‘Loophole’ allows Homer man to stay

• Thanks to new ordinance, mobile home can stay put

By Aaron Selbig
Homer Tribune

Soundview Avenue – a quiet street lined mostly with well-kept, modest, single-family homes – has been Robert Nakada’s address for more than 20 years. And while his single-wide trailer might stick out in the neighborhood, Nakada is happy to be there.
“It’s warm and it’s much nicer than the old one,” said Nakada Monday afternoon as he replaced the spark plugs in a Dodge pickup in his gravel driveway.
Last winter, Nakada was nearly forced to move out.
After he had saved enough money to replace his original, dilapidated mobile home – which was in such a sorry state, it had plastic bags hanging from the ceiling to catch leaking rainwater – Nakada moved the new trailer onto the existing foundation and the old trailer into the yard.
Neighbors complained to the City, starting a ball of bureaucratic red tape that would take more than a year of meetings, appeals and ultimately a special city ordinance to undo.
First, the Homer Advisory Planning Commission ruled that, although Nakada had permission to have the older “nonconforming structure” on his property, which was rezoned in 1982 to exclude mobile homes, he did not have permission to replace it with a new one. At a Nov. 5, 2008 meeting, the commission unanimously denied Nakada’s request to keep the new mobile home in place.
“The complete replacement of a mobile home constitutes a reconstruction and does not allow for the continuation of a nonconformity,” said the commission in its ruling.
After a 30-day appeal period came and went with no response from Nakada, the City issued an “enforcement order” for him to remove the only livable home on his property. Seeing as how it was winter by that time, the City allowed Nakada to stay temporarily, said City Planner Rick Abboud.
“We did get the older mobile home removed and got some things cleaned up on the property,” said Abboud.
But why didn’t Nakada file an appeal? And why didn’t he show up at Planning Commission meetings to defend himself?
It’s because he is disabled, said Nakada’s friend Monte Wilshusen, who met Nakada through a case manager at The Center and had only known him a short time when he helped him dismantle and remove the old trailer from his property last winter.
Wilshusen, who walks with great difficulty and must take pain medication to be as mobile as he is, said he feels a kinship with Nakada, who was unable to testify on his own behalf because of his disability.
“Becoming disabled, you realize just how forgotten some disabled people are,” said Wilshusen. “It was the right thing to do to stand up for him, because some people can’t talk for themselves.”
And that’s exactly what Wilshusen did, talking to city officials and sitting through city council meetings for months until the gears slowly started turning toward a solution.
“The only way it was going to get resolved was for the council to make a decision,” said former council member Dennis Novak. “From a humanitarian point of view, everyone agreed he should not be forced to leave. On the other hand, there wasn’t a loophole that would allow him to stay.”
So Novak created a loophole.
City Ordinance 09-46 (S)(A), which makes a specific exception in city code allowing Nakada to keep his mobile home for the remainder of his life or until he sells the property, was unanimously passed by the council at their Oct. 26 meeting.
In the ordinance, the council calls Nakada “a disabled person of limited means” and finds that “the public interest in strict enforcement of the city’s zoning ordinance is outweighed by the particular circumstances of Mr. Nakada’s situation.”
At the same meeting, council members unanimously rejected another ordinance – ordinance 09-50 – that would have allowed for all property owners in similar circumstances to replace their old mobile homes with new ones, so long as the new one was “in significantly better condition.”
“That ordinance applied to everybody,” said Abboud. “It would’ve had a big impact in a lot of people.”
But at least one person – Frank Griswold, a citizen litigant and frequent critic of city officials – has a problem with a city ordinance that applies to only one person.
In an Oct. 26 statement to council members and Mayor James Hornaday, Griswold called ordinance 09-46 (S)(A) “unnecessary and unwise” and “a de facto zoning variance.” The council doesn’t have the power to grant such a variance, added Griswold.
“Ordinance 09-46 (S)(A) would also set a precedent leading to myriad other requests for exemptions from zoning laws based on financial hardship,” Griswold said in his statement.
The law is similar to one passed in 2006, allowing for the feeding of eagles on the Homer Spit by “Eagle Lady” Jean Keene, said Novak.
“There are situations that come up when there’s a right thing to do, but you don’t have a right way to do it,” he said. “I think this was the right thing to do and that’s the bottom line here.”
Wilshusen agreed.
“I’m just glad the council sees that the city is made up of individuals,” he said. “I’m glad they recognized that not all people can afford $300,000 homes.”
Wilshusen plans to frame a copy of ordinance 09-46 (S)(A) and give it to his friend to hang up in his home.
Nakada said he is “real happy” to be able to stay where he’s lived the last 20-plus years. If things hadn’t worked out the way they did, he might have had to build a “shanty” on his property to live in, he said.
“Because I can’t afford much, it probably wouldn’t have been too pretty, I’m sure,” said Nakada.

Contact the writer
Posted by Newsroom on Nov 4th, 2009 and filed under Headline News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Subscribe via RSS

Subscribe via email