Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRABBIT CREEK VIEW & HEIGHTS BLK 11H LT 13ARabbit Cre k View & H ight Block 11H Lot 13A #020-581-67 SIGNED Redif~rm · 4S 471 SEND PARTS 1 AND 3 WiTH CARBON INTACT - PART 3 WILL BE RETURNED WiTH REPLY Poly Pak (50 sets) 4P471 DETACH AND FILE FOR FOLLOW-UP unicipalitYof Anchorage P.O. BOX 6650 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650 (907) 264-4111 TONY KNOWLES, MAYOR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES September 27, 1985 Mr. Neil Wagner Box 10-1144 Anchorage, AK 99511 Re: L10 Bll Rabbit Creek Heights Dear Mr. WaRner, It has recently come to our attention that your single family dwelling has been remodeled into a duplex. Your on-site septic and well permit, #810130, from the Municipality is approved for only a single family, 3-bedroom dwelling. You need to contact Steven Eng at the State Department of Environmeutal Conservation within five working days of receipt of this letter and apply for a permit to operate a Class C well and septic system. You also are required to cease and desist furnishing water to the adjacent pro- perty of Richard Wiley Dickins at L13 Bll Rabbit Creek Heights Subdivision imme- diately. The Dickins has no proper sewage disposal system for the water. If you have any questions, call me at 264-4721. Sincerely, Stacy Thompson ST1/dEH5 cc: Steve Brig DATE: January 31, 1985 TO: FROM: DPW, Building Safety Division, Chief Zoning Enforcement Officer, Jonathan F. Houk, ASLA, APA DPW, Building Safety Division, Enforcement Officer, Michael Kerr Principal Code SUBJECT: ;~:~bbi;~C~:e~:k H~ightS, Lot 13, B. 16Ck 11" On January 2g, 1985 a m~eting was held concerning Mr. ~;i~a~d Wi;iil;m~ ~¢kins. request for fourteen various commercial uses on the above described property. Robby Robinson, Jim Roberts, and Keith Bandt, Health and Environmental Protection, were present. It was decided ~'~bi~ ~P;~d K~i~h Bandt Would.draf:t:i~a reply addressing t)7~ ~}~!b!e. vi~lations of T~t!e.~ of the Municipal Code 'for six Of the proposed uses. ~W' ~f tiber'draft w:ill belSenlt~ tlo Our office~ ~ rev~6w~ MK/jc bs4/mkl Mun ,ci Anchorage POUCI ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650 (907) 264-4111 TONY KNOWL&S. MA YOFf DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION February 5, 1985 Richard Wiley Dickins Box 10-373 Anchorage, Alaska 99511 Dear Mr. Dickins: In your letter to Mr. Michael Kerr dated December 2, 1984, you indicated that you would be returning to Anchorage on or about January 22, 1985. During the past several weeks, I have had several conversations with Mro Kerr (MOA Building Safety Division) with respect to the anticipated futured nsc of your property described as Lot 13 Block 1l Rabbit Creek Heights Subdivision. These are numerous questions that need to be addressed concerning both the present and the proposed future use of this property. believe that [t would be an advantage to all concerned if we could arrange a meeting and thoroughly discuss and understand your plans and MOA regulationMo Please call m~ at your earliest convenience so that such a meeting can he scheduled. My office number is 264-4720. O Respectively, /--~ Robbie W. RobiBson Manager Environmental Health Division cc: Michael Kerr RR/ra/d7 0 0 o Anchorage PO[ ANCHORA GE. ALASKA 99502-0650 (907) 786-8160 TONY KNOWLE.~ MA YOR DEPARTN~ENT OF PUBLIC WORKS (3500 Easl Tudor Road) October II, 198~I CERTIFIED NO. P 729 133 927 Richard Wiley Dickins Box 10-373 Anchorage, Alaska 99511 Dear Mr. Dickins: From the tone of your letters I am of the opinion you are attempting to establish non-conformi ng status of the uses listed on the attachment to your original letter. Some of the uses listed appear to be plans for the future. If ! have asse'ssed your letter properly, I offer you the following information from Title 21, Land Use Regulations, Section 21.55.010 Non-conforming intent; Section 21.55. 030 ,and- Section 21.55. 050., copies attached. If you. have any questions regarding this information, please call 786-83~15, weekdays between 9:00 A.M, and 5 00 P.I~, Sincerely, Michael Kerr Principal Code Enforcement Officer Building Safety Division Department of Public Works : MK:cb Attachments: As stated RECEIVED SEP 24]9 'ZONING ENFORCEMENT lrom: ~: aro ~'iiey Dickin$ c/o Pall ta (update~till Dec.,198~) R~I3 Box 9 Oxford,NY 13830 : : Box ~0-373 (after Dec.,l~8~) Anchorage,Alaska ~9~11 I did receive your letter dated August 17j 198&, I welcomed the prompt- However~lt is my opinion that your :letter-was very inappropriate tn - light of our face to face conversation of April 12,1986 on.the site of the property in Anchorage and subsequently the content 'of what I wrote based on that conversation,! specificly remember you informing Re of yOUr Depart- Rent's "non-comforming Use study ".I emphasisethe word ~!atudy ":because of my understanding of what this government study of land Use lmplt d)given the context of our diacussion~The tone and content of your latter'got me to wonder about your degree of consideration in reviewing my letter which leads Re to question your representation,objectivee~and,applteation of this "non-comform- lng use study",I was Under the impression that your Study was an hOnest learn- lng effort ~o understand with more clarity the unique existing (asbuilt and as-planned) developments in the region of Rabbit Creek Heights (for the purpose of setting the records straight as well as for useing the ~nowledge acquired to aid in the process of the R-7 and "non-comforming" developmental and oper- ational coexistence).Maybe that is what you think it is. But,unless your letter was a mtstake,insofarae,tone and content,it could be construed from the choice and arrangement of the words you used in your letter(along with speculation that you also use such a style with other land users in the region) that you are maybe trying to use the "study" as a tool to achieve conformity by threat- ening complication and games in order to try breaking apart the drea~ms and realities of land users with perhaps poor written and/or social documentation, or,land users possibly less motivated ~o deal with what they Right consider as 1 to much gox. ernment interference,Yet,it is easy to see that land users can be Seen as established by the fact of their existence therefore the burdon of proof should not rest on the land user especially in a study,If there is a question of the innocence~it should rest on the accuser,Consider that a study suggests observation,notation~and examination of data,Even though it is ~rue that one con~ucting.a study does discriminate insofaras ~hat is datajone conducting e "study '~ lnvolvin8 people does not demand or forceably extrac~ from the subject of study that data,Such demands and/or extraction change the nature and the definition of the learning behavior to something such as lnqulaitionor trial. Your letter suggested such requirments of a land user to prove their existence and intentions;your letter did not 8ire an innocent request characteristic of a study (your letter was conditional),However, I a~ sympathetic to your desires to gain knowledge of the developmental realities of the region in light of the goodness that can be achieved through CO~uaunity and individual understanding and choice to live in an area depicted and defined as this,that or both,There. fore,you will see that I have enclosed documents and discussion ~hich also should be of aid (see at'tachments). If you wonder why I am ~riting and doing as ! am,consider that you did not even address the specifics in my letter of July 6th.Consider the statement in your reply?~Jonathan Houk~Chtef Zoning Officer,and I reviewed the outline in that letter and agree it is inadequate to establish any of the uses described as non-comforming." As you send,you reviewed the "outline in that letter conclude~ that "it ia inadequate to establish a~y of theuses described as non- com~orming ".! want you to see that you mighthave understood the.adequacy of any if you would have reviewed =he entire letter in detail and then conducted (even some} follow up research.Maybe your letter was a standard way for you (i.e~your study)to request ~or more verifying information-therefore that was.your "follow up research ".Maybe you don~t see the arrogance or rudeness of it es a response to the letter that ~ sent you. But surely~you realize that if you ~anted onl~ more conclusive evidence with respect to the history of use and intention o~ my property~you could have asked for such informatio~ in a more amiable (and non--conditional) manner if you could not find such documentation (or if you didntt feel that you vere obit&ed to find such information,you could have stated ad with justification).Consider the fact that I vas 1~rtting your Department in good faith prompted by our conversation of April 12th. Consider ~hat I ~rrote you. I ~as not trying to establish the fact of my property's non-comforming status vith respect to the recent zoning change through an application process conceiving your ~'study" as the means to do sb.I vas providing you vith data of fact for your study (and to be inaccordancevith vith the levees I understood tt then to be from your relatings in our April 12 th conversation).Ny reasons for ~rriting ~ere to relate my situation,my intention,and,provide you vith an outline ad that the records vould be set straight now rather than in the future,I vas expecting a response fro~ you that exhibited detailed thought and consideration on ~hat I ~rote to you. I vas velcoming advice a~d/or information pertaining to classifications and optlons. I vould not have minded (ss much) disagreement ~itb an explanation and justification addressing the specifics. I vas not expecting nor did I velcome such a non-considering reply as that '~ich you gave,It ia not that I donet see e time and a place for such a response vorded as such (given a need and a longer history of mutual communications).But,in this case,! feel strongly that it vas not a good ray to proceed-and 'it certainly vasn~t needed. I also realize that my opposition to your reply is,perhaps in your mind,irrelevant to the problem at hand ~i.e,,setting the records stral&ht).Thoug[~,I could not in good conscience ,just let my objections and con~ents pass byoI am ~riting them and sending them to you to satisfy my need to say vhat I feel about it in hopes that by doing'so you viii act vith a change for the better in your style and approach in matters vhere I am concerned. I vould like it very much if ye could start vith a ney sincerity and deal ~t:h the apparent problems in an amiable and detailed fashion. I realize cooperation ia the best way to achieve this. Perhaps this can be arranged if ~e participate vith more personableness, more detail~and more understanding that our communication ~rill be limited to letters until I am back in Anchorage(my budget ,does not alloy for long distance-calla- I em speculating that yours has similar restrictions-if.that i's not ao~my number is 607-8~3-93~7--call anytime and'let it ·ring s long time if no ttmnediate Shaver). page & of 5 As ! did already relate my dissatisfaction with your conclusions (your ~b~-~ feeling that my letter was inadequate giving no explaination and Justifications~ those enclosed documents (which are copies of the originals) should help you to realize my understanding of my rights to proceed with the described activities (as stated in my letter of July 6) in light of the fact that I am compling with the original zoning (U) requir~snts ~hich do pe~l~ th~forem~ntioned ac~lvities. Also~if you check the A1aska ~usiness Llcens~ ~cords (198~)~you ~ill find record of the businesses~Fiddl~heads ~d Tubs ~d Trip~ ~ich hav~ b~en in (licensed) opera,ion ~ said proper~y since 1983-~ich lncidently,was before ~he zoning ch~se occured (I did no~ audit a copy of the licenses In ~his letCer because at ~his ~ime I don't have a copy of s~ch here in ~).lf you will take the time to review In detail my intenCion;~y outlin~d~my sttuati~again (l.e,~my las~ letter to you),inconJuncCion with ~he lnfo~ation contained in this letter. perhaps you will see the issue in a differen~ ll~t.This should point ouc you (ldo so with sincere respect) that the property ~d activities c~ be con- sidered 'tnon-comforming" (in liEh~ of your use of ~he te~ because of the newly ch~ged zoning requi~en~s in the re~ion i.e,~ U to ~-7),~d~this info~a~lon will v~rify that the property ts c~formin~ vi~h respect ~o ~he original zoning s~atus requl~ncs~U (i,e.~the chan~e puts th~ property in ln~" in relation Co ~he ~-7 zonint r~sCricCions-yeC ~he now active Gr..drabBer Ri~ts allow the property to continue con[o~in~ 'to the original zonin~ ~id~lines. Given,the exisCenc~ of Gr~dfather Ri~ts~the enclosed copies:of original records 3 (~ich should be already in your flles)~and.my open disclo~res easily ~derstood that the proper~y has ~ already established record of beint desired for ~d g~veloped for (~d i~ ts still in the process of being such) restdence~business~d~c~unl~y service, I ~ requesting ~hat you realize more these facts in y~r records and In your conceptions ~d acknowledge that realiza~ion ~ome.Your de,ailed review,c~en~ ~d disclosure to me of ~y relev~t lnfo~a~l~ will be ~os~ apprcia~ed (tn- cludeing debate if tha~ is in deed the'case).~r'~ual coo~ra~lon ~d ~der- 5 oI 5 Standing would be ideal, Thankyou for your attention, si ncerely, . - c.c, to various individuals Attachments are'ss follow~ (l)Land use permit (LUP) acquired for construction of t~o cabins and a "shop for business & barn underneath" (2) "map of approximate spatial relationship of buildings" already on the land and the ones to be built 9nder the LUP {3)copy of the letters that I sent you-first,in Hey 1984 (unregister~d),second,in August 1984 (registered) with a note of explainetion (4) letter that you sent me dated August 17,198& (1)It can be under~tood that there are also other categories o~ land users that would resist this "non-comforming use study" because of other reason than as (2)obviously,my reference pertains to the more barbaric use of such instruments oi justice-the history of use,abuse and attempts to aet right auch misuse of Justice exemplify the point. {3)These documents were issued through your office-additionaly~I subraited one to you at a prior meeting on the site of the property when you issued me a ~arning for my "junk on the side of the road /' / / I'- ' Y,"'-FZ ..... t4OTE: No portion of this structure shall e'er" ~ into any e-~sraent u;~a All wcn'~ shall 1,e done §z= Iq- / tmicipality oocH - 0 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650 of (907) 786-8160 Anchorage August 17, 1984 CERTIFIED NO. P 729 133 821 Richard Wiley Dickins c/o Paliotta RD%3, Box 9 Oxford, New York 13830 RE: Lot 13, Block 11, Rabbit Creek Heights Dear Mr. Dickins: I have received your letter, dated July 6, 1984, on August 7, 1984. Jonathan Houk, Chief Zoning Office~ and I reviewed the outline in that letter and agree it is inadequate to establish any of the uses described as non-conforming. I have enclosed a copy of the non-conforming use affidavit format for establish- ing non-conforming uses. Please note C. these affidavits must be signed, dated, witnessed and notorized before it can be accepted. If you have any questions or require assistance, please call weekdays between 9:00 AM and .5:00 PM at 786-8345. Sincerely, Michael Kerr Principal Code Enforcement Officer BuildingSafety Division Department of Public Works Zoning Enforcement Section MK:cb Enclosure: As stated