Daily Sitka Sentinel

Residents In Court Over Youth Home

By SHANNON HAUGLAND

Sentinel Staff Writer

Two Sitka residents have filed notice in Superior Court that they will appeal the Assembly’s approval of a conditional use permit for the Youth Advocates of Sitka group home for teens and young adults on Halibut Point Road.

The notice of appeal was filed July 12 by Dolores Farrell and Valorie Nelson. Farrell lives in the neighborhood of the group home duplex at 3411 Halibut Point Road. Nelson lives on Littlebyrd Way, about half a mile away.

The relief Nelson and Farrell are seeking is a trial before the Superior Court to overturn the July 13 decision by the Assembly, acting as a Board of Adjustment, to approve the conditional use permit. The 6-0 vote of approval came in the Assembly’s reconsideration of the Planning Commission’s denial of the YAS conditional use permit on April 5.

Youth Advocates of Sitka applied for the permit to use the  4,086-square-foot duplex to provide housing for youths ages 16 to 21 who are homeless or at risk for experiencing homelessness. The YAS operating plan says the agency would provide mental health services and life skills training, and have staff on site 24 hours a day.

In their notice of appeal Nelson and Farrell say they will rely on a number of points in which they allege the Assembly erred:

– in granting the permit sought by YAS relating to the operation of a “quasi-institutional facility” in an R-1 zoned neighborhood.

– in hearing the appeal after the deadline for a request for reconsideration had expired.

– in granting the CUP because the decision was inconsistent with definitions and rights under the city general code. The appellants say the code restricts activity for which the permit was sought, and the Assembly failed to make reviewable findings of fact and conclusions of law as to why sections of the code did not apply.

– in granting the permit because certain conditions of the permit were not satisfied prior to approval, and the Assembly didn’t say why this was allowed.

The notice alleges that the Assembly failed to evaluate the effects of granting the permit, compared to “lawful conditions that exist in the R-1 zoning classification.”

They said the Assembly also erred by failing to evaluate “the substantial decrease in value of the R-1 properties in Sitka”; and that granting the permit lacks conformity with the comprehensive plan because the use is commercial and therefore does not comply with Sitka General Code. “The Assembly lacked substantial evidence to support its action,” the notice says.

The appellants said that granting the permit will be out of harmony with existing residential density and use on R-1 property, which they said is exclusively R-1 dwellings.

One of the points of appeal will argue that the permit will endanger public health and safety by increasing density, parking and traffic accessing a state highway, and therefore does not comply with code. “The Assembly lacked substantial evidence to support its action,” the appellants allege in the court filing.

Following the Assembly’s July 13 decision to overturn the planning commission’s denial of the conditional use permit, a group of property owners opposed to the CUP filed a request for reconsideration, which the Assembly denied.

Nelson said today she and Farrell are waiting for the preparation of the record by the city, which includes minutes of applicable meetings. They then have 30 days to file a brief on the appeal after that.

Nelson said although only two names are on the notice of appeal there may be other appellants who join in at a later time.