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: Okay, that is when they were starting construction, that we started complaining about it. Then, it was just a one-story shed, but it looked so big. So, we started asking questions to see if they had a permit, to see if it was legal and so on. Well, we left on vacation. It was August 4 and the first story was completed. I was already really unhappy because it was just right out my back door, and it seemed so terribly big. But, I accepted the fact that it was a shed. He'd gotten a permit, and even if it was a little bit big, I wasn't going to rattle. Okay, we accept that because it was already built, and we couldn't get the City or the Borough to do anything about it. MRS. CROWE: Who did you call? MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: I called the city inspector. Then it was like, you know, they said well, the Borough approved it, right? Okay, the Borough approved it, so he wasn't going to do anything about it. Well, then we left August 4, and when I came back, which was in September, here was a second story on it, with this huge deck, you know. I mean, it had gone from a storage shed that I thought was too small, to this house that was too big. MRS. CROWE: Did you at any point call the Borough, Community Development Department? MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: I don't know if I actually called the Borough. I don't remember. I mean, that...I haven't, well, I have called. I don't know. I have called a couple other people after we got home to, you know, find out. MRS. CROWE: A couple other people? MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: I don't know. I talked with...I think I must have talked with the Borough, too. I called the city inspector at least once. I can't remember who, anyway. But, they...it was, you know, the Borough gave them the permit. Then, I tried to tell him, well, it's not a shed, and he said, well, if it's a residence, then... MRS. CROWE: Is "he" Mr. Sullivan, when you say this? MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: The guy that I talked to on the phone when I asked for the city inspector...yeh. MRS. CROWE: Do you recall having any conversations with the Borough? MRS. SCHMELZENBACH: I don't...no, I don't recall. Ruth has done probably more calling than I have, anyway. But, you know, it is illegal, and it's just really obnoxious. I think it's, I mean, because it's so big, and it's so close, and because it takes up, with his other house, the whole lot is literally covered with buildings. And I, you know. The problem is that the permit was granted and nobody stopped it. And then, again, there's the Case 83-133/Anderson 5 Verbatim problem that he says a home twice, and it out of the code. At something. it's a shed. Even tonight it has been referred to as looks like a house. So, that makes it even further any rate, I am against the variance. I want you to do MR. HILL: Anyone else in the audience in opposition? MR. CHUCK STALEY: My name is Chuck Staley. I live at 1513 Mission Road, Lot 19, Leite Addition, and I share a boundary with Mr. Anderson. My thoughts, in regard to the so-called storage building on Rausmus Anderson's property are as follows: The structure is, has been found to be, illegal based on current city and borough building restrictions. The building is over maximum height allowed and takes up more ground area than his lot size is qualified for. There are also questions concerning distances between the structure and property lines. It is unfortunate that these errors were not recognized at the time the building permit was issued and on required follow-up inspections. Indeed, I suspect a degree of complacency on the part of both government bodies in this case. The problem of building density in and around our neighborhood is a major concern for all of us. Fire would take out all of the existing structures if ever given a chance. On this premise and the aforementioned violation of restrictions, I recommend a variance not be granted with the terms currently presented. The way I understand this case, number one, whoever granted that permit initially was in violation of the law of the current code restrictions, based on the lot size. To further compound the situation, the government entity had been notified when the structure was started; not just once, but several times, and they did their inspections, and based on the illegal permit, they allowed the structure to be built. To me, that is very poor action on the part of the permit grantor and the inspector. I have a petition that I would like to give you, with signatures of people that have land in and around the area, against the variance. I also have some pictures I would like to show to you. (Mr. Staley handed out the pictures and submitted the petition to the Commissioners.) That is all I have to say, thank you. MR. HILL: Have these been entered (into the record)? You just brought these in tonight, so they haven't been entered into the record? MR. STALEY: I just brought them in tonight. MR. HILL: Anyone else in opposition? MR. SID OMLID: My name is Sid Omlid. I am here speaking in behalf of my mother, Marie Omlid, who lives on Lot 18A, which is right in front of Mr. Anderson's house, Block 2, in the Leite Addition. I do have some material that I would like to pass out, if I could. I also have a couple of pictures. (Mr. Omlid submitted the material and the pictures to the Commissioners.) Case 83-133/Anderson - 6 - Verbatim I am speaking in opposition to Mr. Anderson's request for two basic reasons. First, is the fire hazard that is being created by the construction that has taken place on Mr. Anderson's lot. Also, the flagrant violation that has taken place of the zoning ordinance. I would like to clear up the part about the lot first. I went to the Borough office and got a copy of the lot, and that's the first page that you see. It gives the size of the lot, and you can see my mother's lot right in front of it, 18A. And so, you can see the configuration of the lot. If you look on the second, now this has been on file since 1960, and so, I don't think there is much doubt about what has been on file there. MRS. CROWE: Can I ask you one question before we go on to the next page? MR. OMLID: Yes. The next page just reinforces this page. (Mrs. Crowe did not ask Mr. Omlid any question.) The next page is a recent survey that was done on October 12, 1983, just a few days ago, completed and certified by Roy Ecklund. It again states the exact same boundaries that are shown on the ones that are in the Borough office. So, there should not have been much. dispute as to the size of the lots there when the permit was issued. If you take the longest two lines and multiply them out, the longest two lines on that Lot 18, you will come out with...I took 128 feet x 50 feet, the longest two sides. I came out with 6,400 feet. I took the part that my mother lives on, 74 feet x 40 feet, 2,960 square feet. That leaves Mr. Anderson's lot at 3,440 feet, and that's being a little generous. I really have a serious question about the issuing of an outbuilding at 400 square feet, which is in violation of the 10 percent. Not only that, but when you get to measuring the building that is there, it is approximately 16 feet 9 inches x 25 feet 6 inches, 432 square feet. That's on the ground floor. If you look at the second story, it's 18 feet 9 inches x 27 feet 9 inches, 521 square feet. Not only is it in excess on the ground floor, but it is in excess to a greater degree on the second floor, plus a deck is being added. Plus it is too high. Plus it is too close to the line. This isn't my only concern on the fire hazard. Now, I, too, was concerned or confused about the building permit that took place. I understood that there was a permit to build on his house. And, indeed, Mr. Anderson has built on his house in two different areas. The pictures that I gave you show the area that was built on his house to the one side. If you look at the survey, it is to the right-hand side of Mr. Anderson's house. It covers the whole right-hand side as you face from the road. It covers the whole right-hand side of his house from his house to the lot. And, those two pictures will show that, and bear it out. The roof overhang goes over on the other lot by probably a foot or so. In addition to this, he has taken a deck walk that is on the front of his lot and put a roof on it and enclosed it. I thought this was a part of the building permit he had. But, apparently, it is not. But, all of these added together do create what I feel is a considerable fire hazard. What also concerns me is the way that the zoning...ah, the permit has, been issued. There is something wrong with issuing a permit that is in Case 83-133/Anderson 7 Verbatim violation of law; where you are issuing a permit for 40D square feet on a lot that will support 344 (square feet). I would take exception to one thing that I heard in testimony, and that was that the neighbors have been contacted and explained the situation. My mother has never been asked, has never been talked to about it. There has never been any attempt in any way to talk to her about this building or addition that is taking place. The other parts that I have after the first two pages give justification for the latest survey that took place. You can see that it was a court ruling that took place on April 5, 1982, and clarifies any dispute that might have been over a deed. And, that's the basic justification for the survey that you see, which upholds Page 1 of the original record at the Borough office. I would be happy to try to answer any questions that you have. MS. FREED: I would like to make two points, based on Mr. Omlid's testimony that has some bearing. One is that the Borough tax records show the lot's square footage, and I checked this again today on our current printout, as 3,746 square feet. And, I believe what the person who signed the permit did was round that off to 3,800 square feet. And, from checking the tax records, it indicated in the Borough records that Mr. Anderson has been taxed on 3,746 square feet since he has owned the property. Secondly, based on measurements that were taken with the city building inspector on September 28 of this year, the accessory building, as it is currently constructed, meets all of the current setback requirements for an accessory building. It does not violate any setback requirements. MR. HILL: Thank you. MRS. GORDON: Would you like me to tell you which officials I spoke to? MR. HILL: Not at this time. MR. EVERT SCHMELZENBACH: My name is Evert Schmelzenbach. I am a builder and a businessman in Kodiak, and I live directly behind Mr. Anderson. We have never had any problems with these people and have been good neighbors. I am speaking against this allowing of this variance. I have several concerns. I think one that has been mentioned is the fire, and I am concerned that there might even be a possibility that my fire policy could be cancelled as well as possibly some of the other neighbors. I just bring that up. That has just recently come to my attention, and that's a big concern to me. The other concern that I have, basically, is, as you know, land is scarce in Kodiak, especially in the city. People have problems with places to live. It is expensive to build, and yet, people are more or less forced to abide by the law. I have been. And, I feel like that it is helpful that the laws are upheld as far as the density of living goes. The main concern with the building, to me, is that it is too high, along with the fact that I am concerned that he will move into the building. That is not fact as far as moving into the building. It looks like a dwelling. I am a builder. It is nicely built. It is 5 feet off of my property line. It's very high. It does block the back of my house considerably; mainly, Case 83-133/Anderson - 8 - Verbatim because it's so close. If it was a dwelling and it had been built 25 feet off of his back lot line, then I really wouldn't have any complaint at all. Also, if he was going to use it as a shed, I have no complaint, except it is too high. And it is, as you already know, also too big for an accessory building. I really feel badly that the building is already up. I don't know what is going to be done about it. However, I feel like that if there was some way that the building could remain where the density of the buildings was not so great,,I would be in favor of that. However, as it stands now, I don't know what the solution to the problem is. Thank you very much. (Mrs. Crowe asked for the overhead lights above the Commissioners to be adjusted. There was a brief pause as the lights were adjusted.) MRS. LINDA STALEY: My name's Linda Staley, and I am opposed to this variance because of the fire hazards that exist. With three major structures on one lot, all adjacent buildings are in danger. I have three children that I love, and I want to keep them safe. Thank you. MR. HILL: Anyone else in opposition? (No one else in opposition.) Mrs. Gordon, would you like to tell us those people that you spoke with? MRS. GORDON: Yes. I called Morris Lee, I would say about the 19th of June, when they were...when it was still just a little block. MRS. CROWE: Listen, would you go up to the microphone, please? MRS. GORDON: Oh, alright. I called Morris Lee and I said "Gee, it looks like they are awfully big." I says "I think you had better really watch it close and come out and check and see if it is too big." He says, "I'11 watch it real close, Ruth." So, next week it still was going right on, and I called again and John Sullivan answered the phone. And, he said that he wasn't the "zoner" and that it was so...he says if I had a problem about it being too big, I should call the Borough. So, I called the Borough and I talked...spoke with Mr. Hodgins. Mr. Hodgins says "Well, I'll talk to Mr. Walton,' (no, Dave, or the other one, mixed up, okay) "I'11 talk to Will about it." So, I let it go for awhile. Then, I went fishing and when I came back, it was...they were starting on the two-story. I called the city building inspector again, and I said "do you...it's too tall. They are building a second story." And then I asked Bryce, and I said "are they supposed to?" and he said "Well, it's not supposed to be taller than 14 feet off the ground to the eaves." So, I called John back and told him that, and he said "Well, maybe so," he says, "but you had better call Will." No, he says "Well, maybe so. I don't know." So, I called, I thought it was John's superiors, which is the engineers, cause the superiors here for the building inspectors is the engineers. I called the engineers and he didn't want to talk to me at all. So, I tried to call Mr. Walton again, and I did talk to him. And he says, "Yes, we know. We will have to take care of that. I just don't know what we will do. I will have to talk to John and John will have to be checking that." And, finally then, I asked somebody, "Well, who is the superior out there?" And, so I called Mr. Bueker and Mr. Bueker was not aware of it. Still, as far as that had gone, he was not aware of...that there had been any problems. So, Case 83-133/Anderson 9 Verbatim I started describing the procedure, you know, of things that had happened. He didn't like to listen to that and he says, "I'11 take care of it, lady. I'll take care of it, lady. Now, hang up." And so, that is the way it went. MR. HILL: Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Anyone else wishing to speak either "for" or "against"? MRS. ANDERSON: (As Mrs. Anderson was standing next to Mr. Anderson and is short in height, it is difficult to get an exact verbatim. At this point, I relied upon my notes, memory, and the tape. jg) You know, the reason we put the second story is because in the first floor, I put my washing machine, because, you know, I am 10 years here in Kodiak. That's why I want to put my washing machine, you know. On the second floor, I put...I have three kids and all their bicycles from the downstairs, you know, always around. On the second floor, you know, I put all my old clothes that are open and also some of the clothes of my kids. And the reason that we put the deck that high because our neighbors...if we put it any lower, we smell all the gas and there's lots of cars over there. That's why we put a little bit high, so that during the summer time we have some, you know, like we are sitting there, we cannot smell the gas. Besides that, there are lots of old cars. And, also, about the lot (not able to understand the next sentence). And also, how come they are saying that it is a fire hazard? We are not living there, and there is no wood in there. How come they are saying it is a fire hazard? MR. ANDERSON: Inside there is no finishing; only outside only. MRS. ANDERSON: They said only electric and stuff like that. And also, would you please, if you have time, would you please go there and see for yourself? MR. ANDERSON: You know, I don't know...my neighbor, the poor house of my neighbor. Because we are Philippiano, she want to try...a house like that. MRS. ANDERSON: Maybe they want us to move over there because we are only Philippiano all around us. MR. ANDERSON: That's the way she doing. But, we...ah... MRS. ANDERSON: But, we are trying to be a good citizen, you know. And, then we are Philippiano. Me, my husband, and my three kids. We are all citizens, and we are living here 10 years. And besides that, we don't have any records. We are trying to be a good citizen. MR. ANDERSON: And, excuse me, sir. Do you know Mr. Omlid? Has he showed the piece of paper that it say his mother's property until now is not finished and until now that property belongs to me? His mother is trying to get under to my house of my side of my house. MRS. ANDERSON: You know what? Until our walking distance, they want to get in there, until our porch. Case 83-133/Anderson - 10 - Verbatim MR. ANDERSON: So, we have no more front. She want to get that. But, the truth, if we are talking in the book, you find out in the book who is the deed, where is the property line. This you can find in the book. That's the book that says the truth, not only court paper. Because if you can look in the book in the land title, that's the answer. MRS. CROWE: Excuse me. Which book, Mr. Anderson? MR. ANDERSON: This book of the land title of the lot. The deed. That's only thing that say the truth. Who's that belong that land. She want to get it from my property. That's only thing. So, I am sorry I am explain, because, you know, my English is not making better good. But, I try my best. MRS. ANDERSON: I am sorry about this case. the lot, you know. But, they are the ones about deed. But, for us, we don't want to they are the ones who first say something, too. We don't want to include about who is start...who is saying open it. So, we open because and we want to tell our side, MR. ANDERSON: I thought we were talking about the set only. But, talking about the lot, so I can say only, if you want to find out the truth, who's that belong that lot, she want to get it, that's only the land title in the book in the deed. And that lot, she want to get it to my side of my house to my...in front of my house. MRS. CROWE: I don't think we are disputing on lot size at all. MR. ANDERSON: And his house, that's going inside to my own property in storage. And now, yesterday, he said that is a fire hazard. Mr. Omlid's mother sheds going there this side of my house, and she said something burn. MRS. ANDERSON: Going into the front of our house. MR. ANDERSON: Me and my house is dangerous (she is saying) because we are in the middle, in the back. We have no more front. We have back. No more front. MRS. ANDERSON: I apologize for saying about this, but they are the ones to bring this up about this. MR. ANDERSON: That's long time...that's long time. Three years now she's doing my neighbor like that us. Three years now. Three years now. Until start 1980 until now. MRS. CROWE: Okay, we are not disputing the lot size. MR. ANDERSON: Yeh. They are the ones who start. MRS. ANDERSON: They are the ones who are telling about us. For us, we don't want to open it here because... MR. RENNELL: We understand. We are not going to open it. Case 83-133/Anderson - 11 - Verbatim MRS. ANDERSON: Yeh. Because, I know that is only about the case, but so we tell our side, too. MR. ANDERSON: We are tell only the truth. Thank you. MR. HILL: Thank you very much. Questions? MR. GREGG: Did any of your neighbors contact you when you were putting in your foundation on your first floor about... MR. ANDERSON: No, sir. Nobody, sir. This story is like this. Before we start, I get the permit to Mr. Walton. And then I talk to Mr. Walton. I want to build my stories two story. And then, he gave me a permit. And then he said I go to city to see the inspector. And then I pay. So, I go to city. Inspector over there in front of the telephone company over there. So, I follow the law. And then we build it up the first story. I call inspector, Mr. Sullivan, and then he goes there and then said "Good." And I said "What do you think? I have second floor? I can put it, the second floor?" he said "Okay. Go ahead." And then I want to put also the deck 10 feet. He said "Okay. Be sure your deck it don't fall down." So, I obey and then and be sure 5 feet from the boundary line. So, I obey. And then she brings again the second floor. I call the inspector. So, I always call all the inspectors. Said "Okay. Go ahead." Than then she finish, is already finished. She said "Good. It is nice." So, is passed the inspector. So, am then finished now, my neighbor complained. How come she making complaint before it not yet finished? After we finish, how come she complain? And my neighbor, she there in back of my story. She is there in his house, not just going on vacation. MRS. ANDERSON: Yeh, because sometimes, you know, we see her. She drives up. She is carrying her...and says "Mr. Anderson. What time you will stop?" MR. ANDERSON: That's the way it is said. So, I put "I am sorry." 5o we stop, and we start again tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. So, that is true happen only. We are obey only the law. So, I don't know what happen to my neighbor that for my neighbor, she is try to say to sell my house and go away. MR. HILL: Thank you very much. MR. AND MRS. ANDERSON: Thank you, sir. MR. HILL: Anyone else wishing to speak either "for" or "against," that has not already spoken? MR. JOHN SULLIVAN: Yes. My name is John Sullivan, and I am the building inspector for the City, as you are aware. And, I would just like to say that Mr. Anderson come to our office with what he and we assumed was a legally -zoned building permit, which we issued, after he had already ob- tained zoning compliance. And, I would like to say that whether or not the permit was legally zoned or not, he, I am sure, he acted in good faith. He believed he was following the letter of the law all the way along. He did Case 83 Anderson - 12 - Verbatim • call me twice, I believe, during the project, specifically to make sure that he was not violating the conditions of the zoning on his permit. MRS. CROWE: The conditions of the zoning? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes. MRS. CROWE: Which is a Borough function, right? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, that is a Borough function. So, I looked at his permit. The permit stated on it "two stories." At that time, to be perfectly honest with you, I was not aware that there was a 14 -foot height restriction on accessory buildings, which I found out since, there is. But, that information was not listed on the permit. He believed that he was fully legal in building himself a two-story accessory building. At both times that I talked to Mr. Anderson, we discussed the possibility of someone living there, and he assured me that that was not going to be the case. I specifically mentioned that that would be a violation of the Borough code. And, that was never a problem. He asked me if he could partition the accessory building, which was perfectly legal. He asked me if he could put his washer and dryer in there, which was perfectly legal. I did receive complaints from Mrs. Gordon and Mrs. Schmelzenbach, whom I referred to the Borough since they were both zoning violation complaints. And, basically, I guess what I wanted to say is, I know that Mr. and Mrs. Anderson felt like they were fully complying with the terms and conditions of the building permit. I will be happy to answer any questions that I can to help clear up anything. MR. JAMES: Just for the audience's information. You...do you have any say in zoning enforcement or any Borough codes at all? MR. SULLIVAN: No, I don't. Audience: It is my understanding that city codes and borough codes concerning accessory buildings are identical. MR. SULLIVAN: No, that is not true. The Borough has all zoning authority. AUDIENCE: And what is your job? Just to make sure the building is safe? MR. SULLIVAN: I...we inspect structure. AUDIENCE: Structural inspection. So, there is no zoning inspection done at all? MR. SULLIVAN: None outside what the Borough does. The Borough maintains zoning authority within the city. We have no zoning authority. AUDIENCE: Another question. Why didn't the Borough conduct an inspection? MR. HILL: I can't answer that at this time. Case 83-133/Anderson - 13 - Verbatim AUDIENCE: I see gross complacency all around this. And, I think the Andersons have been mislead, and I think the general public has not been served by our employees in this case. MR. HILL: I can agree. We can all see what has happened. MR. SULLIVAN: It is a sad situation that the permit got issued. And, what I am trying to say is that I know the Anderson's believed that they were following the law. MRS. CROWE: For the City. MR. SULLIVAN: For the Borough zoning ordinances. They have met all the city ordinances as far as I am concerned. The violations that have been brought up against the building are zoning violations. It's brought forth some problems that has made us aware of some problems that have existed in our permit -issuing system with regards to obtaining zoning compliance, but that is neither here nor there in this case. MR. BRIGGS: What you are saying, John, is that once the Borough Assembly or Borough Planners issue a building permit to put a shed or garage or whatever it is, that the inspectors of the city take over from there, will issue the permit to the building, and don't have anything else to say about the rest of it? Is that what you are trying to say? MR. SULLIVAN: That is right. We have no zoning authority whatsoever. MRS. CROWE: I see we have one more person, and we probably shouldn't prolong the fact that Mr. Staley brought up that there is obviously a problem between the City and the Borough. But, I would like to, either later in this evening, or at another time, discuss with Mr. Sullivan, further, what his ideas might be to solve this problem. Because, it is a very definite problem. It is a duplication of effort to send two people to do something that one person could do. MR. SULLIVAN: There is discussion under way. MRS. CROWE: Well, I think we should be aware of it, and I would like to have you share some ideas with us because I think it is very definitely some thing that we should address, but I don't think that right now is the proper time. And, could you make yourself available at your convenience so that we could discuss this more? And, would you let us know, you know, let us know what is going on within your department along this line? MR. SULLIVAN: Ms. Freed and I have already discussed, and the city manager, and we are working toward a solution to make this a more workable situation. That really has no bearing on this. MRS. CROWE: That's true. But, I don't want to let it drop, because once we don't have a ball rolling then it gets dropped by the wayside, and that's why I am making a point of this. MR. HILL: You have a question for Mr. Sullivan? (To someone from the audience.) Case 83-133JAnderson - 14 - Verbatim AUDIENCE: The question I have is the fact that the building is too high and is too large for the lot is not something that you inforce, is that what you are saying? MR. SULLIVAN: That is correct. Those are both zoning violations. AUDIENCE: But you did give the permit? MR. SULLIVAN: The Borough issued the zoning...every time that somebody gets a building permit in the city, the zoning portion of the permit is signed off by the Borough. It is a two -fold process. We don't...you can't just come to me and get a permit. You have to go to the Borough and they approve the zoning prior to them coming to us for a permit. AUDIENCE: So, in other words, when he came to you to get a permit, the zoning had already been approved even though it was not really in compliance? AUDIENCE: Did you have the authority to give him everything that he asked for? A deck? A second floor? Without checking with zoning? MR. SULLIVAN: His permit was zoned for two floors and a deck. MR. RENNELL: It is right on the permit. MRS. CROWE: Not the deck, but the two floors. MR. RENNELL: The two floors. MRS. GORDON: Which department changed it from an addition to a shed? MR. SULLIVAN: The permit came to our office as an accessory building. MRS. GORDON: And the problem arose when history, do you call that "history," the description of the addition was used for the shed; in other words, the two-story. Because when I asked you, you said it was two-story. MR. SULLIVAN: I am not aware. Yes. MRS. GORDON: Well, the next line under that, since you were using that information, said it was supposed to be 23 feet from the rear. Did you read the second line? MR. SULLIVAN: That was...in my understanding that was...there...you will also remember, I know you saw it on top of the permit. Originally, he was going to do the accessory building and an addition on to the house: If you will look on the plot plan portion of the permit, the setback for the accessory building is 5 feet. It is marked right on there. The 23 -foot setback was for the portion of the permit that Mr. Anderson did not choose to use at that time. Evidently, he and...this`is just purely second-hand information, I wasn't in on the discussion...but evidently he had talked with Mr. Walton about doing both of these at the same time, but that didn't prove out. The portion of the permit that you are referring to is the portion for the addition, which was not utilized. Case 83-133/Anderson - 15 - Verbatim MRS. GORDON: But, the second -story part, history, was used on the shed. MR. SULLIVAN: So, obviously there was some confusion there, somewhere along the line. But, I don't believe Mr. Anderson tried to mislead anybody and that he felt that he was fully within the law. MRS. CROWE: Mr. Sullivan? Did you at any time discuss with Mr. Walton or Mr. Hodgins the problem that the phone calls were expressing to you? MR. SULLIVAN : Yes, I did. MRS. CROWE: And what was their response to you? I realize... MR. SULLIVAN: I made them aware of the problem each time that I received a phone call, and Mr. Walton and I went over one time and measured the building. Measured the setbacks of the building. And, talked to the Andersons regarding the use of the building. Basically, that... MRS. CROWE: Okay, the setbacks are not in contention; neither is the use at this point. MR. SULLIVAN: Well, they have been posed as being in contention, but to my knowledge they are not in any violation of the setbacks. They are... MRS. CROWE: Okay, but did you, at any time, with Mr. Walton, discuss the size and the height? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, we did, and he was made aware that there was a height violation... MRS. CROWE: Mr. Walton? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes. MRS. CROWE: Height, but what about size? MR. SULLIVAN: I am sure that he was aware of that, also. I can't remember the exact... MRS. CROWE: I know, and it is not...he should really be here for speaking for himself. MR. HILL: Any other questions? Thanks, John. Anyone else wishing to speak "for" or "against" that has not already spoken? At this time, I will close the public hearing and go back to the Regular Meeting... I would like to read into the minutes a memo of October 12, 1983, to the commission from the Community Development Department. A, B, and C that these should be the facts, or part of the facts that should be considered on the appeal: a) The building permit issued for this building does not anywhere state height restrictions for thestructure; b) The area of the structure is noted on the permit in two different places, with different figures noted; Case 83-133/Anderson - 16 - Verbatim c) The building has not been finished for use as a dwelling unit. The Andersons have been repeatedly informed that the structure cannot be used as a dwelling unit. The Andersons assert that they understand this as, their permit indicates the building is for a "storage shed;" d) The building was inspected five times by city building inspectors and the Andersons were given approval each time to continue construction. MRS. CROWE: Mr. Chairman? MR. HILL: Mrs. Crowe. MRS. CROWE: Before we progress any further, I will ask again, are we going to vote on the upholding or the rejecting administration decision, or are we going to vote on the request for a variance? MR. HILL: I would say at this time that we should... MS. FREED: If I could, I would like to answer that. According to the codes that deal with this kind of problem, you must either affirm or reverse the administrative decision. You can do that in whole, or in part. The reason we presented this as a variance case is so that we could send out public notices and the people in the area could be notified. There are no requirements in the codes under appeals to send out individual public notices. What the Commission has to decide on is whether to affirm the administrative decision, that means to bring the building into compliance; or to reverse the administrative decision, in whole or in part. And to do that you must grant some relief, if you approve of the building not being in compliance. And, in this case, it is recommended that if you reverse the decision, that you grant a variance for those portions of the structure that you feel you can allow to continue. Any decision that you make can be appealed to the Kodiak City Council as a Board of Adjustment by any party that feels they are aggrieved by your decision. MRS. CROWE: That's amazing. We are working on an appeal and...okay, so we are going to vote on affirming the administrative decision. MR. HILL: Number 2 would be the variance. MRS. CROWE: But we would not do that unless we reverse the administrative decision. MR. BRIGGS: Take a vote on that first. MRS. CROWE: Are we open for discussion? MR. HILL: Yes. MRS. CROWE: I have given this a lot of thought. And, there are so many wrongs on not only the Borough's part, but also on understanding what happens with the Borough and the City. The fact remains, an accessory building, according to our code, means that it is a detached building, the use of which is appropriate, and I think the key word here is subordinate, and customarily incidental to that of the main building. I don't think this is. And, that I have felt comfortable...we just took, well, not just, Case 83-133/Anderson - 17 - Verbatim but this is a relatively new code, or, yeh, part of our code when it defines accessory buildings, and I had felt comfortable with it because we had addressed setback requirements, height requirements, and square footage so that no area would be unduely impacted by the construction of an accessory building, but that we did recognize the fact that here, particularly, we do need this type of a building and allowances for it. I went out and looked at the building. And, the first thing I was concerned about first was the density, and the question of the safety, not only of the surrounding property owners, but of the Anderson family themselves. And, I think I would be less than honest...none of our concern is in the construction of the new building, from a safety standpoint. It is in the fact that it is obvious that the Anderson's home is an older home, and I think that the concern comes from if something should happen there, the Omlid home is also older. And, we have two older homes there that probably have more opportunity to have a fire problem, but then the fact that the area is densely built would be immediately affected. I would like some way that we could make the accessory building the residence. And have, you know...1 wonder if there is some room for compromise, but that is out of order at this point, and I think we need to just address the affirmation of the administrative decision. And, those are my feelings. It is the private individual's responsibility to check into these ordinances and they are there as far as the zoning part of it, and for some reasons, only the setback requirements were checked into. MR. JAMES: As far as the shed being secondary, the fault there is with the fact that the permit is listed as having two stories. You know, it says right in the zoning ordinances that sheds are to be one story. So, when the permit was issued, the problem with it becoming primary instead of secondary arose. MRS. CROWE: I MOVE THAT WE AFFIRM THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION as outlined in Ms. Freed's letter. Mr. Rennell seconded the motion and the question was called for. ROLL CALL VOTE: Mr. Briggs - yes Mrs. Crowe - yes Mr. Gregg - yes Mr. Hill - yes Mr. James - no Mr. Rennell - yes The motion carried. MRS. CROWE: I would not like to let that drop. I feel comfortable with re -affirming the decision of the administration, and I think it needs to either be brought...needs to be brought into compliance with the zoning codes. MR. HILL: Okay, what we just voted on would be that the building would be then be required to be brought into compliance with Borough code if there is no further appeal. We can go on with another motion, if you want to. MRS. CROWE: I am not sure how I want to express this. Case 83 Anderson - 18 - Verbatim MR. RENNELL: Doesn't the code express it? MR. JAMES: Not as far as bringing it into compliance. MRS. CROWE: In my estimation, if it is going to remain an accessory building, be it called a shed or whatever, it is an accessory building under our code, I think. It needs to be in compliance because if it isn't then it just adds credence to build it and then come and fight it out. But, I feel like these people did make an effort, and I think that their neighbors recognize that, to be within the law, and we... there was misunderstanding all the way around. And I had called Ms. Freed this afternoon wondering if there was a way it could become the dwelling...a dwelling unit and stipulate that the main dwelling unit that is being used now be removed and let this one become... ALL COMMISSIONERS SPOKE AT ONCE ABOUT SETBACKS. MRS. CROWE: The setback is wrong, but it would cut down the density of the area and the tradeoff could be that the height, if this is a dwelling unit, the height as a dwelling unit could be 35 feet. I don't know...I don't...I'm not ready to make a motion of any...of that nature, because I've really not looked inot it that thoroughly to see what can be built on that lot. MS. FREED: I would suggest, based on your previous motion of the Planning and Zoning Commission, it would be inappropriate for you to take any further action. You have said that you affirm the administrative decision, and that is to bring the building into compliance. It is up to the individivals who are appealing this decision to figure out how they will bring the building into compliance. MR. HILL: Under that matter, I have a few things here which should be a matter of record. There is a petition and two public hearing notices that need to be accounted for. At this time, I will call for a five-minute recess. Recess was called at 10:27 p.m. Case 83-133/Anderson - 19 - Verbatim ITEM #6 Planning and Zoning Commission Kodiak, Alaska 99615 To Whom it May Concern: Evert & Donna Schmelzenbach P.O. Box 1920 Kodiak, Ak. 99615 October 18, 1983 I am writing in regard to an application for variance on Lot PT 18B, Block 2 Leite Addition. I do not feel it would be fair to other property holders in the area if this variance is granted. The variance would allow such over crowding that it would increase fire hazard and bring dorm property values. Neighbors have complained about the structure in question since the beginning of construction, but nothing was done until the project was completed. A variance NOV follows the logic that "one can build illegally and then change the law to make it legal." As adjoining property owners, we cannot view the situation as a minor in- fringement of the building code which could be easily overlooked. Indeed, the building is too big to overlook. It is a residence,NOT a shed, built on a lot too small for the present dwelling. Here the logic seems to be,. - "There isn't room for one house, so we'll build two." I realize the Andersons maintain that the structure is a shed but: 1) it looks like a residence, 2) the high cost of its type of construction, of its numerous windows and doors and of its 160 square foot deck could hardly be justified for a storage shed. 3) The Andersons originally wanted a permit to put an addtion on their present house. Besides, if the Borough can't make the Andersons comply with code for construction, how can they stop Andersons from using the "shed" as the residence it is obviously meant to be. None the less, even if it is a shed, it still flagrantly violates the building code. It is four feet too high (making it an entire story too high), and it is too large for the lot. Code limits accessory buildings to 10% of the lot. The lot in question is actually only 3440 square feet (as confirmed by a recent court order), so the shed should only be 344 square feet. In fact, it is 432 square feet; 88 square feet too large excluding the two foot over hang all around the second story qnd, the 160 square foot deck which takes up 4.6% of the lot by itself. If a variance is allowed, it should be to have Andersons move the new building to the middle of their lot and tear down their present inadequate dwelling. That would certainly be closer to code (and more acceptable tothe neighbors) than the present situation. Sincerely, Fz a Evert & Donna Schmelzenbach • KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH �- Community Development Office P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, AK 99615 PLL ITEM N6 G TC NOTICE DATE: October 7, 1983 CASE NUMBER: 83-133 An application for a variance was filed on September 21, 1983 with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Office by: Anderson/Rasmussen & Emilia and was directed by the Planning 6 Zoning Comm. The application requests a variance from Section 17.51.040 Height Limit and Section 17.51.050 Area on Lot PT 188, Block 2, Leite Addition. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this request at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 2.? 19 1983 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 700 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak. 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 on the request. If you cannot attend, you may submit a written opinion which will be read into the minutes of the public hearing if it is received prior to the time and date indicated above. Should you wish to comment on the request, please use the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Office at Box 1246, Kodiak, 99615. A vicinity map showing the property involved -is on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please call us at 486-5736, extension 255. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE Your Name �iOTi z/ er-C /h (to.(e/, Address Ao2zr �M JJ Your Property Description AlCOMMENTS:c.P IJ/Le aaL /A2 / �P� �,iy, 'l 77'T/ 2)9 Oi KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Community Development Office P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, AK 99615 ITEM #6 NOTICE DATE: October 7, 1983 CASE NUMBER: 83-133 An application for a variance was filed on September 21, 1983 with the Kodiak Island Borough Community_ D_evelop_ment Office by: Anderson/Rasmusson & Emilia and was directed by the Planning & Zoning Comm. The application requests a variance from Section 17.51.040 Height Limit and Section 17.51.050 Area on Lot PT 186, Block 2, Leite Addition. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this request at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 21 19 1983 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 700 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak. 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 on the request. If you cannot attend, you may submit a written opinion which will be read into the minutes of the public hearing if it is received prior to the time and date indicated above. Should you wish to comment on the request, please use the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Office at Box 1246, Kodiak, 99615. A vicinity map showing the property involved is on the back of this -form.-- — -- If you have any questions on this matter, please call us at 486-5736, extension 255. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE Your Name ; a„„; YY4coIL62-2- Address /5r/t3 1-272.4.4,7-ez) Your Property Description 02 ,5..6)-14./ /Louse 4i -J ,tg och,n f/a_t 47teac wA/ yam COMMENTS: l .tom -Ito SUB LILLY AL L MA LAKE - RK SUBDIVISION 5 1 IR 2 RACY A ALE. REZAPIOFF DRIVE POTA30PATCH US SURVEY 2873 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Community Development Office P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, AK 99615 ITEM q6 Kodiak 1s1^-IIdau6h Kadla kaa�q NEC ' !',$a OCT 1 tit ti i 131i,M111d1 A NOTICE DATE: October 7. 1983 CASE NUMBER: 83-133 An application for a variance was filed on September 21, 1983 with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Office by: Anderson/Rasmusson & Emilia and was directed by the Planning & Zoning Comm. The application requests a variance from Section 17.51.040 Height Limit and Section 17.51.050 Area on Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this request at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October.21 19 1983 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 700 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak. 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 on the request. If you cannot attend, you may submit a written opinion which will be read into the minutes of the public hearing if it is received prior to the time and date indicated above. - Should you wish to comment on the request, please use the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Office at Box 1246, Kodiak, 99615. A vicinity map showing the property involved is on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please call us at 486-5736, extension 255. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE Your Name (�a_E..2- Your Property Description Address is/i— / COMMENTS: >44 AROPF S O SI 6 Ofilaingff ST ft 6 A IT L ARC x LILLY A LAKE K SUBDIVISION L �15i17 i9 2, N A;A'A A 37:361' 39.1 A 3A3 .31 A '•Mk M�1 2A 11 14 s 0 A Y TRACT A 2 4 RACT A' 9 1N 8 VISION CT C ANDE 0 I D i a 1 73-117-1 .rt-irrt-_!FZa4s F STREET SI 0 EAST w% CHI 6 NES R1 11 � b 6A thS is, x EICGc, 1 01E11 w 161 9, QIVJIE DRI" 111 w 6 N.E. REZANOFF D1 i 0 9 8 7 6 '. r DRIV PQTATOPATCH U ss 0 cEANvnl�t SOU 7HEAsa• �/0 (a B _ US SURVEY, 2873 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Community Development Office P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, AK 99615 ITEM 0 NOTICE DATE: October 7. 1983 CASE NUMBER: 83-133 An application for a variance was filed on September 21, 1983 with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Office by: Anderson/Rasmusson & Emilia and was directed by the Planning & Zoning Comm. The application requests a variance from Section 17.51.040 Height Limit and Section 17.51.050 Arca on Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this request at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 29 19 1983 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 700 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak. 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 td express your opinion on the request. 'If you cannot attend, you may submit a written opinion which will be read into the minutes of the public hearing if it is received prior to the time and date indicated above. - Should you wish to comment on the request, please use the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Office at Box 1246, Kodiak, 99615. A vicinity map showing the property involved is on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please callus at 486-5736, extension 255. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE Your Property Descr IARANQ LL DDt 2A 5 I N A A 31A BAY TRACT A RACT A ALL SUB. TR AN 8 ,jai ANDE (VISION cr El N.E. REZANOFF Df 'POTATOPATCH KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Community Development Office P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, AK 99615 ITEM H6 NOTICE DATE: October 7, 1983 CASE NUMBER: 83-133 An application for a variance was filed on September 21, with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Office by: Anderson/Rasmusson & Emilia and was directed by the Planning The application requests a variance from Section 17.51.040 H:ightttrRbtffOJ and Section 17.51.050 Area on Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Additi urn'�i_ The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this request at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October fl lq , 1983 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 700 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak. 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 on the request. If you cannot attend, you may submit a written opinion which will be read into the minutes of the public hearing if it is received prior to the time and date indicated above. Should you wish to comment on the request, please use the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Office at Box 1246, Kodiak, 99615. A vicinity map showing the property involved is on the back of this , form. — - - If you have any questions on this matter, please call us at 486-5736, extension 255. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE Your Name i N 0/-14 Ayr . y.l»L&.P Address /We-E-�a/� tL7rf!r Your Property Description 4V0-4//) c3i0-/OJ �, J2 it. . _ ete/? e Z /iv t/ •q aitixeirtiLki L�72� ARANOFI Sug IV SI 0 STR A 6 2,, ARCH DDITSO F LILLY LAKE AIRPARK SUBO?VISIDN •LLMA NI D N 5117 19 2 AA'A 37. 3813 2A 141) A A 7 A `3d BAY Rit A+ TRACT A RACT A SUB( VISION TR CT C D 2 8 It CHI 6 ST R Ed. 151 E EAST 10 E OIN11 uu = u i air Snnua 11> 4 f•.. - aMr W.: rra 5� 5 16 N.E. REZANOFF D rill 1039 81716 4, G=: - one soukDRIV et la ' Oh9(! ?POTAYOPATCH TR takiSIN sOCEANvitili v!E $ U80i `'15f 671/45‘;-,c:? S`S ' '9 sou0rHERsr di/ 4 ..S'URVE.Y `2873 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Community Development Office P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, AK 99615 ITEM #6 NOTICE DATE: October 7. 1983 CASE NUMBER: 83-133 An application for a variance was filed on September 21, 1983 with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Office by: Anderson/Rasmusson & Emilia and was directed by the Planning & Zoning Comm. The application requests a variance from Section 17.51.040 Height Limit and Section 17.51.050 Area on Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this request at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 2.? It , 1983 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 700 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak. You are be ni g 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 on the request. If you cannot attend, you may submit a written opinion which will be read into the minutes of the public hearing if it is received prior to the time and date indicated above. - Should you wish to comment on the request, please use the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Office at Box 1246, Kodiak, 99615. A vicinity map showing the property involved is on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please call us at 486-5736, extension 255. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMt4UNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE Your Name m doze/A,„ Address /Jar ,2o42e1/4,dd Your Property Description L COMMENTS: 1P�., <O a_c 6% - .moi,7,%.v,? 4a G/di Oct_ 4 7 ae,e O /f. ` /n .' 4,4p `.kt-e ArapolIc SUBpV1S 31A•34, t8_j ANDS 1511A A AT t 41 EAST N E- REZAN( a gppm IOPi tin! 1tir Pgsi0 nuC+ o AA 1 P • ,tgrsitilioli t yent OCEAM VIEW SUBD,VISION US SU) 28 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Community Development Office P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, AK 99615 ITEM p6 NOTICE_DATE:. October -7 -1983 CASE NUMBER: 83-133 An application for a variance was filed on September 21, 1983 with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Office by: Anderson/Rasmusson & Emilia and was directed by the Planning.& -Zoning Comm. The application requests a variance from Section 17.51.040 Height Limit and Section 17.51.050 Area on Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this request at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 25 19 1983 in the Borough Assembly Chamber's, 700 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak. You are . being notified -because -you area 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 on the request. If you cannot attend, you may submit a written opinion which will be read into the minutes of the public hearing if it is received prior to the time and date indicated above. - Should you wish to comment on the request, please use the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Office at Box 1246, Kodiak, 99615. A vicinity map showing the property involved is on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please call us at 486-5736, extension 255. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE Your Nanie Your Property Description Address A 4 rARAND S B 21 NO yEt¢HTS LAR C DO �15i17 $9 2i N A,A A ,A R ACT A TRACT A AN B (VISION •Cf C ANDE D 4 CHI' 6 STREET 4 7I11/ „11 1 N.E. REZANOFF DI POTATO -PATCH SA 0 VA".‘ ru ✓/ .e2 -I . \ � Y' Xis -g --72-e0 Caz ITEM 116 L-0 �� G i.5- 14 18 0 . U_.a--, . /o . vde,c,c44- ���� yea 7 ,le,t)2 ka_ At e *Dr,_ j-9ce,a /4_ 3 Ate :- 18'BQ a n cv7;a.�.-.,s... 3 8 0 0 . (4.C� .s J C e.4-ta... 3 Li y o a �, ,o ff e e0 ., cu 5-9 L -, c n ,-e cud '. , a -� ,Qe�C Ste, ('' .�7 .., .,LSALS 357 At - aha 0,t_ 7 , /783 waa_-1» �i hr iiaw n n F �y. _ , a�-,.: 11 a ,-L �, GL044,- �.& cni � � , Och 1,9cce;,_% GM_ (2 • LeIt Ft* 2 *o a uar 4 ock 2 , its fkddovt!__ eirjernA7 -4~7 (A) a. CO1 C,..t /_,..czyfraE< / z r &7_golh- 1op/8:3 Zorc- '1' /35 0 te-c, le12/ /37 ft) 6c,- /0 V Os -0 1 o /C . s Ian d CO(y) , y -)I- beye1oe+CD47-C(Ce Case gur E.3— X33 koc X10`e<4-20in J e S? —1 q a r��� ;1VDIVej• � �I5 CCcSe 1 LOTS E 2_enice A -4* 3- )33 /5J5 /,//ow ;04, • k sr .Jc .s � c ,M pv- v` r`` �� .� u -.L(jd /v\ e Ai T A Au r� CC I(�.� v (uc.Q (� �I1�`S l 7'6` ITEM #6; ave 7ofrc4 /$0 1 1i,2tnn /o -a 1 • A6ra�L Fear Co+ kna- �_ 0oY Foto e . & Mrs. Rassmus Anderson P.O. Box 2793 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 October 13, 1983 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH __ P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 ITEM #6 RE: Request For Variance From Sections 17.51.040 and 17.51.050 of the Borough Code Dear Mrs. Freed: On June 6, 1983 we applied at the Borough for a permit to build a 400 square foot, two-story, storage shed. We spoke with Mr. Walton and Mr. Morris Lee, and were given permission to build. After we began work on the foundation Mr. Sullivan came out and checked on our progress and ensure that we were building 5' from the property line. He found everything satisfactory and we continued building. Upon completion of the first floor, we contacted Mr. Sullivan again and he told us that everything was fine and to go on. We then reminded him of the second story and he. assured us it was okay. After finishing the second story we again called the Borough and Mr.:Morris Lee came out to inspect it. He found everything to be fine. We proceeded with the siding, and finished the building. Your letter, dated October 6, 1983, informed us that our neighbors have complained about the storage shed, you request that we comply with the Borough Code. -We herewith appeal that decision. We feel that we took all the necessary steps to comply with Borough Codes but were simply not fully informed of the area limitations. Whywere we not informed about the error before completion of the building? To change it now would mean a great deal of expense on our part. We request permiss- ion to leave the building as it now stands. Thank You. Respectfully Yours, Mr. & Mrs. Rassmus Anderson KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ITEM #6 MEMORANDUM DATE: October 13, 1983 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Community Development Departme RE: Case 83-133. Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition, a request for a variance from 17.51.040 and 17.51.050. The purpose of this memo is to provide additional information on the action that may be taken by the Commission with respect to Case 83-133. This case is an appeal of an administrative decision (see attached letter of October 6, 1983). The Planning and Zoning Commission can take one of two actions: 1. affirm the administrative decision (the building would then be regired to be brought into compliance with Borough Code, if there is no further appeal); and 2. reverse the administrative decision and grant the relief sought (the relief would be granting of a variance from Section 17.51.040, Height Limit, and Section 17.51.050, Area, of the Borough Code), Any decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission can be appealed to the Kodiak City Council by any person or party aggrieved by the decision. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH MEMORANDUM ITEM #6 DATE: October 12, 1983 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Community Development Departmen# ��i,-- �d-- RE: Case 83-133. A Request for a variance from Borough Code 17.51.040., Height Limit, and 17.51.050, Area, on Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. Fifty-five (55) Public Hearing Notices were mailed on October 7, 1983. BACKGROUND The Anderson's have until October 17, 1983 to appeal the administrative decision outlined in the attached letter dated October 6, 1983. Mr. Anderson verbally stated on October 7, 1983 that he will appeal the decision. Section 17.60.020 of the Borough Code deals with appeals from adminis- trative decisions. The Code requires that the Commission hold a public hearing on each appeal. At the hearing, The Commission shall review the appeal record and hear evidence and arguments presented by persons inter- ested in the appeal. The Planning Commission shall either affirm or reverse the administrative decision in whole or in part. The decision made by the Commission must be based on findings and conclusions, which are reasonably specific so as to provide the community, and where appropriate, reviewing authorities, a clear and precise understanding of the reason for the decision. The cause of the administrative decision and appeal are stated in the attached letter dated October 6, 1983. The following facts should also be considered as part of the appeal record: a) The building permit issued for this building does not anywhere state height restrictions for the structure; b) The area of the structure is noted on the permit in two different places, with different figures noted; c) The building has not been finished for use as a dwelling unit. The Anderson's have been repeatedly informed that the structure cannot be used as a dwelling unit. The Anderson's assert that they understand this as, their permit indicates the building is for a "storage shed;" d) The building was inspected five times by city building inspectors and the Andersons were given approval each time to continue construction. Case 83-133. Variance Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Due to the extenuating circumstances in this case, Staff recommends that a variance be granted from Section 17.51.040 Height Limit and 17.51.050 Area for the "storage shed"/accessory building located on Lot PT18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. It should be a clear understanding of the variance that the structure is not to be used as a dwelling unit. CASE 83-133. Rasmus Anderson Photos submitted 10/19/83 Case 83-133• Rasmus Anderson photos submitted 10/19/83 Co -n 31 m n m H • SENDER:. Complete items 1, 2, 3, and 4. Add your address In the "RETURN TO" space on reverse. _ - (CONSULT POSTMASTER FOR FEES) 1. Rfollowing service Is requested (check one). /� Show to whom and dale delivered "e"�+t Show to whom, date, and address of deliveryt _ 2. 0 RESTRICTED DELIVERY i (raw reslklN 030rey leo a [M'QN b letLikca to tM Moo muter tee.) TOTAL$ Q20 3. mR ARTICLE£ime;SED T0; n IMK�e.esoA ry� �} &.%( a793, 1<ctilittlf M 4. TYPE OF SERVICE: ❑REGISTERED ❑INSURED OCERTIFIED ❑EXPRESS MAIL ❑COD ARTICLE NUMBER P-4�j83'_ ^ 1/I FS/—.<21179 (Always obtain signature of addressee or agent) i have receIvad the article descdbe4 ahwa. ❑Addressee/❑A/�UyUt�attzed/age/nt'' ATE OF DELIVERY('•� POSTMgqRI(� W reylia_b on rs9olse..S VGA , $. APURE$SEE'S ADDRESS (dn4'U meueunp } -111 7. UNABLE TO DELIVER BECAUSE: • )1 7a'EM • 0YEE I 1 1' SS-! a GPO: 1982374493 P 483 531 241 RECEIPT FOR CFRTIFIL2D MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE;PROVIDED— NOT FOR. INTERNATIONAL MAIL (Set RevefseJ Pilmlit;e1Rs kus aAi 4 $,,tJsJ�rdet �No/. a/q3 % aAnd Vdt w Portage Certified Fee Spacial Delivery Foe Re§trIated Delivery Fee Return Recelpt Showing to Whom and Date; Delivered .100 Return Receipt Showing towham,• Date, end Address ohelivery . TOTAL Postage evil Fads $/ 55 ii'ostmsrk or Dote 'Jeri -Ile � Y� tr e /J: • KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH CERIItILD RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Telephones 486-5736 - 486-5737 — Box 1246 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 October 6, 1983 Mr. and Mrs. Rassmuson Anderson: P.O. Box 2793 Kodiak, AK 99615 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Anderson: RE: Violations of Borough Code Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition As a result of complaints by your neighbors, Mr. John Sullivan and I inspected your accessory building on September 28, 1983. As you are aware, having been present during the inspection, your building measures 400 square feet in area and 18 feet high at the side wall. As your neighbors have correctly pointed out, the structure violates portions of Chapter 17.51 of the Borough Code. Section• 17.51.040 of the Borough Code limits accessory buildings to 14 feet in height at the side wall, and Section 17.51.050 of the Borough Code limits the area of accessory buildings to 10 percent of the lot area. Your lot is 3,800 square feet in size. Therefore, the area limitation for your accessory building is 380 square feet. Based on Section 17.75.010 of the Borough Code and as a result of the complaints received from your neighbors, you are required to bring your building into compliance with the code sections noted above. As we have previously discussed, this administrative decision can be appealed to the Planning and Zoning Commission. To appeal the administrative decision, you must file a written notice of appeal with the Community Development Depart- ment, specifically stating the reason for the appeal and the relief sought. In this case, the relief sought would be a request for a variance from Section 17.51.040 and Section 17.51.050 of the Borough Code. You must file your written appeal within ten (10) days of receipt of this letter. The Planning and Zoning Commission must hold a public hearing on the appeal. This public hearing will be held at the Commission's October 19, 1983 meeting. The meeting will start at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Assembly Chambers. At the hearing, the Commission will review the appeal record and hear evidence and arguments presented by .person's interested in the appeal. The Commission must either affirm or reverse the administrative decision. If the Commission affirms the decision, further appeal to the City Council is possible. Rassmuson Anderson Lot PT 188, Blk 2, Leite Addition Page 2 If you have any questions about the procedure outlined in this letter, please call or come into the office. Sincerely, Linda Freed Director Community Development Department -cc: John Sullivan, City Building Inspector Ms. Olive Ruth Gordon Ms. Donna Schmelzenbach ,/Case 83-133. 51.060--17.52.050 17.51.060 Main building. No accessory building shall be located on any lot or parcel of land in the absence of a main building used as a residence. (Ord. 82-14-0(A) §2 (part), 1982). 17.51.070 Construction shack. An accessory building used solely for the storage of tools and materials needed for construction will be allowed upon the issuance of a building permit and until the permit expires or the building covered by the permit is occupied., (Ord. 82-14-0(A) §2(part), 1982). Sections: 17.52.010 17.52.020 17.52.030 17.52.040 17.52.050 17.52.060 Chapter 17.52 AGRICULTURAL BUILDINGS Intent. Definition. Permitted districts. Height limit. Area. Main building. 17.52.010 Intent. It is the intent of this chapter to set forth minimum acceptable standards for agricultural buildings and conditions regarding their establishment. (Ord. 82-14-0(A) 55(part), 1982). 17.52.020 Definition. "Agricultural building" means a building or structure used to shelter agricultural equipment, fishing equipment, hay, grain, poultry, livestock or other agricultural products and in which there is no human habita- tion. (Ord. 82-14-0(A) §5(part), 1982). 17.52.030 Permitted districts. Agricultural buildings are permitted in the wildlife habitat, conservation and rural residential land use districts. (Ord. 82-14-0(A) 55 (part), 1982). 17.52.040 Height limit. The maximum building height allowed is fifty feet, measured at the top of the roof. (Ord. 82-14-0(A) §5(part), 1982). 17.52.050 Area. The area occupied by agricultural buildings will not exceed thirty percent of the area of a lot in a rural residential district. Wildlife habitat and conservation districts agricultural buildings are exempt from the provisions of this section. (Ord. 82-14-0(A) §5(part), 1982). - 120a (Kodiak Island Borough 3/83) Sections: 17.51.010 17.51.020 17.51.030 17.51.040 17.51.050 17.51.060 17.51.070 1, 1.010--17.51.050 Chapter 17.51 ACCESSORY BUILDINGS* Intent. Definition. Permitted districts. Height limit. Area. Main building. Construction shack. 17.51.010 Intent. It is the intent of this chapter to set forth minimum acceptable standards for accessory buildings and conditions regarding their establishment. (Ord. 82-14-O(A) §2(part); 1982). 17.51.020 Definition. "Accessory building" means a detached building, the use of which is appropriate, sub- ordinate and customarily incidental -to that of the main building and which is located on the same lot as the main building. An accessory building shall be considered to be a part of the main building when joined to the main build- ing by a common wall not less than four feet long or when an accessory building and the main building are connnected by a breezeway which shall not be less than eight feet in width. "Accessory building" means any structure, regardless of type of foundation or base support, including skidmounted or other movable structures. (Ord. 82-14-O(A) §2(part)•, 1982). - 17.51.030 Permitted districts. Accessory buildings are permitted in all land use districts except watershed. (Ord. 82-14-O(A) §2(part), 1982). 17.51.040 Height limit. No accessory building shall exceed one story or fourteen feet in height, at the side wall, exclusive of roof structures. (Ord. 82-14-O(A) 52 . (part), 1982). 17.51.050 Area. The area occupied by accessory build- ings shall not exceed ten percent of the area of a lot or mobile home space. Accessory buildings in rear yards shall not be closer than five feet to any side or rear lot line. (Ord. 82-14-O(A) §2(part), 1982). Prior history: Prior code Ch. 5 subch. 2 §10G(1) and (2). 120 (Kodiak Island Borough 3/83) Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission Dear Sirs: Donna Schmelzenbach P.O. Box 1920 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 September 21, 1983 At the present time there is a "shed" being built on Part 18, Block 2 of the Leite Subdivision, Kodiak; directly behind lot 3, block 2 which is our property. Building permit #5088 dated 6/6/83 has been issued to Rassmuson/Anderson for that construction. As I understand it, Rassmuson/ Anderson requested a permit to put a two story addition onto their present house. Since their lot is zoned R-1 and is not even legally big enough for the present building (only 3800 square feet), that request was denied. Instead, they got a building permit for a "shed". The so called "shed" is HUGE. It hovers only 5 feet off our property line, two stories high, taking up the Anderson's entire back yard. The lot is feet wide, and the shed is 35 feet long. It is apparently being built to be lived in with windows all around, an upstairs and downstairs door and a fancy deck. I would like the Planning and Zoning Commission to answer the following questions for me: Aren't there restrictions on the size and height of shed's? Apparently it is not clearly stated on the permit that the shed cannot be lived in, but since it is zoned R-1, is it not illegal for this structure to be used as a residence? If the shed is illegal, as I believe it is, why didn't somebody do something to stop its construction before now? The city building inspector has been called many times since the very beginning of the construction. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Donna Schmelzenbach 202 it SEP 1983 N RECEIVED G 0• - Co <S'.�x'._ tic , J / 7 f/ t „ail vir tgyp--dC -n‘ nivms v 9 • • KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Community Development Office P.O. Box 1246 Kodiak, AK 99615 ITEM //6 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE DATE: October 7 1983 CASE NUMBER: 83-133 An application for a variance was filed on September 21, 1983 with the Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Office by: Anderson/Rasmusson & Emilia and was directed by the Planning & Zoning Comm. The application requests a variance from Section 17.51.040 Height Limit and Section 17.51.050 Area on Lot PT 18B, Block 2, Leite Addition. The Kodiak Island Borough Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this request at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 19 1983 in the Borough Assembly Chambers, 700 Mill Bay Road, Kodiak. 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 on the request. If you cannot attend, you may submit a written opinion which will be read into the minutes of the public hearing if it is received prior to the time and date indicated above. Should you wish to comment on the request, please use the bottom of this notice and return it to the Community Development Office at Box 1246, Kodiak, 99615. A vicinity map showing the property involved is on the back of this form. If you have any questions on this matter, please call us at 486-5736, extension 255.. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE Your Name Address Your Property Description COMMENTS: �;N � 1 I 4 1•• JV VC �C /3 9 6 � rRAcr f� m MINIM iii ins ©ell,v 1 ®�■roli/1�i�� iI A 2 a0 IT0 sge�� �C� EI-H S ` �������--- LAKE Case 83-133 fel mcke RscN } i srn u gso r4 Pu.6(tc ft tJq 1o7f g3 Le ;lc Qvic n) Le4eiUda, 0l0c K P- Lee ddnl c : 6. R Sao 7 g 9 Jo. n a R[ccf< _1 ±l V 6 7 $ 9 lo- (1 ra 13 14 81k s I-ots oo ©a 40 70 SO 90 oo05o0 6 70 I- R_a_00 0 AoO_L0 a o 3 3o y 4/0 S0 '90 ia0005 / 00 /f o Sao /30 5 s� 100 l/'o 6 60 7 70 3 80 13 131 1 411 9 90 to l AO0D u • Oil o o ca o add,. ,,_8 f t0 + I {< 7 a� . 11°0 _Lots: 1_49.=ta:o070 Igo Is 142 r5o 14 o 19.0 _12 13 , 13kr 13A J3 (30 LFl&©o070010 3 A - 17 r70 Qlock b 1-RIa©oo40010 it{ .aPfo Ls /s'i /5/ £ fs- ,s3 16 ? I b I 4 5 _30 Ifo SI 4 5a . A 3 .- 30 (7 f lo Is r$Ii!Ba fas4&GUMI01105" : 1/ao11_50o 1 o 4 lit (9 _19 o ids (-, s b So .14) AD © 6o a. R0 7 71 E 170 .Ead Cdde3,_aloc1C5 Lots 7�oSoo�O i ' 3 30 I go � S : yo - Co 60 10rPLD � l0 it i27Ian 90 /oo h ll 1 9 i10 6 R112%05 ./ooGD 7 pzest, esow`aailedef #07 CkLebxv i 'a , 17. )041,61- zy-61 lilAt,te.af-zeerii/i4e aL-Ls2_0. 11- cua • • s ‘t•-• • DOOL7 . Dtstrle..- • • ••• •'• • - _ „Itg • - • tr. 11 %it So ti411 *.e...n".•r.c..e„...-” , ., _..... ., „ '',...I.L.2....:f.t . • 4i7-‘:41 , 4 • . Td. plat re pravaagya trosotroical of a Parties af let1143,b1=14Zper4 e•-= •=4 ttla calt40.1Tiates plat of tizs4 LSit.0 Lit 1c21:fi Lid I ttio t 5 Caxst se Lova?* attic a ,failakrilt la e4.4. 0 aa4 cioacribal as folle=trmi tt3 5thrat% aDrsa of lot 111,black 2,tharzca,r4ortai 59 Clorrsea red 1 mizzatas VL4243.4V;fcateto t p....nt a •'>•--4,_amir tkarcarliorth 314 degrees Lad is trealeirty7L ......41 r- 1 feat,thaposplforth 59 dogmas cdl,9 Air Asa PF 1.0.0 .,; t otha ace Acutt4 31, cftret a fm Ls 1 Palma t -' s i TA31,71..0 foet,thol=go,South 59 derraaa lied 149 tips "est 40.0 fett,te Cho pQlet sf b1111. '"'-a IA inf-=-Irrea of 9r'51 ..fl.. a let repumbered la L. • RECORD:9 - FILED DRS:. DIST. • 72 "1 19 3 • „ L. _ LI M • • - 74..4V:Ii co. "sr 2. es 4 4'• • • s • • • * • • -: • • . - - • - • - C • CLt FJz)lt:m14. Lul LL i• BUILDING DEPARTMENT — CITY / BOROUGH OF KODIAK Applicant to fill in between heavy lines. APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT AND CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY /.5-I. g t�1,rcett- Lai/ CLASSDF WORK DL4.IOLISII 1,1 ..ttlN ALTERATION 4CPAII4 1 .Ail %+()OHISy! �'•,/ AUDITION MOVE NG PERMIT NO. DATE ISSUED USE OF BUILDING 1,. I.O ./ L' -,yin NO Of ROOMS NO OF FLOORS 0 OF BUILDIN VALUATION BLOC. FEE PLAN CUK. FCC 1OTAL .:J NO OF BUILDINGS NOW ON LOT BUILDING PLUMBING ELECTRIC 0.0F FAMILIES I+LTII SS SIZE OF LOT Itv USE OF BLDG. NOW ON LOT ROU EPTIC TANK SEWER IIOUGIT SI f IXTURES PEC IFICATIONS :.I ATI LI.1f.SI 1.0 FOUNDATION a r • tFt,Rt Sy MATERIAL 1XTERI0fi, FLUr5 GAS 41111511 r lIIAL wtUI It OF TOP WIUTrtOF 1 0 IC+1, DI' 'Tit IN GRO I4.41 PLAT C (Sit L) 1Alt LI,(1.S1 1.0 51/I" SI y 1. h;)i Vt]I0N O Y • t/ (:,111)1 RS GIST 1st. FL. JOIST 21pt. Ft 01St CLILINO C '.111 (11011 S10DS f)0 NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE I)e Of Construction II, III, IV,.Z.2VI . Occupancy Group A, B, C, D, E, F, G, HO Div. 1, 2, 3, 4, 1=ue Zone 1 2034 IN11 1,011 511JUS 11001 ,RAF 1114s Ai11NG WALLS COVERING xIOI? WALL5 itUU INT[ RIOR WALLS 414'l4I.OI ING FLUES FIREPLACE Ft 11JIiNACI TCIICN ttt All 'R R. FURNACE GAS Olt. 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 regLyla(tnfi uilding construction, EQ",5 S' ZO /Gc;rS7 x 3N11 AI J3dO?dd PLOT P �Lt LL -' STREET . L II 41 PLAIINIIIGS ,9 ZONING INFO ZONING DISTRICT f., --/ —�[-/ �.l�L �. �LL 11 L.,�t/ t ,!J TYPO Of OCCUPANCY - 1 ! L � ,' [. • ,. f L`L 1'L L L G • NUMBER OF STORI[5 �' - .' r r t r • TOTAL r,Y ARTA OF LOT i , .i 41( + FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM PROP- NE SIDE YARD SE TRACK FR04.1 PROP LINE '.' /�-/'[ .•�L f'. L C L (L •/ REAR YARD :% Approved: CHIEF BUILDING OFFICAL Approved: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR f,4 .(.J , 71111111111 : TUTORS T DE ED .5LCTION 34.15.030 AS) The Grantor, TIMOTHY A. SCHNABEL, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN and No/100ths ($10.00) DOLLARS in hand paid, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged and receipted for, does hereby convey, grant and warrant unto MARIE OMLID, whose address is P. O. Box 1161, Kodiak, Alaska 99615, the following described real property located in the Kodiak Recording Precinct, Third Judicial District, State of Alaska, more particularly described as follows, to -wit: 4FM: vv A portion of Lot Eighteen (18), Block Two (2) of the Leite Addition to the City of Kodiak, according to the official Plat of U. S. Survey No. 1681 on file with the V. S. Commissioner, Kodiak Precinct, Territory of Alaska, in Volume L of General Records, at page 133, and more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeasterlymost corner of Lot Eighteen (18), as Corner No. 1 of this description; thence in a Southwesterly direction along the Southerly boundary of said Lot Eighteen (18), a distance of 40 feet to Corner No. 2; thence at right angles in a Northwesterly direction along a line parallel to the common boundary of Lots Eighteen (18) and Nineteen (19), a distance of 63 feet to Corner No. 3; thence at right angles in a Northeasterly direction along a line parallel to the Southerlyboundary of Lot Eiahteen (18), a distance of 40 feet to Corner No. 4; thence at right angles in a Southeasterly direction along the common boundary of Lot Eighteen (18) and Seventeen (17), a distance of 63 feet to Corner No. 1, the place of beainning. DATED: This -- day of February, 1973. STATE OF ALASKA TIMOTHY A. SCHNABEL e -- By VERNA McFARLAND His Attorney in Fact ) ss. THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) • THIS IS TO CERTIFY that before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Alaska, duly commissioned and sworn as such, personally appeared VERNA McFARLAND, known to Page One, WARRANTY DEED • - .-01"-•••••- ; • 4.c • • -r •-•-• - -47 - - • - • t7 • - • - A' • - - • 4 • • - • .7- '•: • -.* • .4- • r • • • - ;„., • _ . . 44. - - • • - •• • •_. • s " • IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE•STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT KODIAK MARIE OMLID, 3 Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) 1RASMUS ANDERSON, EMILIA P. ) ANDERSON, and also all other ) 1 persons or parties unknown ) claiming a right, title, ) estate, lien or interest in ) the real estate described in ) the complaint in this action. ) .HBICK-NELSON & NELSON RNEYSAT LAW 0 0. BOX 1947 4K, ALASKA 99613 VI! 436-6191 ) Defendants. ) CASE NO. 3K0 -8O-577 (Civ.) FILED IN Ataska Trial Courts yh rd Judicial District a: rod:ak APR 5 1582 tcra cI Ina mai Courts BY:_1L! ✓ /r uiy JUDGMENT QUIETING TITLE The above entitled action came on regularly for trial on A1 1I r 1981, before this court setting with- out a jury, DENNIS L. NELSON of STERBICKNELSON and NELSON, appearing as attorney for plaintiff and GEORGE VOGT appearing as attorney for defendants RASLUS ANDERSON and EMILIA P. ANDERSON; the court having heard and examined the evidence, having consider the arguments of counsel, and having filed its Memorandum Opinion and Decision, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, now there- fore, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 1. Plaintiff MARIE OMLID owns in fee simple and is en- titled to the quiet and peaceful possession of that real pro- perty situated in the State of Alaska, commonly known as 1515 Mission Road, Kodiak, Alaska and more particularly described as: A portion of Lot Eighteen (18), Block Two (2) of the Leite Addition to the City of Kodiak, according to the official Plat of U.S. Survey No. 1681 on file with the U.S. Commissioner, Kodiak Precinct, Territory of Alaska, in Volume L of General Records, at page 133, and more part- icularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeasterlymost cornor of Lot Eighteen (18), as Corner No. 1 of this description; thence in a Southwesterly direction along the Southerly boundary of said Lot Eighteen (18), a distance of 40 feet to Corner No. 2; thence at right angles in a Northwesterly direction along a line parallel to the common boundary of Lots Eighteeen (18) and Nineteen (19), a distance of 74 feet to Corner No. 3; thence at right angles in a Northeasterly direction along a line parallel to the Southerly boundary of Lot Eighteen (18), a distance of 40 feet to Corner i 11 •" 1 No. 4; thence at right angles in a Southeasterly direction -along the common boundary of Lot Eighteen (18) and Seventeen (17), a distance of 74 feet to Corner No. 1, the place of beginning. 2. Defendants' claim to said property is without any right whatever and defendants have no estate, right, title, lien 'r interest in or to said property or any part thereof. 3. Plaintiff shall recover attorney fees in the amount with interest theron at ten and one-half percent (10.5%) per annum from the date of thisiJudgment. 4. Plaintiff shall recover costs in the amount of with interest thereon at ten and one-half percent (10.5%) per annum from the date of this Judgement. DATED this day of PROVED as to form: beorge -Volgt ,1982, at Kodiak, Alaska The Hon able Roy H. Madsen Superio Court Judge BUILDING DEPARTMENT — CITY / BOROUGH OF KODIAK APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT AND CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Applicant to fill in between heavy lines. BUILDING ADDRESS LOCALITY CLASS OF WORK NEW DEMOLISH NEAREST CROSS ST. tt W Z 0 H � w w ADDRESS I- 2 U 0 Z NAME MAIL ADDRE tis CITY I I I N NAME CITY STATE LICENSE NO. NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE LICENSE NO. SUBDIVISION: LOT NO. BL K. DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE Type of Construction I, 11, III, IV, V, VI 2. Occupancy Group A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, 1, J Div. 1, 2, 3, 4, 3. Fire Zone 1 2 3 4 ALTERATION REPAIR ADDITION MOVE USE OF BUILDING SIZE OF BUILDING HEIGHT NO. OF ROOMS NO. OF FLOORS NO. OF BUILDINGS NO. OF BUILDINGS NOW ON LOT NO. OF FAMILIES SIZE OF LOT USE OF BLDG. NOW ON LOT SPECIFICATIONS FOUNDATION MATERIAL EXTERIOR PIERS BUILDING PERMIT NO. WIDTH OF TOP WIDTH OF BOTTOM DEPTH IN GROUND R.W. PLATE (SILL) SIZE SPA. SPAN GIRDERS JOIST 1st. FL. JOIST 2nd. FL JOIST CEILING EXTERIOR STUDS INTERIOR STUDS VALUATION S ROOF RAFTERS BEARING WALLS COVERING EXTERIOR WALLS ROOF INTERIOR WALLS REROOFING FLUES FIREPLACE FL. FURNACE KITCHEN WATER HEATER FURNACE GAS OIL 1 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 BUILDING FOUNDATION FRAME PLASTER FLUES FINAL DATE ISSUED BLDG. FEE PLAN CHK. FEE TOTAL PLUMBING ROUGH SEPTIC TANK SEWER GAS FINISH S ELECTRIC ROUGH FINISH FIXTURES MOTORS FINAL 3N11 Ala3dOad A PLOT PLAN 1 SETBACK 3N11 A1a3dO6d STREET PLANNING & ZONING INFO. ZONING DISTRICT TYPE OF OCCUPANCY NUMBER OF STORIES TOTAL IIT. 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•