HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-04-13 Planning & Zoning Packet
AGENDA
KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION – REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 13, 2016 - 7:00 P.M.
KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
210 FIDALGO AVENUE, KENAI, ALASKA
http://www.kenai.city
1. CALL TO ORDER:
a. Pledge of Allegiance
b. Roll Call
c. Agenda Approval
d. Consent Agenda
e. *Excused Absences
*All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non-controversial
by the Commission and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate
discussion of these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which case
the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal
sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders.
2. *APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
a. *March 9, 2016 and March 23, 2016 ................................................................... 1
3. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT:
a. Bob McIntosh - Citizen’s Committee and Voter Approval for Final Comprehensive
Plan (10 minutes)
4. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: (3 Minutes)
5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: None
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. PZ16-06 Application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate an approximately
400-square-foot Retail Marijuana Store and an approximately 860-square-foot
Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard, within an existing approximately 2,256-
squre-foot commercial building; located on the property known as 5455 Kenai
Spur Highway, Lot 6A1, Thompson Park 2013 Replat, KPB Parcel No.
04907032. Application submitted by: Roger Boyd, 37095 Kalifornsky Beach
Road, Kenai, Alaska 99611 ............................................................................. 17
[Clerk’s Note: At its March 23, 2016 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission
postponed Resolution PZ16-06 to April 13, 2016 to allow for additional public
hearing. A motion to approve PZ16-06 is on the floor.]
b. PZ16-10 A Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Kenai, Alaska, Recommending Council Adopt the City of Kenai Annex to the
Kenai Peninsula Borough All Hazard Mitigation Plan. .................................... 113
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None
8. NEW BUSINESS: None
9. PENDING ITEMS: None
10. REPORTS:
a. City Council ..................................................................................................... 158
b. Borough Planning .......................................................................................... 162
c. Administration
11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: (3 Minutes)
12. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
a. Notice of Town Hall Meetings – April 16, 2016 and April 30, 2016 .................. 169
13. NEXT MEETING ATTENDANCE NOTIFICATION: April 27, 2016
14. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
15. ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF KENAI
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MARCH 9, 2016 - 7:00 P.M.
CHAIR JEFF TWAIT, PRESIDING
MINUTES
1.CALL TO ORDER:
Commission Chair Twait called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
a.Pledge of Allegiance
Twait led those assembled in the Pledge of Allegiance.
b.Roll Call
Commissioners present: R.Springer, J. Twait, K. Peterson, J. Glendening, J. Focose, D.
Fikes, G. Pettey
Staff/Council Liaison present: City Planner M. Kelley, Deputy Clerk J. Heinz, Airport Manager M.
Bondurant, Council Liaison H. Knackstedt
A quorum was present.
c.Agenda Approval
Commissioner Peterson noted the following items to be removed/added to the agenda/packet:
6.a. PZ16-05
•Memo from Councilor Knackstedt, Approved by Council
•Copy of Quitclaim Deed from FAA
6.b. PZ16-07
•Copy of Rezoning Application
•Memo from the Airport Manager
•Memo from the City Planner
•Correspondence from residents
6.c. PZ16-08
•Copy of Rezoning Application
•Memo from the Airport Manager
•Correspondence from residents
MOTION:
Commissioner Peterson MOVED to approve the agenda including the additions to the packet;
Commissioner Fikes SECONDED the motion. There were no objections; SO ORDERED.
Page 1 of 169
d.Consent Agenda
MOTION:
Commissioner Glendening MOVED to approve the consent agenda; Commissioner Peterson
SECONDED the motion. There were no objections; SO ORDERED.
*All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non-controversial by the
Commission and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of
these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which case the item will be removed
from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of
the General Orders.
e.*Excused Absences – None.
2.*APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 24, 2016
Approved by the consent agenda.
3.SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT: (10 Minutes)
4.PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: (3 Minutes)
5.CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: None.
6.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a.PZ16-05 – An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Kenai, Alaska Amending Kenai
Municipal Code Chapter 14.20 – Kenai Zoning Code, to Enact Kenai Municipal Code
Section 14.20.065 – Airport Light Industrial Zone and Amending Kenai Municipal Code
Chapter 14.24 – Development Requirements Tables, to Add the Airport Light Industrial
Zone.
City Planner Kelley reviewed his staff report providing a history explaining that the Ordinance was
the culmination of work sessions between the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Airport
Commission, at the direction of City Council, and recommended approval of the Resolution, which
was a recommendation to City Council to approve the ordinance. The ordinance provided the
following code amendments:
•Adding sections regarding intent, development requirements, and parking requirements
•Adding definitions for airport compatible uses and necessary aviation facilities
•Modifying the land use table
The City Planner recommended the following additional amendment:
•Changing the land use table to reflect that mini-storage facilities, storage yards, and
warehouses be allowed by conditional use permit as opposed to being allowed without
permitting.
MOTION:
Commissioner Peterson MOVED to approve Resolution No. PZ16-05 with staff recommendations
Page 2 of 169
and Commissioner Fikes SECONDED the motion.
Chairman Twait opened the public hearing.
Kristine Schmidt spoke against the resolution noting there were no provisions for buffers between
residences and the airport and also does not address the health and safety of residents. She
also suggested the airport was a high impact to residents on Float Plane Road.
There being no one else wishing to be heard, the public hearing was closed.
It was noted that the land was trapped and a solution was being sought to try to resolve the issue
and allow Kenai to grow. It was also noted that the land’s specific use was to fund the airport and
be used for airport uses.
MOTION TO AMEND :
Commissioner Springer MOVED amend the land use table to change mini-storage facilities,
storage yards, and warehouses from permitted use to allowable by conditional use permit and
Commissioner Focose SECONDED the motion.
VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT:
YEA: Glendening, Peterson, Fikes, Focose, Twait, Springer, Pettey
NAY:
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED:
YEA: Glendening, Peterson, Fikes, Focose, Twait, Springer, Pettey
NAY:
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
b. PZ16-07 – An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Kenai, Alaska Amending the
Official Kenai Zoning Map by Rezoning 48 Parcels Owned by the City of Kenai,
Located Within the Airport Reserve Boundary from Conservation Zone, Rural
Residential, and Light Industrial Zone to Airport Light Industrial Zone, and Rezoning a
Parcel Owned by the City of Kenai, Located Within the Airport Reserve Boundary
Described as: Lot 1A, Kenai Cemetery Expansion #2 With Vacation of Section Line
Easements; (KPB Parcel No. 04317037) from Suburban Residential Zone together
with Conservation Zone (Split Zone) to Conservation Zone.
City Planner Kelley reviewed his staff report recommending approval of the Resolution PZ16-07,
which was a recommendation to City Council to approve an ordinance to rezone 48 parcels to
protect the viability of the airport and encourage appropriate development and compatible land
uses consistent with aviation uses
Page 3 of 169
MOTION:
Commissioner Peterson MOVED to approve Resolution No. PZ16-07 and Commissioner Fikes
SECONDED the motion.
Chairman Twait opened the public hearing.
Kristine Schmidt spoke against the resolution suggesting City Council asked for
recommendations, not rezoning. Also suggested that a rezoning shouldn’t be done due to the
repeal of the Comprehensive Plan; she read her letter into the record which was included in the
laydown.
There being no one else wishing to be heard, the public hearing was closed.
It was noted that the airport was a nuisance because of noise; that the buffer zones could be
reconsidered; that a lot of time was spent at work sessions reviewing buffer zones but no one
came forth to express concerns.
Staff pointed out that the Airport Master Plan was being reviewed by the Airport Commission and
operations, expansions, and noise mitigation options were being considered; that rezoning the
properties dovetailed with the master plan review. It was also pointed out that most development
was near the current terminal.
VOTE:
YEA: Glendening, Fikes, Focose, Springer, Pettey
NAY: Twait, Peterson
MOTION PASSED.
c.PZ16-08 – An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Kenai, Alaska Amending the
Official Kenai Zoning Map By Rezoning an approximately 900-foot portion of a Parcel
Owned by the City of Kenai Described as: W1/2 Lying N. of Kenai Spur Hwy. & E. of
Marathon Rd., Excluding All Baron Park Subs. & Kenai Industrial Park, (KPB Parcel
No. 04501057), and a Parcel Owned by the City of Kenai Described as: S 1/2, S 1/2,
SW 1/4, Lying South of the Kenai Spur Hwy. (KPB Parcel No. 04501003) from
Conservation to General Commercial.
City Planner Kelley reviewed his staff report and provided a history of the parcels, noting previous
plats had been approved but not recorded; recommended approval of the rezone noting the
following:
•Any future development would require Landscape Site Plans which would address buffers
for residents along Lawton Drive
•Adoption of the ordinance changes the zones; doesn’t change the uses
•Further subdivision would be required to retain buffers or designate a park
•Parcels were narrow and after parking, setbacks, snow storage, etc. there was little left to
develop.
Page 4 of 169
MOTION:
Commissioner Peterson MOVED to approve Resolution No. PZ16-08 with staff recommendations
and Commissioner Fikes SECONDED the motion.
Chairman Twait opened the public hearing.
Mayor Porter noted consideration of rezoning these particular parcels had always been a
contentious issue and that the Airport Commission requested it so they could complete the Airport
Master Plan. She also noted that the airport had to remain self-sustaining in order that taxpayers
didn’t have to subsidize it and when airport properties were leased or sold, the funds were
designated to the Airport Fund.
Roy Wells spoke against rezoning one of the parcels due to the houses across street; noted
general commercial was much different than conservation; spoke in favor of keeping the park.
Lucy Barton encouraged the City to purchase the parcel from the airport.
Kristine Schmidt spoke against rezoning the parcels, noting there wasn’t a big demand to rezone,
that residents oppose rezoning, and that restrictions created by Landscape Site Plans were not
satisfactory as rocks were not as good as trees. She suggested the City purchase the property
and that not every inch of property needed to be developed and monetized.
Debbie Adamson spoke against rezoning suggesting the City and the Airport trade land. She
noted she loved the green look of Kenai; used Lawton Drive to walk; many visit the park. She
also noted that school children walked to and from school utilizing Lawton Drive and the additional
traffic that rezoning would bring was worrisome.
Bob McIntosh noted the history of the funding of Wildflower Field; suggested the Federal Aviation
Administration wouldn’t repossess the land and that conservation is not a trap. He also noted the
green spaces were what made people want to live here.
Roy Wells spoke regarding the monetization of property, pointing out that the City benefited twice
when selling property for retail use, first with the profits from selling the land and then again with
the taxes collected by the retail establishment. He suggested it was a small price to pay to keep
a buffer of land to separate residences from commercial.
There being no one else wishing to be heard, the public hearing was closed.
Administration clarified differences in the meaning of conservation district in the 2003
Comprehensive Plan and in Kenai Municipal Code. Also noted the original deed pre-dated zoning
codes.
VOTE:
YEA:
NAY: Glendening, Peterson, Fikes, Focose, Twait, Springer, Pettey
MOTION FAILED UNANIMOUSLY.
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
Page 5 of 169
8. NEW BUSINESS: None.
9. PENDING ITEMS: None.
10. REPORTS:
a. City Council – Council Member Knackstedt reported on the following meetings:
March 2, 2016:
• Enacted an Ordinance to fund the revisions of the 2003 Comprehensive Plan.
• Also provided a challenge grant for the fire suppression system for the Russian
Orthodox Church.
b. Borough Planning – No report; no meetings.
c. Administration – Kelley reported on the following matters:
• The All Hazard Mitigation Plan required a 5-year update; would be scheduling
meetings to do so.
• Met with the consultant for the Comprehensive Plan Revision; discussed meetings
and developing a process.
11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED:
Airport Manager M. Bondurant spoke about the process required for projects at the airport; noting
environmental assessments and findings of impact as well as public noticing and public hearings.
She also noted that the airport wanted to be a good neighbor and took impacts of construction
and noise seriously.
12. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None.
13. NEXT MEETING ATTENDANCE NOTIFICATION: March 23, 2016
Commissioner Pettey noted she would be absent.
14. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
Commissioner Pettey thanked City Planner M. Kelley and those that testified. She noted she
would like to see the parcels on Lawton Drive to be permanently placed in conservation.
Commissioner Fikes added that she appreciated public comments and the transparency from the
airport manager.
15. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at
9:38 p.m.
Page 6 of 169
Minutes prepared and submitted by:
_____________________________
Jamie Heinz, CMC
Deputy Clerk
Page 7 of 169
CITY OF KENAI
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MARCH 23, 2016 - 7:00 P.M.
CHAIR JEFF TWAIT, PRESIDING
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER:
Commission Chair Twait called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
a. Pledge of Allegiance
Twait led those assembled in the Pledge of Allegiance.
b. Roll Call
Commissioners present: R. Springer, J. Twait, K. Peterson, J. Glendening, J. Focose, D.
Fikes
Staff/Council Liaison present: City Planner M. Kelley, City Attorney S. Bloom, Police Chief, G.
Sandahl, Deputy Clerk J. Heinz, Planning Assistant W. Anderson,
Council Liaison H. Knackstedt
A quorum was present.
c. Agenda Approval
Commissioner Peterson noted the following items to be removed/added to the agenda/packet:
2.a. Minutes – March 9, 2016.
• Remove from the agenda
6.a. PZ16-09
• Correspondence from Citizens
• Pictures of the subject property
6.b. PZ16-06
• Correspondence from Citizens
• Pictures of the subject property
• Memo from the City Planner
MOTION:
Commissioner Peterson MOVED to approve the agenda including the removals/additions to the
agenda/packet; Commissioner Fikes SECONDED the motion. There were no objections; SO
ORDERED.
Page 8 of 169
d. Consent Agenda
MOTION:
Commissioner Peterson MOVED to approve the consent agenda; Commissioner Fikes
SECONDED the motion. There were no objections; SO ORDERED.
*All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non-controversial by the
Commission and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of
these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which case the item will be removed
from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of
the General Orders.
e. *Excused Absences – Glenese Pettey.
2. *APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 9, 2016
[Clerk’s Note: This item was removed at approval of the agenda.]
3. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT: (10 Minutes)
4. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: (3 Minutes)
5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: None.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. PZ16-09 – Application for a Variance Permit for the construction of Four-Plex on a lot
within the Rural Residential Zone, which is approximately 18,295 square feet in size
where 20,000 square feet is required. Located at 240 Fern Street, otherwise known
as Lot 4, Block 2, Thompson Park Subd. Addn. No. 1. The application was submitted
by the Kevin and Jessica Stearns, 108 S. Tinker Lane, No. 4, Kenai, Alaska 99611
City Planner Kelley reviewed his staff report, reviewing the conditions that are to exist as a
prerequisite to issuance of a variance permit and recommending approval of the variance with
the following conditions:
• Compliance with all Federal, State, and Local regulations
• Prior to obtaining a building permit, applicant must submit a Landscape Site Plan
• Applicant must obtain a Building Permit prior to beginning construction
MOTION:
Commissioner Peterson MOVED to approve Resolution No. PZ16-09 with staff recommendations
and Commissioner Focose SECONDED the motion.
Chairman Twait opened the public hearing.
Sydney Ayer spoke against the variance noting traffic concerns, decrease to property values, and
his desire to keep the neighborhood single-family residential.
Page 9 of 169
Elizabeth Brennan spoke against the variance noting that the neighborhood consisted mostly of
single-family residences; stated she did not want transient neighbors in the neighborhood, and
noted the blind corner from Lupine Drive onto Fern Street.
Rosie Thompson spoke against the variance noting that she had lived in the neighborhood most
of her life and that it was her grandfather that subdivided the property and had intended the
properties be used for single-family residences. She also noted the blind corner from Lupine
Drive onto Fern Street and suggested that the lot is too small for a 4-plex.
Nancy Meiers spoke against the variance suggesting the parcel was too small for a 4-plex and
noted there were approximately ten duplexes in the neighborhood. She echoed previous
comments regarding the blind corner and pointed out that she couldn’t see enough space for
dumpster location in relation to garages.
Mike Burcholz spoke against the variance suggesting more land be purchased, and a negative
impact to property values.
Phillip Smith spoke against the variance suggesting transient residents use drugs and pointed out
that a marijuana store was also under consideration across highway
Barb and BJ Elder spoke against the variance noting safety concerns, pointing out that neighbors
had not changed in many years. They also noted that there were duplexes in neighborhood and
that allowing a 4-plex would create noticeably more traffic in the neighborhood.
Arnold W agaman spoke in favor of the variance, noting that he sold the applicants the property
believing they could build a 4-plex. He also pointed out that the blind corner had not been a
problem in 18 years and that the variance was only required because the lot was 1,070 square
feet too small, which was smaller than a house.
Jessica Stearns spoke in favor of the variance noting that when they purchased the property, they
thought they could build a 4-plex, and had plans drawn up by an architect, but learned later that
they needed a variance. She also noted that she respected the fears of the neighbors and
assured they would be selective landlords and keep the property well maintained. She pointed
out that when they moved to Kenai, they had a hard time finding a nice place to live and noted
the shortage in rental properties. Finally, she suggested that a road condition that they were
unable to resolve should not stop their building plans.
There being no one else wishing to be heard, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Peterson stated that because of the controversy within the neighborhood, he would
not support the variance.
Commissioner Fikes stated that due to the concerns regarding parking and the condensed small
area, she would not support the variance
Commissioner Twait noted that the traffic concerns were not on the lot itself, pointed out that the
lot only needed to be ten feet wider and that the variance was proper for consideration and would
support the variance.
Commissioner Springer echoed Commissioner Twait’s comments and added that if the plans
Page 10 of 169
were for a duplex, the variance would be easily approved. He noted he would support the
variance.
Commissioner Glendening noted the different zoning, which allowed only single-family
residences, was across the street and would support the variance.
Planning Director M. Kelley noted that public works could look at the streets and be reviewed to
alleviate safety concerns.
Commissioner Focose noted that with the safety precautions addressed, he was in favor of the
variance.
VOTE:
YEA: Glendening, Focose, Twait, Springer
NAY: Peterson, Fikes
MOTION PASSED.
Commission Chair Twait noted the 15-day appeal period.
b. PZ16-06 – Application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate an approximately 400-
square-foot Retail Marijuana Store and an approximately 860-square-foot Marijuana
Cultivation Facility, Standard, within an existing approximately 2,256-squre-foot
commercial building; located on the property known as 5455 Kenai Spur Highway, Lot
6A1, Thompson Park 2013 Replat, KPB Parcel No. 04907032. Application submitted
by: Roger Boyd, 37095 Kalifornsky Beach Road, Kenai, Alaska 99611
City Planner Kelley reviewed his staff report noting the review criteria that must be satisfied prior
to issuance of a conditional use permit and recommending approval with the following conditions:
• Development of the property shall conform to all Federal, State and Local Regulations
• A Landscape Site Plan be submitted and approved prior to issuance of the Building Permit
• Construction of an 8’ Cedar fence along western and southwestern property lines prior to
final inspection of Building Permit
• Prior to operations, owners shall comply with any and all regulations stipulated by the
Alaska Marijuana Control Board.
• Prior to installation of any new signs, a sign permit shall be submitted and approved.
• Annual reports to City.
Additionally, he noted the following revised recommended conditions,
• Plant trees on southern portion of lot.
• Rebuild the 8-foot cedar fence as a “good neighbor” fence in which both sides were
aesthetically pleasing.
MOTION:
Commissioner Fikes MOVED to approve Resolution No. PZ16-06 and Commissioner Focose
SECONDED the motion.
Page 11 of 169
Chairman Twait opened the public hearing.
Christine Cook spoke against the Conditional Use Permit noting her home was adjacent to the
property and had lived there when the property was a quick stop and liquor store where she dealt
with trash, onsite liquor consumption, trespassers, theft of personal property, and attempted theft
of the store. She also noted that she provided daycare to her grandchildren in the home and had
obtained a business license in the event she wanted to increase the daycare business. She
suggested there would be an increase in traffic and trespassers if the property was allowed to be
used as a marijuana cultivation and retail facility, and finally, she pointed out that the code
prohibits Commercial Marijuana Establishments as Home Occupations in order to preserve the
character, health, and safety of neighborhoods, and that the proposed establishment was thirteen
feet away from her home and residential zone.
John and Mary White spoke against the Conditional Use Permit, noting they had thirteen
grandchildren and did not want them viewing a marijuana retail store in the neighborhood. Also
suggested the business was not appropriate in a largely residential area and that property values
would be affected. They also noted the problems getting vehicles turned around that miss the
Eagle Rock boat launch and feared the marijuana establishment would compound the problem.
Phillip Smith spoke against the Conditional Use Permit noting the separation between zones
being just a fence. He also noted that as his time as a police officer in Knoxville, he saw property
devalued by drugs and pulled drivers over for smoking marijuana because the odor could be
smelled when they passed by; suggested that the odor from growing marijuana would be worse.
He also pointed out that the establishment’s proximity to the bike path was dangerous.
Eric Derleth, partner in the ownership group, explained they had developed a website
encouraging comments and feedback, to include complaints from neighbors, which had been
online for several months and pointed out that the business license for the daycare had been
purchased on February 26, 2016.
Nancy Meiers spoke against the Conditional Use Permit; stated she did not want a marijuana
store in her neighborhood as it would devalue homes and increase traffic and crime.
Mike Burcholz spoke against the Conditional Use Permit, pointed out marijuana has side effects
just as alcohol and other drugs do. He suggested negative impacts would stem from the
establishment to the area around it and negatively affect property values.
Roger Boyd, partner in the ownership group, spoke in favor of the Conditional Use Permit, stating
that they wanted to work with their closest neighbors to ensure minimal impact and an
improvement over the former liquor store. He noted he could understand the objection to legal
cannabis due to the paradigm change. He pointed out that the industry would be one of the most
closely watched industries in the state, is highly regulated and recorded with security cameras.
Finally, he stated the group is committed to engaging in the business in the most responsible way
possible and thanked the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Administration for taking it
on the task of creating regulations to allow it in the community.
Megan Green spoke against the Conditional Use Permit, noting drugs should be kept away from
children and that profits from drugs were not more important than children. She stated she had
two small children and lived in a multi-generational home adjacent to the proposed establishment.
She suggested the industry would damage the public’s safety and welfare, would increase crime
Page 12 of 169
in neighborhoods, and decrease property values. She further stated that one of her children was
home-schooled in the home and felt her child should be afforded the same protection as those
that went to a public school. Finally, she read a portion of code from the City of Boulder, Colorado
and pointed out that marijuana was still considered a federal drug.
Britton Cook spoke against the Conditional Use Permit, noted he owned a property adjacent to
the proposed establishment and would have sold it if he had known a marijuana establishment
was being considered. He stated he was concerned about his grandchildren after the trespassing
and other crime from the previous liquor store. He also stated that there was still not an effective
way to prove a driver was impaired by cannabis.
Mark Tyler spoke in favor of the Conditional Use Permit noting he was heavily involved in the
legislative process for legalization and that it is a scary project for an entrepreneur. He stated he
believed the marijuana industry would give adults a better choice than using prescriptions, alcohol
and other drugs and pointed out that adults purchased liquor with kids present and the industry
would protect children by minimizing the black market. He further stated the owners and
managers of the proposed marijuana establishment intended to have continued open dialogue
with property owners, and community stake-holders by providing for patrolling parks, logging
complaints, trash clean-up, and data tracking to provide data. He added that the business model
would never allow for onsite consumption, called for redundant employee training protocol, and
would combat loitering. Finally, he stated the group’s intent was to see their business model as
a sound model for a high-end establishment employing eight to ten people, serving thirty to fifty
customers per day with zero tolerance for inappropriate behavior.
Ron Isaacs spoke in favor of the Conditional Use Permit, noting that he had worked in construction
for many years and those co-workers that smoked marijuana got in less trouble than those that
drank alcohol. He also stated that legislation had been introduced to change the classification of
marijuana from a Schedule I drug.
Elizabeth Brennan spoke against the Conditional Use Permit noting she wasn’t against marijuana
establishments, but was against them being adjacent to neighborhoods. She suggested there
would be negative aspects to the store being in a neighborhood such as people going into the
woods within the neighborhood to use the marijuana. She stated she recognized marijuana could
be helpful for some that used it for medicinal purposes and pointed out that it was still a mind
altering drug and people made poor choices to get it. Finally, she stated she didn’t want her
neighborhood to be a trial location and that it was a technicality that that the proposed property
wasn’t a residence as there were homes all around it.
Barbara Patrick spoke against the Conditional Use Permit and echoed Ms. Brennan’s comments.
She stated she cared less about marijuana and more about the single-family residences that
surrounded the proposed establishment.
There being no one else wishing to be heard, the public hearing was closed.
City Attorney S. Bloom explained that the adjacent daycare did not trigger a separation distance
requirement and that he would review separation distance regulations in regards to the adjacent
home being used as a homeschool. He also pointed out that city gets two opportunities to
comment on marijuana establishments, first in considering the Conditional Use Permits and
second when the Marijuana Control Board notified the City and requested comments.
Page 13 of 169
City Planner M. Kelley provided definitions from code for different types of schools.
MOTION:
Commissioner Fikes MOVED to postpone PZ16-06 to the April 13, 2016 meeting to allow for more
public testimony, allowing for any and all to testify, and further deliberation; Commissioner Focose
SECONDED the motion. There were no objections; SO ORDERED.
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
8. NEW BUSINESS: None.
9. PENDING ITEMS: None.
10. REPORTS:
a. City Council – Council Member Knackstedt noted that due to the late meeting, he was
available to answer questions regarding City Council actions; there were no questions
asked of him.
b. Borough Planning – Commissioner Glendening noted the following from the March 14
Borough Planning Commission and Platting Committee meetings:
• Four plats were approved
• One time extension request was granted
• A Conditional Use Permit for a gravel pit was approved
• A resolution was adopted for the donation of land near Anchor Point
• Continued work on an ordinance revising local option zoning.
c. Administration – Kelley provided a reminder for the Town Hall meeting on March 26
regarding the kickoff for the Comprehensive Plan revision.
11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: None.
12. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None.
13. NEXT MEETING ATTENDANCE NOTIFICATION: April 13, 2016
14. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
Commissioner Glendening thanked Chariman Twait for his patience in giving everyone a chance
to talk and ask questions; also suggested a site visit.
Administration was thanked for putting together the marijuana package.
15. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:38
p.m.
Page 14 of 169
Minutes prepared and submitted by:
_____________________________
Jamie Heinz, CMC
Deputy Clerk
Page 15 of 169
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 16 of 169
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
FROM: Scott M. Bloom, City Attorney
DATE: April 7, 2016
SUBJECT: Definition of “School” for Zoning Ordinance
During the Public Hearing for PZ16-06 (Application for a Conditional Use Permit to Operate a
Retail Marijuana Store) during the March 23, 2016 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting,
the Commission asked whether or not a private residence in which children were homeschooled
qualified as a “school” that would trigger a 1000 foot buffer requirement under KMC 14.20.330.
My opinion is that the residence in question would not be considered a “school” for purposes of
triggering a buffer requirement based on the evidence presented.
Both 3 AAC 306.010 (a State regulation) and KMC 14.20.330(f) require a buffer between
commercial marijuana establishments and schools. While our code defines “elementary school”
and “high school,” these definitions are not helpful in providing a more general definition of
“school.” There is not a helpful definition of “school” in state law either. However, deductive
analysis leads to the conclusion that the residence in question is not a “school.” The residence is
not recognized by the State Department of Education and Early Development as a school, nor by
the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District. These agencies however only recognize public
schools. It does not appear the residence qualifies as a private school either. In relevant part, AS
14.30.010 requires all school age children to attend a public school unless they attend a private
school with certified teachers, a private or religious school in compliance with AS 14.25100-200,
are enrolled in an approved full time correspondence program or are being educated at home by a
parent or legal guardian. In this case it appears based on the testimony at the public hearing that
the children are being educated at home by a legal parent or guardian, and/or are enrolled in an
approved correspondence program. These alternative types of instruction do not appear to convert
a house where the education occurs into a “school.” Other ancillary evidence support this analysis.
For example, the location is not identified as a school with any signage, there are not special traffic
provisions in the area that would apply to a school, there is no notice that the residence or area
around the residence is a safe school zone, or notice that it is a drug free school zone.
My conclusion is that a residence where children are homeschooled is not a “school” for purposes
of triggering a buffer requirement.
210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794
Telephone: 907-283-7535 / FAX: 907-283-3014
www.kenai.city
Page 17 of 169
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Matt Kelley, City Planner
DATE: March 23, 2016
SUBJECT: PZ16-06 – Application for Conditional Use Permit
The purpose of this communication is to recommend a revised Condition of Approval #2.
Staff recommends the following revisions to Condition of Approval #2.
Proposed language removed is in strikeout and proposed new language is underlined.
Prior to issuance of the Building Permit, the property owner shall submit a Landscape Site Plan
for review and approval by Planning Administration. The Landscape Site Plan shall
demonstrate compliance with Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 14.25 – Landscape/Site Plan
Regulations. The Landscape Site Plan shall include a provision for the planting of ten (10); 10
to 12-foot-tall White Spruce trees which meet the requirements of the American Standard for
Nursery Stock. The White Spruce trees should be located in the southern portion of the subject
parcel to aid in visual screening. The trees must be located in the southern portion of the subject
parcel to aid in visual screening. The Landscape Site Plan shall also include a provision for the
planting of ten (10) 6-inch diameter native spruce trees in the southern portion of the subject
parcel to aid in visual screening.
Thank you for your consideration.
210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794
Telephone: 907-283-7535 / FAX: 907-283-3014
Page 18 of 169
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Date: March 23, 2016 Res: PZ16‐06
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Roger Boyd
37095 Kalifornsky Beach Road
Kenai, AK 99611
Requested Action: Application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate an
approximately 400-square-foot Retail Marijuana Store
and an approximately 860-square-foot Marijuana
Cultivation Facility, Standard, within an existing
approximately 2,256-squre-foot commercial building.
Legal Description: Lot 6A1, Thompson Park 2013 Replat
Street Address: 5455 Kenai Spur Highway
KPB Parcel No.: 04907032
Existing Zoning: LC – Limited Commercial
Current Land Use: Vacant
Land Use Plan: Neighborhood Commercial
ANALYSIS
General Information:
This is an application for the operation a Commercial Marijuana Establishment (CME)
consisting of an approximately 400-square-foot Retail Marijuana Store and an
approximately 800-square-foot Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard. The proposed
CME would be located within an existing approximately 2,256-square-foot commercial
building, located on an approximately 40,096-square-foot lot. The subject parcel is
accessed via the Kenai Spur Highway and Lupine Drive; both roads are maintained.
The subject parcel is served by City of Kenai water and sewer.
History
The subject parcel is Lot 6A1 created by the Thompson Park 2013 Replat which
combined three lots (8A, 7A and 6A, Thompson Park One Stop Replat) into one lot. The
plat reconfigured these three lots to accommodate the existing convenience/liquor store
building and moved the property lines to the exterior walls of the building. This was
done due to one property line going through the interior of the existing building and
former gas station canopy.
Page 19 of 169
PZ16‐06 Staff Report
Page 2
The subject building was built in 1986 and operated as a convenience/liquor store and
gas station until closing in 2008. In May, 1986 a Landscape Review was approved by
the Landscape Review Board and upheld by the City Council for the construction and
operation of the convenience/liquor store. At that time, it was determined that natural
vegetation would remain on the subject property to serve as screening. In addition, it
was required that an 8-foot tall cedar fence be constructed along the rear property line of
former Lot 8A and 7A to act as a barrier between the subject parcel and the residence to
the east. On March 7, 2013, PZ13-11, a Conditional Use Permit was approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission to allow for the operation of an Internet/Retail
Business to sell seafood products. In October of 2014, the business was closed and
since that time the building has remained vacant.
Prior to Lots 8A, 7A, and 6A being vacated via the Thompson Park One Stop Replat in
2000, the subject parcel remained as three separate parcels. In 2003 it was noted by an
adjacent property owner that Lot 6A had been partially cleared of existing vegetation and
trees by new property owners. On July 28, 2004, PZ04-24 a Landscape Site Plan was
approved by the Planning and Zoning Administration to allow for the construction of a
Coffee Kiosk on Lot 6A. Pursuant to KMC 14.25.020, a Landscape Site Plan was
required because it was determined that the Coffee Kiosk was defined as new
commercial development. The conditions of approval required the owners to obtain a
building permit for a Coffee Kiosk and also to plant grasses on the bare areas of the lot
and maintain the existing trees located on the lot. The Coffee Kiosk has been removed
from the subject parcel, however, the record remains unclear as to when that occurred.
KMC 14.20.150(d) details the intent and application process for conditional uses. The
code also specifies the review criteria that must be satisfied prior to issue the permit.
The criteria are:
(1) The use is consistent with the purpose of this chapter and the purposes and intent of
the zoning district;
The subject parcel is zoned Limited Commercial (LC), and is therefore subject to the
Principal Permitted and Conditional land-uses as shown on KMC 14.22.010 - Land
Use Table. Pursuant to Ordinance 2870-2016 as approved by the Council of the City
of Kenai on January 20, 2016 which became effective on February 19, 2016, a Retail
Marijuana Store and a Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard may be established
and operated under a Conditional Use Permit within the Limited Commercial Zone.
The Limited Commercial Zone as outlined in KMC 14.20.115 is intended to provide
transition areas between commercial and residential districts by allowing low to
medium volume businesses, mixed residential and other compatible uses which
complement and do not materially detract from the uses allowed with adjacent
districts.
In 2006, the subject parcel was rezoned from General Commercial to Limited
Commercial, which caused some businesses within the surrounding area to
becoming nonconforming. KMC 14.20.050(b) permits nonconformities to continue
operating until such time as they are removed or cease operation. Due to the
subject parcel being rezoned, the convenience/liquor store and gas station became
legal nonconforming because an Automotive Service Station could only be
established with a Conditional Use Permit under the Limited Commercial Zone.
Page 20 of 169
PZ16‐06 Staff Report
Page 3
Thus, its use was allowed to continue until it was closed in 2008 and remained
closed for twelve (12) consecutive months pursuant to KMC 14.20.050(e)(5), it could
not be reestablished except by a Conditional Use Permit.
As discussed above, on March 7, 2013 a Conditional Use Permit was approved by
the Planning and Zoning Commission which allowed for the operation of an
Internet/Retail Business to sell seafood products. Given the intent of the Limited
Commercial Zone which allows a mixture of low to medium volume businesses
mixed with residential and other compatible uses a retail business would be
appropriate within the zone. As discussed above, the applicant has applied for a
Conditional Use Permit to establish and operate a Retail Marijuana Store and
Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard within an existing approximately 2,256-
square-foot commercial building located on the subject parcel. Pursuant to the
submitted floor plan, the Retail Marijuana Store would occupy approximately 400-
square-foot and the Marijuana Cultivation Facility would occupy approximately 860
square feet. The remaining, approximately 996 square feet would be used for an
office, work room, bathroom, storage room and mechanical room.
The Kenai Spur Highway is classified by the State of Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities as a Major Collector. A collector is defined as “A
road classification applicable to roads serving a mixture of local access and through
traffic, for which the volume, average speed, and trip length of vehicles using the
road are usually lower than for principal or minor arterials, but higher than for local
roads.” Furthermore, KMC 14.20.320 defines a Collector as “…a street located and
designed for the primary purpose of carrying through traffic and of connecting major
areas of the City”. Pursuant to the submitted site plan, primary access to the subject
Commercial Marijuana Establishment (CME) would be from the Kenai Spur Highway,
and not through the surrounding residential neighborhood. Therefore, impacts to the
surrounding residential neighborhood should be minimal, with regards to vehicular
access.
Therefore, given the above discussion within the context of the proposed land-use
project, it seems reasonable the proposed Commercial Marijuana Establishment
would be consistent with the purpose of KMC 14.20.150 and the intent of the Limited
Commercial Zoning District given the compliance with staff recommended specific
conditions of approval.
(2) The value of the adjoining property and neighborhood will not be significantly
impaired;
The proposed development must be in compliance with the requirements of KMC
14.20.330 – Standards for Commercial Marijuana Establishments. In addition, the
proposed development must also be in compliance with Alaska Statue 17.38, an Act
to Tax and Regulate the Production, Sale, and Use of marijuana as well as Alaska
Administrative Code – Title 3 – Marijuana Control Board – Omnibus licensure
requirements and procedures for marijuana establishments.
Pursuant to KMC 14.20.010 – Land Use Table, a Retail Marijuana Store and a
Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard may be established in the Limited
Commercial Zone with a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, pursuant to KMC
14.20.330 – Standards for Commercial Marijuana Establishments, provisions have
been put in place to help mitigate impacts to the value of adjoining property and the
surrounding neighborhood.
Page 21 of 169
PZ16‐06 Staff Report
Page 4
Pursuant to the submitted application materials and a site visit by staff, the proposed
CME would comply with the requirements contained within KMC 14.20.330. As
reviewed by staff, the proposed CME would be contained within a fully enclosed
secure indoor facility as required by KMC 14.20.330(d), thereby, helping to mitigate
the potential impact to surrounding property owners. In addition, pursuant to KMC
14.20.330(e) all CME’s shall not emit an odor that is detectable by the public from
outside the CME. Pursuant to the submitted supplemental application materials,
under Section 2 the applicant has indicated that they will implement an Odor Control
Plan. The Odor Control Plan will consist of carbon filters and a negative-ion
generator. In addition, should odor if needed to further control odor, the applicant
would install an ozone generator within the attic spaces of the CME.
With regards to visual impacts and auditory impacts of the proposed CME, KMC
Chapter 14.25 details the requirements of the submission and approval of a
Landscape Site Plan. KMC 14.25.020 gives the requirements and in part states that
a Landscape Site Plan is required for all commercial development which requires a
change of use under KMC 14.20.250(a). The proposed project requires a change of
use under KMC 14.20.250(a) – Off-street parking and loading requirements requires
the submission of a Landscape Site Plan because the proposed use of the building is
a change of use. A Landscape Site Plan will be required to be approved by the
Planning Department prior to issuance of the Building Permit. The Landscape Site
Plan will need to demonstrate compliance with the off-street parking requirements in
KMC 14.20.250(8) for a “Store: Retail and wholesale sales of non-bulky items”,
which requires One (1) space per 300 square feet of gross floor area and a
“Nurseries and greenhouses” which requires One (1) space per 500 square feet of
gross floor area. Therefore, 2-spaces will be required for the Retail Marijuana Store
and 4 spaces will be required for the Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard for a
total of 6 off-street parking spaces. In addition, to reduce the visual impact of the
proposed CME, it is recommended that 10 new 6-inch diameter by a minimum of 6-
foot tall native spruce trees be planted in the southern section of the subject lot to aid
in natural screening.
In addition, to further minimize visual impacts of the proposed CME from the
adjacent single-family residences located to the west and south, staff recommends
that the existing 8-foot cedar fence which was built as part of the Landscape Site
Plan requirements in 1986 for the convenience/liquor be replaced. Staff further
recommends that the fence be extended to run the full length of the western property
line and be constructed as a “good neighbor” fence.
Pursuant to Alaska Statue 17.38, an Act to Tax and Regulate the Production, Sale,
and Use of marijuana as well as Alaska Administrative Code – Title 3 – Marijuana
Control Board – Omnibus licensure requirements and procedures for marijuana
establishments an appropriate license for a Marijuana Establishment will have to be
issued by the State of Alaska Marijuana Control Board. Staff therefore recommends
that a condition be added to require that prior to operation of the CME a copy of the
approved appropriate license be furnished to the City of Kenai.
Therefore, provided that all conditions recommended by staff and the Planning and
Zoning Commission are followed, staff believes that the value of the adjoining
property and neighborhood will not be significantly impaired.
Page 22 of 169
PZ16‐06 Staff Report
Page 5
(3) The proposed use is in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan;
The subject parcel is defined in the 2003 Comprehensive Plan as Neighborhood
Commercial. The plan defines Neighborhood Commercial as “The Neighborhood
Commercial district applies to areas along the arterial road system that are suitable
for small-scale neighborhood-serving retail, service, and office uses.” The Limited
Commercial Zone closely resembles the Mixed Use Zone in the 2003
Comprehensive Plan. The Mixed Use District fosters a compatible mix of retail,
service, office, public, institutional recreational and multi-family residential uses. The
district does not prescribe specific proportions for these uses, only that all these uses
are desirable within the district. The existing commercial building, which was built in
1986 has traditionally served in a small-scale neighborhood-serving retail capacity.
The proposed use of the existing building as a CME would be a similar type use in
that it is a small-scale neighborhood-serving retail use. The applicant has proposed
to remodel the exterior of the building to create a more modern looking structure that
would be clad in wood with earth-tone colors. As proposed, the proposed use would
be in harmony with the 2003 Comprehensive Plan and mixed use nature of the larger
surrounding neighborhood and is consistent with existing development along the
Kenai Spur Highway.
(4) Public services and facilities are adequate to serve the propose use;
The subject property is served by City water and sewer. City of Kenai police and fire
department resources are sufficient to serve the proposed use.
(5) The proposed use will not be harmful to the public safety, health, or welfare;
The proposed use is to establish and operate a Commercial Marijuana
Establishment consisting of an approximately 400-square-foot Retail Marijuana Store
and an approximately 800-square-foot Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard. The
proposed CME would be located within an existing approximately 2,256-square-foot
commercial building, located on an approximately 40,096-square-foot lot. Pursuant
to the submitted application, the CME would not emit an odor that is detectable by
the public from outside the CME pursuant to KMC 14.20.330(d). The CME would
also require the approval and issuance of a Standard Marijuana Cultivation Facility
license and a Retail Marijuana Store license from the State of Alaska Marijuana
Control Board. Both licenses are subject to the provisions found in Alaska Statue
17.38, an Act to Tax and Regulate the Production, Sale, and Use of marijuana as
well as Alaska Administrative Code – Title 3 – Marijuana Control Board – Omnibus
licensure requirements and procedures for marijuana establishments.
With regards to buffer distances as discussed in KMC 14.20.330(f)(1), the proposed
CME would not be located within 1,000 feet of any primary and secondary school (K-
12) or within 500 feet of any vocational program, post-secondary school including but
not limited to trade, technical, or vocational schools, college and universities,
recreation or youth centers, correctional facilities, churches, and state licensed
substance abuse treatment facilities providing substance abuse treatment.
Therefore, the proposed CME meets the buffer requirements of KMC 14.20.330(f)(1).
With regards to consumption of Marijuana and Marijuana Products within the
proposed Retail Marijuana, the applicant has indicated that they will not allow it to
take place. Thus, the operation of the proposed Retail Marijuana Store would
comply with Ordinance No. 2868-2015, which was approved by the Council of the
Page 23 of 169
PZ16‐06 Staff Report
Page 6
City of Kenai on January 6, 2016 and became effective February 5, 2016. Pursuant
to the subject Ordinance and Alaska Administrative Code - Title 3 – Marijuana
Control Board - Omnibus licensure requirements and procedures for marijuana
establishments, the consumption of Marijuana and Marijuana Products, would be
allowed within a designated area of a Retail Marijuana Store. However, the Alaska
State regulations do not provide any standards for which the Marijuana Control
Board would approve or disapprove a Retail Marijuana Store to permit consumption
of marijuana or marijuana products. Thus, it was in the best interest of the City of
Kenai pursuant to the above Ordinance to establish a moratorium prohibiting the
consumption of marijuana and marijuana products in Retail Marijuana Stores until
further guidance is provided by the Marijuana Control Board or State Legislature
ensures minimum health and safety standards are met to protect consumers, the
public, first responders, and employees of such establishments. Therefore, pursuant
to the above Ordinance a Moratorium is in effect for one year from the effective date
of the Ordinance, unless terminated sooner or extended by Ordinance of the City
Council.
Therefore, giving the above discussion and proposed conditions of approval, staff
believes that they proposed Commercial Marijuana Establishment, consisting of an
approximately 400-square-foot Retail Marijuana Store and an approximately 800-
square-foot Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard would not have a harmful impact
to the public safety, health or welfare.
(6) Any and all specific conditions deemed necessary by the commission to fulfill the
above-mentioned conditions should be met by the applicant. These may include, but
are not limited to measures relative to access, screening, site development, building
design, operation of the use and other similar aspects related to the proposed use.
1. Further development of the property shall conform to all Federal, State, and local
regulations.
2. Prior to issuance of the Building Permit, the property owner shall submit a
Landscape Site Plan for review and approval by Planning Administration. The
Landscape Site Plan shall demonstrate compliance with Kenai Municipal Code
Chapter 14.25 – Landscaping/Site Plan Regulations. The Landscape Site Plan
shall also include a provision for the planting of ten (10) 6-inch diameter native
spruce trees in the southern portion of the subject parcel to aid in visual
screening.
3. Prior to final inspection of the Building Permit for the remodeling of the existing
commercial building, the property owner shall construct an 8-foot tall “Good
Neighbor” cedar fence along the entire length of the western and southwestern
property lines. A Building Permit is also required for the construction of the cedar
fence. The cedar fence shall be maintained in perpetuity by the property owner.
4. Prior to operation of the Retail Marijuana Store and/or the Marijuana Cultivation
Facility, Standard, the property owner shall submit a copy of the approved and
fully executed license for the Retail Marijuana Store and the Marijuana
Cultivation Facility, Standard. The property owner shall comply with any and all
regulations as stipulated by the State of Alaska Marijuana Control Board.
Page 24 of 169
PZ16‐06 Staff Report
Page 7
5. A Sign Permit will be required for the construction of the proposed marquee sign
which is shown on the submitted floor plan and building elevations. Prior to
installation of any new signs, a Sign Permit shall be submitted to the City of
Kenai Planning Department for review and approval.
6. Pursuant to Kenai Municipal Code Section 14.20.150(f) the property owner shall
submit an Annual Report to the City of Kenai.
Page 25 of 169
PZ16‐06 Staff Report
Page 8
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the application and a review of the criteria required to approve the permit, it
appears the application meets the intent of the Limited Commercial Zone and complies
with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff therefore recommends approval with the following
conditions:
The issuance of the Conditional Use Permit shall be conditioned upon the following:
1. Further development of the property shall conform to all Federal, State, and local
regulations.
2. Prior to issuance of the Building Permit, the property owner shall submit a
Landscape Site Plan for review and approval by Planning Administration. The
Landscape Site Plan shall demonstrate compliance with Kenai Municipal Code
Chapter 14.25 – Landscaping/Site Plan Regulations. The Landscape Site Plan
shall also include a provision for the planting of ten (10) 6-inch diameter native
spruce trees in the southern portion of the subject parcel to aid in visual
screening.
3. Prior to final inspection of the Building Permit for the remodeling of the existing
commercial building, the property owner shall construct an 8-foot tall “Good
Neighbor” cedar fence along the entire length of the western and southwestern
property lines. A Building Permit is also required for the construction of the cedar
fence. The cedar fence shall be maintained in perpetuity by the property owner.
4. Prior to operation of the Retail Marijuana Store and/or the Marijuana Cultivation
Facility, Standard, the property owner shall submit a copy of the approved and
fully executed license for the Retail Marijuana Store and the Marijuana
Cultivation Facility, Standard. The property owner shall comply with any and all
regulations as stipulated by the State of Alaska Marijuana Control Board.
5. A Sign Permit will be required for the construction of the proposed marquee sign
which is shown on the submitted floor plan and building elevations. Prior to
installation of any new signs, a Sign Permit shall be submitted to the City of
Kenai Planning Department for review and approval.
6. Pursuant to Kenai Municipal Code Section 14.20.150(f) the property owner shall
submit an Annual Report to the City of Kenai.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. PZ16-06
2. Ordinance No. 2870-2016
3. Ordinance No. 2868-2015
4. Application
5. Supplemental Application Information
6. Site Plan
7. Map
8. Public Notice, Application for Marijuana Establishment License
Page 26 of 169
CITY OF KENAI
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. PZ16-06
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI
GRANTING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE AN
APPROXIMATELY 400-SQUARE-FOOT RETAIL MARIJUANA STORE AND AN
APPROXIMATELY 860-SQUARE-FOOT MARIJUANA CULTIVATION FACILITY, STANDARD,
WITHIN AN EXISTING APPROXIMATELY 2,256-SQUARE-FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING.
APPLICANT: Roger Boyd
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5455 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, AK 99611
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 6A1, Thompson Park 2013 Replat
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PARCEL NO: 04907032
WHEREAS, an application meeting the requirements of Section 14.20.150 has been submitted
and received on February 4, 2016; and,
WHEREAS, the application affects land which is zoned as Limited Commercial (LC); and,
WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing as required by Kenai Municipal Code 14.20.153
was conducted by the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 23, 2016; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has demonstrated with plans and other documents that the
prerequisites of a Conditional Use Permit have been met. Kenai Municipal Code 14.20.150
details the intent and application process for conditional uses. The code also specifies the
review criteria that must be satisfied prior to issuing the permit. The criteria are:
A. The use is consistent with the purpose of this chapter and the purposes and intent of the
zoning district.
The subject parcel is zoned Limited Commercial (LC), and is therefore subject to the
Principal Permitted and Conditional land-uses as shown on KMC 14.22.010 - Land Use
Table. Pursuant to Ordinance 2870-2016 as approved by the Council of the City of Kenai
on January 20, 2016 which became effective on February 19, 2016, a Retail Marijuana
Store and a Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard may be established and operated under
a Conditional Use Permit within the Limited Commercial Zone. The Limited Commercial
210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794
Telephone: 907-283-7535 / Fax: 907-283-3014
www.ci.kenai.ak.us
Page 27 of 169
Zone as outlined in KMC 14.20.115 is intended to provide transition areas between
commercial and residential districts by allowing low to medium volume businesses, mixed
residential and other compatible uses which complement and do not materially detract from
the uses allowed with adjacent districts.
In 2006, the subject parcel was rezoned from General Commercial to Limited Commercial,
which caused some businesses within the surrounding area to becoming nonconforming.
KMC 14.20.050(b) permits nonconformities to continue operating until such time as they are
removed or cease operation. Due to the subject parcel being rezoned, the
convenience/liquor store and gas station became legal nonconforming because an
Automotive Service Station could only be established with a Conditional Use Permit under
the Limited Commercial Zone.
Thus, its use was allowed to continue until it was closed in 2008 and remained closed for
twelve (12) consecutive months pursuant to KMC 14.20.050(e)(5), it could not be
reestablished except by a Conditional Use Permit.
As discussed above, on March 7, 2013 a Conditional Use Permit was approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission which allowed for the operation of an Internet/Retail
Business to sell seafood products. Given the intent of the Limited Commercial Zone which
allows a mixture of low to medium volume businesses mixed with residential and other
compatible uses a retail business would be appropriate within the zone. As discussed
above, the applicant has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to establish and operate a
Retail Marijuana Store and Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard within an existing
approximately 2,256-square-foot commercial building located on the subject parcel.
Pursuant to the submitted floor plan, the Retail Marijuana Store would occupy approximately
400-square-foot and the Marijuana Cultivation Facility would occupy approximately 860
square feet. The remaining, approximately 996 square feet would be used for an office,
work room, bathroom, storage room and mechanical room.
The Kenai Spur Highway is classified by the State of Alaska Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities as a Major Collector. A collector is defined as “A road classification
applicable to roads serving a mixture of local access and through traffic, for which the
volume, average speed, and trip length of vehicles using the road are usually lower than for
principal or minor arterials, but higher than for local roads.” Furthermore, KMC 14.20.320
defines a Collector as “…a street located and designed for the primary purpose of carrying
through traffic and of connecting major areas of the City”. Pursuant to the submitted site
plan, primary access to the subject Commercial Marijuana Establishment (CME) would be
from the Kenai Spur Highway, and not through the surrounding residential neighborhood.
Therefore, impacts to the surrounding residential neighborhood should be minimal, with
regards to vehicular access.
Therefore, given the above discussion within the context of the proposed land-use project,
it seems reasonable the proposed Commercial Marijuana Establishment would be
consistent with the purpose of KMC 14.20.150 and the intent of the Limited Commercial
Zoning District given the compliance with staff recommended specific conditions of
approval.
B.The value of the adjoining property and neighborhood will not be significantly impaired.
Page 28 of 169
The proposed development must be in compliance with the requirements of KMC 14.20.330
–Standards for Commercial Marijuana Establishments. In addition, the proposed
development must also be in compliance with Alaska Statue 17.38, an Act to Tax and
Regulate the Production, Sale, and Use of marijuana as well as Alaska Administrative Code
–Title 3 – Marijuana Control Board – Omnibus licensure requirements and procedures for
marijuana establishments.
Pursuant to KMC 14.20.010 – Land Use Table, a Retail Marijuana Store and a Marijuana
Cultivation Facility, Standard may be established in the Limited Commercial Zone with a
Conditional Use Permit. In addition, pursuant to KMC 14.20.330 – Standards for
Commercial Marijuana Establishments, provisions have been put in place to help mitigate
impacts to the value of adjoining property and the surrounding neighborhood.
Pursuant to the submitted application materials and a site visit by staff, the proposed CME
would comply with the requirements contained within KMC 14.20.330. As reviewed by staff,
the proposed CME would be contained within a fully enclosed secure indoor facility as
required by KMC 14.20.330(d), thereby, helping to mitigate the potential impact to
surrounding property owners. In addition, pursuant to KMC 14.20.330(e) all CME’s shall not
emit an odor that is detectable by the public from outside the CME. Pursuant to the
submitted supplemental application materials, under Section 2 the applicant has indicated
that they will implement an Odor Control Plan. The Odor Control Plan will consist of carbon
filters and a negative-ion generator. In addition, should odor if needed to further control
odor, the applicant would install an ozone generator within the attic spaces of the CME.
With regards to visual impacts and auditory impacts of the proposed CME, KMC Chapter
14.25 details the requirements of the submission and approval of a Landscape Site Plan.
KMC 14.25.020 gives the requirements and in part states that a Landscape Site Plan is
required for all commercial development which requires a change of use under KMC
14.20.250(a). The proposed project requires a change of use under KMC 14.20.250(a) –
Off-street parking and loading requirements requires the submission of a Landscape Site
Plan because the proposed use of the building is a change of use. A Landscape Site Plan
will be required to be approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance of the Building
Permit. The Landscape Site Plan will need to demonstrate compliance with the off-street
parking requirements in KMC 14.20.250(8) for a “Store: Retail and wholesale sales of non-
bulky items”, which requires One (1) space per 300 square feet of gross floor area and a
“Nurseries and greenhouses” which requires One (1) space per 500 square feet of gross
floor area. Therefore, 2-spaces will be required for the Retail Marijuana Store and 4 spaces
will be required for the Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard for a total of 6 off-street
parking spaces. In addition, to reduce the visual impact of the proposed CME, it is
recommended that 10 new 6-inch diameter by a minimum of 6-foot tall native spruce trees
be planted in the southern section of the subject lot to aid in natural screening.
In addition, to further minimize visual impacts of the proposed CME from the adjacent single-
family residences located to the west and south, staff recommends that the existing 8-foot
cedar fence which was built as part of the Landscape Site Plan requirements in 1986 for the
convenience/liquor be replaced. Staff further recommends that the fence be extended to
run the full length of the western property line and be constructed as a “good neighbor”
fence.
Pursuant to Alaska Statue 17.38, an Act to Tax and Regulate the Production, Sale, and Use
Page 29 of 169
of marijuana as well as Alaska Administrative Code – Title 3 – Marijuana Control Board –
Omnibus licensure requirements and procedures for marijuana establishments an
appropriate license for a Marijuana Establishment will have to be issued by the State of
Alaska Marijuana Control Board. Staff therefore recommends that a condition be added to
require that prior to operation of the CME a copy of the approved appropriate license be
furnished to the City of Kenai.
Therefore, provided that all conditions recommended by staff and the Planning and Zoning
Commission are followed, staff believes that the value of the adjoining property and
neighborhood will not be significantly impaired.
C.The proposed use is in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan.
The subject parcel is defined in the 2003 Comprehensive Plan as Neighborhood
Commercial. The plan defines Neighborhood Commercial as “The Neighborhood
Commercial district applies to areas along the arterial road system that are suitable for
small-scale neighborhood-serving retail, service, and office uses.” The Limited Commercial
Zone closely resembles the Mixed Use Zone in the 2003 Comprehensive Plan. The Mixed
Use District fosters a compatible mix of retail, service, office, public, institutional recreational
and multi-family residential uses. The district does not prescribe specific proportions for
these uses, only that all these uses are desirable within the district. The existing commercial
building, which was built in 1986 has traditionally served in a small-scale neighborhood-
serving retail capacity. The proposed use of the existing building as a CME would be a
similar type use in that it is a small-scale neighborhood-serving retail use. The applicant has
proposed to remodel the exterior of the building to create a more modern looking structure
that would be clad in wood with earth-tone colors. As proposed, the proposed use would be
in harmony with the 2003 Comprehensive Plan and mixed use nature of the larger
surrounding neighborhood and is consistent with existing development along the Kenai Spur
Highway.
D.Public services and facilities are adequate to serve the proposed use.
The subject property is served by City water and sewer. City of Kenai police and fire
department resources are sufficient to serve the proposed use.
E.The proposed use will not be harmful to the public safety, health or welfare.
The proposed use is to establish and operate a Commercial Marijuana Establishment
consisting of an approximately 400-square-foot Retail Marijuana Store and an approximately
800-square-foot Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard. The proposed CME would be
located within an existing approximately 2,256-square-foot commercial building, located on
an approximately 40,096-square-foot lot. Pursuant to the submitted application, the CME
would not emit an odor that is detectable by the public from outside the CME pursuant to
KMC 14.20.330(d). The CME would also require the approval and issuance of a Standard
Marijuana Cultivation Facility license and a Retail Marijuana Store license from the State of
Alaska Marijuana Control Board. Both licenses are subject to the provisions found in Alaska
Statue 17.38, an Act to Tax and Regulate the Production, Sale, and Use of marijuana as
well as Alaska Administrative Code – Title 3 – Marijuana Control Board – Omnibus licensure
requirements and procedures for marijuana establishments.
Page 30 of 169
With regards to buffer distances as discussed in KMC 14.20.330(f)(1), the proposed CME
would not be located within 1,000 feet of any primary and secondary school (K-12) or within
500 feet of any vocational program, post-secondary school including but not limited to trade,
technical, or vocational schools, college and universities, recreation or youth centers,
correctional facilities, churches, and state licensed substance abuse treatment facilities
providing substance abuse treatment. Therefore, the proposed CME meets the buffer
requirements of KMC 14.20.330(f)(1).
With regards to consumption of Marijuana and Marijuana Products within the proposed
Retail Marijuana, the applicant has indicated that they will not allow it to take place. Thus,
the operation of the proposed Retail Marijuana Store would comply with Ordinance No.
2868-2015, which was approved by the Council of the City of Kenai on January 6, 2016 and
became effective February 5, 2016. Pursuant to the subject Ordinance and Alaska
Administrative Code - Title 3 – Marijuana Control Board - Omnibus licensure requirements
and procedures for marijuana establishments, the consumption of Marijuana and Marijuana
Products, would be allowed within a designated area of a Retail Marijuana Store. However,
the Alaska State regulations do not provide any standards for which the Marijuana Control
Board would approve or disapprove a Retail Marijuana Store to permit consumption of
marijuana or marijuana products. Thus, it was in the best interest of the City of Kenai
pursuant to the above Ordinance to establish a moratorium prohibiting the consumption of
marijuana and marijuana products in Retail Marijuana Stores until further guidance is
provided by the Marijuana Control Board or State Legislature ensures minimum health and
safety standards are met to protect consumers, the public, first responders, and employees
of such establishments. Therefore, pursuant to the above Ordinance a Moratorium is in
effect for one year from the effective date of the Ordinance, unless terminated sooner or
extended by Ordinance of the City Council.
Therefore, giving the above discussion and proposed conditions of approval, staff believes
that they proposed Commercial Marijuana Establishment, consisting of an approximately
400-square-foot Retail Marijuana Store and an approximately 800-square-foot Marijuana
Cultivation Facility, Standard would not have a harmful impact to the public safety, health or
welfare.
WHEREAS, any and all specific conditions deemed necessary by the Planning and Zoning
Commission to fulfill the conditions as set forth below shall be met by the applicant. These
may include, but are not limited to measures relative to access, screening, site
development, building design, operation of the use and other similar aspects related to the
proposed use, as follows:
1.Further development of the property shall conform to all Federal, State, and local
regulations.
2.Prior to issuance of the Building Permit, the property owner shall submit a Landscape
Site Plan for review and approval by Planning Administration. The Landscape Site Plan
shall demonstrate compliance with Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 14.25 –
Landscaping/Site Plan Regulations. The Landscape Site Plan shall also include a
provision for the planting of ten (10) 6-inch diameter native spruce trees in the southern
portion of the subject parcel to aid in visual screening.
Page 31 of 169
3.Prior to final inspection of the Building Permit for the remodeling of the existing
commercial building, the property owner shall construct an 8-foot tall “Good Neighbor”
cedar fence along the entire length of the western and southwestern property lines. A
Building Permit is also required for the construction of the cedar fence. The cedar fence
shall be maintained in perpetuity by the property owner.
4.Prior to operation of the Retail Marijuana Store and/or the Marijuana Cultivation Facility,
Standard, the property owner shall submit a copy of the approved and fully executed
license for the Retail Marijuana Store and the Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Standard.
The property owner shall comply with any and all regulations as stipulated by the State
of Alaska Marijuana Control Board.
5.A Sign Permit will be required for the construction of the proposed marquee sign which
is shown on the submitted floor plan and building elevations. Prior to installation of any
new signs, a Sign Permit shall be submitted to the City of Kenai Planning Department for
review and approval.
6.Pursuant to Kenai Municipal Code Section 14.20.150(f) the property owner shall submit
an Annual Report to the City of Kenai.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA THAT THE APPLICANT HAS
DEMONSTRATED THAT THE PROPOSED OPERATION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 400-
SQUARE-FOOT RETAIL MARIJUANA STORE AND AN APPROXIMATELY 860-SQUARE-
FOOT MARIJUANA CULTIVATION FACILITY, STANDARD, WITHIN AN EXISTING
APPROXIMATELY 2,256-SQUARE-FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING MEETS THE
CONDITIONS REQUIRED FOR SAID OPERATION AND THEREFORE THE
COMMISSION DOES AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL TO ISSUE THE
APPROPRIATE PERMIT.
PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI,
ALASKA, this 23rd day of March, 2016.
Jeff Twait, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Sandra Modigh, City Clerk
Page 32 of 169
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
Page 33 of 169
March 16, 2016
Dear Mr. Kelley and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
Thank you for the opportunity to explain my opposition to the proposed operation of a commercial pot
growing and retail store in front of my home. Our property (4092 Lupine Dr.) is immediately adjacent to
5455 Kenai Spur Highway and we have first‐hand experience with the reality of sharing a fence line with
this specific business location, property owner, and some prior tenants.
My husband and I purchased our home from long‐time family friends in 2000. At that time, Mr. Boyd’s
property was occupied by a small convenience store and gas station. Over the next several years, we
learned what it meant to live with an erratic stream of sketchy, uninvited visitors prowling around our
side of the fence, untold amounts of garbage, empty liquor bottles, beer cans, and the occasional theft
of items from our property. After fruitless conversations with the store managers, it was evident there
would be no assistance in addressing any of these issues, so we were forced to chase off trespassers,
haul numerous bags of garbage to our own dumpster, and vigilantly keep our buildings and vehicles
locked up. This was not the Kenai in which I had grown up. Consequently, we were not unhappy when
the store closed and the gas station was dismantled.
During those same years, I had occasion to pay Kenai City Planner, Marilyn Kebschull, a couple of visits
regarding the property now referred to as 5455 Kenai Spur Highway. Marilyn did some research and
found that although Mr. Boyd was obligated by the City to install the fence that still stands, there was no
written provision for any maintenance or upkeep. We understood that there would be no assistance in
maintaining the fence, so we removed brush from the fence line, scraped moss from the planks, and cut
up and removed trees that fell on or around the fence.
The last visit with Marilyn was particularly frustrating. In one weekend, the store manager clear‐cut the
property to the south of the store, leaving that portion of the lot entirely devoid of any buffer between
our lot line and the Spur Highway ‐ a buffer we had been assured would be retained. Marilyn, too, was
surprised by this action, but was not optimistic that the City of Kenai would actually enforce the code or
place any sanctions on the individual or the property owner, regardless of the legality or propriety of
this action. While I appreciated her candor, I certainly did not savor the message, and she was right: The
City did nothing.
Fast forward. 2016 is upon us and we are now faced with an entirely new proposal from Mr. Boyd…a
Retail Marijuana Store and Cultivation Facility. Wow. Just wow. A social experiment operated for the
personal profit of a few, at what cost to the community?
When presented with the notice for application for a permit to operate a pot store, memories of the
traffic congestion at the intersection of Lupine Dr. and the Spur Highway caused by the gas station and
store customers immediately came to mind, as well as the loss of privacy from people using our
driveway to turn around, the frequent theft of our property and that of our neighbors, the burglaries
and robberies of the convenience store (one of which ended with the culprit being held at gun point
after being found hiding in our next door neighbor’s truck bed), the cacophony of noise from revved
engines and blaring music vibrating out of the cars circling the empty parking lot in the wee hours of the
night, the trespassers, the trash, the odd and sometimes frightening requests from people who think
nothing of driving or walking onto property close to a commercial enterprise.
Page 34 of 169
Without doubt, a commercial pot store operating in the same location will result in these same
circumstances as well as introducing a far more dangerous set of circumstances. In light of the past
history with this property, I have no confidence that the City of Kenai would enforce regulations or
provide the necessary oversight. Living with those conditions was unpleasant at the time, but at this
point in our lives we are unable to deal with such adversity.
Currently, our grandchildren, ages 2 and 4, live with us, and I am licensed to provide part‐time child care
for up to 5 children. It is unfathomable to me that any of my babies could be placed at risk merely
because some opportunistic adults want to grow and sell pot in front of our home. It is also dismaying
to learn that any hope of expanding my child‐care business would be immediately quashed because of
the establishment of a retail pot store 13 feet from our property.
Mr. Boyd proposes to establish an enterprise that will diminish the peace, safety and welfare of my
family and my neighbors. The expectation of “quiet enjoyment” of my home and property is stripped
away for the sake of a business that lends nothing in the way of community building.
Ordinance 2870‐2016 states that “Commercial Marijuana Establishments shall be a prohibited use as a
Home Occupation in order to preserve the character, health, and safety of neighborhoods (bold
added).” I would not be allowed to operate such an enterprise out of my home in order to safe guard my
neighborhood. However, a mere 13 feet away from my property line, a commercially rated building site
is free to do so with no harm to that same neighborhood? I simply do not understand.
Please consider:
In our immediate neighborhood there are recovering addicts who struggle to work their
programs. Some are not working quite so hard. A pot store will be a magnet for those addicts
and many others. As was evident with the previous liquor store, there are those who will imbibe
(legally or not) outside the store and those who just feel like hanging around. Is this an
enterprise that will ‘preserve the character, health, and safety of neighborhoods’?
Vehicular deaths and accidents on this stretch of the Spur Highway are numerous. Those
numbers will surely increase with the likelihood of impaired drivers crossing the heavily used
bike path, dealing with oncoming traffic, and merging into traffic. The costs and logistics of
providing commensurate police coverage will be shared by all city tax payers. Enjoying bike
rides and walks on the path will be difficult due to constant vigilance. Is this an enterprise that
will ‘preserve the character, health, and safety of neighborhoods’?
Mr. Boyd’s property has been the site of too many robbery attempts to ignore. Regardless of the
type or quality of security measures intended, there is always going to be that one optimistic
thug who will make an attempt to rob a marijuana store. I could no longer allow children to play
freely in a yard separated from this danger by a thin wooden fence. Is this an enterprise that
will ‘preserve the character, health, and safety of neighborhoods’?
Ordinance 2870‐2016 does not acknowledge the potential for diminished property values in
neighborhoods adjacent to a pot store, so I can only conclude that unlike those of us adversely
affected, the City of Kenai is unconcerned with this eventuality. At the same time, the city
comprehensive plan states that, “One of the goals of zoning is to achieve stable, livable
residential neighborhoods by separating them from incompatible uses (emphasis added).” So
Page 35 of 169
which is it? Do we build stable, livable neighborhoods, or allow businesses that jeopardize our
safety and welfare?
Ordinance 2870‐2016 (14.20.330) iterates standards for Commercial Marijuana Establishments,
including specific buffer distances that will be permitted between the CME and schools, youth
centers, churches, treatment facilities, etc. The functions of those facilities generally involve
protecting, educating or caring for a specific user group, many of whom are vulnerable children.
My grandchildren and potential daycare children are fewer in number, but no less deserving of
protection and nurturing. Is this an enterprise that will ‘preserve the character, health, and
safety of neighborhoods’?
Rather than simply insist that a commercial pot store is incompatible with the goals and purposes of a
residential neighborhood, I implore the City and P&Z Commission to consider where such a business
should become established; where it could thrive and provide the financial profits sought by the owners
as well as contribute to local and state tax coffers.
Similarly, because this is a precedent setting endeavor, it is incumbent upon all those involved to utilize
‘best practices’ not only in choosing the site location, but in presenting this particular business model to
the citizens of our City, Borough and State.
Colorado resident Gina Carbone observed that a commercial marijuana establishment results in
“Socializing the costs and privatizing the profits”. This simple sentence is the very essence of my
objections to a CME in the wrong location.
Kenai City Center or the proposed Millennium Square is a logical location for a commercial marijuana
enterprise. In both areas there are numerous locations where this business ‘can be efficiently served
with public roads, utilities and services; maintains the quality of existing development; and creates a
stable, predictable setting for future investment.’ (City of Kenai Comprehensive Plan)
Being mindful that the business Mr. Boyd and his business partners propose is a highly polarizing issue
will go a long way in helping to create a scenario that provides a successful outcome for all.
I appreciate your time and consideration.
Regards,
Christine Cook
4092 Lupine Dr.
Kenai
907.252.7929
Page 36 of 169
March 17, 2016
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
I am submitting written testimony to be included in the record for review in regards to the application for a
conditional use permit for 5455 Kenai Spur Highway (PZ16-06). I reside at 4092 Lupine Drive, which is adjacent
to that property, and I request that this conditional use permit be denied for the safety of my children and the best
interests of our neighborhood.
I have two small children and I am afraid for their safety. If this drug dealership is placed in our neighborhood, it
will not only damage the public safety and welfare, it will specifically endanger my children. I urge you to reject
this conditional use permit because, if this pot growing and distribution center is placed in our neighborhood, it
will:
Endanger Children:
Because it is within 75 Feet of a School: It has been determined that marijuana establishments shall not
be located within 1,000ft of any school. The public entrance of the proposed drug facility is only 75ft
away from the outer parcel boundaries of our property, which is used as a homeschool. Our preschooler is
enrolled in a statewide correspondence program (since September 2015) and attends school full-time in
our home. He is an Alaskan public school student with the same rights as any other public school student,
which includes the right to be free from the dangers of retail drug dealerships operating within 1000ft of
his school. My children must be afforded the same level of protection given to any other Alaskan student.
The intent of current legislation is clear: drug related trades must be kept away from children. Placing this
drug dealership next to our property violates that goal and places my children at risk.
By Exposing Children and Youth in our Neighborhood to Drug Users: If the Planning and Zoning
Commission and the City Council permit this drug establishment, it will place my children and the other
children and youth of our neighborhood in close proximity to drug users. A reasonable and prudent
person would not locate a commercial pot growing and distribution center in a residential neighborhood
where young children and youth live and play, exposing them to drug users and drug activity and
threatening their safety.
Drug addiction is rampant in Alaska; it is highly likely that some of the individuals who frequent the
proposed drug establishment will be addicted to drugs much more dangerous than marijuana, such as
heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, etc. As a mother, I am petrified that drug users will be frequenting a
store within 13ft of where my children live and play (the back of the facility is only 13 feet away from our
front property line). There is nothing keeping these individuals from entering our property and threatening
my children. In the past, unsavory individuals have trespassed onto my family’s property from the
property in question when it was operating as a retail store. These individuals skulked along the fence line
on our property while scoping out my family’s belongings. Furthermore, the property owner has not
maintained the partial, deteriorating fence (which is at least 25 years old) between our properties (for
example, there is currently a tree, which has fallen down from his property, laying over the fence and it
has not be removed). The fence, which does not even span the entire length of his property, offers no
protection from individuals entering our property from his. Although the city required him to build that
fence originally, his lack of maintenance has contributed to putting our property and safety at risk in the
past—a risk that will only be increased by opening a marijuana growing and distribution center.
The reality is, whether or not the property owner implements safety measures (like putting up a fence
around his entire property), the facility will still present a safety hazard to our neighborhood. The safety
of our children and neighborhood youth, along with the kids who walk and ride their bikes on the public
bike path that goes through the 5455 Kenai Spur Highway property, will be fundamentally jeopardized if
this drug dispensary is established.
Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, I ask you to consider whether or not you would
like a commercial pot growing and distribution center operating directly next to your homes or next to
any location where your children play and ride their bikes. The profits from this drug dealership are not
Page 37 of 169
more valuable or more important than the safety of my children and the safety and wellbeing of the other
children in our neighborhood.
By Increasing Crime: When the property in question was run as a retail store, there were multiple
robberies, some of which involved guns, and neighborhood thefts. The risk of more burglaries and crime
increases greatly when marijuana is the primary commodity exchanged. We will see a rise in criminal
activity in our neighborhood and specifically in front of our home. It only takes one stray bullet to kill a
child. My children will be a mere 13ft away from this threat. Please, do not allow this danger into our
neighborhood.
Create a Private Nuisance:
By destroying our right to reasonable expectations of peace and quiet enjoyment of our home. If this
drug establishment is approved to operate 13 feet away from our property line, it will damage our peace
and the quiet enjoyment of our home. Our family has worked diligently for years to create a lovely and
wholesome place to live. Now we can expect to have constant drug activity within feet of our home; it
will be accompanied by increased traffic, bright security lights, police activity, unsavory members of the
public roaming around, and increased criminal activity.
My family and I are trying to raise and educate our children in a wholesome, healthy, and safe
environment. We should not be forced to move from our home for the sake of a business owner who is
seeking to grow his personal wealth at the expense of our children’s safety and welfare. Do the members
of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council of Kenai want to push responsible families
out of the city? That is exactly what will happen if you set a precedent for allowing drug emporiums to be
established in residential neighborhoods, directly next to the homes of small children and youth.
I request that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council:
Find a More Suitable Location: I ask that you find a more suitable location for a pot growing and
distribution center within the city. There are many other commercially zoned locations that are away from
residential areas, schools, and public parks. This business does not need to be placed in our neighborhood
and can easily be located in a safer more appropriate area with other businesses that cater to adult
entertainment.
Conduct Thorough Risk Assessments: Before establishing a drug dealership in our neighborhood, we
insist that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council perform a thorough health impact
assessment, social impact assessment, and economic impact assessment of the proposed retail drug
dealership on our neighborhood and on the Kenai community.
Provide Updated Communication: I request that you provide me with immediate notice of all public
and executive proposals, deliberations, findings, determinations, and legislation on this issue.
In summary, I urge the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission to reject this conditional use
permit. Allowing a drug dealership in a residential neighborhood is a socially irresponsible and morally
reprehensible action that will damage the public safety and welfare. If you allow the first retail marijuana
establishment in Alaska to operate in a residential neighborhood, you will be establishing a dreadful precedent
and violating your responsibility to provide “Zoning Regulations that protect the public peace, health, safety and
welfare.”
Please do not endanger my children by allowing drug dealers and drug users to conduct business within a few
feet of our front yard. My children are entitled to live, learn, and play in their own home, school, and yard without
fear. Again, I beg you not to grant this conditional use permit for 5455 Kenai Spur Highway.
Sincerely,
Megan Green
4092 Lupine Dr.
Kenai, AK 99611
Page 38 of 169
1
Matthew Kelley
From:CL Jones <cynthia.l.jones@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, March 19, 2016 12:04 PM
To:Matthew Kelley
Subject:Fwd: Public Notice - Urgent
Attachments:1032376.pdf; 1032472.pdf; 10056.pdf
Please advice on how a disabled home owner can protest this action? We discovered this notice on a nearby
building upon entry to our neighborhood. Not only will it open doors to potential criminal activities, it will
bring down our home values hence we may never be able to sell our homes. We were not notified of this
proposal via US mail and quite by accident discovered the Public Notice on the building.
We are a family that lives on Lupine Drive and feel that we are being disenfranchised by current limits on
placement of this type facility in residential neighborhoods. Is there not a public online link to oppose such
action when you cannot physically appear?
Cynthia L Jones
4055 Lupine Dr
Kenai, AK 99611
Phone: 907-283-0903 - 907-283-0902
E-mail: Cynthia.L.Jones@gmail.com
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: CL Jones <cynthia.l.jones@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 11:23 AM
Subject: Public Notice - Urgent
To: ed@mopalaska.com
Ed,
I was able to locate a copy of public notice online in addition the big yellow sign on the building door reads as
follows:
Lot 6A1 - Thompson Park 2013 Replat 5455 Kenai Spur Highway - Conditional Use Permit - Retail Marijuana
Sales and Cultivation... (I am unsure of exact language). Meeting is proposed at planning zone March 23, 2016
7:00 PM. Please see attached Documents.
Page 39 of 169
2
Please let me know if I can help with this. We do not want such an establishment in our neighborhood. Not only
will it reduce our property values it will attract potential criminal activities, and not be safe for the children in
our neighborhood.
Let these people move there business to commercial entities that would not affect residential environments.
They can do business in areas where people live.
Cynthia L Jones
4055 Lupine Dr
Kenai, AK 99611
Phone: 907-283-0903 - 907-283-0902
E-mail: Cynthia.L.Jones@gmail.com
Page 40 of 169
1
Matthew Kelley
From:Barbara Patrick <barbarapatrick55@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, March 20, 2016 8:18 AM
To:Matthew Kelley
Subject:Fwd: application for permit/retail marijuana store
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Barbara Patrick <barbarapatrick55@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:17 AM
Subject: application for permit/retail marijuana store
To: mkelley@kenai.city
Good Day,
My home is at 4093 Lupine Drive. I am one of the three closest homes to the proposed application address
being reviewed. I look out my dining and living room windows on the property in question.
I do not believe this is an appropriate business to place in a largely residential area. I have been pondering this
for several days and any way I look at it I do not see how this is a good thing. I feel it will jeopardize the safety
and security of my home and my neighbors homes. I also think it has the distinct possibility of lowering
property values in my neighborhood and making a situation in which it is more difficult to sale our properties if
we so wish.
I also think it will be an expense to the City of Kenai. Regulating such a business with such vague operating
procedures is bound to have large expenses attached. As a citizen of Kenai, I do not care to "foot the bill",
especially at this time of statewide fiscal instability.
Please consider these things carefully before you approve this application.
Sincerely,
Barbara Patrick
4093 Lupine Drive
Kenai
953-9207
Page 41 of 169
Page 42 of 169
1
Matthew Kelley
From:Chris Wakem <bakenwake@gci.net>
Sent:Tuesday, March 22, 2016 4:09 PM
To:Matthew Kelley
Subject:PZ16-06
Dear Sirs,
I am a recent property owner in Thompson Park (275 Fireweed Lane) and chose the neighborhood as a quiet, safe,
family‐friendly place to dwell.
The application for conditional use Permit Marijuana retail/cultivation is NOT what a residential neighborhood should
entertain.
We all know that Marijuana Retail/distribution should be located close to law enforcement for their business’s best
interest…my understanding is that this business will be cash only transactions, and a lot of cash will be readily available
to steal!
The entrance to the store has NO turning lane off of Kenai Spur Highway….another large problem.
NO! to this application.
Thank you for your time in this matter.
Christina Wakem
Page 43 of 169
1
Matthew Kelley
From:JONATHAN WAKEM <bakenwake@gci.net>
Sent:Wednesday, March 23, 2016 8:56 AM
To:Matthew Kelley
Subject:PZ16-06
Mr. Kelley,
Regarding PZ16-06 Application for Conditional Use Permit to operate a retail marijuana store at 5455 Kenai Spur Highway, I would like
to state that I am vehemently opposed to having an establishment of this nature in my neighborhood. I am a resident of Thompson Park
and thoroughly enjoy the quiet, friendly, and safe atmosphere shared by the entire neighborhood. Having a retail marijuana store at the
proposed location would not only change the atmosphere and vibe of the area, increase traffic through the neighborhood, increase the
likelihood of traffic accidents on the Spur, and jeopardize the safety of the tax-paying residents of the neighborhood.
I'm sure that Mr. Boyd would be able to find a more suitable location for his cash-only Federally-illegal enterprise, perhaps in a more
industrial area or in another area where the residents are more open to accepting this sort of business and the collateral impacts.
To coin an old phrase: NIMBY - Not In My Back Yard
Thank you,
Jonathan Wakem
Page 44 of 169
SITE PLAN & MAP
Page 45 of 169
Pa
g
e
46
of
16
9
SH
A
G
I
N
O
F
F
S
U
B
D
.
LOTS
2
0
,
2
1
,
2
2
&
2
3
O
F
B
L
O
C
K
8
& BL
O
C
K
S
9
&
1
0
O
F
V
A
L
H
A
L
L
A
HEIG
H
T
S
S
U
B
D
.
N
O
.
1
2013REPLAT
9
1112
21
20
10
19
22
2
6A
1013
14
1
2
3
3
23
19
4A
19
23
21
18
22
20
9
8A
7A
(3)
2
5
5
5
5
5
1
2
6
5
5
5
1
9
4085
2
7
5
4080
340340
5
5
0
1
5
5
0
1
32
0
310
5
4
5
5
32
0
310
4084
40
8
8
4092
4093
4084
4
0
8
8
4092
2
5
5
5
5
5
1
2
6
5
5
5
1
9
4085
2
7
5
4080
4093
4110
5
3
2
6
2
7
0
5
5
0
4
5
4
5
6
4115
4105
5
3
9
2
5
3
7
0
5
3
9
1
5
3
6
0
5
3
2
8
5
2
9
6
5
3
4
5
5
3
2
6
2
7
0
5
5
0
4
5
4
5
6
4115
4105
4110
5
3
9
2
5
3
7
0
5
3
9
1
5
3
6
0
5
3
2
8
5
2
9
6
5
3
4
5
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
R
D
F
I
R
E
W
E
E
D
L
N
TH
O
M
P
S
O
N
P
L
2
5
5
5
5
5
1
2
6
5
5
5
1
9
4085
2
7
5
4080
340340
5
5
0
1
5
5
0
1
32
0
310
5
4
5
5
32
0
310
4084
40
8
8
4092
4093
4084
4
0
8
8
4092
2
5
5
5
5
5
1
2
6
5
5
5
1
9
4085
2
7
5
4080
4093
4110
5
3
2
6
2
7
0
5
5
0
4
5
4
5
6
4115
4105
5
3
9
2
5
3
7
0
5
3
9
1
5
3
6
0
5
3
2
8
5
2
9
6
5
3
4
5
5
3
2
6
2
7
0
5
5
0
4
5
4
5
6
4115
4105
4110
5
3
9
2
5
3
7
0
5
3
9
1
5
3
6
0
5
3
2
8
5
2
9
6
5
3
4
5
.
125 '
Date: 3/18/2016
The information depicted hereon is for graphic representationonly of the best available sources. The City of Kenai assumes no responsibility for errors on this map.
1 inch equals 125 feet
Lot 6A1Thompson Park2013 Replat
Text
Pa
g
e
47
of
16
9
ELEVATIONS AND FLOOR PLAN
Page 48 of 169
Pa
g
e
49
of
16
9
Pa
g
e
50
of
16
9
Pa
g
e
51
of
16
9
Pa
g
e
52
of
16
9
SITE PICTURES
Page 45 of 165Page 53 of 169
-i-
l
Pa
g
e
54
of
16
9
Page 55 of 169
Page 56 of 169
Page 57 of 169
APPLICATION
Page 58 of 169
Page 59 of 169
Page 60 of 169
Page 61 of 169
Page 62 of 169
Page 63 of 169
Page 64 of 169
Page 65 of 169
Page 66 of 169
Page 67 of 169
Page 68 of 169
Page 69 of 169
Page 70 of 169
Page 71 of 169
Page 72 of 169
Page 73 of 169
Page 74 of 169
Page 75 of 169
Page 76 of 169
Page 77 of 169
Page 78 of 169
Page 79 of 169
Page 80 of 169
Page 81 of 169
ORDINANCE NO. 2870‐2016 AND
ORDINANCE NO 2868‐2015
Page 82 of 169
Page 83 of 169
Page 84 of 169
Page 85 of 169
Page 86 of 169
Page 87 of 169
Page 88 of 169
Page 89 of 169
Page 90 of 169
Page 91 of 169
Page 92 of 169
Page 93 of 169
Page 94 of 169
Page 95 of 169
Page 96 of 169
Page 97 of 169
Page 98 of 169
Page 99 of 169
Page 100 of 169
Page 101 of 169
Page 102 of 169
Page 103 of 169
Page 104 of 169
Page 105 of 169
Page 106 of 169
Page 107 of 169
Page 108 of 169
Page 109 of 169
Page 110 of 169
Page 111 of 169
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 112 of 169
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Matt Kelley, City Planner
DATE: April 7, 2016
SUBJECT: PZ16-10 – All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
At your regular meeting of March 23, 2016, the Planning & Zoning Commission held a Work
Session and discussed the process involved with updating the All-Hazard Mitigation Plan. Since
that meeting myself, the Police Chief, Fire Chief, Public Works Director and City of Kenai
Administration have reviewed the plan further and amended based on your comments. The
plan is presented in a draft form for your consideration.
We thank you for your involvement in the process and welcome any comments you may have
for any revisions. If you approve the plan, we will submit it for consideration by the State of
Alaska Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management for further review. After
it’s review by the State, it will be sent to the Federal Emergency Management Agency for
approval and then back to the City for adoption by the City Council.
Thank you for your consideration.
210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794
Telephone: 907-283-7535 / FAX: 907-283-3014
Page 113 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 1
City of Kenai
ANNEX to the
Kenai Peninsula Borough
Local All Hazard
Mitigation Plan
(References to “the Plan” in this Annex refer to the 2016
Kenai Peninsula Borough All Hazard Mitigation Plan)
Page 114 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 2
Table of Contents
I. Introduction ................................................................................................................3
A. Purpose of the Plan
B. Methodology
C. City of Kenai History and Background
II. Adoption Process and Documentation .......................................................................7
III. Planning Process ........................................................................................................9
A. How was it Done
B. Who were the Contributors
C. Public Opportunity for Involvement
IV. Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment .................................................................10
A. Hazard Identification
B. Profile of Hazard Events
C. Vulnerability Assessments
D. Analysis of Development Trends
V. Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Strategies .............................................................27
A. Floods
B. Wildland Fires
C. Erosion
D. Volcanoes
E. Earthquakes
F. Tsunami
VI. Implementation and Maintenance Procedures ...........................................................30
A. Implementation
B. Maintenance
Appendices
A. Glossary of Terms ..............................................................................................31
B. Acronyms ...........................................................................................................42
Page 115 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 3
Chapter I - Introduction
A. Purpose of the Plan:
The purpose of the All-Hazard Mitigation Plan is to fulfill the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) requirement under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act (the Act), Section 322, Mitigation Planning enacted by Section 104 of the Disaster
Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA) (P.L. 106-390). This initiative provides new and revitalized
approaches to mitigation planning. Section 322 emphasizes the need for State, local and tribal entities
to closely coordinate mitigation planning and implementation efforts. As part of the process of
implementing the DMA, FEMA prepared an Interim Final Rule (the Rule) to clearly establish the
mitigation planning criteria for State, local and tribal governments. This Rule was published in the
Federal Register on February 26, 2002, at 44 CFR Part 201. This plan will identify hazards, establish
community goals and objectives, and develop mitigation strategies and activities that are appropriate
for the City of Kenai.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000), Section 322 (a-d), as implemented through 44
CFR Part 201.6 requires that local governments, as a condition of receiving federal disaster
mitigation funds, have a mitigation plan that describes the process for identifying hazards, risks and
vulnerabilities, identifying and prioritizing mitigation actions, encouraging development of local
mitigation and providing technical support for those efforts.
The purpose of this plan is to produce a program of activities through actions and projects that will
best deal with the City of Kenai’s hazard problems, while meeting other community needs. This plan
will accomplish the following objectives consistent with FEMA planning process guidelines:
Describe the planning process to include public involvement and conduct an
assessment of the risks
Determine what facilities, or portions of infrastructure, are vulnerable to a disaster
Develop a mitigation strategy to reduce potential losses and target resources
Describe how each entity will periodically evaluate, monitor maintain and update the
plan
Describe the process for implementing the plan after adoption by the local governing
body of the community and receiving FEMA approval
B. Methodology
The approach used for the development and updating of the City of Kenai Annex to the Kenai
Peninsula Borough All-Hazard Mitigation Plan consisted of the following tasks:
1. Coordinate with other agencies and organizations.
2. Solicit public involvement.
3. Conduct hazard area inventory.
4. Review and analysis of possible mitigation activities.
Page 116 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 4
5. Describe the update and review process and schedule for plan maintenance.
6. Coordinating the Plan with the State Hazard Mitigation Plan.
7. Submitting to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer for Review.
8. Submitting to FEMA Region 10 for Review and Approval.
9. Adoption of the Plan following a public hearing.
This All Hazard Local Mitigation Plan contains a list of potential projects and a brief rationale or
explanation of how each project or group of projects contributes to the overall mitigation strategy
outlined in the plan.
This plan summarizes the activities outlined above to assess the effects of hazards in the City of
Kenai such as: flooding, earthquake, wildfire, volcanic eruption and fallout and bluff erosion etc. and
recommends mitigation strategies and activities. The City of Kenai annexes to the plan describe
specific hazards experienced by the City: floods, wild-land fires, erosion, tsunami, earthquakes and
volcanoes.
The mitigation plan will be evaluated and updated every five-years. In addition, the plan will be
updated, as appropriate when a disaster occurs that significantly affects the City of Kenai, whether or
not it receives a Presidential Declaration. The update will be completed as soon as possible, but no
later than 12 months following the date the disaster occurs.
Routine maintenance of the plan will include updating historical hazard information, completing
hazard analysis and adding projects, as new funding sources become available or taking projects off
the list when they are accomplished.
C. City of Kenai - Background
Location
The City of Kenai is located on the western coast of the Kenai Peninsula, fronting Cook Inlet. It lies
on the western boundary of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, on the Kenai Spur Highway, from
mile post 4 to 15. It is approximately 65 air miles and 155 highway miles southwest of Anchorage
via the Sterling Highway. It lies at approximately 60.55444° N and -151.25833° W. (Sec. 05, T005N,
R011W, Seward Meridian.)
The City of Kenai is located in the Kenai Recording District. The city limits area encompasses 29.9
square miles of land and 5.6 square miles of water.
Climate
Winter temperatures range from -34F to 44F; summer temperatures vary from 37F to 75F. Average
annual precipitation is 18.16 inches.
History
Kenai’s motto is a “Village with a past, City with a future”. The community has strong physical and
cultural links to its long and rich settlement history. Kenai’s past has shaped its present. Its
settlement history has framed both the cultural setting and the physical pattern of growth.
Page 117 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 5
Long before Russian fur traders first arrived in Alaska in 1741, there was a thriving Dena’ina
Athabascan Indian Village on the high bluff overlooking Cook Inlet near the mouth of the Kenai
River. At that time, about 1,000 Dena’ina lived there in a village called Shk’ituk’t. The fur traders
called the people “Kenaitze”, or “Kenai people”. The Russians built Fort St. Nicholas at Kenai in
1791 as an outpost. By the time British Explorer Captain George Vancouver visited in 1794, about
40 Russians occupied the outpost. The Russian Orthodox religion took root, and Kenai’s oldest
buildings are Orthodox-related: a log rectory built about 1886; the Holy Assumption of the Virgin
Mary Orthodox Church (1895); and the nearby log chapel (1906). After the United States purchased
Alaska from Russia in 1867, Americans took over Fort St. Nicholas, calling it Fort Kenay. A log
wall and two blockhouses protected a barracks, and the church and priest’s residences.
The first dirt road from Anchorage was constructed in 1951. In 1957, oil was discovered at Swanson
River, 20 miles northeast of Kenai - the first major Alaska oil strike. The City was incorporated in
1960. In 1965, offshore oil discoveries in Cook Inlet fueled a period of rapid growth. Kenai has been
a growing center for oil exploration, production and services since that time.
Culture
The Kenai River is a major sport fishing location for Anchorage residents and tourist from all over
the world. The river is world renown for trophy King as well as plentiful Silver salmon and Sockeye
Salmon runs. Thousands of Alaska residents flock to the mouth of the Kenai River every July to
harvest hundreds of thousands of Sockeye salmon for subsistence purposes. The Kenaitze and
Salamatof Indians live throughout the Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB) and utilize the rich resources
of Cook Inlet.
Population and Economy
In January of 2015 The Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
(DCCED) certified Kenai’s population at 7,229 people. Kenai is incorporated as a Home Rule City.
The City is the center of the oil and gas industry, providing services and supplies for Cook Inlet's oil
and natural gas drilling and exploration. Tesoro Alaska's oil refining operation is located in North
Kenai. Both in-state and out-of-state visitors provide a significant industry on the Peninsula.
Other important economic sectors include sport, subsistence and commercial fishing, fish processing,
transportation services, construction and retail trade.
The largest employers within the City of Kenai are: The Sovereign Nation of the Kenaitze Indian
Tribe, Homer Electric Company, Enstar Natural Gas Company, The Home Depot, the City of Kenai
and Walmart.
Facilities
Domestic water is supplied by four deep wells in the Beaver Creek aquifer near Well House 2,
located at approximately mile 6 of the Kenai Spur Highway. Treated water is piped to approximately
75% of households with the remaining 25% of households utilizing individual water wells and septic
systems. In 2012, a Water Treatment facility was built at the Well House 2 site and was operational
that same summer. These upgrades are the result of the City of Kenai meeting mandated
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) arsenic standards for public water supplies. Sewage is
Page 118 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 6
piped and treated to a sewage treatment facility located at South Spruce Street.
Predominately, residential & commercial use for heating is supplied by the Enstar Natural Gas
Company. Electricity for the communities is supplied by Homer Electric Association, which
operates the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project and is part owner of the Alaska Electric Generation
& Transmission Cooperative. It also purchases electricity from Chugach Electric.
A Borough refuse transfer station is located on Redoubt Ave. The Borough landfill is located in
nearby Soldotna, at mile 110.4 Sterling Highway.
Transportation
Kenai is accessible by the Sterling Highway to Anchorage, Fairbanks, Canada and the lower 48
states. The City-owned Kenai Municipal Airport provides a 7,855 grooved asphalt runway, a 2,000-
foot gravel strip, and a 4,600-foot water runway. The airport has a contract control tower and the
Automated Flight Service Station is located across the street from the Airport. The Kenai City Dock
and boat ramp are located near the mouth of the Kenai River. There are also a number of private
commercial fish processing docks. Moorage is by buoys anchored in the Kenai River.
Page 119 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 7
Chapter II - Adoption Process and Documentation
The City of Kenai Annex to the Kenai Peninsula Borough All-Hazards Mitigation Plan was
developed as part of a multi-jurisdictional plan; therefore, to meet the requirements of Section 322
the plan was adopted by the City as well as the Borough.
In March, April 2016, the City of Kenai administration made revisions to the plan and submitted the
updated version for review to the Planning & Zoning Commission who; advertised, and discussed
updates to the plan. Based on this public discussion and review the plan was further updated. Kenai
Municipal Code requires that public hearings must be advertised in the local newspaper a minimum
of seven days prior to the public hearing. The City’s code also requires that the notices be posted in
three public places a minimum of ten days prior to the hearing. Notices were posted at the U.S. Post
Office, State Courthouse, and Kenai City Hall public bulletin boards. Meeting agendas, resolutions
and ordinances are posted on the City of Kenai and Kenai Peninsula Borough web pages prior to the
scheduled meetings. Public hearing notices for the Hazard Mitigation Plan were advertised in the
Peninsula Clarion on March 18, April 6, and April 8, 2016 for the Planning Commission meetings
that were held on March 23, April 13, 2016. The public hearing process was the primary method of
encouraging outside coordination/involvement from neighboring communities, agencies, businesses,
academia, non-profits, and other interested parties.
The City of Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission approved the updated plan by Resolution PZ16-
06 on April 13, 2016. The Kenai City Council held a public hearing on (Will insert date here once
back from FEMA) and adopted Resolution (Will insert once back from FEMA) adopting the updated
“All Hazard Mitigation Plan.” Related resolutions are available for review in the office of the Kenai
City Clerk at 210 Fidalgo Street, Kenai, Alaska 99611.
City administration referenced in this document includes the following:
City Planner
Police Chief
Fire Chief
Airport Manager
Public Works Director
City Manager
Planning & Zoning Commission
Kenai City Council
Page 120 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 8
SAMPLE
Sample All Hazard Mitigation Plan Adoption Resolution
Resolution # _______
Adopting the City of Kenai All Hazards Mitigation Plan
Whereas, the City of Kenai recognizes the threat that all hazards pose to people and property;
and
Whereas, undertaking hazard mitigation actions before disasters occur will reduce the potential
for harm to people and property and save taxpayer dollars; and
Whereas, an adopted all hazards mitigation plan is required as a condition of future grant
funding for mitigation projects; and
Whereas, the City of Kenai participated jointly in the planning process with the other local units
of government with the Borough to prepare an updated All Hazards Mitigation Plan;
Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the City of Kenai City Council, hereby adopts the updated
City of Kenai All Hazards Mitigation Plan as an official plan; and
Be it further resolved, that the Kenai Peninsula Borough will submit on behalf of the
participating municipalities the adopted All Hazards Mitigation Plan to the Alaska Division of
Emergency Services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency officials for final review
and approval.
Passed:
Certifying Official
Page 121 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 9
Chapter III - Planning Process
A. How was it Done
In 2016 the City of Kenai administration updated the 2010 City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The existing 2010 plan was a thorough enough platform that monumental changes were not
necessary. The 2016 review resulted in an update of outdated or inaccurate information. The city
administration compiled all pertinent data and completed a draft plan with subsequent review and
input by the City of Kenai Planning Commission. After review and input by the Planning
Commission, the Commission’s recommendation was forwarded to the Kenai City Council for public
hearing and formal adoption by resolution. (See Chapter II, Adoption Process and Documentation)
B. Who were the Contributors
The following groups contributed to the 2016 All Hazard Mitigation Plan;
The City of Kenai Public Works and Planning Department
The City of Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission
Public and private sectors
The City of Kenai Public Safety departments
The Kenai Peninsula Borough Office of Emergency Management.
C. Public Opportunity for Involvement
The following methods were used to provide opportunities for public involvement;
A Work Session and a Public Meetings held by the Planning and Zoning Commission and
City Council
The City of Kenai and KPB websites
Newspaper notices
Public hearing notices
Public meeting agendas
See page 7 of this report for full details on public opportunities for involvement.
Page 122 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 10
Chapter IV- Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment
Historically, all of the identified natural hazards that could affect the City of Kenai are relatively rare
in occurrence and have low impact when they do occur. As a result, there have been no significant
mitigation actions taken since the 2010 plan. However, the City is proud of the maintenance actions
that have taken place since 2010, such as the Spruce Bark Beetle Mitigation, FireWise education
programs and the continuing pursuit of funding to complete the bluff erosion project proposed by the
Army Corps of Engineers.
A. Hazard Identification
Hazard Matrix - CITY OF KENAI
Flood Wildland Fire Earthquake Volcano Snow Avalanche Tsunami &
Seiche
Y/H Y/H Y/H Y/M N Y/L
Weather Landslides Erosion Drought Technological Economic
Y/H N/L Y/H U/L U/L U/L
Hazard Identification:
Y: Hazard is present in jurisdiction but probability unknown
N: Hazard is not present
U: Unknown if the hazard occurs in the jurisdiction
Risk:
L: Hazard is present with a low probability of occurrence
M: Hazard is present with a moderate probability of occurrence
H: Hazard is present with a high probability of occurrence
B. Hazard Profile (NOTE: References to “the Plan” refer to the KPB
All Hazard Mitigation Plan
Flood
Please reference the Plan for detailed flood events affecting the City of Kenai and Kenai Peninsula.
Kenai is at the mouth of the Kenai River, on the shores of Cook Inlet. The summary of historical
flood events shows clearly that the City is adversely affected by nearly all significant events.
For example, in 1995, as referenced in the Plan, flood events resulted in tremendous debris flowing
downstream into the City limits. There have been no floods since 1995 that have affected the City of
Kenai. City service including police, fire, public works and the administration were mobilized using
City boats, vehicles, and safety equipment to intercept and extract huge quantities of debris such as
docks, sheds, large Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) tanks, fuels storage tanks and damaged boats
Page 123 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 11
from the Kenai River before this debris caused further property damage and before it could flow into
Cook Inlet shipping lanes.
Collected debris was extracted using City Dock resources and cranes, then stockpiled on
approximately two acres of Dock property for safe keeping, identification, pollution prevention,
retrieval by owners and eventual disposal.
City personnel patrolling the Kenai River for debris also assisted many private and commercial
property owners in securing loose docks, boats and other debris before it could be swept downstream,
and before this debris caused additional property and ecological damage.
This process within City limits was conducted entirely with City incident management teams.
Coordinated records, reports and financial records were physically delivered to the Borough offices
by a runner on a daily basis.
The City public safety building served as the incident command site for the duration of this event,
coordinating efforts with the Boroughs temporary command site in Soldotna by phone and periodic
face-to face meetings.
City staff remained on-duty for several days, incurring tens of thousands of dollars in personnel
costs. Resources such as cars, trucks, loaders, fire engines, ambulances, survival equipment and
ropes, buildings and fuel were committed to this event. Damage to equipment was experienced and
was later reimbursed through FEMA.
The City of Kenai is not currently participating in the National Flood Insurance Policy (NFIP)
program. The City of Kenai has no repetitive loss properties.
See “Flood” map in appendix for areas most likely to receive negative impact from flooding.
Wildland Fires
Dead and dying spruce trees pose the greatest risk of wild fire on the entire Kenai Peninsula. Within
the City, trees infested by the spruce bark beetle became a mitigation priority in the late 1990’s, with
firefighters conducting door-to-door educational campaigns in high-risk neighborhoods delivering
information packets to homeowners on how to develop a defensible space around their properties.
The City proactively pursued a fire mitigation plan that resulted in the clearing of dead and dying
spruce from approximately 700 acres of public and private land. Funding for these projects was
facilitated through the Kenai Peninsula Borough Spruce Bark Beetle Mitigation program. The Kenai
Peninsula Borough and the City of Kenai worked cooperatively to identify high hazard areas. Local
contractors provided hazard mitigation under the Borough funded program (which is no longer
active). Logistically, the reduction in fuels within the City has enabled State Forestry resources to
free themselves to patrol other nearby communities, and has reduced wildfire activity within the City.
Damage from fallen trees during heavy wind storms has dropped drastically within the City. Homer
Electric Association has attributed this reduction directly to the City’s pro Firewise actions.
Page 124 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 12
The current drop point for land clearing debris (trees and brush) is at the Kenai Peninsula Borough
landfill located in Soldotna, Alaska.
The City in cooperation with the KPB and State Forestry continue to provide Firewise Communities
educational material to homeowners to enable them to prepare their homes in the event of a wildfire.
Historically significant fires within the City included the 1969 Swanson River Fire and the Swires
Road fire in the mid-1980’s. More recently, the Central Kenai Peninsula experienced significant
wildfires in 2014 and 2015; however, neither of these fires burned inside the City limits of Kenai.
City of Kenai Firefighters provided mutual aid to Central Emergency Services (CES).
The City annually experiences small wildland fires throughout the summer months. The City of
Kenai Fire Department and State Forestry responded to cooperatively to these fires. (Jeff to rewrite)
The City continues to educate the public on the dangers of wildfire in the City, and efforts to identify
and remove wildland fire hazards continue as well.
All areas within the City of Kenai have equal risk of Wildland fires.
Coastal Storms
From the fall through the spring, low pressure systems either develop in the Bering Sea or Gulf of
Alaska or are brought to the region by wind systems in the upper atmosphere that tend to steer storms
in the north Pacific Ocean toward Alaska. When these storms impact the shoreline, they often bring
wide swathes of high winds and occasionally cause coastal flooding and erosion.
The intensity, location and the land’s topography influence the storm’s impact. Another factor that
influences the damage done to the shoreline by coastal storms is whether or not the shore-fast ice is
solid enough to protect against erosion and physical damage to community infrastructure.
Fierce storm conditions do not have to be present to cause damage. The City of Kenai community
suffers from “Silent Storms” where high-water storm surges erode and undercut the banks melting
the permafrost.
Erosion is a process that involves the wearing away, transportation, and movement of land. Erosion
rates can vary significantly as erosion can occur quite quickly as the result of a flash flood, coastal
storm or other event. It can also occur slowly as the result of long-term environmental changes.
Erosion is a natural process but its effects can be exacerbated by human activity.
Erosion rarely causes death or injury. However, erosion causes the destruction of property,
development or infrastructure. In Alaska, coastal erosion is the most destructive. Riverine erosion is a
close second and wind erosion is a distant third.
Classifying erosion can be confusing, as there are multiple terms to refer to the same type of erosion.
For example, riverine erosion may be called stream erosion, stream bank erosion, or riverbank
erosion, among other terms. Coastal erosion is sometimes referred to as tidal land forming gullies.
Page 125 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 13
It is also caused by erosion. For heavy snow or rainfall, this annex, coastal erosion encompasses bluff
and beach erosion while riverine erosion will be considered synonymous for stream erosion, stream
bank erosion and riverbank erosion.
See “Flood” and “Erosion” maps in appendix for areas most likely to receive negative impact
from flooding.
Erosion
The Kenai River meanders through the City of Kenai.
There is about a mile of 55 to 70-foot-high eroding river
bluff in the downtown center of the City. A comparison
of aerial photos over 50 years reveals approximately 150
feet of horizontal distance of erosion. This equals an
average of three feet of erosion per year. There is a
similar erosion problem along the Cook Inlet where the
bluff even gets higher.
Major erosion occurs when there is a high tide and large
storm waves that carry away the base material of the
bluff making the slopes steeper. These steeper slopes are
more susceptible to erosion by wind and surface or
ground water.
The City of Kenai has lost land and structures due to the
erosion. Roads have been abandoned and sewer mains
relocated. In 2000, a sewer line was relocated due to the
erosion on Mission Avenue. The relocation of the line
and subsequent roadwork was in excess of $300,000
(Funded through State of Alaska Capital Improvements
funding).
After years of studies, the City of Kenai is planning a
Bluff Stabilization Project that will stop the erosion
process along the Kenai River in the Downtown Area.
The US Army Corps of Engineers is completing a multi-million-dollar study and the engineering for
this project. The City of Kenai has received appropriations in the amount approximately $4,000,000
from the State of Alaska for this project. On May 4th and 5th, 2016 the US Army Corps of Engineers
held a two-day Planning Charrette to reevaluate the scope and costs of the proposed Kenai Bluffs
Stabilization Section 116 Feasibility Study. The City has appropriated $585,000 thus far for the
project in funding to the US Army Corps of Engineers to complete the study. It is anticipated that
they US Army Corps of Engineers will finish the final feasibility study by August 2017.
See “Erosion” map in appendix for areas most likely to receive negative impact from flooding.
Definitions:
Groin - A narrow, elongated coastal-
engineering structure built on the beach
perpendicular to the trend of the beach. Its
purpose is to trap long shore drift to build up a
section of beach
Jetty - A narrow, elongated coastal-
engineering structure built perpendicular to the
shoreline at inlets to stabilize the position of a
navigation channel, to shield vessels from
wave forces, and to control the movement of
sand along adjacent beaches to minimize the
movement of sand into a channel.
Seawall - A vertical, wall-like coastal-
engineering structure built parallel to the beach
or dune line and usually located at the back of
the beach or the seaward edge of the dune.
They are designed to halt shoreline erosion by
absorbing the impact of waves.
Revetment - An apron-like, sloped, coastal
engineering structure built on a dune face or
fronting a seawall. Designed to dissipate the
force of storm waves and prevent undermining
of a seawall, dune or placed fill.
Page 126 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 14
Coastal Erosion
Coastal erosion is the wearing away of land resulting in loss of beach, shoreline, or dune material
from natural activity or human influences. Coastal erosion occurs over the area roughly from the top
of the bluff out into the near-shore region to about the 30 foot water depth. It is measured as the rate
of change in the position or horizontal displacement of a shoreline over a period of time. Bluff
recession is the most visible aspect of coastal erosion because of the dramatic change it causes in the
landscape. As a result, this aspect of coastal erosion usually receives the most attention. On the
coast, the forces of erosion are embodied in waves, currents, and wind. Surface and ground water
flow, and freeze-thaw cycles may also play a role. Not all of these forces may be present any
particular location.
Coastal erosion can occur from rapid, short-term daily,
seasonal, or annual natural events such as waves, storm
surge, wind, coastal storms, and flooding or from
human activities including boat wakes and dredging.
The most dramatic erosion often occurs during storms,
particularly because the highest energy waves are
generated under storm conditions.
Coastal erosion also may be from multi-year impacts
and long-term climatic change such as sea-level rise,
lack of sediment supply, subsidence or long-term
human factors such as the construction of shore
protection structures and dams or aquifer depletion.
Studies are underway to determine the effects
generated from global warming. Ironically, attempts to
control erosion through shoreline protective measures
such as groins, jetties, seawalls, or revetments, can
actually lead to increased erosion activity.
This is because shoreline structures eliminate the
natural wave run-up and sand deposition processes and
can increase reflected wave action and currents at the
waterline. The increased wave action can cause
localized scour both in front of and behind structures
and prevent the settlement of suspended sediment.
Fortunately in Alaska, erosion is hindered by
bottomfast ice, which is present on much of the Arctic
coastline during the winter. These areas are fairly
vulnerable while the ice is forming. The winds from a
fall storm can push sea ice into the shorefast ice,
driving it onto the beach. The ice will then gouge the beach and cause other damage.
In 2009, the City of Kenai added permanent fencing to the north beach dunes to help ensure this
Erosional and depositional processes:
Degradation: Lowering of the channel bed on a
substantial reach length occurring over a
relatively long period of time in response to
disturbances that affect general watershed
conditions, such as sediment supply, runoff
volume, and artificial channel controls.
Aggradation: Rising of the channel bed as a
result of disturbances in watershed conditions
that produce the opposite effect to those leading
to degradation.
General Scour: Lowering of the streambed in a
general area as consequences of a short duration
event such as the passage of a flood. Examples
are the erosion zones near bridge abutments and
those in the vicinity of gravel pits.
Local Scour: Lowering of the bed due to
localized phenomena such as vortex formation
around bridge piers.
Deposition: Rising of the streambed due to
specific episode. An example is the formation
of a sand bar after a flood event. Deposition is
used in this document as the counterpart of
general scour.
Lateral Migration: Shifting of the stream bank
alignment due to a combination of the above
vertical erosional and depositional processes.
The most common example is meander
migration in the floodplain. Bank retreat due to
mass failure is another example.
Page 127 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 15
natural barrier will adequately prevent bluff erosion. The fencing will help ensure that man-made
destruction of vegetation does not compromise the integrity of the dunes. A similar fencing project
was completed in the summer of 2010 on the south beach. The dunes were at risk of destruction
from the annual personal use dipnet fishery if the fencing was not installed.
In 2014 a subdivision consisting of multiple phases and 48 lots at full build-out has recently been
recorded within the City of Kenai. The subdivision is located along the bluffs has bluff-top lots
which overlook the Cook Inlet. To further combat erosion the City of Kenai and the Kenai Peninsula
Borough required the identification of a setback of 50 feet from the top of the slop for septic systems.
This setback will help to ensure that effluent does not discharge into Cook Inlet in the event of
further bluff erosion in this area.
Factors Influencing the Erosion Process
There are a variety of natural and human-induced factors that influence the erosion process. For
example, shoreline orientation and exposure to prevailing winds, open ocean swells, and waves all
influence erosion rates. Beach composition influences erosion rates as well. For example, a beach
composed of sand and silt, such as those near Shishmaref, are easily eroded whereas beaches
primarily consisting of boulders or large rocks are more resistant to erosion. Other factors may
include:
Shoreline type
Geomorphology of the coast
Structure types along the shoreline
Density of development
Amount of encroachment into the high hazard zone
Proximity to erosion inducing coastal structures
Nature of the coastal topography
Elevation of coastal dunes and bluffs
Shoreline exposure to wind and waves
Page 128 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 16
Coastal Erosion in Alaska
Coastal erosion is a problem in all 30 coastal states, including Alaska. A 1971 U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) study showed that just less than 11% of Alaska’s coastline was undergoing
“significant” erosion. This may not sound like much but it means that approximately 5,100 miles of
Alaska’s coast is experiencing “significant” erosion. That’s more than most states have in coastline.
When undeveloped coastlines undergo erosion, it does not present a problem because there is nothing
to be damaged. However, in developed areas, primarily along the western and northern coasts of
Alaska and the Cook Inlet, erosion is a significant threat. In extreme cases, an entire community can
be threatened in these areas such as the City of Kenai, Shishmaref and Point Hope. Usually, only
part of a community is at risk. For example, most of Kenai is unaffected by erosion; however, large
sections of the City’s coast, including the Historic District, and residential areas are.
Riverine Erosion
Rivers constantly alter their course, changing shape and depth, trying to find a balance between the
sediment transport capacity of the water and the sediment supply. This process, called riverine
erosion, is usually seen as the wearing away of riverbanks and riverbeds over a long period of time.
Riverine erosion is often initiated by failure of a riverbank causing high sediment loads or heavy
rainfall. This generates high volume and velocity run-off which will concentrate in the lower
drainages within the river’s catchment area. When the stress applied by these river flows exceeds the
resistance of the riverbank material, erosion will occur. As the sediment load increases, fast-flowing
rivers will erode their banks downstream. Eventually, the river becomes overloaded or Velocity is
reduced, leading to the deposition of sediment further downstream or in dams and reservoirs. The
deposition may eventually lead to the river developing a new channel. While all rivers change in the
long-term, short-term rates of change vary significantly. In less stable braided channel reaches,
erosion and deposition of material are a constant issue. In more stable meandering channels,
episodes of erosion may only occur occasionally. The erosion rate depends on the sediment supply
and amount of run-off reaching the river. These variables are affected by many things including
earthquakes, floods, climatic changes, loss of bank vegetation, urbanization, and the construction of
civil works in the waterway. Riverine erosion has many consequences including the loss of land and
any development on that land. It can cause increased sedimentation of harbors and river deltas. It
can hinder channel navigation and affect marine transportation source.
Other problems include reduction in water quality due to high sediment loads, loss of native aquatic
habitats, damage to public utilities (roads, bridges, and dams) and maintenance costs associated with
trying to prevent or control erosion sites.
In 2014, the City of Kenai implemented a No Wake Zone along VIP Subdivision during the
Personal Use Fishery, in response to complaints from residents caused by boat wakes during
extreme high tides.
Page 129 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 17
Riverine Erosion in Alaska Input Research Data
Examples of riverine erosion are found throughout Alaska that threatens both public and private
property. Presently tracking the permitting process for bank stabilization, there is no riverine erosion
within the City of Kenai requiring mitigation.
Erosion on the Kenai River, predominantly outside the City of Kenai, is of great concern to
resource management agencies because the increased sedimentation and loss of streamside cover
associated with accelerated erosion rates may threaten salmon returns to the river. Salmon fishing on
the Kenai generates significant revenue to the local economy each year.
Wind Erosion
Wind erosion is when wind is responsible for the removal, movement and redeposition of land. It
occurs when soils are exposed to high-velocity wind. The wind will pick up the soil and carry it
away. The wind moves soil particles 0.1-0.5 mm in size in a hopping or bouncing fashion (known
as saltation) and those greater than 0.5 mm by rolling (known as soil creep). The finest particles (less
than 0.1 mm) are carried in suspension. Wind erosion can increase during periods of drought.
Wind erosion can cause a loss of topsoil, which can hinder agricultural production. The dust can
reduce visibility causing automobile accidents, hinder machinery, and have a negative effect on air
and water quality creating animal and human health concerns. Wind erosion also causes damage to
public utilities and infrastructure.
Volcanoes
Historic Volcanic Activity
The largest volcanic eruption of the 20th century occurred at Novarupta Volcano in June 1912. It
started by generating an ash cloud that grew to thousands of miles wide during the three-day event.
Within four hours of the eruption, ash started falling on Kodiak, which is located approximately 250
miles southwest of the City of Kenai, darkening the city. It became hard to breathe because of the
ash and sulfur dioxide gas. The water became undrinkable and unable to support aquatic life. Roofs
collapsed under the weight of the ash. Some buildings were destroyed by ash avalanches, while
others burned after being struck by lightning from the ash cloud. Similar conditions could be found
all over the area. Some villages ended up being abandoned, including Katmai and Savonoski villages
located across the Shelikof Straights from Kodiak Island. The ash and acid rain also negatively
affected animal and plant life. Large animals were
blinded and many starved because their food was
eliminated.
The ash fall from this eruption was significantly
greater than the recent eruptions of Redoubt, Spur
and Augustine Volcanoes. Fourteen earthquakes of
magnitude 6 to 7 were associated with this event.
At least 10 Alaskan volcanoes are capable of this
type of event.
Page 130 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 18
A more recent eruption occurred on Augustine Volcano in 1986. An ash plume disrupted air traffic
and deposited ash in Anchorage. A dome formed in the crater, and caused some to fear it would
subsequently collapse and trigger a tsunami along the east shore of Cook Inlet, as happened in 1883.
Redoubt Volcano erupted in 1989-1990 and debris flows caused temporary closing of the Drift River
Oil Terminal. A similar eruption event occurred again in 2009 effecting the offloading of 3.7 million
gallons of crude oil from the oil terminal. Media reports, the Kenai Peninsula Borough OEM website,
and the Kenai communications center, located in and operated by the Kenai Police Department,
adequately informed citizens of volcano precautions. The City government took steps to minimize
damage to vehicles, buildings, and computer equipment. The City of Kenai administration feels the
above actions were more than adequate to help mitigate potential damage from volcanic ash fallout to
residential and commercial assets.
During the 1990 event, a KLM 747 jet aircraft, flight 867, temporarily lost power in all four engines
when it entered the volcanic ash plume. It would have crashed into the mountains had they not be
able to restart their engines about 4,000 feet (1,219 meters) above ground.
All areas within the City of Kenai have equal risk of effects from volcanic activity.
Earthquake
Alaska is one of the most seismically active regions in the world. Alaska has had 3 of the 10 of the
largest earthquakes ever recorded. Earthquakes of magnitude 7 or greater occur in Alaska on average
of about once a year; magnitude 8 earthquakes average about 13 years between events.
On January 24, 2016 at 1:30am a 7.1 magnitude quake occurred 53 miles west of Anchor Point. The
City of Kenai felt the greatest impact when a gas line broke on Lilac Lane. There were two house
explosions, and a total of four homes completely burned down on Lilac Ln. on the same morning of
the Earthquake. City Public Safety personnel promptly evacuated Lilac Ln. to help ensure that there
was no loss of life or injury following the first explosion. Enstar Natural Gas Company worked for
days to repair the gas line. Local businesses suffered economic loss from product that fell off of
shelves; but there was no significant structural loss to commercial businesses. This earthquake was
described as the largest ever felt by some residents who have lived in Alaska for decades.
Commercial and residential structures withstood this high magnitude quake without significant
structural damage, which is a testament to the strict building codes in place in Kenai.
Hazard Analysis/Characterization
Most large earthquakes are caused by a sudden release of accumulated stresses between crustal plates
that move against each other on the earth’s surface. Some earthquakes occur along faults that lie
within these plates. The dangers associated with earthquakes include ground shaking, surface
faulting, ground failures, snow avalanches, seiches and tsunamis. The extent of damage is dependent
on the magnitude of the quake, the geology of the area, distance from the epicenter and structure
Page 131 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 19
design and construction. A main goal of an earthquake hazard reduction program is to preserve lives
through economical rehabilitation of existing structures and construction of safe new structures.
Ground shaking is due to the three main classes of seismic waves generated by an earthquake. P
(primary) waves are the first ones felt, often as a sharp jolt. S (shear or secondary) waves are slower
and usually have a side to side movement. They can be very damaging because structures are more
vulnerable to horizontal than vertical motion. Surface waves are the slowest, although they can carry
the bulk of the energy in a large earthquake. The damage to buildings depends on how the specific
characteristics of each incoming wave interact with the buildings’ height, shape, and construction
materials.
Earthquakes are usually measured in terms of their magnitude and intensity. Magnitude is related to
the amount of energy released during an event while intensity refers to the effects on people and
structures at a particular place. Earthquake magnitude is usually reported according to the standard
Richter scale for small to moderate earthquakes. Large earthquakes, like those that commonly occur
in Alaska are reported according to the moment-magnitude scale because the standard Richter scale
does not adequately represent the energy released by these large events.
Intensity is usually reported using the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale. This scale has 12
categories ranging from not felt to total destruction. Different values can be recorded at different
locations for the same event depending on local circumstances such as distance from the epicenter or
building construction practices. Soil conditions are a major factor in determining an earthquake’s
intensity, as unconsolidated fill areas will have more damage than an area with shallow bedrock.
Surface faulting is the differential movement of the two sides of a fault. There are three general
types of faulting. Strike-slip faults are where each side of the fault moves horizontally. Normal
faults have one side dropping down relative to the other side. Thrust (reverse) faults have one side
moving up and over the fault relative to the other side.
Earthquake-induced ground failure is often the result of liquefaction, which occurs when soil (usually
sand and course silt with high water content) loses strength as a result of the shaking and acts like a
viscous fluid. Liquefaction causes three types of ground failures: lateral spreads, flow failures, and
loss of bearing strength. In the 1964 earthquake, over 200 bridges were destroyed or damaged due to
lateral spreads. Flow failures damaged the port facilities of Seward, Valdez, and Whittier. Similar
ground failures can result from loss of strength in saturated clay soils, as occurred in several major
landslides that were responsible for most of the earthquake damage in Anchorage in 1964. Other
types of earthquake-induced ground failure include slumps and debris slides on steep slopes.
All areas within the City of Kenai have equal risk of Earthquake effects.
Tsunamis
As defined by the Kenai Peninsula Borough, areas or concern for tsunami impacts within the
Borough are divided into geographical zones. Due to resource limitations, smaller KPB coastal
communities are currently not scheduled for tsunami mapping. Without these maps, communities
must rely on historical or estimated information for land use and evacuation route planning
Page 132 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 20
Coastal areas with potential tsunami risk in the North Zone begin at the north side of the mouth of the
Kenai River and continue north up the coast, including the west side of Cook Inlet. Due to the
relatively shallow depth of upper Cook Inlet and the substantial distance from areas to the south with
significantly higher risk, the upper Inlet is believed to have low tsunami risk
Central Zone
The areas of concern in the Central Zone begin at the south side of the mouth of the Kenai River and
continue south to Clam Gulch. Due to the relatively shallow depth of upper Cook Inlet and the
substantial distance from the lower end of Cook Inlet, the Central Zone is believed to have a low
tsunami risk.
Earthquakes are a natural occurrence that can occur anywhere in Alaska and are a common cause of
tsunamis. The City of Kenai is located adjacent to Cook Inlet between the North and Central zones.
It is unknown if a tsunami has ever had a significant destructive effect on the land mass where the
coastal city of Kenai lies. Given the high coastal bluffs protecting much of Kenai, and a lack of
historical documentation of a destructive tsunami in Kenai, the City administration feels tsunami’s
pose a low threat to the City’s people and property.
Page 133 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 21
Economic
Hazard Analysis/Characterization
Economic disasters can result from uncontrollable natural events that have large negative effects on a
region's economic base. Unfortunately, economic disasters also result from poor business practices
and public policies that inhibit competition. An economic disaster declaration does not trigger the
availability of disaster assistance in the manner of a natural or technological disaster, but it can
provide the basis for seeking and receiving financial assistance. For example, the declaration of an
economic disaster for fisheries led to the availability of assistance through provisions of the
Magnusen-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act and the Interjurisdictional Fisheries
Act in 1998, 1999 and 2000. In other instances, a disaster declaration has been unnecessary to secure
Assistance. For example, when Southeast Alaska pulp mills closed, extensive worker assistance was
provided through the Job Training Partnership Act and the Trade Adjustment Act; funds were made
available for projects through the Economic Development Administration, the U,S. Forest Service
(USFS) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)-Rural Development.
Economic disaster mitigation is not usually done by emergency management agencies, as these
agencies are oriented to natural and technological disasters. Instead, it is essentially performed by
economic development agencies. These agencies or any segment of Government cannot create
private economies even though they have an historic and legitimate role in fostering opportunities for
economic development. Government's role cannot be to create or replace the marketplace, but to
recognize and understand it, and help its citizens capitalize on the opportunities. Economic
development agencies have programs designed to build, broaden and diversify the economic base by
fostering economic development, and/or creating an environment in which economic development
can flourish.
Public infrastructure, sensible regulations, public-private partnerships, efficient and coordinated
service delivery, industry advocacy, marketing, economic analysis, and the dissemination of timely
information all represent legitimate venues for government to promote economic development.
Approaches to Economic Development
Economic development can be promoted in a variety of ways, using a variety of approaches.
These approaches can overlap with one another and are not meant to represent distinctly separate
strategies, but to be illustrative. These approaches are also dynamic; state strategies evolve
accordingly. Economic development approaches include:
Industrial recruitment - competing for the siting of large industrial or manufacturing
companies by promoting advantages such as tax abatement, transportation access or
developed industrial locations.
Targeted incentives analysis - using regional economic and workforce to match the most
suitable type of industry for particular areas.
Page 134 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 22
Quality of life - promoting recreation and leisure opportunities, quality schools, cultural
entities, low crime rates, a skilled workforce and clean air and water, to attract new
business.
Tax abatement - offering property tax abatement and other forms of tax relief as a
development incentive.
Workforce development - training the resident workforce for existing and anticipated
jobs created through policy-based development initiatives, evolving technology, etc. For
example, showcasing well-educated workforces, where higher than average percentages
of workers have high school degrees or college diplomas.
Resource endowments - promoting the existence of natural resource endowments to
attract extractive industries.
The new economy - promoting an adaptable, consumer-friendly, technology savvy,
innovative, performance-driven and accountable environment to attract technology-based
and knowledge-based industries.
Web-based economic information systems - developing web sites, often using boroughs
or sub-state regions as portals, to display and link to comprehensive economic
information providing users with easy access.
Regional partnerships - promoting regional organizations to implement community and
regional economic development priorities. These organizations are like a two-way door
with local and regional issues, problems and priorities passing upward to the agencies,
and agency programs, funding and technical assistance passing downward to the
benefiting populations.
Assessing Risk
The first step to long-term mitigation is understanding which economies are at risk and which
economies have the best chance to reduce risks through public and private investments. Ways to
quantify economic risks include:
Identifying comparative advantages in order to produce goods or services better than a
competitor
Monitoring long-term supply and demand trends
Measuring the diversity of end-product markets
Measuring the size and diversity of base industries
Measuring the growth rates in employment, income and gross sales
Page 131 of 165Page 135 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 23
Monitoring the relative dependence on imports
Assessing the skill levels in the workforce
Assessing the infrastructure needs to reduce transportation and energy costs
Risk can then be used to evaluate and rank economies on their potential resilience during an
economic downturn. Perhaps more importantly, when risks are regularly monitored, economic
information is more freely shared, creating fewer uncertainties.
C.Vulnerability Assessments
Earthquake & Volcanic: All City facilities are vulnerable to volcanic ash fallout and seismic
activity. Protective measures are in place to minimize damage such as housing emergency
generators inside and meeting construction standards for the seismic zone.
Erosion: The Senior Center, Congregate Housing (Vintage Pointe Manor) and Wastewater
Treatment Plant are more vulnerable to erosion damage than the remainder of City facilities.
The City has taken steps to preserve the integrity of protective dunes by installing permanent
fencing.
Flood: City Dock facilities are somewhat vulnerable to flood conditions, but were constructed
with those events in mind, and generally remain usable in a flood event.
Fire: The City maintains a defensible space around all City facilities as a preventative measure
for wildland fires.
Emergency Planning: An emergency plan is in place for critical infrastructure, evacuation
districts, emergency notification and housing. The Kenai Police and Fire Departments work
closely with local school administrators in planning to be self-sufficient during disasters which
may isolate schools for three or more days. The following table describes the critical facilities for
the City of Kenai. Without these facilities loss of life and human suffering is certain.
Page 132 of 165Page 136 of 169
Ci
t
y
o
f
K
en
a
i
A
l
l
H
a
z
a
r
d
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
F
i
n
a
l
–
J
u
l
y
,
2
0
1
6
Pa
g
e
2
4
Ha
z
a
r
d
M
a
t
r
i
x
f
o
r
CI
T
Y
O
F
K
E
N
A
I
F
l
o
o
d
W
i
l
d
f
i
r
e
E
a
r
t
hq
u
a
k
e
V
o
l
c
a
n
o
T
s
u
n
a
m
i
W
e
a
t
h
e
r
L
a
n
d
s
l
i
d
e
s
E
r
o
s
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
00
.
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
X
X
X
X
X
01
.
F
i
r
e
X
X
X
X
02
.
P
o
l
i
c
e
X
X
X
X
04
.
H
e
a
l
t
h
C
l
i
n
i
c
X
X
X
05
.
S
c
h
o
o
l
X
X
X
07
.
E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
X
X
X
X
X
X
08
.
T
e
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
X
X
X
X
X
10
.
W
a
s
h
e
t
e
r
i
a
X
X
X
11
.
H
a
r
b
o
r
/
D
o
c
k
/
P
o
r
t
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
12
.
L
a
n
d
f
i
l
l
/
I
n
c
i
n
e
r
a
t
o
r
X
X
X
13
.
M
u
s
e
u
m
X
X
X
X
14
.
L
i
b
r
a
r
y
X
X
X
X
15
.
R
o
a
d
X
X
X
X
X
X
16
.
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
H
a
l
l
X
X
X
17
.
P
a
r
k
X
X
X
X
X
19
.
C
e
m
e
t
e
r
y
X
X
X
20
.
O
f
f
i
c
e
s
X
22
.
W
W
T
P
X
X
X
X
X
23
.
T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
s
X
25
.
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
/
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
X
X
26
.
B
r
i
d
g
e
X
X
X
X
X
27
.
P
o
s
t
O
f
f
i
c
e
X
X
X
28
.
R
a
d
i
o
T
r
a
n
s
m
i
t
t
e
r
X
X
X
29
.
R
e
s
e
r
v
o
i
r
/
S
u
p
p
l
y
(
w
a
t
e
r
)
X
X
X
30
.
Se
n
i
o
r
C
e
n
t
e
r
/
C
o
n
g
r
e
g
a
t
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
X
X
X
X
X
31
.
C
h
u
r
c
h
X
X
X
X
X
33
.
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
o
r
X
X
34
.
G
u
a
r
d
X
X
36
.
B
o
a
r
d
w
a
l
k
X
Page 137 of 169
Ci
t
y
o
f
K
en
a
i
A
l
l
H
a
z
a
r
d
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
F
i
n
a
l
–
J
u
l
y
,
2
0
1
6
Pa
g
e
2
5
Pa
g
e
1
3
4
o
f
1
6
5
Page 138 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 26
D.Development Trends
The City has been a deferred code enforcement entity since the late 1970’s enforcing local building,
fire and life safety codes in plan reviews for new construction. This provides local access and
oversight in new construction without requiring plans being sent through the State Fire Marshal’s
office in Anchorage.
Zoning changes are needed to comply with Comprehensive Plan and to prevent infrastructure loss
near eroding bluff. Public Works has been addressing this for several years, and the City has
restricted new construction near hazardous areas and infrastructure has been relocated to prevent
added loss or damage (water and sewer lines, utilities, etc.).
Commercial, industrial and residential development is continuing at slow but steady pace, as is the
population. The population is aging and the need for senior housing and assisted living is increasing.
This has been addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. Health care facilities, physicians, dentists and
family care offices are increasing within the City.
Use of the beach for recreation and personal use fisheries increases each year. This increased use of
the beach is taxing to the City’s Public Works and Police Departments. The City will invest $1
million into blower improvements for the Sewage Treatment Plant, which will significantly improve
energy efficiency of the facility.
The Municipal water system is being enhanced and expanded annually, with a risk analysis plan
already in place.
In 2007, the City of Kenai completed a comprehensive Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). The plan
is currently being updated with minor changes. The plan describes the system that will be used to
manage the mitigation of, preparation for, response to, and recovery from natural and man-caused
disaster emergencies. It is an all-hazard, all-risk plan based on the National Incident Management
System (NIMS) for comprehensive management of disaster emergency relief forces and disaster
emergency operations. The EOP consists of 14 sections, each considering a different element of
emergency response.
This EOP is intended to meet disaster emergency planning requirements of all federal, state, borough,
and city agencies and departments having jurisdiction over such matters. It is further intended that
this document be used as a reference and training aid for municipal, regional, industry, and other
emergency response personnel to ensure efficient and effective response to and management of
disaster emergencies. This EOP will be activated whenever there is a disaster emergency that could
significantly threaten human health, property or the environment. Upon declaration of a disaster
emergency, the designated person responsible for disaster emergency management is authorized to
commit the resources necessary to carry out the provisions of the Emergency Operations Plan.
Section 2 of the City of Kenai Emergency Operations Plan references the Kenai Peninsula Borough
All-Hazard Mitigation Plan, and states that the City of Kenai All-Hazard Mitigation Plan is Annex C
of the KPB plan.
Page 135 of 165Page 139 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 27
Chapter V- Mitigation Goals, Objectives, & Strategies
A: Floods:
Goal: Reduce or eliminate property damage and influx of debris into waterways due to
floods by raising public awareness, and through zoning changes
Objective: Raise public awareness of probable magnitude of flood damage and debris based
on historical events using on site visits and meetings during permit issuance. Encourage
securing of docks, vehicles, trash and utilities (LPG tanks, fuel tanks, etc) to reduce loss of
same to owners, and reduce influx of debris into waterways during floods.
Action Item: Continue cooperative efforts of the Kenai Peninsula Borough, City of Kenai
Planning & Zoning Commission, City Council and land owners/developers to enact and
enforce a 50-foot setback of items on property adjacent to waterways.
Source of Funds: State and Federal Grants, Corps. Of Engineers
Agency Lead: City
Timeline: Ongoing
Goal Completion: Kenai River Overlay mandates a 50 foot building setback from the mean
high water line of the Kenai River. Borough regulations for development in this area meet
the objective to minimize damage in the event of a flood.
B: Wildland Fires:
Goal: Reduce or eliminate loss of homes and property due to wildland fires.
Objective: Promote the development of FireWise neighborhoods.
To include the removal of fuels and increase awareness of wildland/urban fire hazards in the
community.
Action Item: Continue to promote FireWise programs including public education programs
in schools and neighborhoods. Promote the development of defensible space and
landscaping techniques to community and home construction contractor participation.
Source of Funds: None
Agency Lead: City of Kenai and Alaska State Forestry
Timeline: Ongoing
Goal Completion: Ongoing
Page 136 of 165Page 140 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 28
C.Erosion:
Goal: Reduce or eliminate the erosion of the bluff at the mouth of the Kenai River.
Objective: Construct a retaining wall to protect the bluff, adjacent structures, and city
infrastructure in area.
Action Item: Continue working with US Army Corps of Engineers to finalize the Fesibility
Study with anticipated complete in August 2017. Continue to seek funding placement
funding for bluff protection, establish zoning and building restrictions for that area, and
develop a plan to move infrastructure back from bluff to protect from catastrophic failure and
potential pollution of inlet.
Source of Funds: City, State and Federal Funds
Agency Lead: City
Timeline: Ongoing
Goal Completion: TBD – Pending Funding Sources and Construction
D.Volcanoes:
Goal: Help prepare citizens to adequately protect themselves and property from hazards of
volcanic ash.
Objective: Help facilitate the public to prepare for the harmful effects of volcanic ash fallout
to life and property.
Action Item: Continue cooperative effort with Borough OEM, local media, and City of
Kenai websites to provide the public with preparedness information prior to and during
periods of increased volcano seismic activity.
Source of Funds: City, State and Federal Funding
Agency Lead: City, Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO)
Timeline: Ongoing
Goal Completion: During the 2009 volcanic activity the public was adequately informed for
preparedness via Kenai Peninsula Borough and AVO Websites as well as collaboration of
City Government and local media.
Page 141 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 29
E.Earthquakes:
Goal: Prepare our citizens and the built environment to better survive the hazards associated
with earthquakes.
Objective: Raise public awareness of potential threats and necessary preparations to increase
survivability of citizens and structures.
Action: In an effort to reduce property damage, the City of Kenai will continue to adopt and
enforce current building codes and construction standards that address the seismic concerns
for our area. Prepare our citizens and the built environment to better survive the hazards
associated with earthquakes through the promotion of public education, promote the practice
of sheltering in place, and encourage the preparation of our citizens for self sufficiency on a
post earthquake scenario.
Source of Funds: City and Kenai Peninsula Borough
Agency Lead: City of Kenai and Kenai Peninsula Borough
Timeline: Ongoing
Goal Completion: Building codes are in effect. Public awareness is ongoing via education in
the schools and disaster preparedness through Community Emergency Response Team
(CERT) drills
F: Tsunami:
Goal: Lessen loss of life through adequate notification and evacuation of identified high
hazard areas.
Objective: Public awareness of publically recognized hazard zones needing evacuation in the
event of a tsunami.
Action Item: Continue cooperative advisements to public via Borough OEM, local media,
and local emergency responders to collectively evacuate the public.
Source of Funds: City and Kenai Peninsula Borough
Agency Lead: City of Kenai and Kenai Peninsula Borough
Timeline: Ongoing
Goal Completion: Public awareness is ongoing via disaster preparedness through
Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) drills
Page 142 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 30
Chapter VI - Implementation & Maintenance Procedures
A.Implementation
The City of Kenai will implement this plan by using the Comprehensive Plan, the Capital
Improvement Plan, the City of Kenai Emergency Operations Plan, and other plans. The various
community plans will consider the best mitigation practices to maximize the benefit to the
community. The City of Kenai will consider projects that are cost effective to ensure that for every
dollar spent there is a minimum of one-dollar savings by eliminating or reducing future disaster
losses.
All Hazard Mitigation Strategies considered by the City of Kenai will utilize a Benefit Cost Analysis
calculation which takes into consideration lives saved, property saved and preventing the functional
loss of critical infrastructure. For future FEMA mitigation grant requests, the City of Kenai will use
the FEMA Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) as outlined on the FEMA web site.
www.fema.gov/government/grant/bca.shtm
The City of Kenai Bluff Erosion project is the only current mitigation project that has significant
mitigation costs (present & future). In February 2011, the City of Kenai received the Kenai River
Bluff Limited Economic, Cultural and Historic Property Evaluation, published by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Alaska District. This report outlines the existing conditions, causes and possible
solutions to the erosion along a one-mile portion of the Kenai bluff at the mouth of the Kenai River.
The report evaluated possible lost income and diminished opportunities as well as potential loss of
historical and cultural sites.
The City of Kenai will use the following criteria to prioritize mitigation projects based on:
1.Life saving or personal safety issues
2.Protection of infrastructure (water, sewer, utility systems)
3.Protection of private property
4.Protection and preservation of the bluff and river
5.Protection and preservation of historical areas
6.Coordination with all community plans. For example: The Community Comprehensive
Plan, the Community Capital Improvement Plan, the All-Hazard Mitigation Plan, etc.
B.Maintenance
The All-Hazard Mitigation Plan will be reviewed annually and will be updated at a minimum of
every five years or 90 days after a presidentially declared disaster. The City Planner will be
responsible for ensuring that reviews are completed. The general public will be notified of
opportunities to review the plan and public involvement will be solicited. Public involvement is
essential to ensure that the mitigation goals, objectives and action items are addressing the
community’s needs.
Page 143 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 31
Appendix A
Glossary of Terms
Asset Any manmade or natural feature that has value,
including, but not limited to people; buildings;
infrastructure like bridges, roads, and sewer and water
systems; lifelines like electricity and communication
resources; or environmental, cultural, or recreational
features like parks, dunes, wetlands, or landmarks.
Avalanche Mass of snow and ice falling suddenly down a
mountain slope and often taking with it earth, rocks,
trees, and rubble of every description.
Base Flood A term used in the National Flood Insurance Program
to indicate the minimum size of a flood. This
information is used by a community as a basis for its
floodplain management regulations. It is the level of a
flood which has a one-percent chance of occurring in
any given year. Also known as a 100-year flood
elevation or one-percent chance flood.
Borough The basic unit of local government in Alaska.
Building Any structure used or intended for supporting or
sheltering any use or occupancy.
Building Code The regulations adopted by a local governing body
principally setting forth standards for the construction,
addition, modification, and repair of buildings and
other structures for the purpose of protecting the health,
safety, and general welfare of the public.
Community Any state, area or political subdivision thereof, or any
Indian tribe or tribal entity that has the authority to
adopt and enforce statutes for areas within its
jurisdiction.
Dam A structure built across a waterway to impound water.
Development Any man-made change to improved or unimproved
real estate, including but not limited to buildings other
structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving,
excavation or drilling operations or of equipment
or materials.
Disaster Mitigation Act DMA 2000 (public Law 106-390) is the latest
Page 144 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 32
legislation of 2000 (DMA 2000) to improve the
planning process. It was signed into law on October 10,
2000. This new legislation reinforces the importance of
mitigation planning and emphasizes planning for
disasters before they occur.
Earthquake A sudden motion or trembling that is caused by a
release of strain accumulated within or along the edge
of the earth’s tectonic plates.
Elevation The raising of a structure to place it above flood waters
on an extended support structure.
Emergency Operations Plan A document that: describes how people and property
will be protected in disaster and disaster threat
situations; details who is responsible for carrying out
specific actions; identifies the personnel, equipment,
facilities, supplies, and other resources available for
use in the disaster; and outlines how all actions will be
coordinated.
Erosion The wearing away of the land surface by running
water, wind, ice, or other geological agents.
Federal Disaster Declaration The formal action by the President to make a State
eligible for major disaster or emergency assistance
under the Robert T. Stafford Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended. Same
meaning as a Presidential Disaster Declaration
Federal Emergency Management A federal agency created in 1979 to provide a single
Agency (FEMA) point of accountability for all federal activities related
to hazard mitigation preparedness response and to
hazard mitigation, preparedness, response, and
recovery.
Flash Flood A flood event occurring with little or no warning
where water levels rise at an extremely fast rate. It is
often the result of heavy rainfall in a localized area.
Flood A general and temporary condition of partial or
complete inundation of water over normally dry land
areas from (1) the overflow of inland or tidal waters,
(2)the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of
surface waters from any source, or (3) mudflows or the
sudden collapse of shoreline land.
Page 145 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 33
Flood Control Keeping flood waters away from specific developed or
populated areas by the construction of flood storage
reservoirs, channel alterations, dikes and levees, bypass
channels, or other engineered structures
Flood Elevation Elevation of the water surface above an establish
datum (reference mark), e.g. National Geodetic
Vertical Datum of 1929, North American Datum of
1988, or Mean Sea Level
Flood Hazard Flood Hazard is the potential for inundation and
involves the risk of life, health, property, and natural
value. Two reference base are commonly used: (1) For
most situations, the Base Flood is that flood which has
a one-percent chance of being exceeded in any given
year (also known as the 100-year flood); (2) for critical
actions, an activity for which a one-percent chance of
flooding would be too great, at a minimum the base
flood is that flood which has a 0.2 percent chance of
being exceeded in any given year (also known as the
500-year flood).
Flood Hazard Boundary Map Flood Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM) means an
Official (FHBM) map of a community, issued by the
Administrator, where the boundaries of the flood,
mudslides (i.e., mudflow) related erosion areas having
special hazards have been designated as Zones A, M,
and/or E.
Flood Insurance Rate Map Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) means an official
map of a community, on which the Administrator has
delineated both the special hazard areas and the risk
premium zones applicable to the community.
Flood Insurance Study Flood Insurance Study or Flood Elevation Study means
an examination, evaluation and determination of flood
hazards and, if appropriate, corresponding water
surface elevations, or an examination, evaluations and
determination of mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and/or flood-
related erosion hazards.
Floodplain A "floodplain" is the lowland adjacent to a river, lake
or ocean. Floodplains are designated by the frequency
of the flood that is large enough to cover them. For
example, the 10-year floodplain will be covered by the
10-year flood. The 100-year floodplain by the 100-
year flood.
Page 146 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 34
Floodplain Management Thee operation of an overall program of corrective and
preventive measures for reducing flood damage,
including but not limited to emergency preparedness
plans, flood control works and floodplain management
regulations.
Floodplain Management Floodplain Management Regulations means
Regulations zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building
codes, health regulations, special purpose ordinances
(such as floodplain ordinance, grading ordinance and
erosion control ordinance) and other applications of
police power. The term describes such state or local
regulations, in any combination thereof, which provide
standards for the purpose of flood damage prevention
and reduction.
Flood Proofing Any combination of structural and nonstructural
additions, changes, or adjustments to structures which
reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or
improved property, water and sanitary facilities,
structures and their contents
Floodway Floodway means the channel of a river or other
watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be
reserved in order to discharge the base flood without
cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation
more than a designated height.
Geographic Information System A computer software application that relates physical
features of the earth to a database that can be used for
mapping and analysis.
Governing Body The legislative body of a municipality that is the
assembly of a borough or the council of a city.
Hazard A source of potential danger or adverse condition.
Hazards in the context of this plan will include
naturally occurring events such as floods, earthquakes,
tsunami, coastal storms, landslides, and wildfires that
strike populated areas. A natural event is a hazard
when it has the potential to harm people or property.
Hazard Event A specific occurrence of a particular type of hazard.
Hazard Identification The process of identifying hazards that threaten an
area.
Page 147 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 35
Hazard Mitigation Any action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term
risk to human life and property from natural hazards.
(44 CFR Subpart M 206.401)
Hazard Profile A description of the physical characteristics of hazards
and a determination of various descriptors including
magnitude, duration, frequency, probability, and
extent. In most cases, a community can most easily use
these descriptors when they are recorded and displayed
as maps.
Hydrology The science of the behavior of water in the atmosphere,
on the earth’s surface, and underground.
Infrastructure The public services of a community that have a direct
impact to the quality of life. Infrastructure refers to
communication technology such as phone lines or
Internet access, vital services such as public water
supply and sewer treatment facilities, and includes an
area’s transportation system, regional dams or bridges,
etc.
Intensity A measure of the effects of a hazard event at a
particular place.
Inundation The maximum horizontal distance covered by
flood water, a seiche or a tsunami.
Landslide Downward movement of a slope, soil, and other
materials or debris under the force of gravity.
Liquefaction The phenomenon that occurs when ground shaking
cause’s loose soils to lose strength and act like a thick
or viscous fluid. Liquefaction causes two types of
ground failure: lateral spread and loss of bearing
strength.
Local Emergency Planning LEPCs consist of community representatives and are
Committee (LEPC) appointed by the State Emergency Response
Commissions (SERCs), as required by Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), Title
III.They develop an emergency plan to prepare for and
respond to a chemical emergency. They are also
responsible for coordinating with local facilities to find
out what they are doing to reduce hazards, prepare for
accidents, and reduce hazardous inventories and
Page 148 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 36
releases. The LEPC serves as a focal point in the
community for information and discussion about
hazardous substances, emergency planning, and health
and environmental risks
Local Government Any county, borough, municipality, city, township,
public authority, school district, intrastate district,
council of governments (regardless of whether the
council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit
corporation under State law), regional or interstate
government entity, or agency, or instrumentality of a
local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal
organization, or Alaska Native village or organization;
and any rural community, unincorporated town or
village, or other public entity, for which an application
for assistance is made by a State or political
subdivision of state.
Magma Molten rock originating from the Earth’s interior.
Magnitude A measure of the strength of a hazard event. The
magnitude (also referred to as severity) of a given
hazard event is usually determined using technical
measures specific to the hazard.
Mitigate To cause something to became less harsh or hostile, to
make less severe or painful
Mitigation Plan A systematic evaluation of the nature and extent of
vulnerability to the effects of natural hazards typically
present in the State and includes a description of
actions to minimize future vulnerability to hazards.
Municipality A political subdivision incorporated under the laws of
the State that is a home rule or general law city, a home
rule or general law borough, or a unified municipality.
National Flood Insurance The Federal program, created by an act of Congress in
Program (NFIP) 1968 that makes flood insurance
available in communities that enact satisfactory
floodplain management regulations.
National Weather Service Prepares and issues flood, severe weather, and coastal
(NWS) storm warnings and can provide technical
assistance to federal and State entities in preparing
weather and flood warning plans.
Page 149 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 37
Natural Disaster Any natural catastrophe, including any hurricane,
tornado, storm, high water, wind, driven water…
tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide,
snowstorm, fire, or drought. (44 CFR Subpart M
206.401)
New Construction New construction means structures for which the “start
of construction” on or after the effective date of a
floodplain management regulation adopted by a
community and includes any subsequent improvement
to such structures.
One Hundred (100)-Year The flood elevation that has a one-percent chance of
occurring in any given year. It is also known as the
Base Flood.
Period The length of time between two successive peaks or
troughs of a wave. The Period may vary due to
complex interferences of waves. Tsunami wave periods
generally range from 5 to 60 minutes apart.
Planning The act or process of making or carrying out plans; the
establishment of goals, policies, and procedures for a
social or economic unit.
Preparedness The steps taken to decide what to do if essential
services break down, developing a plan for
contingencies, and practicing the plan. Preparedness
ensures that people are ready for a disaster and will
respond to it effectively. Actions that strengthen the
capabilities of government, citizens, and communities
to respond to disasters.
Presidential Disaster Declaration The formal action by the President to make a State
eligible for major disaster or emergency assistance
under the Robert T. Stafford Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended.
Probability A statistical measure of the likelihood that a hazard
event will occur.
Recovery The actions taken by an individual or community after
a catastrophic event to restore order and lifelines in a
community.
Page 150 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 38
Relocation The moving of a structure from a flood area to a new
location, normally to one where there is no threat of
flooding.
Response Those activities and programs designed to address the
immediate and short-term effects of the onset of an
emergency or disaster.
Richter Scale A numerical scale of earthquake magnitude devised by
seismologist C.F. Richter in 1935.
Risk The estimated impact that a hazard would have on
people, services, facilities, and structures in a
community; the likelihood of a hazard event resulting
in an adverse condition that causes injury or damage.
Risk is often expressed in relative terms such as a high,
moderate, or low likelihood of sustaining damage
above a particular threshold due to a specific type of
hazard event. It can also be expressed in terms of
potential monetary losses associated with the intensity
of the hazard.
Riverine Relating to, formed by, or resembling rivers (including
tributaries), streams, creeks, brooks, etc.
Riverine Flooding Flooding related to or caused by a river, stream, or
tributary overflowing its banks due to excessive
rainfall, snowmelt or ice.
Runoff That portion of precipitation that is not intercepted by
vegetation, absorbed by land surface, or evaporated,
and thus flows overland into a depression, stream, lake,
or ocean (runoff, called immediate subsurface runoff,
also takes place in the upper layers of soil).
Run-up The maximum vertical height of a tsunami in relation
to sea level.
Scale A proportion used in determining a dimensional
relationship; the ratio of the distance between two
points on a map and the actual distance between the
two points on the earth’s surface.
Seiche An oscillating wave (also referred to as a seismic sea
wave) in a partially or fully enclosed body of water.
May be initiated by landslides, undersea landslides,
long period seismic waves, wind and water waves, or a
tsunami.
Page 151 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 39
Special Flood Hazard An area within a floodplain having a 1 percent or
greater Area (SFHA) chance of flood occurrence in
greater Area (SFHA) chance of flood occurrence in any
given year (100-year floodplain); represented on Flood
Insurance Rate Maps by darkly shaded areas with zone
designation that include the latter A or V.
Special Hazard Area Special Hazard Area means an area having special
flood, mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and/or flood-related
erosion hazards, as shown on a FHBM or FIRM as
Zone A, AOA, A1-30, AE, A99, AH, VO, V1-30, VE,
V, M, or E.
Stafford Act 1)The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as
amended. 2) The Stafford Act provides an orderly and
continuing means of assistance by the Federal
Government to State, local and tribal governments in
carrying out their responsibilities to alleviate the
suffering and damage which result from disaster.
State Hazard Mitigation Officer The SHMO is the representative of State government
(SHMO) who is the primary point of contact with FEMA, other
State and Federal agencies, and local units of
government in the planning and implementation of pre-
and post-disaster mitigation activities.
Stile A set of stairs to allow access over an obstruction, such
as a floodwall
Storm Surge Rise in the water surface above normal water level on
open coast due to the action of wind stress and
atmospheric pressure on the water surface.
Stream A body of water flowing in a natural surface channel.
Flow may be continuous or only during wet periods.
Streams that flow only during wet periods are termed
“intermittent streams.”
Structure That which is constructed above or below ground in
some definite manner for any use or purpose.
Subdivision Regulations Ordinances or regulations governing the subdivision of
land with respect to things such as adequacy and
suitability of building sites and utilities and public
facilities.
Page 152 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 40
Subsidence Sinking of the land surface, usually due to withdrawals
of underground water, oil, or minerals.
Substantial Damage Damage of any origin sustained by a structure in a
Special Flood Hazard Area whereby the cost of
restoring the structure to its before-damaged condition
would equal or exceeds 50 recent of the market value
of the structure before the damage.
Tectonic Plate Torsionally rigid, thin segments of the earth’s
lithosphere that may be assumed to move horizontally
and adjoin other plates. It is the friction between plate
boundaries that cause seismic activity.
Topography The contour of the land surface. The technique of
graphically representing the exact physical features of a
place or region on a map.
Tribal Government A Federally recognized governing body of an Indian or
Alaska Native Tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village or
community that the Secretary of the Interior
acknowledges to exist as an Indian tribe under the
Federally Recognized Tribe List Act of 1994, 25
U.S.C. 479a. This does not include Alaska Native
corporations, the ownership of which is vested in
private individuals.
Tsunami A sea wave produced by submarine earth movement or
volcanic eruption with a sudden rise or fall of a section
of the earth's crust under or near the ocean. A seismic
disturbance or land slide can displace the water
column, creating a rise or fall in the level of the ocean
above. This rise or fall in sea level is the initial
formation of a tsunami wave.
Volcano A volcano is an opening, or rupture, in a planet's
surface or crust, which allows hot magma, ash and
gases to escape from below the surface. Volcanoes are
generally found where tectonic plates are diverging or
converging. A mid-oceanic ridge, for example the Mid-
Atlantic Ridge, has examples of volcanoes caused by
divergent tectonic plates pulling apart; the Pacific Ring
of Fire has examples of volcanoes caused by
convergent tectonic plates coming together.
Page 153 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 41
Vulnerability Describes how exposed or susceptible to damage an
asset it. Vulnerability depends on an asset‟s
construction, contents, and the economic value of its
functions. The vulnerability of one element of the
community is often related to the vulnerability of
another. For example, many businesses depend on
uninterrupted electrical power - if an electrical
substation is flooded, it will affect not only the
substation itself, but a number of businesses as well.
Other, indirect effects can be much more widespread
and damaging than direct ones.
Vulnerability Assessment The extent of injury and damage that may result from
hazard event of a given intensity in a given area. The
vulnerability assessment should address impacts of
hazard events on the existing and future built
environment.
Watercourse A natural or artificial channel in which a flow of water
occurs either continually or intermittently.
Watershed An area that drains to a single point. In a natural basin,
this is the area contributing flow to a given place or
stream.
Water Surface Elevation Water surface elevation means the height, in relation to
the National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of
1929, (or other datum, where specified) of floods of
various magnitudes and frequencies in the floodplains
of coastal riverine areas.
Water Table The uppermost zone of water saturation in the ground.
Wetlands Areas that are inundated or saturated frequently and for
long enough to support vegetative or aquatic life
requiring saturated or seasonally saturated soil
conditions for growth and reproduction.
Wildfire An uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative
fuels, exposing and possibly consuming structures.
Page 154 of 169
City of Kenai All Hazard Mitigation Plan Final – July, 2016 Page 42
Appendix B
Acronyms
AEIC Alaska Earthquake Information Center
ARC American Red Cross
AVO Alaska Volcanic Observatory
DC Department of Corrections
EOP Emergency Operations Plan
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GIS Geographic Information System
KPB Kenai Peninsula Borough
LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NOS National Ocean Service
NPS National Park Service
NWS National Weather Service
SERC State Emergency Response Commission
SHMO State Hazard Mitigation Officer
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFS United States Forest Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
Page 155 of 169
CITY OF KENAI
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. PZ16-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
KENAI, ALASKA, RECOMMENDING THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI ADOPT
THE CITY OF KENAI ANNEX TO THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH ALL HAZARD
MITIGATION PLAN.
WHEREAS, the City of Kenai recognizes the threat that all hazards pose to
people and property; and,
WHEREAS, the State of Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency
Management (DHS&EM) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
require that a local hazard mitigation plan be adopted by as a prerequisite of future
mitigation funding; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Kenai participated jointly in the planning process with
other local units of government with the Borough to prepare an update to the
All Hazards Mitigation Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Annex has been submitted to the DHS&EM and FEMA officials for
final review and approval along with the Kenai Peninsula Borough All Hazard
Mitigation Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED TO THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KENAI, ALASKA, BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
KENAI THAT THE CITY OF KENAI ANNEX TO THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH ALL
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN BE ADOPTED.
PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI,
ALASKA, this 13th day of April, 2016.
Jeff Twait, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Sandra Modigh, City Clerk
Page 156 of 169
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 157 of 169
ACTION AGENDA
KENAI CITY COUNCIL – REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 6, 2016, 6:00 P.M.
KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
210 FIDALGO AVE., KENAI, AK 99611
http://www.kenai.city
A. CALL TO ORDER
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Roll Call
3. Agenda Approval
4. Consent Agenda (Public comment limited to three (3) minutes per speaker;
thirty (30) minutes aggregated)
*All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non-
controversial by the council and will be approved by one motion. There will be
no separate discussion of these items unless a council member so requests,
in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda and
considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of the General
Orders.
B. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS (Public comment limited to ten (10) minutes
per speaker)
C. UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS (Public comment limited to three (3)
minutes per speaker; thirty (30) minutes aggregated)
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY AS AMENDED. Resolution No. 2016-13 –
Amending City Council Policy 2014-01, Kenai Council Public Recognition
Policy, to Provide Letters of Recognition and Plaques for City Committee,
Commission and the Council on Aging Members After Five and Ten Years of
Service Respectively.
2. ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY AS AMENDED. Resolution No. 2016-14 –
Requesting that the Legislature and Governor Enact Legislation Including Cost
Reductions and Revenue Enhancement to Address Current and Future State
of Alaska Budgets During the 2016 Legislative Session.
E. MINUTES
1. APPROVED BY THE CONSENT AGENDA *Regular Meeting of March 16,
2016
F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Page 158 of 169
1.RECONSIDERED AND ENACTED. Reconsideration of Ordinance No.
2882-2016 – Waiving a Sale Restriction Imposed by Kenai Municipal Code
Section 21.05.010(B) with Respect to Lot 1, Block 1, Gusty Subdivision (KPB
Parcel No. 04327008) Located within the Airport Reserve; Authorizing the Sale
of Lot 1, Block 1, Gusty Subdivision to Ronald and Shirley Smith; and
Determining that Lot 1, Block 1 Gusty Subdivision is Not Needed for a Public
Purpose.
[Clerk’s Note: At the March 16 meeting, Mayor Porter, who voted on the
prevailing side, requested a reconsideration be placed on the next meeting
agenda for consideration.]
2.POSTPONED TO 4/20/16. Resolution No. 2016-10 – Confirming the
Assessment Roll on the VIP Drive Lid Street Improvement Special Assessment
District.
[Clerk’s Note: At its March 16 meeting, Council postponed the Resolution to
the April 6 meeting allowing the City Manager to review to process and report
to Council. A motion to approve is on the floor. The Council may convene in
executive session to discuss this matter pursuant to AS 44.62.310(c)(1)(3) a
matter of which the immediate knowledge may have an adverse effect upon
the finances of the City, and a matter by which law, municipal charter, or
ordinance are required to be confidential.]
G.NEW BUSINESS
1.APPROVED BY THE CONSENT AGENDA. *Action/Approval – Bills to be
Ratified.
2.APPROVED BY THE CONSENT AGENDA. *Action/Approval – Renewal of
Liquor License No. 204 for Applicant G&P, Inc. D/B/A George’s Casino Bar.
3.INTRODUCTION POSTPONED TO 5/4. Ordinance No. 2883-2016 –
Amending Kenai Municipal Code Section 21.15.260 – Acquisition of Real
Property, to Allow for Acquisition of Real Property Outside the Airport Reserve
as Airport Lands for Public Use, Including Use for Establishing and Maintaining
Buffer Zones.
4.INTRODUCTION POSTPONED TO 5/4. *Ordinance No. 2884-2016 –
Enacting Kenai Municipal Code Section 14.20.065 – Airport Light Industrial
Zone, Amending Kenai Municipal Code Section 14.22.010 – Land Use Table
and Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 14.24 – Development Requirements Table, to
add the Airport Light Industrial Zone.
5.INTRODUCTION POSTPONED TO 5/4. *Ordinance No. 2885-2016 –
Amending the Official Kenai Zoning Map by Rezoning 51 Parcels Owned by
the City of Kenai, Located within the Airport Reserve Boundary from
Conservation Zone, Rural Residential Zone, Suburban Residential Zone, and
Light Industrial Zone to Airport Light Industrial Zone and Ratifying the
Application to the Planning And Zoning Commission for the Amendments.
Page 159 of 169
6.DIRECTION PROVIDED TO CITY ATTORNEY TO FILE LAWSUIT FOR
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. Action /Approval – To Provide Direction to the City
Attorney Regarding Enforcement of the City’s Moratorium on Existing Local
Marijuana Clubs. [Clerk’s Note: The Council may convene in executive session
to discuss this matter pursuant to AS 44.62.310(c)(3), a matter by which law,
municipal charter, or ordinance are required to be confidential.]
7.DIRECTION PROVIDED TO THE MANAGER. Action/Approval – Approving
a Settlement Agreement with Teea Winger regarding Kenai Café Operations.
[Clerk’s Note: The Council may convene in executive session to discuss this
matter pursuant to AS 44.62.310(c)(1), a matter of which the immediate
knowledge may have an adverse effect upon the finances of the City.]
8.SPECIAL USE PERMIT GRANTED. Action/Approval – Approving a Special
Use Permit to HDL Engineering Consultants, LLC for Building/Land Lease.
9.REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA. Action/Approval – Approving a Special
Use Permit to Louise Nutter, D/B/A Burning the Midnight Oil for Terminal Space
Lease.
10.SPECIAL USE PERMIT GRANTED. Action/Approval – Approving a Special
Use Permit to the State of Alaska Division of Forestry for an Apron Lease.
11.WORK SESSION SCHEDULED FOR 4/18/16 AT 5:30PM. Action/Approval
–Schedule a Work Session to Discuss Senior Center Funding and the Multi-
Purpose Facility Expansion – Build out.
12.POSTPONED TO 5/4/16. Action/Approval – Schedule a Work Session to
Discuss Proposed Ordinances Relating to Establishment of Airport Light
Industrial Zone and the Rezoning of Parcels to Airport Light Industrial.
13.MANAGER DIRECTED TO NEGOTIATE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
Discussion/Action – To Provide Direction to the City Manager to Meet with
Representatives of the United Way Regarding the Temporary use of Vacant
Office Space Owned by the City of Kenai.
H.COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS
1.Council on Aging
2.Airport Commission
3.Harbor Commission
4.Parks and Recreation Commission
5.Planning and Zoning Commission
6.Beautification Committee
7.Mini-Grant Steering Committee
I.REPORT OF THE MAYOR
J.ADMINISTRATION REPORTS
Page 160 of 169
1. City Manager
• Establishing a Working Group to Review the Airport Sales Process
2. City Attorney
3. City Clerk
K. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT
1. Citizens Comments (Public comment limited to five (5) minutes per speaker)
2. Council Comments
L. EXECUTIVE SESSION – See Agenda Items F. 2, G.6. and G.7
M. PENDING ITEMS – None.
N. ADJOURNMENT
****************************************************************************************************
INFORMATION ITEMS
1. Purchase Orders between $2,500 and $15,000 for Council Review.
2. Correspondence to the Alaska State Legislature Supporting Legislative
Confirmation of Robert Ruffner to the Alaska Board of Fisheries.
The agenda and supporting documents are posted on the City’s website at
www.kenai.city. Copies of resolutions and ordinances are available at the City Clerk’s
Office or outside the Council Chamber prior to the meeting. For additional information,
please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 907-283-8231.
Page 161 of 169
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION
LAND’S END RESORT
QUARTER DECK ROOM
4786 HOMER SPIT RD
HOMER, ALASKA 99603
April 11, 2016 - 7:30 P.M.
Tentative Agenda
A.CALL TO ORDER
B.ROLL CALL
C.APPROVAL OF CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDA
All items marked with an asterisk (*) are consent agenda items. Consent agenda items are
considered routine and non-controversial by the Planning Commission and will be approved by one
motion. There will be no separate discussion of consent agenda items unless a Planning
Commissioner so requests in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda and
considered in its normal sequence on the regular agenda.
If you wish to comment on a consent agenda item or a regular agenda item other than a public
hearing, please advise the recording secretary before the meeting begins, and she will inform the
Chairman of your wish to comment.
*1.Time Extension Request
a.ATS 219 ....................................................................................... 2
KPB File 2008-049; [Church/Stranik]
Location: City of Seldovia
b.Jensen Anchor River Tracts 2013 Replat .................................... 8
KPB File 2014-024; [Seabright/Dragonfly LLC]
Location: On the Sterling Highway in Anchor Point
Anchor Point APC
c.Christensen Tracts 2009 Addition .............................................. 13
KPB File 2010-024; [Imhoff/Hough]
Location: City of Homer
*2.Planning Commission Resolutions
a.SN 2016-03; Renaming certain public rights-of-way ................. 20
within Sections 14 & 26; T4N R11W; SM, AK; within
ESN 302 and Renaming certain public rights-of-way
within S7, T5N, R10W, SM, AK; within ESN 302.
*3.Plats Granted Administrative Approval ................................................... 26
*4.Plats Granted Final Approval (20.10.040) - None
*5.Plat Amendment Request
a.Schwanke Subdivision 2013 Addition ........................................ 29
KPB File 2013-017;
[Johnson /Sterling Cache LLC, Moustakis, Goodwin, Borromeo]
Recording No. KN 2013-31
Location: Near MP 82 of the Sterling Highway in Sterling
Paulette Bokenko-
Carluccio
PC Member
City of Seldovia
Term Expires 2018
Alice Joanne Collins
PC Member
Anchor Point/ Ninilchik
Term Expires 2016
Cindy Ecklund
PC Member
City of Seward
Term Expires 2017
Robert F. Ernst
PC Member
Northwest Borough
Term Expires 2017
Dr. Rick Foster
Parliamentarian
Southwest Borough
Term Expires 2017
James Glendening
PC Member
Kenai City
Term Expires 2016
Sandra Key Holsten
PC Member
East Peninsula
Term Expires 2016
Jam es Isham
PC Member
Sterling
Term Expires 2018
Harry Lockwood
PC Member
Ridgeway
Term Expires 2016
Blair Martin
Chairman
Kalifornsky Beach
Term Expires 2018
Robert Ruffner
Vice Chairman
Kasilof/Clam Gulch
Term Expires 2018
Franco Venuti
PC Member
City of Homer
Term Expires 2016
Page 162 of 169
*6. Utility Easement Vacations - None
*7. Commissioner Excused Absences
*8. Minutes
a. March 28, 2016 Plat Committee Minutes
b. March 28, 2016 Planning Commission Minutes
D. PUBLIC COMMENT/PRESENTATIONS/COMMISSIONERS
(Items other than those appearing on the agenda. Limited to five minutes per speaker unless
previous arrangements are made
E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
F. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Rename existing streets to facilitate the Enhanced 911 Street Naming
and Addressing Methods within the Kenai Peninsula Borough.
Renaming rights-of-ways that have the same, or a similar sounding,
name will enable 911 Emergency Services to respond to emergencies in
an efficient timely manner, thereby avoiding delays in providing
necessary emergency services.
a. Chisik St (portion of) originally named 85th Ave ...................... 47
SE by plat KN0760162 Tract A Rex W. Eagle
Homestead; Renamed by the City of Kenai date
unknown; T 5N R 10W SECTION 8; Seward Meridian,
AK; in the Ridgway Community; ESN 302; REASON
FOR RENAMING: Jump Street; PROPOSED NAME:
Golden Eagle Way
b. Heavy Down Dr originally named by plat KN0760042 ............ 59
Eastview Subdivision; T 3N R 11W SECTION 9; Seward
Meridian, AK; in the Kalifornsky Community; ESN 302;
REASON FOR NAMING: Jump Street; PROPOSED
NAME: Heavy Down Ln N & Heavy Down Ln S
c. Northern Pike Blvd originally named by plat............................ 70
KN0860120 Sevena Lake Meadows; T 5N R 10W
SECTIONS 1 & 2; Seward Meridian, AK; in the
Ridgeway Community; ESN 302; REASON FOR
RENAMING: Jump Street; PROPOSED NAME: Burbot
Loop E & Burbot Loop W
d. Ravenwood St originally named by plat KN0850035 ............... 89
K-B Subdivision Part Five; T 5N R 11W SECTIONS 23-
26; Seward Meridian, AK; in the Kalifornsky Community;
ESN 302; REASON FOR NAMING: Jump Street;
PROPOSED NAME: Ravenwood St N & Ravenwood
St S
e. Sandhill Crane Loop originally named by plat ......................100
KN0850160 Soldotna South Subdivision; T 3N R 11W
SECTION 3; Seward Meridian, AK; in the Kalifornsky
Paul Whitney
PC Member
City of Soldotna
Term Expires 2017
Max J. Best
Planning Director
Mike Navarre
Borough Mayor
Page 163 of 169
Community; ESN 302; REASON FOR RENAMING:
Jump Street; PROPOSED NAME: Gyrfalcon Rd N &
Gyrfalcon Rd S
f.Spruce Ave originally named by plat KN00720005; T 5N ...... 118
R 10W SECTIONS 19, 20, 29, & 30; Seward Meridian,
AK; in the Ridgeway Community; ESN 302; REASON
FOR RENAMING: Jump Street; PROPOSED NAME:
Tamarack Ave E & Tamarack Ave W
g.West Point Ave (portion of) originally named by .................. 128
plat KN0750109 College Estates Subdivision; T 5N R
11W SECTIONS 24 & 25; Seward Meridian, AK; in the
Kalifornsky Community; ESN 302; REASON FOR
RENAMING: Jump Street; PROPOSED NAME:
Scholastic Ave
h.Westway Rd originally named by plat KN00760022 ............... 138
Kingwood Estates Subdivision; T 5N R 11W SECTIONS
19, 20, 29, & 30; Seward Meridian, AK; in the Kalifornsky
Community; ESN 302; REASON FOR RENAMING:
Jump Street; PROPOSED NAME: Weatherly St N,
Weatherly St S, & Seattle Slew St
2.Ordinance 2016-10; An ordinance placing a question on the ............... 151
ballot of whether the Kenai Peninsula Borough shall adopt a
local option to prohibit the operation of any commercial
marijuana establishment in the area of the Kenai Peninsula
Borough outside of the cities.
3.Ordinance 2016-12; An ordinance amending KPB 7.30.020 to ............ 161
change the way minimum distances are measured between
marijuana establishments and schools, churches and
correctional facilities, and imposing minimum distances between
marijuana establishments and local option zoning districts.
G.ANADROMOUS WATERS HABITAT PROTECTION DISTRICT (21.18)
1.Resolution 2016-09; Conditional Use Permit to install ......................... 165
Articulated Concrete Mat (ACM) and relocate existing barrier
rocks associated with a boat launch within the 50-foot Habitat
Protection District of the Kasilof River. This project is located on
the left bank of the Kasilof River at River Mile 8, T3N, R11W
Sections 30 & 31 SM, KN, Govt Lot 10 Section 30 & the NE1/4
NW1/4 Section 31 all lying east of the Sterling Highway, SM, AK,
(KPB Parcel # 133-550-09). Petitioner: Alaska Department of
Natural Resources Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation
2.Resolution 2016-10; Conditional Use Permit to install an .................... 191
Elevated Light Penetrating (ELP) gratewalk viewing platform and
access stairs within the 50-foot Habitat Protection District of the
Kenai River. This project is located on the right bank of the
Kenai River at River Mile 39, Govt Lot 1, Section 20, T5N, R8W,
SM, AK, (KPB Parcel # 065-081-25). Petitioner: Alaska
Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks and Outdoor
Recreation
Page 164 of 169
H.VACATIONS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING - None
I.SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS - None
J.SUBDIVISION PLAT PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.The Plat Committee is scheduled to review 5 preliminary plats.
K.OTHER/NEW BUSINESS
L.ASSEMBLY COMMENTS
M.LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE COMMENTS
N.DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS
O.COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
P.PENDING ITEMS FOR FUTURE ACTION
Q.ADJOURNMENT
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
NO ACTION REQUIRED
1.Seward Planning Commission Minutes ............................................................. 216
-February 2, 2016
NEXT REGULARY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be held Monday, April 25,
2016 in the Assembly Chambers of the George A Navarre Kenai Peninsula Borough, 144
North Binkley St, Soldotna, Alaska at 7:30 p.m.
ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS
CONTACT INFORMATION
Advisory
Commission
Meeting Location Date Time
Anchor Point Anchor Point
Chamber of Commerce TBD 7:00 p.m.
Cooper Landing Cooper Landing
Community Hall May 4, 2016 6:00 p.m.
Hope / Sunrise Hope Social Hall TBD 7:00 p.m.
The Kachemak Bay and Funny River
Advisory Planning Commissions are inactive at this time.
NOTE: Advisory planning commission meetings are subject to change. Please verify the meeting
date, location, and time with the advisory planning commission chairperson. Chairperson contact
information is on each advisory planning commission website, which is linked to the Planning
Department website.
Page 165 of 169
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Phone: 907-714-2200
Phone: toll free within the Borough 1-800-478-4441, extension 2215
Fax: 907-714-2378
e-mail address: planning@borough.kenai.ak.us
web site: http://www.borough.kenai.ak.us/planning-dept/planning-home
Page 166 of 169
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLAT COMMITTEE
LAND’S END RESORT
QUARTER DECK ROOM
4786 HOMER SPIT RD
HOMER, ALASKA 99603
6:30 p.m. April 11, 2016
Tentative Agenda
A.CALL TO ORDER
B.ROLL CALL
1.Election of Officers (Chairman / Vice Chairman)
C.APPROVAL OF AGENDA, EXCUSED ABSENCES, AND MINUTES
1.Agenda
2.Member/Alternate Excused Absences
3.Minutes
a.March 28, 2016 Plat Committee Minutes
D.PUBLIC COMMENT
(Items other than those appearing on the agenda. Limited to five minutes per speaker
unless previous arrangements are made.)
E.SUBDIVISION PLAT PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.Dragseth Subdivision 2016 Addition ......................................................... 2
KPB File 2016-025
[Integrity / City of Kenai]
Location: Off of Royal Street in the City of Kenai
2.Eagle Lake Subdivision 2016 Addition ................................................... 49
KPB File 2016-040
[Integrity / Jacketta, Warner]
Location: Off of Frogberry St. in Ridgeway
3.Stream Hill Park Unit 2 Delaguna Addition ............................................. 66
KPB File 2016-026
[Geovera / Welch, Lehner, Klamser]
Location: Off of Craftsman Rd. in the City of Homer
4.Commercial Park Unit 1 .......................................................................... 89
KPB File 2016-039
[Geovera / Arno, TL Investments LLC]
Location: Near MP 3 of East End Road in the City of Homer
5.Nikiski Village Subdivision Kennedy Addition ....................................... 112
KPB File 2016-034
[Segesser / Wanda J Kennedy & Wenda J. Kennedy Living Trust]
Location: Off of Nikiski Ave. in Nikiski
MEMBERS:
JoAnne Collins
Anchor Point / Ninilchik
Term Expires 2016
Cindy Ecklund
City of Seward
Term Expires 2017
James Glendening
City of Kenai
Term Expires 2016
James Isham
Sterling
Term Expires 2018
ALTERNATES:
Robert Ernst
Northwest Borough
Term Expires 2017
Harry Lockwood
Ridgeway
Term Expires 2016
Franco Venuti
City of Homer
Term Expires 2016
Page 167 of 169
F.FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT PUBLIC HEARING
G.OTHER / NEW BUSINESS
H.MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION -- NO ACTION REQUIRED
I.ADJOURNMENT
NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING
The next regularly scheduled Plat Committee meeting will be held Monday, April 25,
2016 in the Assembly Chambers of the George A Navarre Kenai Peninsula Borough, 144
North Binkley, Soldotna, Alaska at 5:30 p.m.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Phone: 907-714-2215 Fax: 907-714-2378
Phone: toll free within the Borough 1-800-478-4441, extension 2215
e-mail address: planning@borough.kenai.ak.us
web site: http://www.borough.kenai.ak.us/planning-dept/planning-home
Page 168 of 169
CITY OF KENAI
2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
TOWN HALL MEETINGS
KENAI SENIOR CENTER
361 SENIOR COURT
KENAI, ALASKA 99611
http://www.kenai.city/compplan2016
SATURDAY, APRIL 16, 2016 (9:00AM-12:00 NOON)
DEVELOP GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
•Discuss which ones to keep or revise from the 2003 Plan (Chapter
Two) and the Draft 2013 Plan (Chapter Six).
•Create new goals as needed.
•Feel free to bring written examples to share.
TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 2016 (6:00PM – 9:00 PM)
DISCUSS LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS AND LAND USE MAP
•Discuss how land uses are classified and mapped.
•Discuss the role of the land use plan in city decision-making.
Public comment on the process and statistical and historical data
contained in the Plan is welcomed, encouraged and important to the
Plan.
For more information on the 2016 Planning Process or either of the
meetings, please contact:
Matt Kelley, City Planner at 907-283-8235 or email at:
compplan2016@kenai.city
Members of the Council of the City of Kenai and the Planning and Zoning
Commission may be in attendance, however, no action will be taken.
Publish: 4/8, 4/10, 4/13, 4/15, D192/648552
#7000052207-01 (2col, 3.79in x 5in) 04/06/2016 16:46 EST
Page 169 of 169