Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-04-07 Council PacketCOUNCIL PACKETS lqi?2 Kenai City Council Meeting Packet April 7, 1982 s ••�� Tl:�!'1�"?'.�_'�%..7['�il�tir:ri+Gi:GY.li� �J AGENDA KENAI CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING APRIL 7, 1982 - 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. ROLL CALL 1. Agenda Approval B. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD John Williams, Chairman Harbor Commission- C. PPUBLIC HEARINGS /1. Ordinance 760-82 - Amending KHC - Provide Charge for Discharge of Septic Materials be in Regs b Rates of City of Kenai ,.A. Ordinance 761-82 - Increasing Rev/Appna - Equipment for n Parks Dept. - $6,225 y, Jf Ordinance 762-82 - Increasing Rev/Appna - Health Facilities - $ 7,978 ,/4. Ordinance 763-82 - Increasing Rev/Appns - State Library Grant, Personnel b Services - $3,900 �. Ordinance 764-82 - Increasing Rev/Appns - Correctional Officer to Attend Academy - $1,700 r/6. Ordinance 765-82 - Increasing Rev/Appal - State Grant, -1K Library Supplies - $9,000 Ordinance 766-82 - Increasing Rev/A-pno - Misc. Park Improvements - $152,651 14. Resolution 82-30 - Authorizing Participation in State Day Care Assistance Program .1/ Resolution 82-31 - Accepting Grant from State of Alaska, is the amount of $103,565 for Construction of First, Birch b Fourth Streets Water b Serer riYb. Resolution 82-32 - Awarding Contracts for Playground Equipment „id. Resolution 82-33 - Awarding Bid for Sander Unit to Yukon Equipment, Inc. 12. Renewal of Liquor License Application - Kenai Joss 13. Renewal of Liquor License Application - Harborview 14. Transfer of ownership of Liquor License from Kostas Manolakakis to •loran Antoski D. MINUTES None E. CORRESPONDENCE None F. OLD BUSINESS 1. Pr opals! for Kenai Boat !tamp ^ p 2. Stoehner Lease Application - 4 lots in Etolin Sub. Yaater b Sem on MlelMtt b T�i t�N d rmen G nto Semen o s gn Development Drawings G. NEW BUSINESS 5' ^ , 9 � C { z t— Q- 1. Bills to be Paid, gills to be Ratified 2. Requisitions Exceeding $1,000 3. R b P Enterprises Lease Approval t;k �• w 4. Amendment No. 4 - Sewerage Facilities - Design Work - CH2H Hill Contract Increase by $30,325 5. Ordinance 767-82 - Increasing Rev/Appna in Jail Fund by $2,000 for Replacement of Heat b Snake Detector In Jail 6. Ordinance 768-82 - Increasing Rev/Appna General Fund by $7.000 in Recognition of Grant from State of Alaska for Fire Service Training AGENDA ^' April 7, 1482 H. REPORTS 1. City Managor — %&� e {•o,�� 2. City Attoraey 3. Mayor 4. City Clark 5. Finance Diractor 6. Planning 6 Zoning 7. Harbor Coimiaaion _._ _._� .___ • rN- - , r y,...-. N. . I. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD ADJOURNMENT i u } f, :ffiim Aim 0 ♦ . -. �. y. r.. .. /.rr. � mac.. r avo'aJ.G 4'. _ ___ _ _ _ � _ _ _ _ _ _ - .. mow_---• , ✓a. - -.. _.._ ._ ..�_ n..r. .__�. _ ��.�-�_ •. n. - `.� ... �., rr� ...ram-� a�rn+n+-. 'T�-'.t ��---�-�::Y— __ - _ `r` COUNCIL MIifi/I' I Nr Of-' mom �►�m�o�ri��rn�ir. I I ji 1 CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE NO. 760-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, TO AMEND KMC 17.30.040 (5) TO PROVIDE THAT SPECIFIC CHARGE FOR DISCHARGE OF SEPTIC CESSPOOL MATERIALS IN THE SEWER TREATMENT PLANT SHALL BE SET BY RATES IN THE PUBLIC UTILITY REGULATIONS AND RATES OF THE CITY OF KENAI. i WHEREAS, the City has adopted a comprehensive rate structure for charges in the water and sewer systems in the Public Utility Regulations and Rates of the City of Kenai, and WHEREAS, in making provision for dumping of septic cesspool materials in the Sewer Treatment Plant, KMC 17.30.040 (5) provides a specific rate for such dumping, and WHEREAS, this rate should not be set by ordinance but should be included in the comprehensive rate structure, and WHEREAS, this rate is unreasonable under the present conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF J KENAI, ALASKA, as follows: n I $ggtion_1: That KI4C 17.30.040 (5) is hereby amended as follows: "(5) The fee per acceptance of hUjk_gaRhin_MatCri&l 1 [ANY QUANTITY AT ANY GIVEN TIME] shall be in_aCCQZdznr€_kith ; Ciix_Qf.[Sgnai [$10 PER PROPERTY OVINER] plus tax [WHETHER OR NOT A FULL LOAD CAN BE ACCEPTED]." PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 7th day of April, 1982. ATTEST: Janet Vlhelan,-City Clerk 3 VINCENJT O' REILLY, I4AYOR First Reading: March 17, 1982 Second Reading: April 7, 1982 Effective Date: May 7, 1982 CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE NO. 761-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS IN THE FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND BY $6,225 FOR EQUIPMENT FOR THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. WHEREAS, the Parks Department wishes to purchase several pieces of equipment, including a mower, a roto tiller, a scraper, and a sweeper to be used for park maintenance, and WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Director desires to purchase this equipment prior to other scheduled Federal Revenue Sharing allocations so that the equipment can be used this summer, and WHEREAS, proper accounting! practices require that all appropriations of City monies be made by ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the following increases in estimated revenues and appropriations be made: F��s�a]�8€Y�nn�&tia�io�guu�: Increase Estimated Revenues: Federal Revenue Sharing $6,225 Increase Appropriations: , Transfer to General Fund $6,225 Increase Estimated Revenues: Transfer from FRS Fund $6,225 Increase Appropriations: Parks -Machinery & Equipment $6,225 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 7th day of April, 1982. V I NCENT 0' FEI LLY, 2iAYOR� ATTEST: Janet R elan, City Clerk J First Reading: March 17, 19C2 Second Reading: April 7, 1982 Effective Date: April 7, 1982 Approved by Finance: C.9a_ F ; 4 1� _ • .fir—�,�;'J <.., � , . .. a . G.. .. �.... .- .. w� r .-y++.+uar"-.tip � 1.r .�Y• C3 CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE NO. 762-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS IN THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET BY $7,978 AS A RESULT OF AN INCREASE IN STATE REVENUE SHARING FOR HEALTH FACILITIES. WHEREAS, the City of Kenai has appropriated $8,000 of State Revenue Sharing monies for distribution to two health facilities at $4,000 each, and WHEREAS, the State of Alaska has increased this allocation to the City to $8,000 for each facility, adjusted by COLA and proration factors to equal a total distribution of $15,978, and WHEREAS, proper accounting practices require that all appropriations of City monies be made by ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the following increases in estimated revenues and appropriations be made: • �as;za�Elius� Increase Estimated Revenues: State Revenue Sharing $7,978 Increase Appropriations: _ p Non -Departmental -Grants to Agencies $7,978 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 7th day of April, 1982. ATTEST: Janet -Whelan, Ci'ty-Clerk Approved by Finance: 3 VINCENT O'REILLY, MAYOR~ First Reading: March 17, 1982 Second Reading: April 7, 1982 Effective Date: April 7, 1982 E� ._.-__�r__.y._=._._�,.. ., - CITY OF KENAI P. O. BOX $80 . KENAI, ALASKA - PHONE 283.7535 to. City Council FRom Charles A. Brown oASE 3-30-82 REFERENce Amendment to Ord. #762-82 Possible amendment to this Ordinance as requested by J. Wise: "Replace the first tWhereast with the following: Whereas, the City of Kenai has appropriated $8,000 of State Revenue Sharing monies for distribution to the Cook Inlet Council on Alcoholism and the Central Peninsula Mental Health Center at $4,000 each, and" I'M1 REPLY ■ 1' eq CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE NO. 763-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTI►+IATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS IN THE 1981-82 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BY $3,900 AS A RESULT OF A GRANT FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA FOR LIBRARY PERSONNEL AND SERVICES. WHEREAS, the State of Alaska has granted the City of Kenai $7,500 for Library personnel and services, and WHEREAS, these monies are to be used through September 30, 1982, for inter -library loan coordination, and the City desires to appropriate $3,900 now and the balance next fiscal year, and WHEREAS, proper accounting practices require that all appropriations of City monies be made by ordinance. NOWF THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that estimated revenues and appropriations be increased as follows: Gang al-Euad : Increase Estimated Revenues: State Grants -General $3,900 Increase Appropriations: Library -Salaries $2,710 " - PERS 272 " - Workmen's Comp. 18 " - Office Supplies 300 " - Communications 609- $3.4.2QQ PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CIT': OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 7th day of April, 1982. VINCEPIT 0' REILLY, l+IAYOR-^ ATTEST: Janet~Whelan, City Clerk First Reading: March 17, 1982 Second Reading: April 7, 1982 Effective Date: April 7, 1982 Approved by Finance: fie_ a, f� CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE NO. 764-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS IN THESTATE JAIL CONTRACT FUND BY $1,700. WHEREAS, the Police Chief desires to send an additional correctional officer to Anchorage to attend the State Correctional Academy, and WHEREAS, monies are available in the Fund Balance of the Jail Fund for such an expenditure, and WHEREAS, proper accounting practices require that all appropriations of City monies be made by ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the following increases in estimated revenues and appropriations be made: Increase Estimated Revenues: Appropriation of Fund Balance $1,700 Increase Appropriations: Jail -Transportation $1,700 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 7th day of April, 1982. ATTEST: ,. Janet Whelan, City Clerk- VINCENT-O'REILLY, MAYOR -------- First Reading: March 17, 1982 Second Reading: April 7, 1982 J Effective Date: April 7, 1982 Approved by Finance: !C +I „r f. d i CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE N0, 765-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS IN THE 1981-82 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BY $9,000 AS A RESULT OF A GRANT FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA FOR LIBRARY SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT. i WHEREAS, the State of Alaska has granted the City of Kenai $9,000 for Library supplies and equipment, primarily for reading materials and a microfilm/microfiche storage cabinet, and WHEREAS, proper accounting practices require that all appropriations of City monies be made by ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that estimated revenues and appropriations be increased as follows: Q=al-rand Increase Estimated Revenues: State Grant -Library $9,000 Increase Appropriations: Library -Office Supplies $ 300 " - Rentals 100 Machinery & Equipment 2,000 Books AlAQ9. I PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 7th day of April, 1982. ATTEST: Janet 4IhMn, City Clerk Approved by Finance:�� -.J VZNCEPJT^0'REILLY, MAYOR First Reading: !March 17, 1982 Second Reading: April 7, 1982 Effective Date: April 7, 1982 e 4V ■ /r C-7 CITY OF KENAI i ORDINANCE NO, 766-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTI14ATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS IN A NEW CAPITAL PROJECT FUND ENTITLED "MISCELLANEOUS PARK IMPROVERENTS" BY $152,651. WHEREAS, the City of Kenai has received $2,313,340 as 1981 Municipal Aid Entitlement, and WHEREAS, by resolution, the Council has designated $152,651 of this entitlement to be spent toward miscellaneous park. improvements. WHEREAS, proper accounting practices require that all appropriations of City monies be made by ordinance. i NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that estimated revenues and appropriations in the "tiscellaneous Park Improvements" Capital Project Fund be increased as follows% i3i6�s11.�D€Qu8rE8�.k_�m�rrQy�.tu€a��_�a�1��� _E�2i���s�oQ Increase Estimated Revenues: 1981 Municipal Aid Entitlement $152A11. Increase Appropriations: Administration $ 600 Equipment 41,651 Construction _11O..41Q $1.14(ta1. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this; 7th day of April, 1982. ATTESTS Janet Whelan,wCity Clerk Approved by Finances _ J VINCENT 0•REILLY,'MAYOR _ First Reading: t?arch 17, 1982 Second Reading: April 7, 1982 Effective Dates April 71 1982 /' e) CITY OF KENAI RESOLUTION NO. 82-30 es BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, THAT SAID COUNCIL IS HEREBY AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE STATE DAY CARE ASSISTANCE PROGRA14 PURSUANT TO AS 44.47.250-310. WHEREAS, AS 44.47.250-310 authorizes municipalities or other organizations to contract with the State for the implementation and administration of a program to assist in providing day care for the children of low and moderate income families; and Y:HEREAS, the City of Kenai, Alaska wishes to provide a Day Care Assistance Program in our community. NOW, TiIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that V1m. J. Brighton, City Manager is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Community and Regional Affairs on behalf of the City of Kenai for funds to implement and administer a program to assist in providing day care for children of low and moderate income families in our community. VIm. J. Brighton, City Manager is further authorized to act on behalf of the City of Kenai to accept any offer of funds from the Department and to execute a contract with the Department to implement and administer said program. Wm. J. Brighton, City I4anager is also authorized to execute any subsequent amendments; to said contract to provide for increases or decreases in the program funds committed to our community, based upon program needs; in our community and those of other communities throughout the State. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this; 7th day of April, 1982. ATTEST: ,,net t,helan,^City Clerk J VIIICI:I:T O' REILLY, ^MAYOR L CITY 01: K1;NAI RESOLUTI0N NO. 82 - 31 A RESOLUTION 01: Till' COUNCII. OF Till' CITY OF KENAI , ALASKA, ACCEPTING A GRANT FROM TnE STATE OI- ALASKA, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, IN THE AMOUNT OF $105,565 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION 01: FIRST, BIRCH, AND FOURTH STREETS WATER AND SEINER. WHEREAS, the State of Alaska has offered the City of Kenai a grant for $105,565 for the construction of water and sewer improvements on First, Birch, and Fourth Streets, and WHEREAS, the City of Kenai agrees to accept the responsibility to operate and maintain the prcposcd water and sewer improvements and agrees to the terms and conditions of the grant offer, and WHEREAS, this grant offer must be formally accepted by the City of Kenai. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KI:NAI, ALASKA, that this grant in the amount of $105,565 from the State of Alaska is hereby accepted for the construction �. of First, Birch, Fourth Streets Water and Sewer. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 7th day of April, 1982. J ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City G er,c Approved by Finance: <<,_ vrmam,OTHILLr, MAYOR JAYS• HAMMOND, 0OYf9NOH D)D:�•'D'. IDD D;11 D:tU11aD:�'1':l/, 1TDUN POUCH 0 - JUNMU Mill February 25, 1982 Mr. William Brighton City Manager , ., .;. y City of Kenai Box 530 Kenai, AK 99611 Dear for. Brighton: State Grant Offer: First, Birch & Fourth Streets 'dater & Sewer In accordance with AS 46.03.030, the Department of Environmental Conservation offers the City of Kenai a grant of State funds, not to exceed $105,565, to be applied toward the financing of approximately 685 feet of 6-inch water line and 1370 feet of 8-inch asbestos concrete server, along with numerous taps for service laterals on Birch and Fourth Streets. This will be carried out in conjunction with street improvements and storm drainage on First, Birch, and Fourth Streets. This grant offer represents fifty percent (50%,,) of estimated non -federally funded eligible costs of $211,130. This offer is expressly conditioned upon the terms and limitations contained herein, and in 18 AAC 73, is and based upon the estimated eligible project costs as itemized below: Total Estimated Eligible Project Costs 1. Administrative Expenses _0_ ' 2. Legal Expenses -0- 3. Engineering Design Fees 2,300 4. Project Inspection and Surveying 20,4130 t 5. Construction 179,350 --' 6. Equipment _0_ 7. Other 3. j 1 9.�- 10. Project Contingencies 9,000 3 d f i t S t i. a Mr. William Brighton Page 2 February 25, 1982 11. Total Estimated Eligible Costs 211,130 12. Less: Federal Financing -0- 13. Estimated Non -Federal Eligible Costs 211,130 14. State Grant - 50% of Line 13 105,565 Adjustment of expenditures within the budgeted cost items is allowed, however, if actual project costs exceed the total estimated eligible costs, a revised grant application must be submitted before additional funding can be committed. If actual project costs are less than the estimated costs, the grant will be reduced to the extent necessary to comply with the percentage limitation set forth in this offer. Grant payments. will be made in accordance with the enclosed payment schedule. All requests for payment must be submitted on the enclosed "Request for Payment" form. By accepting this grant offer the City of Kenai agrees to comply with the procedures and requirements contained in the Construction Grants Regulations (18 AAC 73, appended) as well as the following general and special grant conditions. GENERAL GRANT CONDITIONS 1) Plan Approval The grantee agrees to obtain plan and specification approval from the Department in accordance with 18 AAC 73.020 prior to issuing a notice to proceed with construction, to a contractor. 2) Contract Award A Contractor Bondinq Requirements a, he grantee agrees to b d construct on contracts exceeding $50,000. Adequate time, not less than 30 days, shall be allowed between the date of formal advertisement and the date the bids must be submitted. The grantee agrees that any contract awarded will be to the lowest responsive responsible bidder. b. The grantee agrees to submit procedures for award of construction contracts of less than $50,o00, to the Department for prior approval when means other than the competitive bidding process are proposed. c. The grantee must require the contractor to furnish performance and payment bonds in accordance with AS 36.25.010. d. If local or federal ordinances or regulations also apply to the contract award or contractor bonding requirements for this project, the host stringent requirements shall apply. e. The grantee agrees to provide AUEC with a summary of itemized bid tabulations, a copy of the Notice to Proceed, and a copy of the construction, contract. ■ D. u- Mr. William Brighton Page 3 February 25, 1982 3) Change Orders The grantee agrees that all project change orders will be submitted to the Department for approval in accordance with 18 AAC 73.020(e). 4) Project Completion e grantee agrees to provide sufficient local funding to match State and federal grant assistance and to ensure the completion of a properly functioning project, in accordance with 18 AAC 73.020 (j). 5) Operation and Maintenance The grantee agrees to operate and maintain the completed project. ' 6) Titles and Easements The grantee agrees to obtain all titles and easements necessary to provide clear title or authority to construct and maintain the proposed project. j 7) Eligibilit The grantee acknowledges that disbursement of progress payments by the State does not constitute acceptance of any item as an eligible project cost until all project costs are audited and determined to I be eligible. i 8) Inspection j The grantee agrees to alloy, State inspections of all project work ! and audits of related records and data for which this grant is offered, at any reasonable time. 9) Records h�rantee agrees to maintain project accounts and records which verify the grant eligibility of project expenditures. These accounts and records shall be kept apart from non -grant -eligible local records and from those records maintained for the purpose of other State or federal grant programs involved in the project. 10) Progress Reports The grantee agrees to submit periodic progress reports on the proposed project with each payment request, r ! 11) Subcontracts The grantee agrees to submit project subcontract, over $10,000 and all changes to these subcontracts for Departmental approval. i 12) 031na yes 9 tee acknowledges that the State is serving only as a funding i� source for this project and as such is to be held harmless by the grantee from any claims or damages arising during or as a result of this grant assisted project. i 13) Municipal Bond The municipal official having custody of the construction account must be bonded as authorized in AS 29.23.520. r3 Mr. William Brighton Page 4 February 25, 1982 14) Grant Cancellation The grantee acknowledges the right of the State to rescind the grant and seek recovery of payments already made on the proposed project if the grant application is found to contain incorrect or misleading information or if a condition contained herein, or in 18 AAC 73 is violated. SPECIAL GRANT CONDITIONS None Please carefully review this grant offer, the related grant conditions, and the enclosed regulations. If satisfactory, sign and return the original along with a formal resolution accepting the grant enacted by the Kenai City Council. In the resolution, the municipality must agree to accept responsibility to operate and maintain the proposed water, sewerage or solid waste utility improvement and agree to the terms and conditions of this grant offer. Acceptance of the grant is required within six months to prevent revocation of the offer. No progress payments can be made until the grant offer is accepted. Nothing in this offer, whether or not accepted, may be deemed to constitute a contractual obligation on the part of the State until a resolution of acceptance has been submitted to the Department. The City is to be congratulated on its effort to provide this important community improvement. Si ir ueller Commissioner Enclosures Accupted on behalf of the by: iypea Na;ie fitie Date Si ,nat,ire r 0 CITY OF KENAI RESOLUTION NO. 82-32 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AWARDING CONTRACTS FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT. WHEREAS, the following bids (F.O.B. Kenai) were received for the above mentioned equipment from: Beaver Loop Welding/ Old Local Firm Rec-Time World Vanco Funco 1. 1 Structure ---- $3,307.00 ---- ---- $3,024.00* 2. 1 Structure ---- 1,240.00 ---- ---- 1,139.00* 3. 1 Structure ---- 3,204.00 ---- ---- 2,943.00* 4. 1 Structure ---- 2,980.00 ---- ---- 2,736.00* 5. 2 Structures ---- 4,010.00 ---- ---- 3,680.00* 6. 1 Structure ---- 1,047.00 ---- ---- 961.00* 7. 1 Structure ---- 3,785.00 •--- ---- 3,471.00* 8. 12 Park Stoves ---- ---- ---- $1,092.00** 1,017.60 9. 6 Picnic Tables*** $1,680.00 ---- $1,380.00 1,860.00 2,262.00 10. 4 Shelters 4,400.00** ---- ---- 4,312.00 ---- 11. 6 Goals A Posts ---- ---- ---- 2,760.00 3,090.00 42. 5 Water Fountains ---- ---- ---- 5,070.00 4,112.50 13. 6 Riding Animals ---- ---- ---- 1,038.00 1,141.80 14. 1 Roller Coaster*** ---- ---- ---- 638.00 574.00 Bid items incomplete - not enough information ** Bid items greatly exceed minimum specifications *** Bid items deleted WHEREAS, the City of Kenai has the option to choose none, one, combination of any, or all items submitted, and WHEREAS, some bid items greatly exceed minimum specifications, some were incomplete, and others deleted, and WHEREAS, the selection of these items would be in the best interest of the City even though some bids are not the lowest, and WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Parks and Recreation Department make the following recommendations: A. That bid item 410 - 4 shelters be given to Beaver Loop Welding because they are a local firm, their product greatly exceeds the minimum specifications, and their product looks superior to that of the other bidder. B. That bid items 1-7 be given to Rec-Time Equipment because the only other bidder did not submit the proper information required to be submitted with the bid for these items. C. That bid items 8, 11 and 13 be given to Vanco who was the low bidder on items 11 and 13 and had a superior product to that of the low bidder on item 8. J 1 0. That bid item #12 be given to Funco, the low bidder. E. That bid items 09 and 14 be deleted at this time due to a possible local source at a lower price. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA that the following playground equipment be purchased: Items Numbered Total Cost Beaver Loop Welding 10 $ 4,400.00 Rec-Time Equipment 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 19,573.00 Vanco 8, 11, 13 4,890.00 Funco 12 4.112.50 Total PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, THIS 7th day of April, 1982. VINCENT 01REMLY, MAW ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City C er U i i I I CITY OF KENAI RESOLUTION NO. 82 - 33 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AWARDING THE BID FOR ONE 10-FOOT SANDER UNIT TO YUKON EQUIPMENT, INC. WHEREAS, the following bids were received for the above mentioned sander unit April 1, 1982. Bidder "Bid Price Yukon Equipment, Inc. $ 8,476.00 Sahlberg Equipment, Inc. 8,747.00 Evans Engine and Equipment Co. 11,066.00 Craig Taylor Equipment Company No Bid MIEREAS, the recommendation from the Public Works Department is to award the bid to Yukon Equipment, Inc. for the amount of $ 8,476.00. WHEREAS, sufficient Federal Revenue Sharing monies are appropriated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the bid for one 10-foot sander unit be awarded to Yukon Equipment, Inc. for the amount of $ 8,476.00. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF. KENAI, ALASKA, this 7th day of April, 1982. VINCINI 2EILL , MYOR ATTEST: Approved by Finance: Id M r N� CITY OF KENAI Del Cd dW o/ 414"a " P. O. BOX 550 KENAI. ALASKA 99611 _ - - f5Li►NONS 159 • 7535 March 30, 1982 TO: Kenai City Council FROM: Janet Loper, Acting City Clerk SUBJECT: Liquor License Applications Notification has been received from Borough Attorney Joe Kashi that Kenai Joe's and Harborview Restaurant have taken care of any problems they have had at the Borough level and are eligible 04 for approval of their liquor license revewal applications. Both applications had been objected to by City Council. Italian Gardens has applied for a transfer of ownership of liquor license from Kostas Manolakakis to loran Antoski. Mr. Kashi states that the Borough has no objections. j1 LJ JAY S. 11A/.M0110, 64VfR110R � ,1 CDa:UQ�BAg'Q'DAQ�.D'9' QDa' 66L�:0'G�:ROTC: 201 EAST 9TH. AVENUE ALCIOHOLICBEVERAGECUNTROL BOARD ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 March 19, 1982 . Janet Whelan, Clerk _. City of Kenai P.O. Box 580 Kenai, AK 99611 Dear Ms. Whelan: Wle are. in receipt of the following application(s) for transfer of ownership of a liquor license(s) within the City of Kenai You are being notified as required by AS 04.11.520. RESTAURANT/EATING PLACE ITALIAN GARDENS; Zoran Antoski; Mile 12 Kenai Spur Rd.; Mail: Box 2843, Kenai, AK 99611. Transferred from Kostas Manolakakis; same d/b/a and location. A local governing body as defined under AS O4.21.030(10) may protest the '� JI approval of the application(s) pursuant to AS O4.11.480 by furnishing the . ,y board and the applicant with a clear and concise written statement of reasons in support of a protest of the application within 30 days of receipt of this notice. If a protest is filed, the board will not approve the application unless it finds that the protest is arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable. Instead, in accordance with AS O4.11.510(b), the board will notify the applicant that the application is denied for the reasons stated in the protest. The applicant is entitled to an informal conference with either the director or the board and, if not satisfied by the informal conference, is entitled to a formal hearing in accordance with AS 44.62.330-44.62.630. IF THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A HEARING, THE MUICIPALITY MUST COME FORWARD AT THE 11EARI'IG 'WITH EVIDENCE AND ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF YOUR PROTEST. Under AS O4.11.420(a), the board may not issue a license or permit for premises in a municipality where a zoning regulation or ordinance prohibits the sale or consumption of alcoholic beverages, unless a variance of the regulation or ordinance has been approved. Under AS O4.11.420(b) munici- palities must inform the board of zoning regulations or ordinances which pro- hibit the sale or consumption of alcoholic beverages. If you wish to protest the application referenced above, please do so in the prescribed manner and within the prescribed time. Please show proof of service upon the applicant. Under regulation 15 AAC 104.145(c) the board will grant a local governing body an extension of 30 days in which to pro- test an application if a request is filed in writing within the original 30-day period. If a municipal zoning regulation or ordinance prohibits the sale or con- sumption of alcoholic beverages at the proposed premises and no variance of the regulation or ordinance has been approved, please so notify us and provide a certified copy of the relevant regulation or ordinance if you have not previously done so. PROTEST UNDER AS O4.11.480 AND THE PROHIBITION OF SALE OR CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AS REQUIRED BY ZONING REGULATION OR ORDINANCE UNDER AS O4.11.420(a) ARE 1110 SEPARATE AND DISTIINCT SUBJECTS. Please bear that in mind in responding to this notice. BLC:vk Enc. Sincerely, Betty L. Calhoon Records & Licensing Supervisor (907) 277-8638 I t r1� El CITY OF KENAI I'M eapda� 4 4Z"4a F. O. EOX NO KENAI, ALAEKA 99611 - " TELEPHONE 4E3 • 763E MEMORANDUM TOs Members of the Kenai Planning & Zoning Commission FROMs Ben T. Delahay, City Attorney av SUBJECTs Lease Application on Proposed Lot 9, Block 1, Etolin Subdivision Addition No. 3 DATES April 7, 1982 I have been requested for an opinion as to whether the application submitted by John Stoehner and Kristine Stoehner on March 30, 1982, should be considered as a new lease application or an amendment of an old lease application. It is quite obvious that the lease application dated March 30, 1982, is the fir ad only application for lease of Lot 91 Block 11 Etolin Subdivision Addition No. 3. I have read the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Stoehner dated March 30, 1982, to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and I find at least two inaccurate statements therein. The first was the statement that this lease application "is an amendment and continuation of a lease application that was submitted previously by Arctic Aviation, Inc, in early January, 19821. The earlier application referred to was made by a corporation (Arctic Aviation, Inc.) and was w= fbr a new lease. but rather was for an amendment to allow a new use for an existing lease. This change of use was denied subsequently because of the conditions of the land conveyance to the City and FAA restrictions. In denying the amendment to Lot 1 in Block 3 because the use suggested was not airport related and that lot was on the airport, it was suggested that other City land might be available off the airport where that objection would not apply. Subsequently, discussions were had about a new lease to other land in the vicinity that was unplatted, and the lease application now before P & Z is the result of those negotiations. The second inaccuracy occurred on page 2 of the Stoehner letter in paragraph 3 where they stated "and it was determined that Arctic Aviation, Inc, does not have any problems with their leases other than to have them reappraised pursuant to the lease provisions, and those matters would be resolved". As a matter of 1 fact it was aQt so determined. These lands were reappraised by the City prior to July 1, 1980, and prior to July 1, 1981, for a renegotiated rental, and Arctic Aviation, Inc. failed to go forward with any negotiations or any response to the City concerning such renegotiations. The Stoehners, who are the officers in Arctic Aviation, Inc., hay& discussed the matter with the City Manager and City Attorney and have indicated they were moving forward with getting an appraisal of their own. However, this does aat resolve the situation - after they obtain an appraisal, it will still be necessary to determine a fair rental which may or may not automatically result from their appraisal. After that rental is determined (and from other leases renegotiated over the same period of time, it is apparent that the rents will be increased in some amount) Arctic Aviation, Inc. must still pay the arrearages in rent on one lot from July 1, 1980, and on the other from July 1, 1981, both through June 30, 1982, $SfQig Arctic Aviation, Inc. will be in good standing with the City. City officials appreciate the fact that Mr. and Mrs. Stoehner are going forward at this time to resolve these matters, but it ig inaccurate to state that they "would be resolved". If the parties cannot agree after the Stoehner's reach their appraisal there might still be a court suit to resolve these issues. I would like to point out to the Commission that you are working in a dual capacity. In one capacity you interpret and enforce Borough Ordinances on zoning (specifically Chapter 21,76 of the Kenai Peninsula Borough) and determine what uses may be allowed and what variances or conditional uses should be permitted. In this instance the property is in a light industrial zone under Section KPB 21.76.120 which is designed to provide for the development of industrial uses which are mutally compatible and which are of a type which has no nuisance effects upon surrounding property, or which may be controlled to prevent any nuisance effects on surrounding property. The uses thereunder include warehouse and wholesale businesses, retail businesses, manufacturing, fabricating, assembling, and storage of a character that meets the development requirements of that section. Among other development requirements set forth in Paragraph C of that Section is that no use shall be conducted in a matter which is noxious or injurious to nearby properties by reason of the production or emmision of dust, smoke, refuse matter, Q&Z, gas fumes, noise, vibration or similar substances as of W- or conditions. Thus in this capacity you must determine whether the requested use falls within the principle uses permitted, and if so, whether it would produce or emit odor - which has been claimed by opponents of this lease and denied by those supporting it. In your other capacity you have a broader authority. where uses of Cit"lined laa" are concerned, your recommendations to the City Council can be based on your opinions as to the desirability of a particular use within the neighborhood even though it might be within the strict standards of the Zoning Ordinance. As owner of the lands, the City does not have to allow uses for their 0M j,MWR that might well be permitted under the Zoning Ordinance for lands owned by the parties involved. In this capacity you should considered the value of adjoining properties and whether or not the properties in Etolin Subdivision should be restricted to offices and retail businesses rather than wholesale, commercial or industrial enterprises. The City Council will make the final decision in this matter of propriety of use, but, the Council is entitled to your earnest consideration and forthright advice in the matter. BTDskh r rwe.rr►i ` v��. _-����. �_-_ - _- ,ate ;=r = � " - - _ - i�if�l�fl; JOHN STO1:ll ILR ,and KRISTINE STOL''1lNER P. 0. Box 550 Kenai, Alaska 99611 March 30, 1982 City of Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission P. 0. Box 580 Kenai, Alaska 99611 Attention: Phil Bryson, Chairman Re: Lease application on proposed Lot 9, Block 1, Etolin Subdivison No. 3 Gentlemen: Enclosed is a lease application on Lot 9, Block 1., Etolin Subdivision No. 3, as set forth on the preliminary plat prepared by 11alone & Associates, Inc., Lot 9 being the pie -shaped lot containing 30,000 square feet. As will be noted, in the lease application, plans for a 38' x 54' concrete block building have previously been submitted to the City of Kenai, showing not only the con- struction of the building but the waste -water drainage as well as electrical and plumbing. Attached to this appli- cation is the plot land showing the location of the building on proposed Lot 9. There needs to be some clarification as to this lease application. This lease application is not a new one in the true sense of the word. It is an amendment: and con- tinuation of a lease application that was submitted previous- ly by Arctic Aviation, Inc. in early January, 1982. Originally Arctic Aviation, Inc. requested from the City of Kenai a permit to construct a 30'x6O' metal building on a lot already leased by Arctic Aviation, Inc. located in the General Aviation Subdivision adjacent to the hanger that is being occupied by Arctic Aviation, Inc. The purpose of the pro- posal was to construct a building to be used in part as an engine overall shop and in part as a clam processing plant. On January 20, 1982 Arctic Aviation, Inc. made a formal lease application which was presented to the Commission on January 27, 1.982, at which time the proposed building;, uses and operations were described to the Planning and Zoning Commission. J I City of Kenai (larch 30, 1982 Page Two There was considerable discussion as to whether or not both, or at least one, of the businesses contemplated in the building were airport related. There was further discussion relative to problems concerning waste -water and the sewer system. Commissioner LaShot felt that more research was necessary into the project and Wayne Regelin asked the City Attorney, tor. Ben Delahay, for his opinion. Mr. Delahay stated that he felt the clam processing facility would not be applicable to the general aviation leases and would not be agreeable with FAA. He felt that the machine shop was within the lease and would be approved by FAA. There were some questions raised as to the leases which Arctic Aviation, Inc. has and whether or not they were current. At this time the Planning and Zoning Commission turned down the application. Subsequent to the January 27, 1982 hearing before the Commission, Mr. Richard W. Peifer, of the State of Alaska, Department of Environmental Conservation, was contacted relative to waste -water and sewage problems that occur in clam processing plants, and Mr. Peifer wrote a letter to Kristine Stoehner of Northern Lights Fisheries, Inc. on the 17th day of December, 1981 in response to her inquiry (copy attached to this letter as Exhibit "A"), which is self- explanatory. Further, Mr. LaSort was contacted and it was suggested that if he wanted to do any further research to contact Bell Boy Seafoods of Seaside, Oregon, as they are one of the largest processing plants of shellfish, such as shrimp, crab, clams, etc., and are located within city limits and on municipal water and sewer systems. In addi- tion, Kristine Stoehner also contacted Bell Boy and requested information regarding the effects of processing on municipal water and sewer systems to which Bell Boy replied, on March 20, 1982, in two letters, one signed by Mr. Marvin A. Smith, as Manager, and one signed by Mr. Clarence E. Sigurdson, as President (copies of which letters are attached hereto as Exhibits "B" and "C" respectively). The question of the leases of Arctic Aviation, Inc. was discussed both with Bill Brighton, City Manager, and Mr. Delahay, the City Attorney, and it was determined that Arctic Aviation, Inc. does not have any problems with their leases other than to have them reappraised pursuant to the lease provisions, and that those matters would be resolved. Subsequent to the January 27, 1982 meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission, we approached the City Council with our plans and proposals and the City Council appeared to be most interested and suggested that we go back to the Planning and Zoning Commission with additional information. City of Kenai March 30, 1982 '1 Page Three On February 24, 1982 there was another meeting wiLh the Planning and Zoning Commission, at which time there was con- siderable discussion with reference to the general aviation lots already leased by Arctic Aviation, Inc. and the City Manager, Mr. Brighton, reported to the Commission that he had been in contact with the FAA and was informed that the clam processing plant probably would not be permitted on the lots leased by Arctic Aviation as clam processing was not airport related. At this time it was also reported that the Stoehners had requested a 30,000 square foot lot across the street in the proposed Etolin Subdivison No. 3, which is not on general aviation property and therefore a clam processing plant would be allowed. however, at that time the area in question had not been platted or appraised by the City of Kenai but was in the process at the time. Subsequently there was a preliminary plat prepared by McLane & Associates, Inc. which apparently had been submitted to the City of Kenai for approval. At the February 24, 1982 Commission meeting the Com- mission apparently approved the concept as proposed by Arctic Aviation, Inc. on a motion by Commissioner Blanding to include the approval (of the concept) contingent upon the approval from FAA, and should the FAA disapprove then approve (the concept on) Lot 7, Block 1 of Etolin Subdivision. The motion was seconded by Hal Smalley. Upon roll call vote, it was unanimously approved, apparently the concept of a clam processing plant was approved by the Commission on February 24, 1982 on the Arctic Aviation, Inc. lot if ap- proved by FAA. If it was not approved by FAA then the concept was apparently approved for Lot 7, Block 1, Etolin Subdivision. This was before the preliminary plat came out and the lot in question was changed from Lot 7 to Lot 9 of Block 1, Etolin Subdivision No. 3. On March 10, 1982, the Stoehners appeared before the Planning and Zoning Commission to update their present application and proposal. Mr. Smalley informed the Planning and Zoning Commission that the FAA had objected to a clam processing plant on FAA leased land. The lot in question being a general aviation lot that is under lease by Arctic Aviation, Inc. However, there was the condition that should any new information be received FAA would take a second look at its decision. At the time of the meeting no further information had been received. In the course of the f,. City of Kenai March 30, 1982 Page Four discussion it was pointed out that there was now a pre- liminary plat and it was suggested that the application be resubmitted as a new appl.icaton for one of the lots under the new proposed plat. There was some discussion as to what lot the Stoehners were interested in, it appearing it was Lot 10, but in actual fact it was Lot 9 and Lot 9 was decided upon. In the discussion there were questions involving (a) zoning of the new proposed lots, (b) obnoxious odors, (c) time factors relative to water and sewer that would be available later in the year. The Commission was advised that the processing would take place in Sterling until the new plant was completed and the water and sewer hooked up. Questions of water and sewer, drainage, and refuse were discussed and it was suggested that the manner of disp-;sal of the waste material from the clam processing plant be written into the lease. On March 24, 1982 the Stoehners appeared at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and upon request were placed on the agenda for further discussion of their lease ap- plication, at which time they orally requested two amend- ments to the existing lease application by Arctic Aviation, Inc., (1) that the lease applicant be changed to Mr. and Airs. Stoehner d/b/a Northern Lights Fisheries, Inc. and, (2) that the description on the lease application be amended to read Lot 9, Block 1, Etolin Subdivision No. 3. At this time there was considerable discussion relative to the various questions that had arisen previously, and more specifically as to odors. It was pointed out to the Commission that one of the largest clam processors in the Washington and Oregon area had never had any problems with odor and they were located within city limits and on city water and sewer. It was further brought out that until sewer and water were hooked up, processing would be carried on in Sterling. In the event construction of the new plant was finished prior to the sewer and water being available the lines would be taken to the property lines and stubbed out for hookup when construction of the sewer and water was finished. With reference to the question of odor it was discussed at length, and Mr. Peifer's letter of December 19, 1982 was submitted to the Commission along with the letters from Bell Boy. It is quite obvious that the question of odor is -.=-' determined by the management and sanitation of the plant. 1 The Commission was advised that the waste parts of the clam - - were handled by placing these items in plastic buckets and City of Kenai I•larch 30, 1982 Page Five disposed of at an appropriate disposal facility. This was also true of the clam shells. There was some indication from 11r. Jerry Cartier that he allowed his clam shells to set for a number of days at a time and they created odors and flies that could be smelled for some three blocks. This is a problem of management and if properly handled according, to State regulations there should be no problems whatsoever. The Administrative Code under A.A.C. 37.220, Paragraph 9, specifically states, and I quote "[S]hells from which the meat has been removed must be promptly removed from the shucking room and disposed of so that the shucked part of the clam can in no manner become contaminated and so that no nuisance is created" (emphasis added). The AdmIR-istrative Codeefurther states, under A.A.C. 11. 371.20 "Waste and offal, or any other waste, incident to the processing, cleaning or storing or preparation of any fishery product for storage, curing or marketing must be promptly removed from the premises and disposed of in accordance with environmental regulations 18 A.C.C. 77.' t 1—s quite obvious that shell and other waste products from fish processing must be re- moved immediately. That does not mean in three or four days, but at the completion of processing at the end of the day. - - - With reference to the sewer and water drainage, the =, plans indicate that there are two waste water systems, one which comes directly from the processing plant and goes into a large trap for purposes of trapping sand and other solids and keeping them from going into the main sewer system, and the second sewer system is the one for domestic waste from the restrooms and other parts of the plant which will be fed into the main sewer system downstream from the large trap that comes from the processing room. It is quite obvious that this particular type of dual system will prevent any major problems with drainage into the sewer system. The attached lease application, which appears to be a new lease application, is really a continuation of the proposals and concepts which have already been approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. However, the two amendments that have been previously discussed, i.e, the i. change of the name of the applicants and the legal description of the property to be leased, was the reason for this new application. The rest of the proposal submitted by the $ Stoehners and Arctic Aviation, Inc, in the past still remains the same. The only differences that have cropped up so far City of Kenai March 30, 1982 Page Six is the Stoehners obvious desire to comply with the requests and directions of the Planning and Zoning Commission in pre- paring a set of plans that meet all environmental concerns as evidenced by a letter recently from Mr. Piefer of the State Department of Environmental Conservation to Kristine Stoehner that the plans for construction of the processing plant have been reviewed and approved as presented on March 25, 1982, these being the same sets of plans that were submitted to the Commission on March 24, 1982. The Commission was advised at the March 24, 1982 meeting that time is of the essence in this particular instance as it is necessary for a lease to be approved so that financing can be obtained and bids can be let for construction of the plant, and we are getting to that time of the year when time is growing short. Nir. Piefer of the Department of Environmental Conservation was more than helpful in approving the plans prior to having a lease or a place to put the plant, although he had mentioned earlier that he would not do so, Mr. Piefer realizing the importance of time and that the approval of the plans was necessary. It is respectfully requested that if at all possible, the Planning and Zoning Commission hold a special meeting for the approval of the concept application that has been submitted this date or, as an alternative, inasmuch as we do not know the procedures of the Commission, whether or not a telephone approval can be made based upon the fact that the concept has previously been approved and that is all that is necessary at this time is to approve the lot on which the plant is to be located so a lease may be drawn. It was also our understanding that after we left the meeting on March 24, 1982, after the Commission had tabled the lease application that there was further discussion to the effect that our concept and project had been approved subject to the updating of the paperwork, i.e., filing a subsequent formal lease application. This being the case, we would appreciate it very much, since the application is the same as proposed previously with no changes other than ,I the ones mentioned at the meeting on March 24, 1982, i.e,, the names of the applicants and the correction of the legal �j description, that this lease application be approved so that fi we can go forward with the formal lease approval by the City Council at their next meeting. Sincerely, --- ; 431 cc: Bill Brighton, Manager City of Kenai I"T. -- w „ -ran-ITX USt; ON" • C: l "1 ' }' U ; � l; l: ;�' ; t l Date Received_ P. O, BOX 580 K[NAI• l.IASKA PHONE 2B3.7i15 Time LEASE' APPLICATION (sf9naturp a^d tltlt Name of Applicant John Stoehner and Kristine SI:oehner i Address P. 0. Box 550, Kenai, Alaska 99611 i Business Name and Address d/b/a Northern Lights Fisheries, Inc. P. 0. Box 1406, Kenai, Alaska 99611 Kenai Peninsula Borough Sales Tax No. 06309 (if applicable) State Business License No. 82-037 (if applicable) i Telephone (907) 283-7158 (Check One) Lease X Permit Lot Description Proposed: Lot Nine (9), Block One (1), ETOLIN SUBDIVISION Kenai .ecor ng s r ct. Desired Length of Lease: Fifty (50) years Property to be used for Clam processing plant Description of Developments (type, construction, size, etc.) _ 38'x54' block building per plans previously submitted. Plot plan attached. Attach development plan to scald (1" = 50'), :,Iunwing all buildings planned. Time Schedule for Proposed Development: I'.eginning Date June 1, 1982 Proposed Completion Date Jules►_15, 1982 EStimaLe VillUe of CoI1SLr11Ci iota $ 89,000.00 �f I 1 ' Date. _--- Si,;nvdiS% _ -- — (".31E'DULL "A" 1. Pressed ButildLnZ. The proposed building on the lease application o£�`John Stoehner and Kristine Stoehner is a 38' x 54' building located toward the East property line of Lot 9, Block 1, Etolin Subdivision No. 3, as shown on the plot plan. 2. Parking Facilities. There will be a large area to the South o the propose wilding, running from the East property line to the main street, or West property line, for employee parking. There will be an area from approximately the middle of the proposed building on the West to the property line on the East, Along the arc, as parking for customers. 3. Land Clearing. All of the land in question is already cleared. T ere will be a necessity of removing the overburden, the overburden being the part that is in Lhe parking lot areas, which is an acceptable method when there is no buildings to go on top of the parking area. 4. Set -Back Lines. The normal 25-foot set -back lines are being observed In tHie instant case per the plot plan. There are no requirements that there be set -backs from the side lot lines to the South or to the East and the building is located close to the East line, allowing considerable room to the South, North and ',Vest. 5. Drainage Plan. It is anticipated that drainage will be from the Soutffe-ast corner toward the arc of the street so that all drainage goes into the City street storm sewers. 6. Entrances and Exits for Building and Lot. The lot !�? is a rather unusual s ape so all of the entrances and exits '�. from the facility are contained on the arc of the main street loop, and all of the entrances and exits to the building will be to the West and to the North. 7. Building Material. The building will be constructed of concrete loc on the ground floor. All exterior walls will be finished and painted with a flat roof. All interior walls Will meet both city and state codes as well as all materials for electrical and plumbing will meet state and city code. 8. Location of Signs, Size and Materials. The only ----- signs that w-FIT-5e faced upon tTie�5ui ng originally will be directly over the office door, indicating the name of the --`- establishment, the business being operated there, and the - 1 sign will be either painted on the buil.ding or permanently attached to the building. There will be another sign on -- the West and of the building also designating the business --- name, which will be painted on the building or attached to the building. SCHEDULE "A", (Continued) 9. Fencing. There will be no fencing at present. 10. Curb Cuts. Curb cuts should be done on the arc directly to tFie West of the proposed building to facilitate access to the delivery builders, and there should be a curb cut to the North not too far from the Eastern boundary to facilitate access to the customer parking in front of the office and the rest of the parking areas. 11. Buildin& Height. The building originally will be ten to twelve feet in height, being a one-story structure. The foundation, however, will be parepared for a second story for future storage and office space of an additional ten feet. CITY OF KENAI • CHECK LISP FOR SITE PLANS ALL ITEMS MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE APPLICATION CAN BE ACCEPTED. Drawings should be drawn to scale 1"= ft.* and should show layout of the lot applied for and the location of all improvements proposed. Drawings should show: 1. Buildings ......................................... 2. Proposed Buildings............ ;.. . . ..... ....... (Could be indicated with dotted red 3. Parking Facilities ..•� ... ... . ... .............. (How many spaces and wherelocated) 4. How much land will be cleared, landscaped, ..... paved, graveled, etc. and method of disposal of overburden should be specified. 5. Building Set Backs ................................ 6. Drainage Plan ..................................... 7. Entrances and exits for building and lots......... S. Building materials ................................ 9. Location of signs, size, and materials made of... 10. Fencing ........................................... 11. Curb Cuts (where applicable) ...................... 12. Building Height .................................. 13. Buildings on or near the airport on airport lands must complete FAA Form 7460-1 (Far Part 77)....... *This does not have to be drawn by an architect. Page 2 of 5 4 mm,D i;:(.; i;:POi?Id,1'am On this sheet submit a drawin;; of bui.ldi-n;; planned, dra:.:n to scale. Scale: 1" = ft•. Construction materials: (wood frame, Steel btti.lding, etc.) 1 r THIS DRAWING r/ Y b SHOULD BE AS COMPLETE AS POSSIBLE 1 I n I • 1 i / r 1 y 1 - 4 i.1 •ra `r -i 1 1 1 I i 7 i ,i 3 - di:;rC;:�'rl L :_.s :t;�•, i_11_. in • J 1 5 , r � rT 1 a Description of Property__ j • i CONDITIONS 01' ACUPTANCE (To be completed by the City) i � I Annual rent rate or cost y Zoned for Permits required Assessments i Insurance required Construction must begin by Completion date for major construction THIS APPLICATION WILL BE A PART OF THE LEASE Planning Commission Approval By: Date of Approval Chairman •City Council Approval By: Date of Approval Mayor Pace 5 of 5 On chip: Kept NWAL a ci7.:.;Aq r;lic• 0:1 Lin, 1.1;•r,ut: of III(! lot: applied jor •m' III,, 1, ,c:..,;i of ;ill. lunrm•.�hgitu proym—d. (i.c. ;,Irlci►:;� lot'./I01,.: WlMr CU.) c,,;im A, or AN drawing .: uld ;give a clair idea or whe c vach impmvemcm hrupoN cd will by on the lot.. Scalc: t Iowa BL+�L BUOY CRAB COMPANY �-- __- :.---,--_—--_—_—r_ — . _....Qfudltl, Sea Foods_ We Specialize in 11. U. Box 46 -:- SEASIDE. OREGON 97139 Fresh and Canned Crabs I'hone Area Code 503 738-6354 Hare;i 20, 19fi2. Northern Lights Fisheries, Inc. Box 1406 Kenai, Ala rdta f19611 Dear Kristine Stooiiner, or '.%Iiom It tiny Concern, I have been with 1;e11 Buoy Crab Colupnny g;ui.ug on 30 ;ears, and for some time, as the Ilactoger. t In processing razor clamq, they have tilt- least -,lmount of odor. As in any Nonfood plant, sanitntion is the utinost important factor. The waste nhould be dumped daily, and the washing; and stcri.lizing of the containers with products such as T 20 X - Zap or J..)lt. I Ai all Lite years I have been with Bell Buoy Crab, we have not had any problems with the City regarding odor. Very truly yours, BELL I11JOY C1{AB WmIlAI•IY M via A. Smith 11AS:cc f" fA c) i � I{ f \/ M t. �+.•.:ww� .r ,q:.."'7'�/.—TTiTjJ37"�;�"'..:�r,�;,A� .. .ra.�. k t 7 sU f ' ` 1 { 1 1 1 I I I I 1 { I JI I 1 I I 1 i �J1 1 1 ■ BELI, BUOY CRAB COMPANY ---_-------.--== —Quality Sc.i roods We Specialise in P. 0, Bar 46 -:- SEASIDE, ORL ON 9713o Fresh and Canned Crabs 11honc Area Code 503 738-6354 "arch 20' Northern Lights fisheries, I c. Box 1406 Kenai, Alaska 99611 wor i.rinLine 3tvnitner, k'e rre rOrr•. L) 1,cai: bolt you :.re , ettin ; fl: c'c f:-to.l t•nur COW- petition regardi'g itu.t.+llatiru of your c1rn•1 dre.;iugt pl.•nt at Kenai. I believe I can speak with more authority than .:.t:• other person regarding the sanitation problem of putting tip razor clams. I;y past experience was lrorevtan of a clan canner:• in Copalis Beach, Washington, durii+l; the npriny, clr•n scosoll, iiarch I to June 1, 1922, 1925, and 1926. A total of several millio+i purtinci : were processed with the cannery located right i,t town with no cu.nplaiuts of odor, etc. i also operated a razor cl.-w cannery in Cordov:l, ellwaka, during �1 the suu=ers of 1924 and 1925 with no sanitation problem: n clata cannery located in Vorth Cove Washington tit 1923 with no coi:+pl tints; a clam cannery in Warrenton, Oregon, during Lite dears 1927 to 1932 right in town with no complaints; a hard shell clout cannery located l right in the center of Port Townsend, Washington, during; the winters of 1935 to 1941 with no complaints; and during the suinmer seasons of 1935 to 1941, I operated razor claw canneries in Westport, Washington, and Markham, Washington, with no complaints. r During Lite ]vast 16 yU:lra, 1. 11.1vc 1)"I-"i 1 ef'l" t. ut the 4t. ltun� Crab Grimproy, 1lperntin;, on buLh razor clan' rnli r: ir:. t;n_ are Inside Lite city lititu; of Seaside, r Loon of about 5,000 popcil.'tion. Ile are connected to the sewer, lle 1• +ve never I:e:lrcl a ('ri:aPla 1nt iron+ a city official during our 36 years here. i � 'Ilse worst odor from any :en£oud 1)Irnt c smi-!; } rori tits, of r:+Lion of tuna. The people in Astoria are very unhapt)y bec:Luse zevt.! I )lstorfa tuna plants have closed down. ' ` V ! f r: r.: 'Y- r , I:r in Liite '--I.r Pare 2 March 20, 1982 If you c:ui u:;e this letter to your adva;:ti,ge, ;,Lc.+::n_ feet fire to do so. It i3 a shn;ue to let the Alarka rnzor clads go to waste an they have in the pant % i thout betting; full use of then. Yours very truly, BELL BUOY CRAB COMPAW / Cl.:renc 2. Uirurd ,on President CES:cc P.S. if anyone is worried about sand in the .eiwer line, you can make a sump about three feet Square and run the pier, to the sewer line about three inches above the sump floor. In this way, the sand can be cleaned out of the sump periodically. I� it - c tJ) 11 Alt ►, (..► .� � � !..:i1 ,. it�•r• I/L10T. OF ENV1114/N.ME TA1. CONSERVATION DIVISION OF SEAFOOD AND ANIMAL INDUSTRIES , JAY S. HANNOXO, 60VIAMOt P. 0. BOX 1832 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 09610 PHONE: (907) 272-1561 P. O. BOX 1088 PALMER ALASKA 99646 March 19, 1982 PHONE: (907) 746-3230 POUCH O Ms. Kristine Stoehner, President JUNEAU. ALASKA 90811 BOX 1 406 PiIONE: (907) 466-2828 Kenai, Alaska 99611-1406 Dear Ms. Stoehner: This letter is in response to your req uenct for comments re- rarding sanitation related problems, such as odor, solid waste, and insect control, associated with the processing of razor clams. The magnitude of any sanitation problem, particularily in the aforementioned areas, is generally proportionate to the volume of product processed within a given time frame and the strin- gency of quality control measures practiced. A comparison of a razor clam operation such as you propose, to a salmon or other seafood processing operation and mandated quality control/sanitation measures would not be valid. The volume and nature of waste generated in a razor clam oper- ation differ significantly from other seafood operations in that a normal processing volume for your operation has been from 1000 to 3000 pounds of shellstock per day. The majority of the waste generated is shell which does not readily decom- pose and is required to be contained in a closed, insect proof container. The balance of the waste consists of siphon tip3 and viscera which is collected from containers such as plactic pails with covers. All waste is required to be removed from the premise daily. In addition, frequent wash down tortether with adequate drainage of waste storage areas are a required enhancement of overall sanitation. Waste from other seafood operations mur,t also be properly con- tained and disposed of but, is generally of much greater volume and the majority is subject to very rapid decomposition, there- fore posing a more difficult odor control problem as well as providing a greater attraction to insects. ■ 1' Kristine :3too hnor i' irc11 19, 1982 Pago 1 The procos sing, of bivalve : hol.l.fish in regulatod undor the requirements of the Stato of Alanka and the llattonal Sholl- fish Sanitation Program. Thosol requirements oxtund from the i growing or harvest areas to retail outlets with strict micro- biological standards for growing aroa watorn, live animals and finished product. No other typo of seafood is as strin- gently regulated. Failure to comply with sanitation require- r ments to a minimum 80% level and/or oxcooding product micro- biological standards result in suspension of the operators permit (closure of the facility) as well as embargo and con- demnation of the product. It should be apparent that anything loss than excellent sani- tation and quality control practices places the operators existence as part of the shellfish industry in jeopardy. The microbiological standards for finished product pose a problem for the processor which must be approached through strict time temperature control, the frequent if not continuous. -,use of chemical sanitizers such as hypochloritp solutions as well as a high state of general cleanliness. It should be quite apparent that proper procossing of razor ; clams or other bivalves will not constitute a nuisance. Should sanitation, i.e., odor, wasto storage and disposal, etc. become a problem, this department would be obligated to take appro- priate action to eliminate the problem. I I hope I have a isfactorily answered your questions. Since A RWPsb J t i� JAY 111AWopa, 60YUMOR UEl'T. OF ENVlBOXIMENTAL Q;iDg'SI UVATION P. O. SOX 1832 DIVISION OF SEAFOOD AND ANIMAL INDUSTRIES ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 00610 PHONE: (907) 272-1661 P. 0. 60X 1065 I<lr iSe. �'�� aNh n P Y, PALMER ALASKA 09045 1t�.� A)& hor4kern LYyk:5 7•isherie5 Ltd. PHONE: (007) 746-3230 i).O. a pX y 4 (f POUCH 0 !' Ke nC�i Aic. 196 it JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 PHONE: (007) 406-9608 �ecLr Mom. �'540 hne.r'�-a': ` ' 0 r IS 1s 01n��reyl `i•haA OLLC' J (� PI( AS -j0r e0►1SirtlC' v� cL neo razor e.l�•�.•. �, roe��ss in, �aci l� (l ii�u e 6(leel �eUl.ew t.cl Arid as orest'AA(. ci avvl 0.1seuss-v& or, f4ka(•c_-- 25j i)$a-. /C1 ,/txZ/",C. 0 �j Following are letters solicited from local businessmen regarding the building of a clam processing plant within the City limits, for inclusion in the packet per Kris Stoehner, 4/2/82. B !' m�� AVi My, •} �r � ��i fiy Ir� i,ti�' � 1 � '•-!�: L t...r �-} � G C �•• � t WON 10 AI"XA AOOt1f1©Q �rf fAINQANf4ST 10 [111! /0 t^NO o •0 11[f � 10 $1 1 to Soo WON nos NO f0 46060SOIMy1WmA[ONWf Af f WI a ANOM0IAIIAN1 KINAf [OOIAt //t 11141 M11 „01 "Of N110 9001 "off To�_--�- bubjoct .ANMWM •MIfAM ,roan enunr UNAIJCN UAfJAfyQN LN.NOYI4I • /MMMAN/1 —_ --•-�-__-••--•—_ .•-__� � r—� �___-.,. _-_ �_ _`. _.�_ 4afwruA. '.•raAND • .A.D[1 .fau A,A10A ND WNIr/ i /INK Copltf INTACT Wlra CAISONS wAa.�M rfiarwia[ •rnn ids /OrA "Its coin s IurArn rlrur aorr In YOUR aus i r.tjpLr[i!/1r�.O�..��i�:►J��Iif',�rII�I��1iri4AtilG!!��if+•%1i.��'iiZ'".!!')I':!"'t�K/!e.f:,%C��L.P'i./'!`!!%%%1G �tY'"tirl'!.j .i I �i .-rr.+ra.�rrr.. • ' ...wrr.r.�r.v+..r.w.....rr srir. ...as w.r.�.��....�w... �. • r w- �r .w-.r. •r . ... .. �. f !-. � - . .. , V, -0. , " 1. 1. , 11 II.A. I I " I i THE DIA•LOO COMPANY INTIR•Offltl tORRISPONOINCI + � ' Date TO --._AL Irro t SvnJrcr; t, _ „ etLO G `QMpANY VIA 0 O 4n DO." yam, wEt� AI. J.IASKA. ggyt1 ■ ■ '.7 Phone 283-4595 Mail Orders Welcome KENAI FABRIC CENTER FABRICS - PATTERNS - SEWING SUPPLIES VIKING SEWING MACHINES BOX 1149 KENAI, ALASKA 99611 customer's Order No. Date M Address 0tv State SOLD By I CASH C.O.O. I CHARGE ONACC`Tj MOSS jPAID OUT j I I RET'D QUAN. DESCRIPTION PRICE AMOUNT -e Alt. CLAIMS AND at TURNED GOODS MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY THIS BILL RnVID BY.-- 699 10 F-v CITY OF KENAI %Od 6;aja" 4 4" I. O. AOX $80 KENAI, ALASKA 99611 -- " TEIE/HONE 209 • 7555 April 7, 1982 TO: Kenai Advisory Planning; and Zoning Commission FROM: Jack LaShot, City Engineer SUBJECT: Northern Lights Fisheries, Inc. Lease Application The Public Works Department requests that the following items be included as a part of the aboved referenced lease application and that each be made a requirement of the lease, if approved. The Public Works Department has no objections to the lease and associated clam processing operation if these items are given adequate consideration. 1. The estimated weight of shellstock processed per day is 1000 - 3000 lbs., and the estimated water usage is 500 - 700 gallons per hour maximum. If operations exceed these estimates or if operations change (either in method of clam processing or a shift to processing anything other than clams), the leasee shall immediately notify the City before conditions change and follow the proper procedures for obtaining approval. The City reserves the right to deny or approve such changes as may be appropriate. 2. All Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation regulations shall be strictly adhered to regarding sanitation, odor, dust, solid waste disposal, noise, etc. If the City receives three or more complaints from any citizen, adjacent property owner, or business in any three-day period due to any aspect of the operation, the City may force the operation to cease and desist operations until corrective action is taken or stop operations completely if the problem is not or cannot be corrected. 3. Proper installation and maintenance of a sand trap sump. -== The sand trap as shown on the submitted drawings is adequate provided a screen with mesh openings no greater than 1/2" is permanently installed over the outlet of the trap. The trap shall be cleaned as often as necessary to insure proper 1 operation. �. Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission Page 2 April 7, 1982 4. The water service shall be metered to ascertain accurate measurements of water usage and sewer inflow. This meter will be furnished and installed by the owner. The meter, remote reading, and material along with the location and installation of the meter will be inspected and approved by the City. S. No parking will be allowed on any public street for employees or customers of the proposed processing plant. Two access points shall be allowed from Main Street Loop to the proposed plant site. 6. The City shall have access at all times for purposes of inspection and reading of the water meter. 7. Topsoil shall be removed from the site as necessary to insure a proper soil foundation for the proposed structure. Parking shall be constructed to drain properly and be free of dust and mud. 8. Sewer and water service will not be provided until the new water and sewer facilities on Main Street Loop are constructed, tested, accepted, and in operation. The leasee needs to understand that the contract for Installation of the water and sewer lines is already in existence. The water and sewer service lines that will be provided will be from the main to the property line only. It will be the leasee's responsibility to construct their service line from the building to meet the City's service line at the property line. The leasee should stub out only a short distance from their building so that the proper grade can be maintained and so that the sewer line perfectly meetsthe City's already installed portion of the service line. Because the sewer line in this area is relatively shallow, there will be very little room for error. 9. Should the City of Kenai or Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation feel that the sewer effluent from the clam processing plant needs to be tested, (be it once, re-11arly, or periodically), the leasee will allow the testing and bear any costs for such testing. I£ the tests show a severe problem, the owners shall take corrective action and bear all costs associated. .JL/jet a .0 : 0 Phone 283-4595 M-til Orders Welcome KENAI FABRIC CENTER FABRICS - PATTERNS - SEWING SUPPLIV- VIKING SEWING MACHINES BOX 1149 KENAI, ALASKA 99611 Ordw No. Date Addrm City State phi KIMr4-oM7WUV-lW- 6-1.. _..- - - -- — .. — - "-F A A&A.CLASUSMORtrURNZOGMDSMM$F.ACCO PANIEDBY THIS BILL L16 699 THE DIA-LOG COMPANY INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Date_�i�ciC_ Ta At-- From At SUBJECT: G�% S✓D -�` /l / c*- % LOG COMPANY 8 THE p1A • ��Moust� MAX WANTON 1 t1 TEI.(Sol) 283"4511 --- 1 P. O. SOX 52U. KEStAI. AtAs 98i' _ �-�"� r.WlJ►!lu►'i4af I;r"' N,;..v .R i.'v:•. ; „4 Ye f,• J .,i. r � •Fr .•y t ') . r e �. ayYs�,r�� • >t'•!�. lrr. r Ld•.}��:t�t�'fi"r' �t•Jl�tl'. ..w t. �. v: o ..��^.. �. �'� /M�if y`�Pw�;1i �1�yKNAF� ��•.�� h �.l •. � �► .l s n•: ► 'dry. • •f .T i + ax .. J. �j�...I t-�fi. .. �"jsw/'�-:y�:�v!-•v �i. ..si�f .lam'/ 1"i ��. o w�.'tir! .r+L'►-f:/. +..rJ�� /. / a '+il.Y�f','i':rd'�., "Quality Printhig At Reasonable h ict*" [7�t�►�yS���l[��i-�iltsl:Jzil►�j�l►�I� C) BOX 1109 KENAI. ALASKA 99611.1109 ART WATERS 263.9609 City of Kenai: 4-7-82 I have no objectmons to John and Kristine Stoetiner building their clam proccessing plant on their proposed site. Sincerely, 4 /7/7 / l Owner i �. �.� •G( %I-7 cr , •��.•, ?ic. -ri � 1, t C%mot „_..:�. -e_ 7- 4 I — THE MUSTARD : ITI) Lyle Grove, Owner%ma"11f1)1r Books, Bibles, (lifts. Hallmark P.O. Box 4384. Kenai. AK 99611 Phone 907-283.4010 . • •• I• 1 ♦fir' , if ��V!.,t ' .'; •.. " • � •� • ...�. ..� • �) �s mot,... r. .• •.:. %' •�•,...,' ' : .... i..: • . . •• `_J •l )� r .j,�Y,•I, �� '•(. 'T .•i• �1i •1"' • ., •A• S ,.' ).. • /d.�•• �1�"iW�r���, �1•st•• � "�ti..;,"��. � �: r •��y;`s y `�rri::!',S.Rsut'. '�....�` �, t{,.•>; �•, .'',� •• • :S •.,••'.`' �:�yy`.�`1'►.:y�•A ""FFF++ ' ,,1,fq�h�ll;r�.�'l.�f:•MA�f�•I4�••/f.,ii�/I•�4ij����.�iTri"�"�t :L %�.�/.M4 )•• �i�''J.d�.%M.,:..�. e.•►i�l�.,�o•I"Z�.I.p.��,sTw 4.•►.`.1��'/q���• .. r,...�y, /"'�V'1.Tit'sy/}M�^II+.'4�ti"+•ii.,�►•••w.•.w,���►y�,��i�1��: :•ti�M}+'ry'�:?��•.�u �::r:view"'.l+'.11`Jri+/w"��.%ir�i�•f�r .� _"� •rra+ ,z/ >..y`Fr' �le�'# y1. rI! aq. j-•4 ,*• ,! v--•,r:=".J'ti� 1 I 0 ♦ 1 sag 111UNN 10 AIAIXA ADDR1 supply a tion f •t• I. oxx 1AT• r0 sox 1912 r.0 sox1A0 to 3113 to sox•11 r0 sox 1107A TCOWD •101otbilw rDNWr •11 FAINIA r0 10N9111 ANCXORA01 FAIN/ANKI XINAI XODIAX FA/MIN MDOTNA 1►1NAW AWHOM61 ANU001AN f IR110 "10? "611 "M MA•1 N/H 90101 N101 00"I :��' T�---___------------------ ------ ------------From_----- ,•, f Subject_—_ _ ___ _ _ _— ___� _ y_ _Date _ c>Pe_ �1 �'�1 vim' �_ �1r✓_� J / � i :l ' DATE • REPLY i .. Y s .. - �•01►ONAt10M 1 •IylplpbN •raylfFy J, JOHN BAUM BRANCH MANAGER fs• I gnA••:.•L •i 3 i Av.MgAaq[ • fa•Nnaa•a acaA" .00•A• OA'.•NN PO 110. "A,--- 40LOofhA . S•f NANO • YAlOfl .I.NA' AUU.A wau�.A *c�fP.oat a0+ 'Nr +s,A END WHITE i PINK COPIES INTACT WITH CARSONS �+ fky WHITE COPY A RETAIN PINK COZY IN YOUR FILES J', s ,�•; ��;Io•*°• putt�, 1{�Y �S "f � # .-.� f j . �' irnirr�wlirriril ifii'i fflxmsiitsl,s•...,.r...: i� �»: ram(, �,a•rw(. April 7, 1982 I' s ► Brix -1V4 Krnur. Ak wwl1 Mayor of Kenai, Krrhrji City r01sneS.1 mioud,r)rr: Konai, Alorska RSs Clam Procerssinq Plant Dear mayor O•ftlrtlly t, city Crrsnril. Vr-rrdu•rr, SouthContral Air tars no objnrtion to ttur c;larn plarrt proporsed by Arctic Aviation ars long at' the LollOwinrf provirsirnri arcs rnarJrsI 1. There irs a removal of waste on a daily batsirs. 2, Measures are taken to prevent any Wor. Thank you, i Yw� David.: 'Dia prosiaent, SouthContral Air Dw/cry Charter C,Umrmstm Mr I most -I i'u,hs{ i, Urrriary r--,:-.,.�--..,.�-�::��__:.:..��;=�. �-tea,,-_.__-.__ ,r I !' 1:M1fAif�'���4:.'/,IT,��! yi�4"NibJir 1I�- iR ;4; '.*f;: yy. rd :* �� ` ��yG ��> 1° in0 � .y •SFr ___ _- ____ - .Jw _�♦ J�enai P-(,n1-".4u1a 6crow, Company WALCA BUILDING. V0. BOX 1405 • KENAI. ALASKA 00611 Tolophonv 283•7161 April 7, 1982 70 WHOM I7 MAY CONCERN I see no objection to a clam processing plant being built in Kenai. - KENAI PENINSULA ESCROW COMPANY r { - -r- 1 II I i R 5 d � ' I I I �I 1 I mw` =^ � ~ ' �lP�ir � lif�A X -?w s o . Sa i v#V GGr% A k Ad, �f ,J`1 Z12 we5 - IIJV C�II Ct - 4 1. e,i — ifcr - From $10.00 per day 10, per mile CHEEME A UTO RENTAL Low Woekly • Monthly P.O. Box 3122 • Konal, AK. 99611 Rates Available Phone 263.7805 r /*;J,;l cv � � ;� dO2s � Th � le�s� ,9�f+:.c.,ala� l � .y,� >� •y,�s Nh vC.G l v %hGiG vtid/Ao,4;iz %`o y klow*l l�,qtrc iiv elk'O s E'11 /.Gat �.*►� To Ti .g �.eDAs,owP/lOCCSS✓,4V 4 y et & e 4.,e, ti D O 6yec%ie r�s D I* )Ce4 r. e 14= i104?04 Q.re C?G14;;k--1r o &v a 4/Z 4�'sI.&eO00' We Rent For A Song- q 14 rw City of Kenai 4-7-82 I Jeff Fauteaux have no objections to John and Kristine Stoehner building their clam processing plant in their planned location. I own Futo aux s Faat Phot o s which is located in the B & C Building. . a i Sincerely, ; ! iiti-���-�-tiar• - ,CoT 9 C roc�N �i3 O. /✓e..f i ScntE /''s gyp' �D 0 } z � Y �n �. v K a. m + , L !r•a�s 17Q,rR (dam LO�D.+4 II �Fr►�'roys�t '' G 0 ....-.rrrrwti r..r�-! rrrrr.rrr April 7, 1982 1-' •� Nilliam Brighton City of Kenai City Manager Dear Sir: I am the current owner of lots five, six, seven, and eight block one Simpson sub. (parcel numbers 045-150-59 thru 045-150-62). I propose to the City of Kenai to instal water and sewar lines under Borealis st./Steelhead ct. The length of the lines would extend aproxamently 590 feet (one block) and start at Tinker Lane. This would be a large expense to an individual, but a service to at least eleven other properties. The City of Kenai having at its disposal an equitable means of distributing the costs. I am looking forward to your response. Sincerly, Steven R. Crites Box 4142 Kenai, Ak. ph. 283.7065 Asa WATER AND SEWER PETITION CANDLELIGHT Total Lots Total People 26 22 OFM LINWOOD Total Lots Total People 12 9 Returned Returned Yes No Stipulations Yes No Stipulations 12 1 2 S - 1 Returned Unanswered (No forwarding Address) 1 Notes: 1. Copy of petition that was sent certified mail is attached. 2. Petition did not have to be returned if voted no since we ;k were seeking percentage of people in favor of the project. ,f. 3. Some people had stipulations such as no -water; yes -sewer or want service lines installed to the property. F ff V' 4 S 1� i CITY OF KENAI -0d ea " of 44ua„ P. O. {OK $80 KENAI, ALASKA •9611 TELEPHONE 383 • 7335 March 19, 1982 Subject: Water & Sewer on Candlelight Drive The City of Kenai has received a request for water and sewer main line extensions on Candlelight Drive and Linwood Lane. The Council of the City of Kenai is considering forming an assessment district where each property owner would pay 20% of the estimated cost of the project. Xroiegj FnUmateS -G= ' Percent. tLr&_Pronerty Candlelight privg $300,000 x 20% = $600,000 i11aYtQQs�& $125,000 x 200 = $25,000 The estimated approximate cost that you as a property owner would have to pay for this project is $— . This project is for water and sewer main lines only. It is still the property owners' responsibility to pay for and arrange with a contractor to hook up to the main and run the service line over his property to his own building. There is a mandatory connection requirement in the Kenai Code that states: "It shall be mandatory for all structures susceptible to being or currently being a source from which sewage may or is being generated, to be connected to the public sewage system provided that any part of the structure is or is to be within 200 feet of an existing public sewer main." k March 19, 1982 Page 2 If you are in favor of this project and willing to pay the costs, please sign the petition at the bottom of this letter and return to the City of Kenai within ten (10) days of receipt. Sincerely, W Wm. J. ightonZF'� City Manager WJB/md We, the undersigned, are residents of the City of Kenai and own property on Candlelight Drive and based on the estimated approximate costs recited above we hereby petition the City Council of the City of Kenai to install water and sewer mains down Candlelight Drive, fully realizing that the additional costs of connecting to the sewer and water mains will be our responsibility. Signature of Property Owner Street Address �� Phone Number �i r , March 19, 1982 Subject: Water & Sewer on Linwood Lane The City of Kenai has received a request for water and sewer main line extensions on Candlelight Drive and Linwood Lane. The Council of the City of Kenai is considering forming an assessment district where each property owner would pay 20% of the estimated cost of the project. M4.eat Eatimated C= f zaant Costo—Property Own€ra �aaal€liSh�..prlY� $300,000 x 20% = $60,000 Link;20_Laaa $125,000 x 20% = $25,000 The estimated approximate cost that you as a property owner would have to pay for this project is S_w_�__. This project is for water and sewer main lines only. It is still the property owners' responsibility to pay for and arrange with a contractor to hook up to the main and run the service line over his property to his own building. There is a mandatory connection requirement in the Kenai Code that states: "It shall be mandatory for all structures susceptible to being or currently being a source from which sewage may or is being generated, to be connected to the public sewage system provided that any part of the structure is or is to be within 200 feet of an existing public sewer main." If you are in favor of this project and willing to pay the costs, please sign the petition at the bottom of this letter and return to the City of Kenai within ten (10) days of receipt. Sincerely, Wm. J. Brighton City Eanager hJB/md We, the undersigned, are residents of the City of Kenai and own property on Linwood Lane and based on the estimated approximate costs recited above we hereby petition the City Council of the City of Kenai to install water and sewer mains down Linwood Lane, fully realizing that the additional costs of connecting to the sewer and water mains will be our responsibility. Signature of Property Owner Street Address •n i rj Phone Number rEt ' l • � .. , ter .,� T•� t w mi � •,Rr �' fr ,: • .i .V�w ♦ �5..! 'ti .1 J i Va(,/L•!r -OF.,.-:KEI • ��:. r�: •�;: ,;' ,. ;,<: �rf r�t.'Ii%' jr;!tlJA'�'r�'w�i«��! 1� m Aloft . ''r,- ••i r•`t,dl%' - �:ir 4� {�kia�'•'i.'.'•{y.¢n •• � ••,r .':..r••.. r'r: •^. • i ;ri.}A,.til+'J/4•Aj�•.r.!'{�.: ... • ;�, . ,. •°r:r• it : t..y•t. , .:�; •;i;F:! r,K'•. Sri=�'�i %i: • yip 1988 ' a .J:. a .,. 'r' ' ,�j rS.'. r�J,. J,�{ i r�;n6,1 y''X'•1'� M �. 1r %' •tom n T IMPIROV1,71mlo"'Sr.... J ,jIl,•,''/}�Q'. '•jt I./ ,{{jpy��J� '1 , • ~ . 't •!,' .. . • S!. •i J r•� ``, f • ®� Merit � I.�M - • REQUEST FOR STATE GRANT FUNDING _,..� ,�M. Y' .� '' •,• .: •'•! .r•Srrr••�•�*� ... i.�'.'�,.'!'1'•'%•i L�a� J�Y •f:.lw. • � � 4 �� • ..J! • • •`Yi t�.. '�.•'.t.j! '�irr.:;:•trr;•A!• ltK++arP✓�.T- �YLN� j+�r �.j-sr `h•,'t_1i�i�` r j•'Z.iv_i�'�`�+��'v1�• , y :s % ! 1�.:. -a �. •�c i'•'I", • .7�1�• " • - "i ��•r .,6-�• L.e f_�•��f.a._ .Sr. .iUTAL_.••►:. •f,:: ir.'3.i•�_7,. is7 •. 'i:i •7%: - F�%��i„��'��/•:I••'4%✓7'•^:r'-�:-riss-srr^„•:-•'s•ar��-•-i-.-raw• . .:r'�t •. �A•�{.���• w•�..r:� ir�rrr.tiitiiit.�.iiftrf �+.��• .��.. o.. ,_� . Na , 0 • , CMI or F=:Ai (ED ONPI.1L L•TRGVr-- IT P:2=r. RCQUrM FOR STNIV r GRX'." r I-Vi'DIM, Project Road L^provaTents I Airport Parks b Pee Nimber G-41ravel P=Pnvinu T mm voc e runts Lmrovcmonts Proiec`. Cost A.cc-"^. Total 1. Candlelight - G Linwood - G $ 200,000 $ 200,000 2. 14. Dogwood - G N. Lupine - G 250,000 450,000 3. Spruce - G 75,000 525,000 4. Main St. Loop -- P Barnacle Ilay - P 700,000 1,225,000 5. Forest Dr. L:t. - P Gill - P 200,000 1,425,000 6. TinY.er, Lawton, & Rogers - P 575,000 2,000,000 7. A. P. Terninal Renovations 500,000 2,500,000 g, A.P. Short Ter Parking 100,000 2,600,000 9. Circh, Fourth, b First - P 700,000 3,300,000 10. Second and Third - G 25,000 3,325,000 11. Phillips - r 75,000 3,400,000 12. Ta•,,tcn, !".alY.er - P 325,000 3,725,000 13. :'Zll FioIAS & 50,000 3,775,000 Youth Conter 14. 3eavor Cr. , n'mici-,al, 4th St., E. Komi, & S 150,000 3,925,030 Tlie nroIOct lit Inhers 1i::tcd bc•low are oil, .same pro lee t n►smhrrs Ii.,trd Oil ti►e matrix on p:►�oes 1 and I :hid on th.. locat ion map oil page 12. These .are the Project Narrative. for the Cit% of Kenai 1941-12 Capital Improvcment Proicets-- Reiluc;t for State Grant fundiitg. The number on the left is the Project Number and is followed by a brief project description. ,�y� Gil► fy'� Under Road Improvements, those cts aby a capital aeproject-, thtbasic basically ciuireexcavtionofmud silt, a nd clay along with backfill and gravel material to bring them back tip to grade. These projects do, of course, also include some Q 00C16*0 type of solution to the surface water drainage problems. These (L roads which are listed for future gravel resurfacing are roads that are impassable during spring breakup and during heavy rainfalls. f� hose 'projects listed followed by a capital "P" are projects �A,tB 4�S that could include rater and serer (where app ica e) , surface water runoff drainage, curs and gutters, sidewalks , lighting, � and paving. Paring these roads would save the City a considerable `tyG �y amount of money under summer road maintenance. �# 1. This project is for gravel resurfacing of Candlelight Drive from the Spur Highway south to the terminus and for Linwood Lane from the Spur lligh►+ny south to the terminus, Both roads have quite a few residents living along them and both roads are impassable many times during the year. (G) 2. North Dogwood Road from the Spur Highway northeast to the terminus and North Lupine Drive from the Split. Highway northeast to the terminus. 'These two roads are the main t entrances to a relatively 1.•►rge subdivision. They are 1 also impassable many times during the year. (G) 3. Spruce Street from the Spur Highway north to fourth Avenue. 'I'll!!; is for gravel resurfacing; of a residential road and a road that receives quite a bit of through traffic. Again, it is impassable many tines during; the year. (G) 4. This road project starts at the Spur Highway g;oinr north along;'lain Street Loop where it tics in to 1tii11mti Street. The project also includes Itarnacle Way which "T's" off of Main Street loop to I1.111otc Street. Included in this proiect would be some possible reconditioning of '1.►in Street Loop continuing on from Willow Street back to the Spur llig;lu:ay. 1'1►i; project .11-:o inclu.les t.:ttcr and setter along with all the other ite►:t!: li.,tea above. The water and the sewer on this proiect have already been engineered. The complete proiect is preset►tly beinc e►t,ineered and will be completca by Febrt►ary Z:), 19SO. (11) '� I r 1� REQUESTS RIsCEIVED BY THE CITY OF KENAI FOR WATER AND SEER LINES WITHIN Till" CITY LIMITS 17 611A 670 REQUEST FOR WATER AND SMOR ON EVERGREEN i ice• v �r N Alaska 1 KENAI GRACE Bretkrert elturck America's lest frontier r C ti C A Si LiZe Teae-king Chunch Howard Snively, Pastor McCollum and Spur Rd., Mile 9.2 Phone 283.4379 P.O. Drawer 3920 Church and Kenai, Alaska 99611 Pastor's Home City Council MAY 0 3 1CS1 City of Kenai 'Box. 580 wrcto fCLrwK Kenai, Ak. 99611 Dear Sirs: We are in receipt of your letter of April 20th regarding our request for city water supply to the Grace Brethren Church mile 9.2 Spur Highway. Thank you for considering our request. Thank you too for the action directing the administration to seek State and Federal grants to accomodate our needs. Our present plans are to start construction 1# April of 182. Any help that you can give us with regard to water supply will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for considering our needs. Howard Snively, Pastor w Hs/is (Vj e„ L� 9 Alaska KENAI GRACE Oretkren ekarch America's last frontier Ar-B A 131 bee Teaching Chuach Howard Snively, Pastor McCollum and Spur Rd., Mile 9.:;,:, ;�1VcI� Phone 283.4379 2 P.O. Drawer 3920 Church and Kenai, Alaska 99611 1181 Pastor's Home Apn.i,Z 7, J 981 ei ci-r AVMPJIOMPATMQ$ j clry OF .alA{ Ak. WiWAVI Saighton City Iftlagen Box 580 Kenai., Ak. 99611 I Dean S.uu Thi6 Zetta cornea to you a4 6oAmat neque-6t, by the people o6 Gnace Snetivi:en Chune t, 60% city watex..to be 4uppZied Son out. 6ae,LeUla at mile 9.2 Spun Rd. The ZegaZ daexiption i4 Sec. 34 T d N R11 W S 148.51 06 Zot 83. The City o6 Kenai p%ovcded city 4ewet pti.o% to eon4tuxtion o5 oun pne4ent 6aeciitie6 and we axe appneeiati.ve o6 that puvab.coit. Gaaee Sae amen Cluviceh i6 a potaing elwnclt. 16 oat p%e6ent g%owtA tote td eontkitue4, we wilt be 4enving a4 many a6 one tltou4and people .iit 6.ive yeau. At .the p%eaent .time we au pZaniziitg the addition 06 apptoxinnteZy tweeve t1tou4and 4q. 6t. which Witt i;WWe a 6uZC 4.ize gymna4,cw;i ptu4 cZasa uoata. Th i,6 tviU enabte u4 .to %each and 4e%ve mane o6 the youth o6 the aaea. With .the neeea4a cy 4h0wVt4, toiW6 and, etc. 06 a buieding VU4 4.ize, we need an adequate 4uppZy o6 w•aten. A4 a non p%o6.t t 4enviee o%gaiuzatlon, we appea.2 to you 6o% 6avot- able e0it4idexa.ti,on o6 this %eque4t. We of pa.e4emMi in, .the ptawting stage but a%e paojeeting an Ap%i.l, date 1982 6o% begimiing coit4txuetion. lit belaZ6 06 .the good people at Gnace rkethAeit Mach, I .thank you boa you% atten ti.oit to th.i.4 need which we 6ace. Hoping .to HC,ip, /� f HeauAd Sitivee y, Pa4,to% HSIZA a , r� ., Jr �Jr v�JJPIn t•'G!! r� ��r:i/ ((��rcrrit PASTOR JAMEdS J. SALLWEBER Xxfi.!{$KGU�iLNSSm{iE�:{XR.XKJGii3Q29CSD7tK 74itKCiQG�Y►XX�'AC��A6�{ BOX 1260 Kenai, Alaska 99611 April 30, 1981 City of Kenai Alaska Attention Mr. Brighton, City Manager Dear Mr. Brighton: Ve at First Assembly would like to pursue the possibility of City Water and Sewer to our church and parsonage. This request is due to the very high water table in this area and difficulty of getting sufficient drainage. This church has been at this location for 10 years and the parsonage for about 4 years. Previous to this since 1957, we were located on the bluff in Kenai. Our attendance is growing to a position where our present septic system will not handle it. To the best of our knowledge, the footage from city stub off to the church ! is about 405 feet and from the church to the parsonage is about 250 feet. We would appreciate pp your attention on this matter and we will give any help we can. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, James J. Ballweber, Pastor ., 7 i PHUJECT DESCRIPTION WATER i.:: r . i.tu c+++i:i.0 i:S i . L•'"; i I; IA i UJ SF.t;L'It I'EING1.11 II1SH"U1,10:1 ClYO.STRUCTION ADMIN. C011'I't:. TOTAL COST ( 17%) COST (107 ) C"S 1' Nalco Chumical 1.1 40n0' $ 27,200 $ 16q,Of10 $ 500 $ 16,000 $ 203,700 S 4600' 49 640 292t0I 5��0 29L200 371a340 76,840 452,000 1000 45,200 575,040 Z *Grace Brethren Church W 990, 9,180 54,000 500 5,400 69,080h (M(;Collum b Spur) McCollum Street W 1340' 11,560 68,000 500 6,800 86.864 (to Aliak) Aliak Drive W 1000, 6,800 40,000 250 4,000 51,050 (McCollum to Spur) S 1000, 7,650 1,5,000 250 11,_540 57t400 14,450 85,000 500 8,500 108,450 Cinderella, Princess, Monk W 4000' 31,280 184,000 500 18,400 234,180 (in between) S 4600' 35,190 207,-000 500 20 2fi3,39p ' 66,470 391,000 1000 39,100 497,570 *First Assembly of Cod W 400' (Princess Lane) S 400' 5,780 34,000 500 3,400 43,680* Bast Kenai Church of Cod W 800, 5,440 32,000 250 3,200 40,890 R Near Spur - between S 800, _j§j120 36,000 250 3,600 45_1970 B. Aliak and Spur 11,560 68,000 500 6,800 86,860 I Sewer Crossing at Illiamna S 90, 3,060 18,000 250 1,800 23,110 Water to Dust Bowl W 2800' 19,040 112,000 500 11,200 142,740 (Betviven Airport Way b Princess) • i � I i � WATER EST. F?Jr' 'Fit F!;T, �JftATf.JT PRO.. ,T DESCRIPI1011 S1ilYGR 1,1aGT11 IJ"sPECTIO,, C0:1STRUCTIOU AD:111J. COUTC. ToW, COST (171.) COST 0 0%) COST ' Aurora Strect W 50(1' $ 3,400 (Off Linwood) S 500' 3,825 �7,225 Candlelight & Linwood W 3900, 26,520 S 3900, 29,835 56,355 Valhalla 11t4. (11. Dogwood W 8700 59,160 N. Lupine, Phillips, Standard, Richfield) Thompson Park (Fireweed, Togiak, Eisenhower, Iowa. Nevada, Wildrose, Dogwood W 11400' 77,520 Primrose, Forget-me-not, Fern, Lupine) Evergreen, llaller, W 9400' 63,920 McKinley, & 4th. S 9400' 71. 910 135,830 Spruce, 2nd, & 3rd (Spruce - 4th to Spur, W 3000' 20,400 2nd & 3rd - Spruce S 3000' 22,950 to Birch) 43,350 *Not needed if associated streets are done $ 20,000 $ 250 22,500 42,500 _210 500 156.000 500 175,500 500 331,500 1000 348,000 1000 2,000 J $ 25.650 2, -i0 28,825 4,250 54,475 15,600 Z , 198,620 17,550 ,.. 223 385 33,150 .;,; 422,005 34,800 442,960 456,000 1000 45,600 580,120 376,000 500 37,600 478,020 423,000 500 42,300 537,710 799,000 1000 79,900 1,015,730 120,000 250 12,000 i 152,650 i 135,000 250 13,300 171.700 255,000 1000 25,500 324.850 ■ ■ a CITY OF KENAI 1982.83 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS REQUEST FOR STATE GRANT FUNDING Project Road Improvements Parks & Rec. Other Project Accum. Number G•Gravel P•Paving Improvements Improvements Cost Total 1. City Gyrn $ 800,000 $ 800.000 2. Ryans Creek mark 50.000 850,000 Ft. Kenav 3. Renovations Re 50,000 900.000 4. Kenai Boat Ramp 300.000 1,200.000 6• 1st & 2nd St. • P 350.000 1.550.000 Ahak. McCollum. Cinderella, 6, Fox. Princess. and Linwood 300.000 1.850.000 Extension - 7• Thompson Park Subdivision - G 750,000 2.600.000 S. Evergreen. Haller. McKinley • G 200.000 2.800.000 Standard, Richfield. 9• Thompson Place • G 280.000 3.080.000 t0. Lupine. Fern. Togiak • P 400.000 3.480.000 11 VIP Dr Lora. Watergate. Ketch 1.000.000 4.480.000 P 12. Granite Point & F B.O. Road - P 250.000 4.730.000 13. Bike Travis Tinker to Shires 200,000 4,930.000 14. W x S Valve R 75.000 5.005.000 Manhole Repairs .LiNw• o D W,fttltq, 34'I.v a'12� *Np Ro A O PEE vnec. 7- v. lwa 3 T.I r4r /W0A10 Y r//J*d roy*4T AWO.7474- - AW4,01 To OE oc,4G6D eN ?y/J OJl/n,EiTY L/ST -- G o>a T /1 , l'of ?4 , .5 �d U al t WIN Project Number Road Improvements G•Gravei P•Paving Parks & Roe. Improvements Other Improvements Project Cost Accum. Total 16. Library Addition $1.000,000 $6.005.000 t8, Itinerant A.P. Parking 250,000 6.255.000 17. S. Highbush. Davidson & Bumblebee • G 150.000 6.405.000 18. Kaknu, Linwood. E. Aliak. Swires. Highbush • P 900.000 7.305.000 19. i Main St. Loop . P 325,000 7.630.000 iAirport 20. Vehicle Parking • P 400.000 8.030.000 21. Landscaping 30.000 8.060.000 22. Ball Park Improvements 150.000 8.210.000 23. Bike Trails 300.000 8.510.000 24. Old Town • P 300.000 8.810.000 25. Airport Ramp Extension 8 TIW 2 .500.000 11.310.000 26. Spruce. 2nd. 3rd • P 700.000 12.010,000 27 Convention Center (300) 4,500.000 16.510.000 This brochure was produced under the direction and approval of the Mayor and Council of the City of Kenai. Public Hearings were held on December 16, 19, 8 21, 1981, concerning the preparation of the brochure, and a concluding public hearing on this brochure in its entirety and in its final state is planned to be held on January S.1982. Tht projects numbered 1.15 on last year's C.I.P. request list were funded. The projects 1.12 above will complete last year's list. The Mayor and the Council of the City of Kenai pledge their affirmative vote for maintenance and operational costs of the projects listed in this brochure. F U T U R E f JAYS. NAMMOND, GOVERNOR UI:PT.01- ENV1110NN1-"NTA1. CONSERVitTION 465-2610 POUCNO - J(lNfi009llff Mr. Keith Kornelis, Director City of Kenai Public Works P.O. Box 580 Kenai, AK 99611 Dear Mr.:Kornelis: February 2, 1982 bt.16A61V D C11 T Ur 1%C11111^ - � n-nT AI• M,n. .w n-r I am writing to inform you of a situation that may impact your Capital Improvement Construction Program for the Department of Environmental Conservation in 1982. The Construction Grants Program has no funds available at this time for new projects. This program, as you may know, helps fund water, sewer, and solid waste capital improvement projects. Several combined factors in the latter part of 1981 created an unprece- dented demand for ADEC participation in new utility construction statewide. These included expansion of the construction grants program to incorporate funding for solid waste processing and disposal facilities, and the avail- ability, on a massive scale, of legislatively distributed revenues which provided many municipalities with the local matching funds required to apply for these grants. The effect has been that all funds available to the Construction Grants Program have been obligated to specific projects. A reserve of approxi- mately $1.5 million has been set aside for completion of current construc- tion, but this fund is insufficient to allow commitment to new projects. The program will continue to receive applications for grant assistance. Applications received will be reviewed to determine grant eligibility and placed on a waiting list in order of receipt in completed form and the applicant notifed of the inability to provide immediate grant commit- ment. As new funds become available, grants will be made to projects in order. We will contact you to determine your continued interest when funding is available. We anticipate to be able to award a few new grants as unused funds from completed projects are returned to the bond fund for reobligation. tie also expect the Legislature to appropriate our capital budget request of $10 million in June or July of 1982. These funds should enable our normal practice of awarding grants as applications are submitted. We also expect voters to be given the opportunity to approve approximately $40 million pore in the November 1982 general election. / Keith Kornelis -2- February 2, 1982 If we can provide further information on any aspect of information contained in this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Keith Kelton, Director, Division of Facilities Construction and Operation at 465-2610. _aIllLerely, 011 Ernst W. Mueller Commissioner ityC� CGI�I�Lu'="�� xl-!•a•I'� .G�l'i-�L� PVT--a� /�C 4�-� L.rE'��. .�l•C• •��G +c��f • 1�7�c.-{'tt�vt`' .C�� ic:, r./�,C� Oc'i p� ���2�s-t .��GC�t. /yGr�i-��� ��'. LLCK'Cr.r���, /'/C��C �Z ��% �I ilrc.[-�G«c. 1�,�`rt•C—/���L •, � t -�.+. •Z•t ,Ik S*�,r•� mil"`/ .�li.•- /�i'!'�!. .�G�-C[I���'2_ /J�� _ � �%� .»u.Ect�-'•c. �1.�-t.=r- fir•-/� �C� Zc-��f��' /s� ��-G�� �� ; 44 ,•�-t.fr�.�--��1�'.•-/ yid �,Cr/��--�-��-• ..7�: �r�.�e..� .c�..�c��;L �� '%ct����ll�..c-%` ✓[6.s ,�tGLcN 2.-rrt-t�z.-s+i?1L��.� rGY��� /flil{�lee, !mot-l'-:ee'u. r • M' carmen vincent gintoll, architect Dox 4625 professional building suite 110 Kenai, alaska 99611 907 283.7732 April 7th 1982 KENAI SENIOR CITIZENrS COMMUNITY CENTER DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE —FINAL COST SUMMARY CONSTRUCTION COST $667,762 (Clark -Graves Est) ' MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING 86,250 ELECTRICAL 56,120 KITCHEN 48,500 TOTAL ----------- $858,632 10% CONTINGENCY 85,863 GRAND TOTAL -------- $944,495 $944,495 DELETE PORTECOCHERE - -S 25,200• DELETE SOLARIUM -b 35,000 TOTAL DELETE - 60,200 -b 60 200 884,295 IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE SOLARIUM AND PORTECOCHERE BE ISSUED AS ADDITVE ALTERNATES. 1 + l •- KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS COMMUNITY CENTER CARMEN VINCENT GINTOLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE C LAR K -GRAVES, INC. Anchorage, Alaska � J I 1 01 0 aa1 • • •a• MiERML && WISM CCN= wsEaas 11� lot rvisia�s�] 22, 3, 14, 15 & 16 DME QF WMIM CLPRK-&R VE5"1AC. �• is �• a: i � � � � FF :) �., $140,844.00 $67,045.00 $47,606.00 $7,217.00 $4180.00 $104:301.00 $99,287.00 $78,851.00 $118,050.00 $59,269.00 $15,307.00 $741,957.00 ARM 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 i 1-GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Engineering Supervision Building Permit Submittals Schedule Quality Control Expediting Freight Financing Fquipnent Reserve Temporary Utilities Temporary Field Facilities Final Cleanup Warranty QUANTITY DESCR: 1 month 6 months 1 job 1 job 1 job 1 job 6 months 50,000 lbs 8 months 6 months 8 months 8 months 1 job 1 job 10% Ej;TJ4afJ' �l101v . 4- CLPRK-GR VE.S.1NC. KEW SENIOR CITIZENS CEWER CAPME.'N VIN'CENT GINTOLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 1 MATERIAL UNIT $500.00 $3,000.00 $500.00 $2,000.00 $1,500.00 $500.00 $0.20 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $500.00 $400.00 $100.00 $500.00 10% TOTAL COST $3,000.00 $33,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 $15,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $27,000.00 $4,400.00 $4,400.00 $1,100.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $116,400.00 $11,640.00 $128,040.00 $12,804.00 $140,844.00 APRIL 6, 1982 ` 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 d LABOR RATE $3,000.00 $5,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $500.00 $50.00 $150.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 10% MATERIAL COST $0.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $500.00 $2,000.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $24,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,200.00 $100.00 $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $62,800.00 $6,280.00 $69,080.00 LABOR COST $3,000.00 $30,000.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $12,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $400.00 $1,200.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $53,600.00 $5,360.00 $58,960.00 , KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CEN= CARMEN VINCENT GINZOLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMAZE PAGE 2 1 n SUBCONTRACT SUBCONTRACT TDThL 2-SITEWORK QUANTITY DESCR. UNIT COST COST $0.00 $0.00 $0.0C Clearing & Grubbing 50,000 sf $0.05 $2,500.00 $0.00 $2,500.01 Rough Excavation 2,500 CY $4.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.09 Fill & Grading 5,000 Cy $7.00 $35,000.00 $0.00 $35,000.00 Curbs & sidewalks 1,200 sf $3.50 $4,200.00 $0.00 $4,20000 s Topsoiling 50 Cy $20.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $1,000:00 r Asphalt Concrete 75 Afty $4:007 /S�• co -6300:00 $0.00 -030". 0- � $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.0@ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 PACE MMS $53,000.00 $0.00 $53,000.00 AWU91MW FACTORS AWUSUM AMUNTs 15% $7,950.00 $0.00 $7,950.00 ESTIMATED 00ST $60,950.00 $0.00 $60,950.00 , RECON+1Fd+IDED CONIINM= 10% $6,095.00 TOM EgTImATE $67,045.00 DAM OF ESTIMATE APRIL 6, 1982, CLRRK-GRRUE51Ar. i 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337-2767 r F_ n i b m m ic�i • L«_ Footings & Foundation Wall Main Building Slab Solarium Slab Portocochere Slab Forms, Footing Forms, Foundation Re -steel Mesh Finish PAGE 'TOTALS AWUS314W FACTORS A=sn= Abxxm ;i 4j.��, ire a� l•;�0y 4 FET,h j l�T=tyZyr�i %� QUANTITY DESCR. 18 Cy 76 Cy 6 Cy 14 Cy 2,000 bf 3,500 sf 4,000 lbs 10,000 of 8,000 sf CLIPRK GRRVES.1A: 10% KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCENT GINMLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 3 MATERIAL UNIT $93.00 $93.00 $93.00 $93.00 $0.30 $1.00 $0.40 $0.25 $0.05 15% $60.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $0.50 $0.30 $0.50 $0.10 $0.40 50% MATERIAL COST $0.00 $1,674.00 $7,068.00 $558.00 $1,302.00 $0.00 $600.00 $3,500.00 $0.00 $1,600.00 $2,500.00 $0.00 $400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,202.00 $2,880.30 $22,082.30 LABOR COST $0.00 $1,080.00 $3,800.00 $300.00 $700.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $1,050.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $3,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 • $0.00 $0.00 $14,130.00 $7,065.00 $21,195.00 I A TOM COST $0.00 $2,754.00 $10,868.00 $858.00 $2,002.00 $0.00 $1,600.00 $4,550.00 $0.00 $3,600.00 $3,500.00 $0.00 $3,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $33,332.00 $9,945.30 $43,277.30 $4,327.73 647,605.03 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337-2767 4-MASONHY Concrete Masonry Units KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCENT GINROLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 4 SUBCONTRACT QUANTITY DESCR. UNIT 1,630 sf $3.50 PAGE TOTALS ADJUSEAENT FACTORS AWUSIMENT AMOUNTS ESTIMATED COST RTBC*OMMOVED CDNITNGENCY ESTIMATE DATE OF ESTIMATE s� CLRRK-5RAl1E5.m: 10% 15% 50% MATERIAL COST $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,705.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,705.00 $655.75 $6,560.75 LABOR COST $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 •$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TDM COST $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,705.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,705.00 $855.75 $6,560.75 $656.08 $7,216.83 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337-2767 E „ ri Misc. Metals KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCENr GINIOLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 5 MATERIAL LABOR QUANTITY DESCR. UNIT RATE 1 allowance $2,000.00 $1,000.00 15% 50% MATERIAL LABOR WiAL COST COST COST $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 i $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 a $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 a $0.00 $0.00 $040 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 i $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 j $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 I $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 i $300.00 $500.00 $800.00 $2F300.00 $1,500.00 $3,800.00 $380.00 $4,180.00 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 r-.- - - --- - - / 6-CARPE= QUANTITY DESCR. Framing Lumber 17,000 bf :food Siding 3,500 sf Finish Wood Surfaces 11000 bf Roof Plywood 10,000 sf Portocochere Soffit 11000 sf 16, TM 4,920 if sf Wood Decking (Stoop & Porto) 12,000 b£ Nails & Framing Accessories 11,000 lbs PAGE '1nTAL5 AD JUS MENT FACMRS ADJUSIMENT AKOUM z9IlHAM COST REMNP+I MED CONTINENCY WM EST MATE DATE OF ZVI MATE i- ..j CLRRK-SRRVES.1AC . p, i 10% KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCENT GIDWLI, ARMITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 6 IATERIAL LABOR MATERIAL LABOR 70TAL UNIT RATE COST COST COST $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.50 $0.80 $8,500.00 $13,600.00 $22,100.00 $1.20 $0.80 $4,200.00 $2,800.00 $7,000.00 $2.00 $1.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.50 $0.40 $5,000.00 $4,000.00 $9,000.00 $1.00 $0.60 $1,000.00 $600.00 $1,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00 $1.00 $14,760.00 $4,920.00 $19,680.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.45 $0.35 $5,400.00 $4,200.00 $9,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $11000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 -$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $41,860.00 $31,120.00 $72,980.00 15% 50% $6,279.00 $15,560.00 $21,839.00 $48,139.00 $46,680.00 $94,819.00 $9,481.90 $104,300.90 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337-2767 r 0 7-THE RKAL & MOISTURE CONTROL QUANTITY DESC.'R. Gypsum Sheathing 4,500 sf Vapor Barrier 20,000 sf Wall Insulation 4,000 sf Ceiling Insulation► 8,000 sf Sound -proof insulation 11000 sf Metal Roofing (w/soffit etc.) 10400 sf Built-up Roof 1,000 Sf •.H . OF. 1: • DATE OF ESTIMATE Cb9RK-GRPVES.,uc. . `. KEMI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CW%EN VINCENP GINROLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 7 MATERIAL UNIT LABOR RATE MATERIAL LABOR ST TOM COS $OCXO)SST $000 $ $0.35 $0.40 $1,575.00 $1:800.00 $3,375.00 $0.05 $0.10 $1000.00 $2,000.00 $3000.00 $0.50 $0.15 $2,000.00 $600.00 $2,600.00 $0.90 $0.20 $7,200.00 $1,600000 $8,800.00 $0.30 $0.10 $300.00 $100.00 $400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4.00 $1.25 $40,000.00 $12,500.00 $52,500.00 $1.50 $0.50 $1,500.00 $500.00 $2000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $53,575.00 $19400.00 $72,675.00 15$ 50$ $6t036.25 $9,550.00 $17,566.25 $61,611.25 $28450.00 $90,2 l$9,026:25 $99,287.38 ABAIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 3372767 r ■ ■ 8-DOORS & W 4mS Exterior Doors (w/frames) Interior Doors (w/frames) Windows Re -liter Kitchen Pass -through Solarium Glass Hardware KE'NAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCENT GINWLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 8 MATERIAL QUANTITY DESCR. UNIT 9 ea $300.00 18 ea $250.00 450 of $22.00 350 of $12.00 1 ea $300.00 580 sf $40.00 25 sets $250.00 PAGE T7VW AWUgft= ' FACMRS 5 AOW9'ZVMr AMOUITlg ZgZIMAMM COST ED CMn7NGgl3CS! TOM ZOTIMATE DAN OF E917MATE CLPRK-GRRI/E-9#r 1-0 - lot 15% LABOR RATE $150.00 $120,00 $3.00 $5.00 $300.00 $3.00 $0.00 50% MATERIAL COST $0.00 $2,700.00 $4,500.00 $0.00 $9,900.00 $4,200.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 $23,200.00 $0.00 $6,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $51,050.00 $7,657.50 $58,707.50 COST COST 4 $0.00 $0.00 $1,350.00 $4,050.00 $2,160.00 $6,660.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,350.00 $11,250.00 $1,750.00 $5,950.00 1 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,740.00 $24,940.00 ' $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 { $0.00 WOO I W $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,650.00 $59,700.00 � $4,325.00 I $11,982.50 $12,975.00 $71,682.50 $7,168.25 $78,850.75 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337.2767 w 9-FINISHES Gyp -board Gyp -board (w/r) Fire Taping Finish Taping Quarry Tile Ceramic Tile Resilient Floor Carpeting Concrete'Hardener Painting Exterior Walls Facia/Soff it -Deck Gyp -board Misc. Vinyl Wall Covering PAGE TOMW MUSTMEW FAC MRS AWUS!l+W AYDUNTS QUANTITY DESCR. 18,000. sf 2,000 sf 1,200 sf 17,300 of 1,060 sf 2,060 sf 2,000 sf 140 sy 1,000 sf 3,500 sf 11000 sf 1,000 sf 13,400 sf 3,800 jsf ELRRK-ERRVE5"ric 10% KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCE2JT GINZOLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 9 MATERIAL UNIT $0.45 $0.50 $0.10 $0.15 $3.00 $3.00 $1.00 $22.00 $0.12 $0.12 $0.15 $0.20 $0.12 $250.00 $1.50 15% LABOR RATE $0.40 $0.40 $0.20 $0.30 $4.00 $4.00 $1.00 $6.00 $0.20 $0.50 $0.50 $0.40 $0.60 $1,500.00 $1.00 50% MATERIAL COST $0.00 $8,100.00 $1,000.00 $120.00 $2,595.00 $3,180.00 $6,180.00 $2,000.00 $3,080.00 $120.00 $0.00 $420.00 $150.00 $200.00 $1,608.00 $250.00 $5,700.00 $0.00 $34,703.00 $5,205.45 $39,908.45 LABOR COST $0.00 $7,200.00 $800.00 $240.00 $5,190.00 $4,240.00 $8,240.00 $2,000.00 $840.00 6200.00 $0.00 $1,750.00 $500.00 $400.00 $8,040.00 $1,500.00 OJ00.00 $0.00 $44,940.00 $22,470.00 $67,410.00 " a 4DTAL COST $0.00 $15,300.00 $1,800.00 $360.00 $7,785.00 $7,420.00 $14,420.00 $4,000.00 $3,920.00 $320.00 $0.00 $2,170.00 $650.00 $600.00 $9,648.00 $1,750.00 $9,500.00 $0.00 $79,643.00 $27,675.45 $107,318.45 $10,731.85 $118,050.30 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 J i - 10-SPECIALTIEES Chalk/Tackboards Toilet Partitions Louvres & Vents Fireplace & Stove le (identifying Devices Dockers Fire Extinguishers & Cabinets Storage Shelving. Telephnne Enclosures Toilet & Bath Accessories Wardrobe Specialties Entry Benches PAGE WDU MUSliM FACTORS MUSBUT AMO(12M 1 "io1 6 KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CEPUER CARMEN VINCEM GIMLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 10 MATERIAL UNIT LABOR RATE pATERIAL COST LABOR QUANTITY DESCR. $0.00 y0.00 $0.0c 40 sf $7.00 $600.00 $2.00 $120.00 $280.00 $3,600.00 $80.00 $720.00 $360.00 $4,320.00 6 25 sets of $40.00 $1,000.00 $5.00 $150.00 51,000.00 $1,000.00 $125.00 $150.00 $1,125.00 $1,150000 1 1 ea ea $1,000.00 $500.00 $300.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $500.00 $300.00 $1,500.00 $1,30G.00 1 1 allowance allowance $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $300.00 $10,000.00 $300.00 $300.00 $1,300.0G $1,300.00 1 allowance if $1,000.00 $50.00 $300.00 $5.00 $1,000.00 $20,000.00 $2,00.00 522 0.00 400 1 ea $750.00 $250.00 $200.00 $100.00 0750.00 $1400.00 $200.00 $600.00 $950.00 $2,100.00 6 1 sets allowance $5,000.00 $500.00 $50.00 $5,OOD.00 $690.00 $500.00 $11,150.00 $5,500.00 $1,840.00 23 if $30.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.30 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $37,820.00 $6,925.00 $44,745.00 15$ 50$ $5,673.00 $3,462.50 $9,135.50 $43,493.00 $10,387.50 $$5,388.05 10% $59,268.55 APRIL 6, 1982 CLPRK-GR)9VE.S.1Mr. 5.902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 ■ /I 1 I KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER C`"9L'D] VINCF.M GINTOLI, ARCiITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMARE J PAGE 11 , UNIT LABOR MATERIAL LABOR TDTAL 11-DQUIPMENT QUAMITY DESCR. ALL IMJCE RATE COST COST Ct03P j $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Food Service Equipwt No allowance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 i $0.00 $0.00 0.00 Nurses Equip mt No allowance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 Misc. Cabinets & Casework 80 if $100.00 $8,000.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Window Treatment 450 sf $8.00 $3,600.00 0.00 $3,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Furniture & Accessories No allowance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.0 0.00 i Rugs & Mats 1 allowance $500.00 $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 i $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ` $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 _ $0.00 $0.00 0.00 PAGE TDTALS $12,100.00 $0.00 $12,100.00 AWUSli+M FFCHMS 15% 0% AWUglyM AMOUNTS $1,815.00 $0.00 $1,815.00 COST $13,915.00 $0.00 $13,915.00 REMSM2D CONTINGENCY 10% $1,391.50 ' . TML FSTUM $15,306.50 u DATE OF ESTIMATE AFRIL 6, 1982 CLPRK-GRRVE- 1AC 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 I%/%n TItY, FOLLOWING CHECKS ARY rrVYlt 51,0911,00 NIIII:II NI:V.I/ (7111tIG11, AI'1'1a1VA1. O)t RA71Y/(:A'lllJtl a/. � • V_Y.RiMSR AW11111T H1,50RIII IIOI PRO. lL1;T AI11AIf1H1111' Al,r/sI1HI r;HAV1,V AFlst(13 1'n11 FOR APPRUVAI,s Alanka Intfuntrial 1,(151.97 Chain Airport 11 1, O Repair 1, ti,slnt, ',upplir s 7.n'sL,00 )/l/5 Hardware Mtnc. Toolq Afrport H 6 tf S:,inll Toola 1, Minor Equip, III I.h1F 1/110 Squeegee 6 Plunger !Sewer Operating 3upplloa 11.11 )7211 Pis IIeyn !Shop Repair 6 1lalnt. luppllea 109,50 VIII Tube Cutter Building lnnpector Small Tonln 1, Minor kgsllp, 30,30 31431 Blue Cross 11,100.08 April Ftrdlcal Inn. Varlaun Health Innuranre II,10u,02 Burrougha Corp. 1,100.00 Willty gilllnv School FR-Finance HlnreIIanenun 5i0,00 30154 Utility Billing School PR-Ylnrince Mincollaneoun 550,09 31781 Central Pen. Mental 8,184.00 Grant lion -Departmental Granto To Aso,tsc.fes 1,989,60 Health Y.VOleatfon Police Profeaalonal Sorvlcen 195.00 32187 Clean Right Janitorial 2,000.00 March Janitorial Terminal Profenalunal Servirea 2,000,00 30084 Computer Palace 2,124.00 Computer YR-I.ibrary Machinery 6 Equipment 2,724.00 32224 Cook Inlet Council On 7,989.00 Grant tiun-Departra'ntal Granta To Agenclon I,IWJ.Or) Alcoholiam Echo 1,41so lockers 1,672.80 Kent for March COA-Gong, Flealn Operating Ftupplion 1i59,78 321)9 CAA -Home lialIvery Operating Suppllen 11,4.94 321I9 Heat for April COA-Gong, Meals Operating Supplies 1,74,46 32421 COA-llmw Delivery Operating Supplion 169,61 31421 Carman V. Gintoli 12,860.00 Arch. Servicen CP-Senior Center Y"ngineoring 12,860,00 Glacier State 1,834.75 March Phone Service Various Com:wnlcatLons I,FI)4.J5 Hutchings Chevrolet 30,979.64 2-Police Cnra Police Machinery 6 Equipment 21,410.00 3IJ58 Heat Rimer Shop Popair 6 Haint. Supplies 17.59 32173 Statfonwagon .1411 machinery 6 Equipment 9,542,05 31865 Kenai Peainoula Care Center 6,763.88 Construction Project Hon -Departmental Grants To Agencies 6,763,88 r CJlY.CR8 OUR $1,000.00 4/7/82 PAGV 2 V_YJJVOR MUIIT DESCRIPTION PRO JF.CTIDY.PARINY.0T ACCOUH3 CHARGE AMOUNT POO RUSCO 3,584.27 March Natural Gas Ilonge Vnrfonn 11tilltita 3.584.27 jMcLane b As wc, 2,167.00 Yimni Spit `Survey lion -Departmental Professional Services 2,767,00 31575 YY.RS 27,113.21 Mar. Retirement Various Retirement 27,113.23 f i P.R, 6 S, 15,646,01 Pay Y.et, 02 GP -Candlelight b Lin, Construction 15,646.01 ' Peninsula F0r4 12,486.42 Pickup Truck FR-Parka Machinery 6 Equipment 12,486.62 31306 Pptorkin Dist, 1,904.86 Clans Cleanpr 6 Sponges Fire Operating Supplies 36.I0 32259 Coffee Filters Streets Operating Supplies 9.05 32298 Sugar Police Operating Supplies 25.95 32315 Concession Fao4 Re,reation Operating Supplies 39.40 32341 Coffee Pots Police Operating Supplies 55.50 32343 Rrnwls 6 Lides GOA-Hose Delivery Operating Supplies 21.85 32347 Inmate Foo4 Jail Operating Supplies 717.88 32196 Inmate V004 Jail operating Supplies 33.20 32286 Inmate Food Jail Operating Supplies 683.88 32286 Inmate Food Jail Operating Supplies 125.90 32309 Coffee Pots .Jail Operating Supplies 150.15 32352 Struacpler Plumbing 3,685.41 Plumbing Renovations -Pine Arts lkm-Departmental Repair 6 Maintenance 3,482.41 31465 Install Toilet - Fine Arta flon-Departmental Repair 6 Maintenance 135.00 32201 Install Laundry Tub lion -Departmental Repair 6 Maintenance 68.00 32210 Tie's Janitorial 1,287.00 March .Janitorial i90n-Dep4rtmental Professional Services 1.287.00 30083 Homen's Resource Center 6#959.70 Feb. Child Care Women's Resource Accounts Receivable 6,959.70 YuYon Office Supply 1,493.16 Misr, Office Supplies Attorney Office Supplies 18.67 31084 Record Files Cowjunications Machinery 6 Equipment 746.48 31411. Wheel For Typewriter Library Office Supplies 36.00 31453 Stapler 6 Ribbons Library Office Supplies 33.35 31678 Tray t, Deak Pad Fire Office Supplies 18.96 31727 Rise. Off1re Supplies City Manager Office Supplies 12.02 3185b Mine. Office supplies Attorney Office Supplies 12.02 31858 pttvelopas City Clerk office Supplies 6.38 31858 I ciiEas ovu Fita. 3 AMOUNT I)F";(:Rl PI" ION r ACCOUNT CHARGE AWN1111 If)# Yukon Office Supply ((;r)nt.) Xerox Paper Non-Wpnrtmental Printhig 1, Binding 391.50 31962 Pads b Ribbons Library Offict, Supplies 90.88 il 911 Drawer III len Finance Office Sfjppi I en 56.66 320: 9 Storage Boxes City Manager Office Supplies 15.63 32021 Note Pads Attorney Office Supplies 1.61 32021 IA,ttarm & 1,41PUIS Library Office Supplias 20.39 32055 Notary Sanl & Pads Pollee Office Supplies 18.72 32066 Stamp Pads Planning & Zoning Office Supplies 9.00 12098 Note Haolto Recreation Office Supplies 4.90 32098 FOR RATIVICATIONs A.H.E.F.C.U. 16,347.00 Credit Union WIll Various Liability 16,347.00 Bayly, Martin & Pay 5t450*00 Feb. Workmen's Comp Various Workmen's Compensation 5,450.00 Marathon Oil 10t847.41 Feb. Natural Can Trust & Agency In Trust 10,847.41 National Bank of AK 41t570.00 Fed. W/H Central Fund Liability 41,570.00 Union Oil 10,823.76 Feb. Natural Gas Trust & Agency In Trust 10,823.76 National Bank of AK 882,236.67 Treasury Bill 3/18/82 Central Treasury Central Treasury 882,236.67 1,500,000.00 Certificate Of Deposit 3/31/82 TrD Central Treasury 1,500,000.00 3,235,000.00 REPO 3/15/82 Central Treasury Central Treasury 3,235,000.00 12.57, Int. 3,675,000.00 REPO 3/16/82 Central Treasury Central Treasury 3,675,000.00 12.5% Int. 4,075,000.00 REPO 3/17/82 Central Treasury Central Treasury 4t075,000.00 12.52 InL. 3,200,000.00 REPO 3/18/82 Central Treasury Central Treasury 3,200,000.00 12.5/ Int. 3,070,000.00 REPO 3/25/82 Central Treasury Central Treasury 3,070,000.00 12.5% Int. 2,425,000.00 REPO 3/31/82 Central Treasury Central Treasury 2,425,000.00 12.52 Int. 2,890,000.00 REPO 4/l/82 Central Treasury Central Treasury 2,890,000.00 11.52 Int. 111011 ; rM R11.011VA UPON OVER $1 WHICH 1111,M) COUTICIL APPROVAL 4///87 VLItx)R DESCH III I I ON M-9111-1I Anderuon'a Sweeping Svrvfc(,- I;w,.,-I. Fftwil (Aty Streets Streets Repair b Maintenance 5 6,500.00 lioxer-Marcus Company Kitchenware C,,tjn(:Il on Aging - Borough Operating Supplieu I KNA Oilfield Services Storage fank for waste oil VRS-Streets Machinery fj Equipment 3,000,00 Me Lane & Agenclaten Replat 1.3.81 Spur 5/1) 02 and Plat Frontage Road boundaries Airport -Land Professional Servlcen 3,400.00 McLane 6 Associates Survey A, flint Senior CItfzen Center Tract Airport -Land Professional Services 3,400.00 Polar Reproduction Mobile File Cabinet & Acces. PW-Mmin, Machinery & Equipment 502.00 Printing & Binding 1.202.40 0 n Rr:i;;,.,.: is ,... ^:'!:!! et nnn•nn u}!trlc ncr•u rnuvcli. AI•PROVAL 4/7/82 C OLSCit11.7IOR Uia'Alttlbit:f AMMINT _ myow _tEl:IxtR Amieroon's Sweeping Service Sweep Kenai city Streets Street!: Repair 4 II.slnten.,nr..• Boxer -Marcus Company Kitchenware Council on Aging, Borough OperatinP, Supplies 1.300.42 KIIA Oilfield Services Storage tank fur waste oil FRS -Streets Machinery 4 Egalprent 3,000.00 llrl,ane b Associates R••plat 1.3.R1 Spur S/B #2 and Hat Frontage Hoad boundaries Airport -Land Professional Serileee, 3.400,00 McLane 4 Associates Survey 4 Plat Senior Citizen Center Tract Airport -Land Professional Services 3.400,00 Polar Reproduction Mobile File Cabinet b Acces, Pll-Admin, ?lachinery L Fq-tip—tit 501.00 Printing 4 Bin4inp, 1.2'12.40 �. � - ICI jiff.,. � +., ,s� •.. , K , r .. • ."=�.At�wr�cc3ra��� r G-s LEASE OF DIIiPQBT-LDl1GS-QIS�DC2L1TSE8 IS by andHbetweenEtheTCITYtered into this OF KENAI, City Hall, P.0 fBoxr580,1982, Kenai, Alaska 99611, a hone -ruled municipal corporation of Alaska, hereinafter called "City," and ROBERT ROTH i DAN PITTS, dba A i P ENTERPRISES, P. 0. BOX 2939, KE11AI, ALASKA 99611, hereinafter called "Lessee." That the City, in consideration of the payments of the rents and performance of all the covenants herein contained by the Lessee, does hereby demise and lease to the Lessee the following described property in the Kenai Recording District, State of Alaska; to wits Lots 1, 2 6 3, Block 1, POO Subdivision iss A. RUBROEEs The purpose for which this Lease is issued Aviation Cargo Services T commencingoLThe term of nthelotday of May, 1982, to the 30tbLease is for 99 eday �of June, 2081. C. S of General Covenant 110-9EoEtPthis LLease,brentalectoforetherms above -described land shall be payable as followss 1. Right of entry and occupancy is authorized as of the lot day of May, 1962, and the first rent shall be computed from such date until June 30, 1582, at the rate of month equals $1,960.00 now due5980.00 per , based on 61 of appraised value of $156,000.00. 2. The annual rental rate shall be 66 of the fair market value (as set forth and defined in General Covenant No. 9) Of the demised premises, and the rental on the effective date of this Lease shall be $11,760.00 per year subject to redetermination pursuant to General Covenant No. 9. 3 and ending June n30ashall tbeopayable iinaadvance l Year bonior!beg fore}the first day of July of each year. If the annual rent exceeds $2,400, then the Lessee may opt at the time of the execution hereof or at the beginning of each new Lease year to pay rent in equal monthly installments, payable in advance on or before the first day of July and on or before the first of each month thereafter. 4. Rental for any period which is less than one (1) year shall be prorateu based on the rate of the last full year. S. :su o General Covenant droio9,tthe hLessee sagreesfto payotoied �thebject ii.proi•riate parties all levies, asseLcments, and charges as iereinafter proviceus (a) Taxes pertaining to the ltaseholc interest of the 1 ,i 1 i i t 7 CITY OF KE•:A, •t•.• a is ��.. A+ •. n MIN ! f V - 7 i i5 I 1 n 53. DPYROYAL-M-OTB&R-ALITUORIT1Bfis The issuance by the City of Leases does not relieve the Lessee of responsibility of obtaining licenses or permits as may be required by duly authorized Borough, State, or Federal agencies. 54. PART OPJ.Eb5Zz The application for lease upon which this Lease is based, the building information and development plans filed therewith, and the sheet entitled "For Your Information" setting forth the conditions for acceptance and approval of the application, all of which are attached hereto, are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this Lease. IH WITLESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands, the day and year stated in the individual jacknowledgments below. LESSORS CITY OF KENAI By$ William J. Brighton City Manager LESSEES R i P ENTERPRIS S tle Rv� Title (If Lessee is a corporation) ATTESTS 15 M :,. C•TY f)F sc 4M STATE OF ALASKA ) THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFXJ( that on this Z day of 1 82 tames .&x ;_�i,Cs'iuK, Titles lldsr';fri� �� �. of being personally known to me or having produced satisfactory evidence of identification, appeared before me and acknowledged the voluntary and authorized execution of the foregoing instrument. N tary Public for Alaska By commission Expiress«�P�/ STATE OF ALASKA ) THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO C�ROPY that on this �� day of ,J� -- �>> , 1 82, Names � LZI �',/%r , Titles of being personally known to me or having produced satisfactory evid.oce of identification, appeared before me and acknowledged the voluntary and authorized execution of the foregoing instrument. Notiry Public for Alaska by commission Expiressll�F1'!`,/ STATE OF ALASKA ) )GO THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on this day of , 1982, WILLIAM J. BRIGHTON, City Manager of the City of Kenai, Alaska, being personally known to me or having produced satisfactory evidence of identification, appeared before me and acknowledged the voluntary and authorized execution of the foregoing instrument. Notary Public for Alaska my Commission Expiressss�r C� Approved as to lease form by City Attorney L (initials) Approved by finance Director �.—=--- (initials) Approved by City Manager tinl ls) LEASE APPROVED by City Council this day of 1982. City Clerk _. 16 Ee "M CITY USE OISJL.Y C I 'I'}' ()1' I.1:1VM I date ltseeived ►Z.- -- P. O. BOX 580 • KENAI, ALASKA . PHONE 283.7535 I Time 4 . LEASE APPLICATION; -0;194neture and;atle Name of Applicant Robert Roth & Dan 0. Pitts Address P.O. Box 29 39 Kenai, AK99b 11 Business Name and Address R & P Eaterpriaes P.O. Box 2939 Kenai AN 99611 Kenai Peninsula Borough Sales Tax No. Pending (if applicable) State Business License No. Pending (if applicable) Telephone 262-5919 ^2Y133 (Check One) Lease X Permit ,. Lot Description Block "1" Lots 1__ 2,,,A 3 Kenai Airport 3T� Desired Length of Lease: 30 Years i Property to be used for Aviation Cargo Services r Description of Developments (type, construction, size, etc.) 100' X 50' Netal building for banger and office. Undo round fuel storage. Aircraft parking. Attach development plan to scale W' = 50'), showing all buildings planned. i Time Schedule for Propo .ed Develop —cent. Leginning Date_ spring 182 I i Propo:;ed Ces..nletion Date spring Esti:aate Value Of Construction $ "00)000. - -- _ Da e : �.,� 'f, c - ..t.� • „s—� �LG �� / /"'�J�:/ J .�» ? : •a 1 C- 5 s CITY OF KENAI CHECK LIST FOR SITE PLANS ALL ITEMS :BUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE APPLICATION CAN BE ACCEPTED. Drawings should be drawn to scale 1"a Xy ft. * t " = •,v C4 *,* and should show layout of the lot applied for and the location of all improvements proposed. Drawings should shows 1. Buildings..........�.............................. 2. Proposed Buildings ............. :.................. (Could be indicated with dotted red lines) 3. Parking Facilities.......... 0..................... (Hoes many spaces and where located) 4. How much land will be cleared, landscaped, ....... paved, graveled, etc. and method of disposal of overburden should be specified. 5. Building Set Backs, ...... #--* .......... 6. Drainage Plan.... ....... I................. 7. Entrances and exits for building and lots......... 8. Building materials ................................ 9. Location of signs, size, and materials: made of... 10. Fencing ........................................... 11. Curb Cuts (where applicable) ....... ............... 12. Building Height .................................. _ 13. Buildings on or near the airport on airport lands must complete FAA Form 7460-1 (Far Part 77)....... *This does not have to be drawn by an architect, Pace 2 of 5 I I i ow, of 01c, lot, app! for ;I-,,! t !I,, :"I'l Of ;III f t.111 I ,(,Ilt pro, o.,-.(,d i 1), 1 r 1,. 1:,.;, bu L Ct C. Ct;,..vpI ci. lon of t h! drawl M., 111d ',%i Clear i6c., of 'Ch proponwl dill. by oil C. Lh 10'.. - IV r rA C; RA /41 P 4 L fo 44 4 &,'V ,cc L4T 14 ��:.y+= . . ,��. �.,. _.,.. �,,.. ram.•. . 1 IiI1II.D I:J(; I;JI'O{::�?/1'1'10:J Gn thia Mict-IL submit a drawin;; of buildW,; planned, drawn to scale. Scale: 1" _ ^.C` ft:. Construction Materials: (wood frame, steel building, etc.) THIS DI M-i'ING SHOULD BE AS COMPLETE AS POSSIBLE ' I �-, - -- - - --- - - - I 'VI S - V 1 Degcription of P• arty CONDITIONS OF ACCEPTANCE (To be completed by the City) Annual rent rate or cost Zoned for Permits required Assessments Insurance requiredG'S Construction must begin by T,244 Completion date for major construction THIS APPLICATION WILL BE A PART OF THE LEASE Planning Commission Approval i Sy; ''�'-:L �.�•} i•^� Date of Approval L v% 'x.'1 c6� Chaff man City Council Approval By: Date of Approval Mayor Pace 5 of 5 t i A '�°+easiiastr ---..� „II„�� •., u,: ,•,,.. 1'.:II ',ui, I,.I'�Irr 1...•1..�. rt' I:•.I,, ., . I l �I li.\t I. U1!•1111 SI Il.l. i AS \\'UI(hSllla:!' • iv Nyi REMuvk CARBONS OEPARiIdC OF tRANSPORTATION Form Approved O.M B. No 004 R0001 FOR FAA USE ONLY V, • IECIRAL AVI AII0N ADMINISTRATION AERONAUTICAL STUDY N0, NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION 1 NATURE OF STRUCTURE • Cum plc to hLf h .1 tired ll ttrluu , A. (((.�'/It t k rrrec 1 FAA will either return this form or lJ NEW CONSTRUCTION ALTERATION issue a separate acknowledgement. B I ('kirk tine 1 (N/olt 1ru11Ih A. The proposed structure: ❑Does not require a notice to FAA. FERMANENT TEMPORARY o, Ilmf,) Htt> Would not exceed any obstruction 2 NAME AND ADDRESS OF INDIVIDUAL. lOMPANY, CORPORATION• ETC. PROPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION standard of Part 77 and would not c.Yntawe, street. t.'dy. St#b and %ap rode) be it hazard to air navigation. r -� Q i­ p 9,\j Pot 15 r .S Should be obstruction Q marked 0 lighted per FAA Advisory Circular TO 70/7460.1, Chapter(s) ❑Obstruction marking and l(ghting I�(Ae1. l �9 . f-�U; are not necessary. Requires supplemental notice. (� s It Use FAA form enclosed. _J B. FCC was M was net [3 advised. REMARKS: 100'�sU' J 4011it-'l- TALL.) VheT�9L C9iJ`si.) OFFICE: 4. LOCATION OF STRUCTURE A. COORDINATES (To nearest second) B. NEAREST CITY OR TOWN, AND STATE LATITUDE LONGITUDE 4 k,- A j 46 !,),,5Ki4 W DISTANCE FROM 48 (2) DIRECTION FROM 48 -Z.v c 1 r y MILES No C. NAME OF NEAREST AIRPORT, HELIPORT, OR SEAPLANE BASE (I) DISTANCE FROM NEAREST POINT OF (2) DIRECTION lLNNAl 414I-`4% 1 NEAREST AY iOC)Ln^f' FROM O F.Ae' D.U!!!!•r/tY.Y t!F LUrAT1UN ORUNW F s1TE -"-- RESPECT TO 111GUIVA1's, sTURErs, AiRruccTs. 1'RU.VINENr rERRAIRPORT Aj.YRFEAF�6.yk 8 Ex. tmri.vo srRBe,ri,REX, ETV' (Attach a Aiphtray, street. or any ocher appropri#te map or .ealed dratrtny shoatinp the rstnisonehip o! construction .0s, to nrarsrt airport(#) 11 were spare is repaired, eontiars on a separate .fleet of pa per and uN z *3 Vf. to t�notice.) FiL.eG�" 1 c..ors � �D„��� C/a57- t�o�17P•F�. L 5 L�►ILL.a..v n=�� r- S. HEIGHT AND ELEVATION (Cum) lets el, if and C to the nrarrst out) 6. WORK SCHEDULE DATES y 2 ! A. WILL START A. ELEVATION OF SITE ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL �+ B HEIGHT OF STRUCTURE INCLUDING APPURTENANCES AND LIGHTING if/ any► ABOVE GROUND, OR WATER IF SO SITUATED j� (� ! 8. WILL/COMPLETE C. OVERALL HEIGHT ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL (A +A) 1 T.4 5%/�l/tJ�•• `�� 7. OBSTRUCTION MARKED AND/OR I YES NO LIGHTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH A. MARKED CURRENT FAA ADVISORY CIRCULAR B. AVIATION RED OBSTRUCTION LIGHTS 70 7460.1, OBSTRUCTION MARK- t ING AND LIGHTING C. FIl(,FI IYfbNSITY WttITE OBSTRUCTION LIGHTS x D. DUAL 1.1011T1N STEM j K IF-it1 S'F.RTIFY that -11 of thent above at. trrnes made b n e ere ur torn rte an correct tote rut of m uw ed •e. 8. NAME AND TIM OF PERSON FILING THIS NOTICE trype or Pei n ' t SIG P T c 5t+i ill E 1lrtnt� y� „ r t 10. OAT OF S NATURE II - TELIEPH NE NO. l rues wa& area re r) G kC'H I'eeeane ftbo lanowant{ly and wailfully fall to comply with the provutons o the Federal Aviation Resulations Part 72 ara liable to a fine at s i00 rer the fast ettmse, with mcreassd Penaltwo thereatter as is tied by Section v02caI of the Federal Avpstaon Act of 19sa as anoonde& FAA F�orns 74E0.1 (I1.7?) SUPERSEDES PREV16lli a W Dk'VRLOPI0:IT PLAN �`- Block 1 Lota 1, 2, 3 Kenai Airport Alaska INTPOEOCTIONs As requested by the planning and zoning comaision City of KenaiA Alaska. The following 2 year development plan for block 1.lots 1, 2, 3 Kenai Airport is respectfully submitted by Dan 0. Pitts and Robert Roth. Pending approval of the lease application for the above late by the City Council of Xenai, construction of a large aircraft air cargo freight. fuel,and maintenance _ facility will begin after break up 1982 as follows. _ %Y 1 82s Tree removal and ground preparation to large aircraft specifications _ airport ramp aide of Iota 1. 2, 3. 0.^TOBER11982s Cound preparation completed, power into lots, 12X16 teaporary n -- " office constructed, fuel storage tanks buried , over burden disposed of off airport. Q "t Construction of foundation for hangar and storage facility (approx. 50ft. X 100ft. metal building) begins. Latoberl'081s &sngar and storage facility gravel parking area completed future plans call for paving aircraft ramp area and proposed additional buildings as needed. Dan O. Pitts 8oburt BOLE& 1 i •� 'fit, +jr..�t�....�•«`c.� � rS. Y.•..� I t • la ' a 1 �l �I GRAVEL PARKING SPACE DRAINAGE DITCH cc� �� `-t, TIE DOWN SPACE D I - I I TANKS i"UEL OFFICE 1 _ 1 I I I v = I Z v I D 1p O Z I 0 I IP 1 A to r*i a I A I I I 1 RAMP GRAVEL. _ i _ SLOPED SIDES D 392' -O 1" 5o'-O" ,11 u . 1 11 a SECTION "A -A" IN a 201-01- } 1 i Ll 1,7 k ti 1 9 9 J9 10 .s 4, A ty it r-lL•'/�-A,' vV"A: '- C'//� ,,/N/vc- A�1END!.1ENT N0. 4 to d y 3-15 AGREEMENT TO FURNISH ENGINEERING SERVICES to the CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA FOR MODIFICATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO SEWERAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES WHEREAS, design services for the sewerage facilities have been completed and final design costs determined; and WHEREAS, a cost ceiling adjustment is necessary to cover additional costs unanticipated when the design budget was previously adjusted; IT IS, THEREFORE, necessary to modify the original Engineering Agree- ment dated December 13, 1978, as amended January 3 and May 19, 1980, and November 16, 1981, as follows: GENERAL: All conditions of the original contract remain in effect except as specifi- cally noted herein. ARTICLE 2: J Under Schedule A, modify the following items: Task Cost Ceilinq Fixed Fee Total Price Design Services $ 325,158 $ 45,492 $ 370,650 APPROVED BY CH2&1 HILL APPROVED BY CITY OF KENAI, NORTHWEST, INC. ALASKA 4 v 13 1A ) Date 3 1.4 Sit_ Date _3/ a 2- j i,VA AJt 47 va 000:00 i CHI:W "HILL ungineers planner~ economists scientists March 23, 1982 K12720.B7 Mr. William J . Brighton, Manager City of Kenai Box 580 Kenai, Alaska 99611 Dear Mr. Brighton: l►{ T yr r mvNl 1�CP• nff a.u.......,., Re: Sewerage Projects Design Cost Ceiling Adjustment Request We are enclosing for your review and submittal to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) the support documentation that you requested during our meeting on Friday, March 12, 1982, The cost ceilin for desi n services needs to be increased to cover costs o 30 324.18 that ave not een rev ous__Wl. By adjusting other line items in the existinc) bud et the total increase tote tep 2 grant is $26.450--the City'11 s share of which is 33_�na The need for a cost ceiling increase was anticipated during mid-1980, at which time we discussed the insufficiency of the remaining budget with Charles Brown and Keith Kornelis, before the cost ceiling was reached. At that time, Mr. Brown requested that we Identify the amount of funds that would be required to complete our design services. In the Interest of obtaining construction bids during a favorable bidding climate, we completed design services on the interceptor, sewage treatment plant, and outfall without a formal amendment to our agreement. We are pleased that the bids for the three projects were excellent and that the projects have gone well with few change orders. l The prifnary reasons for the costs exceeding the previously estimated budget are as follow: f o Additional supervision of the minority subcontractor, !Iustafa, Hong and Associates, including some redesign of their inter- ceptor and outfall work. o An increase in our Defense Contract Audit Agency approved rates fo r forward pricing, no- • as ide ntified in our August 18,1980 progress report. Anthorage 016ce Deniit tower tionh. 2550 DPrwli Sheet. 8th f inor. Anchorage. Alaska 99503 90,, 278.2551 k. Mr. 1:'Illiam J. Brighton, Manager March 23, 1982 K 12710. P.7 Page 2. o Increased work required by the ADFC regarding the outfall location. Mr. Alex Viterl requested that the previously approved outfall location be restudied. The result of field activities and discussions with the ADEC was that the outfall location was moved to Its existing location nearer the sewage treatment plant. This required current studies, test pits, surveying, and design for the new outfall. o The assistance maps and support required by the City for easement acquisition and other approvals required before con- struction could start, including the delicate routing near the Russian Orthodox Church were greater than anticipated orig- inally. We believe that the request for these additional funds is reasonable. Even though some of the additional design services constituted an Increase in the scope of work, we are requesting recovery of costs only, without profit taken on our investment into the design project. Following your review, the enclosed documents should be signed and submitted to the ADEC for their approval. Chuck Torkko and I both appreciated the time you spent with us while we explained the details of this project with you. We are looking forward to hearing from you regarding resolution of payment for the additional design services. Sincerely, Loren D. Leman, P.E. Project Manager Enclosures bja:000:k 0 -11 CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE NO. 767-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, increasing estimated revenues and appropriations in the 1981-82 Jail Fund by $2,000 for replacement of the heat and smoke detector system in the Jail Facility. WHEREAS, an examination of the heat and smoke detector system in the Public Safety Building has revealed that the system in the Jail facility is not working properly, and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the system must be replaced, and WHEREAS, monies are available in the Unreserved Fund Balance of the Jail Fund. NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that estimated revenues and appropriations be increased as follows: +Tail FUnd Increase Estimated Revenues: Appropriation of Fund Balance $2,000 Increase Appropriations: Jail - Repair & Maintenance $2,000 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 21st day of April, 1982. VINCENT O'REILLY, MAYOR -� ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk - First Reading: April 7, 1982 Second Reading: April 21, 1982 Effective Date: April 21, 1982 Approved by Finance J21JZ i MrA M CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE NO. 76 8-82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS IN THE 1981-82 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BY $7,000 IN RECOGNITION OF A GRANT FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA FOR FIRE SERVICE TRAINING WHEREAS, the City of Kenai has received a grant in the amount of $7,000 from the State of Alaska, Department of Education, to finance a regional crash fire/rescue seminar. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that estimated revenues and appropriations be increased as follows: Increase Estimated Revenues: State Grant $7,000 Increase Appropriations: Fire - Operating Supplies $4,000 Fire - Professional Services 1,500 Fire - Miscellaneous "M $' .16 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 21st day of April, 1982. ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk Approved by Finance: _ VINCENT O'REILLY, MAYOR First Reading: April 7, 1982 Second Reading: April 21, 1982 Effective Date: April 21, 1982 a H- 3 CITY OF KENAI %Od Cap" 4 4" I. O. BOX 580 KENAI, ALASKA 99611 TELEPHONE 213 • 7631 April 7, 1982 TO: Council ,Ic FROM: Vincent O'Reilly 1 N Mayor 4 t RE: Telephone Conversation with Senator Don Gilman TO BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION I. Municipal Assistance Funding As reported, Governor and proposed operating budgets of both Houses are at the $71 Million level down from $85 Million. Appears to be little strength in push to restore to proper amount. This would bring our 6/83 appropriation to estimated $800,000 compared to $1,000,000 to be received 6/82. II. C.I.P. The $250 per capita distribution of Municipal Aid appears safe. Current thinking appears to be of $100 Million per House for C.I.P. If District 13, Senate K, receives 2% of total, amount available for allocation would be $10-$11 Million to be divided between Borough and Municipal- ities. Borough would be beneficiary of items in Governor's budget so thinking appears to be to allocate major portion of $10-$ll Million among municipalities. We should know by next week. Senator did receive some 40 letters supporting Kenai library expansion. Senator also believed there would be some funding Of D.E.C. Water & Sewer account enabling us to obtain 50% matching money. VOR:jw M 6 QF g , KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, March 24. 1982 Kenai City Hall Philip Bryson, Chairman 1. ROLL CALL Present: Phil Bryson, Mary Quesnel, Lee Lewis, Jim Blanning, Paul Turner, and Hal Smalley Absent: Jack Castimore 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 3. AGENDA APPROVAL It had been requested that John and Kris Stoehner be added to the agenda, item 5-B and discussion of a Corp Permit, item 7-D MOTION: Hal Smalley moved, seconded by Lee Lewis to accept the agenda with the two additions. There were no objections 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF March 10, 1982 MOTION: Jim Blanning moved, seconded by Hal Smalley to approve the minutes without change or correction. Motion passed unanimously '17 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Discussion: Acceptance of Zoning Powers from the Borough At the last meeting, the motion had been passed by the Planning and s, Zoning Commission to be presented to the Council which requested a resolution transfering the zoning powers from the Borough to the City and any considerations the Council may have. It was decided that Bill Brighton, Phil Bryson, and Ben Delahay would meet on Friday to draft an ordinance or resolution. J KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 2 Regular Meeting, March 24, 1982 B. Lease Application: John and Kris Stoehner Attorney Ed Garnett briefly described for the Commission the present desire of the Stoehners in regard to the clam processing operation on the Etolin Subdivision tract. Drawings of the building were presented. The application is now being made for lot 9 on that tract. A drawing of proposed parking was presented, however, there were no copies available for the file. Mr. Garnett stated that one of the main reasons for being at the Commission meeting was to ask the Commission to consider a speedy resolution of the matter as Mr. Garnett pointed out that the clam season begins in April. Mr. Garnett explained that the building will be concrete and fiberboard or fiberglass will be on the inside of the building. Mr. Pfeuffer of the State had gone over the drawings as presented to the Commission Mr. Garnett addressed the letter written to the City and Commission which objected to the operation, submitting a letter written by Mr. Pfeuffer addressing the question of sanitation and odors. Also submitted to the Commission was a letter written by a neighbor of the Sterling operation which also dealt with the question of odors. Letters were submitted from Bell Bouy Seafoods which stated that there were little problems with odors and sanitation. Phil Bryson asked if the clams processed in both operations were for human consumption, they were being processed for both human consumption and bait. He also pointed out that a written lease for modification had not been presented and asked if it would be forthcoming, Mr. Garnett stated that it would. Jim Blanning asked if this would not be an entirely new lease application, Phil Bryson and Bill Brighton felt that it would be a modification in that the request for lease is the same, just the location has changed, and the machine/engine shop was dropped. Bill Brighton pointed out that the water and sewer hookup would not be operational until at least July. Ed Garnett stated that construction could start before that time and the operation would be ready by the time the water and sewer is in. In reference to the Light Industrial zone, Phil Bryson stated that his interpretation of the ordinance was that the uses in that area are intended to be compatible with General Commercial uses and felt that odor could become a problem that would be objectionable to General Commercial uses. Since outside storage of shells and waste could be problem, Hal Smalley asked what arrangements were made for dumping and Mr. Garnett stated that the shells would be kept in plastic containers sealed until dumped. �- KENAI PLANNING AND LONLNG COMMISSION Page 3 Regular Meeting, March 24. 1982 Paul Turner asked if there was a lease application before the Commission, there was none. MOTION: Paul Turner moved to table this item until a completed application were before the Commission. Mr. Garnett stated that there was an application before the Commission in the form of a modification, a continuation of a lease already applied for. Phil Bryson pointed out that it was a concept lease application. Motion died for lack of a second Phil Bryson asked for comment from the public. Mr. Jerry Cartee spoke from.his experience as an operator of a clam processing operation outside the City. Mr. Cartee addressed the problem of shells being disposed of, stating that shells are usually not taken away on a daily basis and are usually kept in a dipsy dumpster until it was feasible to haul the shells to the dump, creating an odor. Mr. Pheuffer passed Mr. Cartee's operation which is much larger, and the ` problem of odor was never addressed. Ferol Hall spoke concerning the size of operation of the Stoehners in that the Sterling operation was small compared to the size of the operation now under consideration. The operation that Mrs. Hall runs, while larger than the Sterling n operation disposed of over one million clam shells last year and the Stoehners operation now under consideration could conceivably run that high once the plant had begun and in order to support the size of the operation, a larger volume was produced. Mrs. Hall also wished the Commission to take into consideration the fact that seafood operations usually are not within the City centers and that odors under those conditions are a problem, and finally to consider the FAA's rejection of the conceopt of the processing plant, and further that they may want to concur on anything that was in a close proximity to the airport, since what they had rejected is now only a block away from the original site. Both persons wished the Commission to a. know that they were not against competition, they were concerned with the City and in the normal course of growth, an operation will frequently go from clam processing to possibly fish and would the -�,--- City want that in the downtown area. Mr. Brighton wished to point out that in the last sentence of a letter sent to Kris Stoehner from Mr. Pheuffer, it states that should sanitation including odor, waste, waste storage and waste disposal become a problem, the DEC would be obliged to take appropriate action -- to eliminate the problem. i KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, March 24, 1982 Page 4 Mr. Cartee indicated that he had contacted Fish and Game and other knowledgeable agencies pertaining to clam processing and also discussed the odor problem in regards to businesses that may want to establish in that area. Phil Bryson asked what one million clam shells represented, Jerry Cartee indicated that it represented processing 5,000 to 6,000 pounds per day. Mr. Bryson then asked the Stoehners what volume they would be processing, Kris Stoehner said they process approximately 1,500 pounds per day, which is what they have processed in the last two years. Mrs. Stoehner also asked to comment on the point of dumping the clam shells, stating that their operation dumps at least once a day, sometimes twice a day. Dr. Turner asked if the Stoehners would be willing to have that made a part of their lease, that the waste from the clam processing be dumped on a daily basis. Mrs. Stoehner stated that she would. Mr. Bryson asked Jack LaShot if there would be special requirements concerning the handling of waste products and the sewage that would be created by a facility of this type and size. The handling of the daily waste can be controlled but not the solids eliminated into the treatment operation. Dr. Turner voiced his concern about the two leases under consideration. What Mr. Garnett is saying is that he would like the original concept lease approved, but from Dr. Turner's opinion, the original concept is completely different from what is being presented, and again expressed his concern over seeing an entire lease package presented to the Commission for consideration. Mrs. Stoehner stated that she wanted to process in the month of April and had plans to take the final plans before Mr. Pheuffer the next day and since they are on a tight schedule they need to get started and pointed out that they had been before Council and Commission 8 times. Jim Blanning commented that it was his opinion that it was not so much a lease problem as it is zoning and the odor and if it comes down to a problem of being noxious to nearby properties would Administration then acquire the problem and deal with it. Mr. Brighton stated that it would, that Administration would protect the leases and would not permit a problem to exist. Jim Blanning stated he felt the City would have the same problem whether the property was bought outright or leased it and felt that it was strictly a zoning problem. Phil Bryson asked the status fo the original lease. "Essentially it is the same leaso application and in general the same use". Fes, a.r -'F-AR KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 5 Regular Meeting, March 24, 1982 MOTION: Paul Turner moved to table the application whether the original lease or modification until an entire lease application or modification is before the Commission, seconded by Jim Blanning Motion passed with Commissioners Quesnel, Lewis, Blanning, Turner, and Smalley voting yes; Commissioner Bryson voting no. Hal Smalley wished to voice his opinion that what the Commission is going to want to see in the package to come back is the question of parking that was never addressed this session. Jim Blanning stated that in answer to Mrs. Stoehner's statement that this was their eighth meeting, the foot dragging was not on the part of the Commission but that alot of it comes from FAA and some from the Stoehners themselves. While it is unfortunate that the Commission could not approve their plan, neither can it rush into something without proper information before the Commission. Phil Bryson felt that it probably would have been in order not to allow it on the agenda. Dr. Turner concurred in that he was being asked to approve a lease or concept that was not before him. Bill Brighton asked to go through the sequence of events surrounding the application of the Stoehners for the Commission, which he did, indicating that part of the problem for the Stoehners now is that DEC is not willing to license them for an entire season at their present location, however, some sort of agreement must have been reached with the governing agency that should they get another site and should they start construction of a new facility so that the governing agency knew that they were going to vacate their present facilities they would then permit them to start the processing season at the old facility. Dr. Turner asked why the agency would allow them to start at the old facility. Mr. Bryson felt that they essentially wanted the use of the other facility ended and were willing to strech it a season. Mr. Smalley pointed out that the Stoehners have not been denied, the Commission requested that to avoid confusion he now feels he would like to see an entire package before him, and felt that as a Commission it would be nice to be able to look at the papers and say this is what they want without all the changes and confusion. 6. NEW BUSINESS ---- A. Information Item and Discussion: Review of Cone Gravel Pit -- Mr. Brighton stated that this was a formality that was required by the code and went on to explain that there are three gravel pits now in the City and that the Cone gravel pit is the only one that - - provides the City with an annual report as required by the code. r 0 KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular :fleeting, March 24, 1982 Page 6 Mr. Brighton pointed out that the last report from Borgen was in 1980 and there have been no reports from the Coyles. Mr. Brighton informed the Commission that he will be making a report to the Commission on the state of these other two pits. He also brought out that there is a pit called Fredrickson pit and is supposed to be inoperable, however, there have been gravel trucks pulling out from that area last summer. An investigation will be done on this also. B. Discussion: P 6 Z Ordinance 21.76.150/Supplementary Zone Regulations This ordinance deals primarily with setbacks. Mr. Howard Hackney, City Building Inspector addressed the ordinance as it relates to Old Town. The main problem is space. Lots in that section are small and create safety hazards by way of visibility for vehicles at intersections when structures are set close or over the setback allowable in the ordinance. It was suggested, after much discussion that the Commission would not change an entire ordinance but rather consider each case on an individual basis for that area. 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Citv Council Report: Bettv Glick The City Council received a letter from the Kenai Utilities Service Corp. regarding the franchise agreement between the City and Kusco. Their agreement ends in 1987, however, they are looking at trying to either prolong that or extend their contract or hear other recommendations. The Administration will be discussing this along with the land Union Oil has discussed purchasing. B. Borough Planning Report: Betty Glick The Borough reviewed the Nisson Subdivision No. 2 and approved a time extension and reviewed the final plat with staff recommendations which were given to Jack LaShot. The preliminary plat for Etolin Subdivision No. 2 was approved. Application was received for the placing of buoys in the Kenai River. Royal Pacific Fisheries was one of the applicants. C. City Administration Report: Bill Brighton The Harbor Commission may be going back to one meeting per month. W, a KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 7 n Regular Meeting, March 24, 1982 D. Corps of Engineers Report Application The request for permit is from Royal Pacific Fisheries to place 12 steel mooring buoys in the Kenai River for the purpose of mooring 125 boats during the fishing season. This permit will be forwarded to the Harbor Commission for comment and any Planning Commissioner wishing to make comment can do so. 8. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 9. COMMISSION QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS Dr. Turner asked Mr. Brighton for an update on the letters sent to persons who were in violation of the City code. Mr. Brighton referred to the issue of the building permit that was to be obtained by Father Targonsky specifically, stating that he has not as yet come in to get the building permit. MOTION: Paul Turner moved to request the Administration address the issue of the abandoned trailer presently existing adjacent to the Russian Orthodox church, seconded by Hal Smalley, Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote. There is yet one person not yet in compliance and the is Parsons. 10. ADJOUM414ENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission will be April 14, 1982 at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted: 3ar#f Loper, Se a ary Y- 0 KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Regular Meeting of March 23. 1982 Kenai City Hall John Williams, Chairman 1. CALL TO ORDER Meeting called to order at 7:10 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Present: John Williams, Leon Quesnel, Marvin Dragseth, Tom Thompson, and M.W. Thompson 3. AGENDA APPROVAL Agenda approved unanimously with no changes or additions 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES, March 9, 1982 MOTION: Moved by Marvin Draseth, seconded by M.W. Thompson to approve the minutes with no changes, corrections, or additions. There were no objections 5. GUEST SPEAKERS None 6. COMM ICATIONS A. Agenda from an upcoming Alaska Coastal Policy Council Vince O'Reilly is attending this meeting in Juneau and will bring a report back to the Council and Commission B. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice Notice that Columbia Wards Fisheries is applying for a permit to replace an existing fueling dock. No action necessary C. Memo from City Attorney Ben Delahay to Harbor Commission This memo is in response to a request from the Harbor Commission asking the City Attorney to clarify the powers and duties of the Commission with specific reference to shore fisheries leases. D. Grant writing material from the State Department of Development and Planning No response at this time. 1 KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Page 2 Regular Meeting, March 23, 1982 E. Letter from the State Department of Natural Resources Ref: Kenai River State Park Units Master Plan The Commission noted the lack of information passed to the City of Kenai which sits at the mouth of the river, the other cities which were granted public hearings being Seward, Homer, and Soldotna. A letter is to be written asking the department involved to keep the City of Kenai informed of further develop- ment plans. 7. REPORTS A. Bill Brighton: Progress on Release of Bond Money Mr. Brighton furnished the Commission with copies of his letter to John Bates with the Department of Transportation and Public Paciliites and a copy of the grant, briefly bringing them up to date on the progress of the grant, which, at this time, was that the grant had not been approved nor the money released and Mr. Brighton will keep the Commission informed should any communications be received. B. Report from Council M Mr. Brighton brought the Commission up to date on the Council meeting of March 17th. Since the grant money had not been released, the Council could take no action on the proposal for Wince, Corthell, Bryson, and went on to explain that the Council may like hearing from the commission what the plans are and the needs as indicated in the proposal now before the State. It was discussed that Mr. Bryson felt that the State markers on the plats of the boat ramp site were not in place and it was felt that a new plat should be drawn up which would include all plats involved, a,b,c, and d on one plat. As the plats are now, a,b,c are separate from d. Also to be taken into consideration is that it has been some time since the last platting was done on any of the tracts. It was decided that John Williams and any other members of the Commission that could, would be present at the next Council ,jeeting. The Commission felt that nothing could be done in time for this season to help fisherman, as herring season begins around April first through the fifteenth. 8. OLD BUSINESS A. Discussion: TAMS/Nortec Proposals Discussion was held to determine which proposal would best fit the needs of the City addressing such questions as would funding be available right away, and would the proceedure for requesting K KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Page 3 Regular Meeting, March 23, 1982 funds for beginning the project be the same as for the boat ramp. Bill Brighton addressed both questions informing the Commission that the funds would not come from the same bond monies and therefore should not be held up, and that the funds were in the general fund ready to go, pending Council approval. MOTION: Marvin Dragseth moved, seconded by Leon Quesnel to take the Tibbetts- Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton proposal to the Council for approval as our recommendation and request a contract be entered into to begin the sedimentation study. Motion passed with unanimous roll call vote i B. Progress on Removal of 'Optimist" Bill Brighton informed the Commission that the deadline had passed for Mr. Wright to respond with no communciation with him as of this date. Discussion was held and several suggestions made as to how to dispose of the abandoned vessel and it was determined that more information was needed before moving ahead on its removal. 6 C. Shore Fisheries Leases Discussion was held and many questions raised pertaining to the leases q - now held by the City. With no response coming from the current holders of leases, it was determined that a more thorough study would have to be done. MOTION: Marvin Dragseth moved to table the shore fisheries lease issue until such time as owners can be determined, seconded by Leon Quesnel. There were no objections The Commission directed that the Department of Natural Resources be contacted to ascertain where the money went that was being collected } from shore fisheries leases at the rate of $60.00 per year and if any of the leases listed by the City are currently making those payments. Also, ascertain if the State would administer the City leases as they are already set up to handle State leases. 9. NEW BUSINESS -- None 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None i� KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Page 4 Regular Meeting, March 23, 1982 11. Commission Questions and Comments None 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The Commission suggested that if there was no progress on the two contracts pending before the Commission, the next regular meeting on April 6 will be cancelled. The next regular meeting would then fall on April 27th. Respectfully submitted: et Loper, Secretary II i Ti CITY OF KENAI "O,rl igaja r of 4" P 1 ►. O. SOX NO KENAI, ALASKA 99611 IWIPNONE 4S3 • 753E March 23, 1982 TO: Kenai City Council FROM: Kenai Advisory Harbor Commission The following motion was made at the regular meeting of the Harbor Commission on March 23, 1982 for your consideration: MOTION: Marvin Dragseth moved, seconded by Leon Quesnel to take the Tibbetts- Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton proposal to the Council for approval as our recommendation and request a contract be entered into to begin the sedimentation study. Motion passed with unanimous roll call vote. * 4 CITY OF KENAfp' 4"„ P. o. EOK SEC KENAI. ALASKA 99611 TELEPHONE 323 • 7595 April 2, 1982 TO: Wm. J. Brighton, City Manager FROM: Keith Kornelis, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: What's Happening Report, for City Council Meeting April 7, 1982 WATER AND SEWER ON CANDLELIGHT AND LINWOOD In the packet for this upcoming Council meeting is the information concerning the installation of water and sewer on Candlelight and Linwood. This information includes: _ 1. The results of the petition sent to property owners. 2. Copy of the letter that was sent as a petition to the property owners. 3. The copy of the 1981-1982 Capital Improvements pr6jects that shows Candlelight and Linwood being scheduled without water and sewer. 4. Additional requests for water and sewer lines in other areas of the City, some written and some verbal. S. Copy of this year's request to the Legislature. 6. Copy of ADEC's letter and phone conversation stating that they no longer have funds available at this time. As the Public Works Director in charge of the Street Dept., I have the " Water and Sewer Dept., and the Sewer Treatment Plant, following comments to make. 1. While water and sewer lines may enhance development, the lines is realized benefit derived from the water and sewer only by those individuals hooked up to the water and sewer � ! lines. Installation of additional water and sewer lines ` results in additional costs to the City in maintenance and operation of those lines. If enough individuals are hooked on to the system, possibly enough revenue will he generated work to pay for these additional costs, but the amount of and effort involved will increase while the size of our I in agreement crew has remained the same for many years. am with the opinion that water and sewer improvements should be -- = What's Happening Report Page 2 April 2, 1982 assessed so that those that benefit from the improvements would share the costs of the construction. I also feel that the assessments should be large enough to cover a large portion of the construction costs. It has turned out that many of the assessments along these two roads amount to only $130 per year over the next 10 years. Some exceptions when installing water and sewer lines would benefit everyone and not just adjacent property owners would be: A. A transmission line that completes a loop or provides needed expansion such as water and sewer in Section 36. B. Installing lines that would be installed in the near future prior to asphalt paving. 2. Street improvements are a little different than water and sewer improvements in that almost everyone,in some way, benefits. The property owners along the road, of course, benefit the most in that they have a year-round passable road, but the general taxpayers also benefit along with the City itself. -- With a new improved road, the property owners, their visitors, general siteseers, and individuals using the raods as a means of access to other areas all benefit by not having to go through �. lakes or puddles caused by poor drainage, not getting stuck in - mud, or having the cars fall apart because of the rough roads. The City greatly benefits in that we do not have to spend as many long hours working on the road, trying to make it passable, closing the road because it is impassable, pumping water, etc. All this extra time and effort costs money ---money coming in the City from the taxpayers. Also, without having to spend so much time working on the mud roads, our crews will have more time to spend on other roads. 3. If the Council of the City of Kenai decides to change the policy and install water and sewer lines in gravel roads as they are being upgraded then our State funds will be expended very quickly. Should this happen. -there will be many mud roads in the City that will continue to stay mud roads for quite a while until the funding becomes available. Recommendation Should the Council of the City of Kenai wish a recommendation from the Public Works Director, I have the following in order of — priority. T I 1. The City of Kenai continue with the road improvements only on Candlelight and Linwood. These improvements have already been contracted GaL and work has already begun on them. -- Completion of the project would be in August of this year. = If the property owners on Candlelight and Linwood want to pursue the installation of water and sewer on the streets, ®M M What's t{appening Report Page 3 n April 2, 1982 they should petition the City properly as according to the Code at the full amount of the cost of the project. 2. Continue with the contract for road improvements on Linwood and Candlelight. If the Council feels that they want to finance the largest portion of the project with the use of State Grant Funding then create a new project of water and sewer and place it at the end of our priority list. Wherever it is placed, it should not be placed prior to Project No. 9 since there are five projects prior to that which involve replacing mud streets with improved gravel. Some of these mud streets are presently barricaded because they are impassable. 3. If the Council wishes to hold off on the street improvements until water and sewer can be installed also, then the road projects should be canceled, the contractor paid $44,000 that he has requested, and the combined road and water and sewer project should be placed on the priority list again at Least at a lower priority than Project 9. I want to repeat again that the above is only my opinion as the Public Works Director of the City of Kenai. I realize that this is a very controversal subject and expect some heated debates at the next meeting. As I recall, we had quite a bit of heated debate when the priority list was established and the subject of water and sewer was brought up at that time. I know that my opinion will anger some people along Candlelight and Linwood but I am certain that the people that live along Evergreen, Haller, McKinley, Standard, Richfield, Thompson Place, Thompson Park, etc. would be equally angered if they knew that their roads may not be improved because of insufficient funds caused by adding a large water and sewer project ahead of their improvements on the priority list. SEWER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION There has been a final punch list prepared for Brown and Associates, J.V. Many of the items cannot be completed until this summer. FIDALGO SUBDIVISION STREET IMPROVEMENTS Quality Asphalt Paving, Inc. has still not submitted a final pay estimate on this project. Questions of liquidated damages, shrinkage factor, and signs are among the things that still must be settled. What's happening Report Page d April 2, 1982 KENAI SPUR FRONTAGE ROAD This project is essentially 100 percent complete but Doyle Construction Co. has submitted some claims on miscellaneous items that we are still waiting for backup on. WATER AND SEWER THROUGH SECTION 36 There is a very small amount of work left to be done on this project. Doyle Construction Co. will be completing this project during this spring or summer. LAWTON, TINKER, WALKER, ROGERS STREET IMPROVEMENTS Quality Asphalt Paving, Inc.'s sub Zubeck did not get a chance to complete the underground last year and will be completing it as soon as the weather permits. MAIN STREET LOOP AND BARNACLE WAY There has been no change since my last report. Doyle Construction Co. has been shut down for the winter. NORTH DOGWOOD, NORTH LUPINE, PHILLIPS Quality Asphalt Paving, Inc.'s subcontractor, Central Alaska Construction has been shut down for the winter. CANDLELIGHT AND LINWOOD STREET IMPROVEMENTS Jackson and Garland who is doing the subcontractor work for P R F S has started work on this project. They have stripped the pit and have received the culvert for the project. Refer to the first part of this report for additional information on this project. FIRST, BIRCH, FOURTH Quality Asphalt Paving, Inc. has been given the notice to proceed on this project and is waiting for the weather to break for starting. SECOND AND THIRD/SPRUCE Quality Asphalt Paving, Inc. has been given the notices to proceed on these projects and is waiting for the weather prior to start up. .-1 . .y What's Happening; Report Page 5 April 2, 1982 FOREST DRIVE EXT. AND GILL STREET Harley's Trucking has been awarded this project and given the notice to proceed. He,too, is waiting for the weather before starting. RENOVATION AND EXPANSION OF THE KENAI MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Carmen Gintoli is presently working on the designs for this project. FINE ARTS BUILDING RENOVATION This project has been completed. The Public Works Dept. will be going over the project with the various subcontractors as a final inspection. SMALL EQUIPMENT WAREHOUSE This project is 100 percent complete and occupied. This will be the last report on this project. KENAI REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STUDY Therb will be a public meeting on the Kenai Regional Transportation Study at the Kenai Peninsula Borough Building on April 12, 1982, at 7 p.m. It is important that interested parties go to this meeting since the recommendation made by the report will be placed on the annual capital improvements request to the Governor and the Legislature. DRAINAGE STUDY The contract has been executed with USKH for the completion of the Topo Study. The contract for the Drainage Study will be executed by the next Council meeting with QUADRA Engineering. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS There is a purchase order coming before Council for street sweeping for Anderson's Sweeping. The purchase order may be a little early but was done in an effort to get first on his list of street sweeping to be done as soon as the snot. & ice melt. Also coming into the list of P.O.'s to be approved is a tank from KNA Oilfield Services. This tank is a railroad tanker that we plan to use for storing waste oil. Included in other bills over a S1,000 is a P.O. for McLane & Associates for surveying on Frontage Road and the Senior Citizen's plat, a bill from Carmen Gintoli and Pay Estimate No. 2 on Linwood and Candlelight job from P R & S. What's happening Report Page 6 April 2, 1982 I wrote a letter to HEA requesting information concerning street lights. A copy of this letter is in the packet along with their answer which was merely a transmittal of their tariff. A letter concerning the Local Service Roads and Trails Program is included in the packet. This letter mentions that this program is being dropped. There is a letter in the packet from CEIP that gives some clarification as to when to expect a decision concerning the applications that are in. There is a resolution accepting the grant from ADEC on First, Birch and Fourth. There is a resolution and ordinance concerning the Parks and Recreation playground equipment. KK/ j et P � a n POLICE FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING REQUESTS 1982 - 1983 1. Acquisition of Radar $ 3,500 2. Telephone System 25,000 FIRE 1. "Learn Not To Burn" Curriculum Films 2,000 2. Hydraulic Rescue Tool 7,000 3. Universal Exercise Gym 5,000 4. Beaver Creek Sub -Station 250,000 PARKS AND RECREATION 1. Sweepster RB60 TW (Broom) 1,788 2. Kubota BL3660 (Flail mower) 1,718 3. Kubota FS 1270 (Rototiller) 1,900 4. Kubota B7515 (Scraper Box) 818 URPQRT I DEPT, TOTALS 28,500 264,000 6,224 1. City government radio (Motorola) portable, with charger for Airport Manager $ 2,000 2. Pull type runway snow broom 40,000 3. Sweeper for airport 20,000 4. Transient aircraft parking lot 250,000 5. Pave terminal parking lots 400,000 Would terminal lobby furnishings qualify? 60,000 712,000 Terminal baggage claim conveyor belt 90,000 Terminal public address system 2,000 New airport lighted sign 8,000 160,000 872,000 LS8RUX 1. CRT unit with transfer switch 2. Typewriter 3. Children's record bin 4. Films (5) 16mm S. Projectors (2) 16mm 6. Microform cabinet 7. Book trucks (2) 8. Basic book replacements (children) $ 1,200 1,100 500 2,500 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 11,300 M P(IHLI�_biQBK� New Buildings, Machinery, and Equipment List (Not in any priority order) Animal_c==1 1. Renovation & expansion of Animal Shelter $ 95,000 2, New Pickup for other officer if present pickup becomes unserviceable 10,000 fit- Adminlatzatian 1. City Engineer — pickup tool box 350 &hQb2 1. Parts washer for new parts room (will save lots of time) 500 2. Forks for 966 to unload freight (parts, machinery, & equipment) 51000 r=Mrm 1. Flatbed truck — presently using Water & Sewer flatbed that is an old 1968 International (Parks & Rec and Water & Sewer use this old truck also) 20,000 2. Small compressor and associated air tools and accessories for warehouse 1,500 3. Small compactor 1,900 4. Small dozer — D4 Wangle blade 60,000 5, Wheel Dolly for Changing Large Equipt. Tires 900 6, Large Equipment Tire Changer 7,000 Wilding 'nap =ax 1. New pickup w/radio (If have both Inspector & Building Maintenance) 13,000 ida�sz_�_ga�z 1. Project of TV & grout sewer lines (Partial) 100,000 2. Lower lift station on Lawton & Walker 61000 3. New building or van for E.R. Gen. at 3M Tank 12,000 4. Vacuum cleaner (AIH) Sm. Equipment Warehouse (W) 700 5. Compactor 2,300 6. Breaker and bits 1,400 7. Clean & paint 2 water tanks 16,400 u 353,950 $1,535,974 Federal Revenue Sharing 3-19-E2 Fund Balance, 6-30-81 $190,432 Rec'd 10-12-81 51,156 Rec'd 1-11-82 81,638 Appropriated 8-19-81 (342,992) ( 19,766) Estimate of interest income (81-82) 25,000 Expected to be received; 4-10-82 81,638 7-10-82 81,638 Estimate of fund balance, 6-30-82 JL62A212 (1) Estimate of 1982-83 receipts: 10-10-82 $ 81,638 1-10-83 60,000 (2) 4-10-83 60,000 (2) 7-10-83 60,000 (2) Interest income 25,000 Y286A638 Total available through 6-30-83 (estimated) 1455"148 (1) $6225 for Parks (ord. #761-82) is due to be adopted 4-7-82. This amount has not been adjusted for this ordinance. (2) Rough estimate; subject to congressional action. 1982 - 1983 MLICE 1. Acquisition of Radar Request that the purchase of a Radar be added to the Capital Equipment list for Fiscal Year 1982-83. The amount requested is approximately $3,500,00, to cover the purchase of a quality moving radar. At present, the department relies on two moving radars, received under state grant several years age. The two units were low cost units and have become very costly to maintain. Maintenance costs of the two units in fiscal year 1982 to date have been approximately $1,500.00. The funds requested would allow for purchase of a higher quality unit. If grant funds are available, the City funds could be used as a match and purchase two units. 2. Telephone System in Public Safety Building $25,000 be appropriated from General Fund Revenues or Federal Revenue Sharing for purchase of a telephone system for the Public Safety Building. In 1983 the City will no longer be able to lease the present system in the Public Safety Building. We will be required to either purchase the present system at a cost of approximately $15,000 or purchase another system. Our existing system is antiquated by present standards and is not recommended for purchase. A system similar to that presently in City Hall would more adequately meet our present and future needs. Sgt. Ralar in his memorandum of 2/18/82 (see attached) outlines the advantages of the newer system as well as a monthly cost savings of $228 a month were we to purchase it in 1982. Costs estimates of the new system and proposal of cost distributions are only approximate at this time and are subject to variance when actual costs are known. r FIRE 1. "Learn Not To Burn" Curriculum Films ($2,000.00) We are requesting the sum of $2,000.00 to help build a basic "Learn Not to Burn" film library to work in conjuction with the "Learn Not to Burn" curriculum that the Borough school district is adopting. Both Nikiski and Soldotna Fire Departments are budgeting for film also. If we are successful with our requests, we will all share the film and pamphlets to present throughout the year in our respective districts. 2. Hydraulic Rescue Tool ($7,000.00) We are -requesting $7,000.00 for a hydraulic rescue tool with shears, to carry on the crash truck. We carry a similar tool on our squad truck at the present time, be we cannot respond on the - initial call with the squad due to our manpower q Po r limitations. Time is critical in rescue operations dealing with burning aircraft and spilled fuel. vie may not have 10 or 15 minutes to wait for the off -duty personnel to pick up the squad, or perhaps we would need another piece of apparatus - i.e., ambulance or another engine first. 3. Universal Exercise Gym, Floor Supports ($5,000.00) We are requesting $5,000.00 for a "Universal" body conditioning set to install in the Fire Station. Because of the extreme physical exertion necessary to carry out firefighting duties, we would like to develop a sound physical fitness program that we can control and monitor on a set schedule. By having the necessary equipment at the station, we -- would be able to develop our own schedule designed around our work shifts. -' 4. Beaver Creek Sub -Station ($250,000.00) r, {f i i - - I �- P�$K�B�TI�$��8F8TZQDI The Parks and Recreation Commission is submitting a list of desired equipment for purchase this year. Each item is made to be used with the tractors that we presently have and will greatly aid in our maintenance of present facilities. We are planning a great deal of park and playground work this summer and if it were possible to purchase this equipment now it would be very beneficial to our summer plans. The items requested are as follows: 1. Sweepster RB60 TW rear mounted heavy duty grounds maintenance broom - 60" sweeping width. This could be used to sweep sidewalks, bike trails, grass clippings (heavy grass after rains tends to smother out existing grass) and light snow (ice skating areas). ($1,788) 2. Kubota BL3660 flail mower - This would give us a flail mower for each tractor. The flail works much better on ball fields and right -of ways as it doesn't wind row the grass and blades do not break or bend when hitting rocks, etc. Much lower maintenance cost. MOM OM 3. Kubota FS 1270 rototiller - This will be used in preparing ground for grass seeding and also for working infields on ball fields. 01,900) F 4. Kubota B7515 scraper box - used in landscaping and leveling areas for planting - leveling and filling low areas on ball fields and playing fields. ($ 818) These prices are from Craig Taylor Equipment Co. where we purchased our Kubota and Satoh tractors. All items can be delivered within 45 days. The work we will be doing on playground and park areas is a result of State Capital Improvement funds received. We did not ' request any of these items on last years' budget as at that time we were not certain the money would be received for the improvements. Your consideration for the purchase of these items at this time would be greatly appreciated. f oi' In '! 8Z8848T ' 1. City government radio (Motorola) portable, with charger for Airport Manager $ 2,000 2. Pull type runway snow broom 40,000 C 3. Sweeper for airport 20,000 4. Transient aircraft parking lot 250,000 5. Pave terminal parking lots 400,000 j Would terminal lobby furnishings qualify? 60,000 Terminal baggage claim conveyor belt 90,000 Terminal public address system 2,000 New airport lighted sign 8,000 LOB= 1. CRT unit with transfer switch $ 1,200 ' 2. Typewriter 1,100 3. Children's record bin 500 4. Films (5) 16mm 2,500 :.. - 5. Projectors (2) 16mm 2,000 - 6. Microform cabinet 1,000 7. Book trucks (2) 11000 f r i S. Basic book replacements (children) 2,000 I . ti. i i E., i y i s - I EIi�LZ�_IdQBgg New Buildings, Machinery, and Equipment List (Not in any priority order) 8aima"Q=21 1. Renovation & expansion of Animal Shelter S 95,000 2, New Pickup for other officer if present pickup becomes unserviceable 100,000 P- &-8dmial=Au Qa 1. City Engineer - pickup tool box 350 Abu 1. Parts washer for new parts room (will save lots of time) 500 2. Forks for 966 to unload freight stgeatB (parts, machinery, & equipment) 5,000 1. Flatbed truck - presently using Water & Sewer flatbed that is an old 1968 International (Parks & Rec and Water & Sewer use this old truck also) 20,000 2. Small compressor and associated air tools and accessories for warehouse 1,500 3. Small compactor 1,900 4. Small dozer - D4 w/angle blade 60,000 5. Wheel Dolly for Changing Large Equipt. Tires 900 6, Building Large Equipment Tire Changer inspector 7,000 1. New pickup w/radio (If have both Inspector & Building Maintenance) 13,000 1. Project of TV & grout sewer lines (Partial) 100,000 2. Lower lift station on Lawton & Walker 61000 3. New building or van for E.R. Gen. at 3M Tank 12,000 4. Vacuum cleaner (AIH) Sm. Equipment Warehouse (W) 700 5, Compactor 2,300 6. Breaker and bits 1,400 7. Clean & paint 2 water tanks 16,400 n TO% Chief Ross FRO:4s Sgt. Kalar SUBJECT: Telephone System DATE% 2-18-82 In 1983 Glacier State Telephone will be deregulated and will require us to purchase a telephone system rather than leasing a system as we presently do. The purchase of the present system we have will be approximately $15,000. This system is not adequate for our present needs and I suggest we do not purchase it. A new system similar to the one presently used by City Hall could provide for our need more effectively. The new system has multiple simultaneous voice intercom allowing more people to use the intercom and also alert people to urgent calls. It will indicate that you have a message waiting. It pro- vides for privacy on calls so no one can interrupt your call. Also a do -not - disturb function stops all calls from coming in to allow someone to work un- disturbed. The dispatcher will be able to know what extensions are being used, on hold, and which line was last put on hold. The system also has memory dialing for each station allowing most frequently called numbers to be dialed in less time. Also with this system it will rodial on command the last number dialed in case of a busy signal. The system also has multi -line conferencing allowing several people to talk together on different lines. Night transfers are also available in the system. The cost of the now system is approximately $25,000. This would be broken down as followss C01414UNICATIONS ......$10,000. POLICE ..............$ 6,500. FIRE .................$ 6,500. JAIL................5 2,000. By purchasing the system we would also save approximately ;228.00 per month on our current telephone expenses. This is the cost of leaning the current system. These cost estimates were given to me by Glacier State Telephone and quoted on a tie mesitor 2260 system. 0 Te!c;:hrrr f907) 276.1497 ' Appraisal C1110mynnu of 'Alaska 4460 BUSINESS PARK BOULEVARD ANCHORAGE BUSINESS PARK ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99603 March 22, 1982 Mr. William J. Brighton City Manager City of Kenai P.O. BOX 580 Kenai, Alaska 99611 Dear Mr. Brighton: As you requested, Steve and I have reviewed the appraisals submitted on City land by Vern Frykholm and Ed Warfle. As I discussed with you when I was down there, one of two things can be wrong. Either Mr. Frykholm was very low when he made his first appraisals or he and Mr. Warfle are too high on their current appraised values. There was not enough data in Mr. Frykholm's appraisals to really review. The brief value letters submitted by Mr. Warfle are not enough to render an opinion on either. We did note one thing in both of the appraisers valua- tion process. The comparable sales utilized were of commercial properties in a location, though relatively near the airport, that is generally used for retail commercial and professional office buildings. The buyers of these properties are not the same buyer/users of industrial lots around an airport. Small industrial concerns cannot afford higher priced commercial land in most instances. Comparing these two types of proper- ties that have different users is not making a "like" compar- ison, unless, an adjustment is made in the final value esti- mate reflecting this difference. This was not done by either of the appraisers. For this reason it appears the values are high. in addition to our basic review of the industrial lot appraisals, we have put together some ideas for getting consistency in the land values of the property owned by the City. some of these suggestions may already be completed or may not be feasible for you to do at all. Below we have set forth these ideas and sug- gestions that will lead to a good sound program of property dis- posal of City owned land in a consistent and timely manner. The recommendations outlined have been taken from observations of other cities successful land disposal practices in Alaska and the Lower 48. K- ■ 1) Establish types (commercial, residential, etc.) and quantL_ta__`67 City land to be disposed of. 2) Estimate the length of time involved for absorption of the different types of land into the market (for obvious reasons it would not be wise to market all the land at once). 3) Have master appraisals done on land ready for dis- posal by a professional appraisal firm qualified in this area (a firm having M.A.I. or S.R.E.A. designa- tion). (A) Update appraised values every six months or year depending on market activity (if market for lots is strong than update every six months, if not, every year would be suf- ficient. 4) Method used for updating appraisals could be by several different procedures. (A) Apply CPI (Consumer -Price Index) to values. (B) Apply inflation factor. (C) Hire appraisal firm to update. 5) Establish lease rates on City owned land by using a per- centage of market value of land. Said percentage rate would be established by comparison with other public and private land lease rates in Alaska of similar type pro- perties. 6) Consider hiring a professional real estate officer to handle sales and leasing of City land. (Officer could also handle any right-of-way matters that come up.) The above recommendations may not cover all of your problem areas and if you have further questions, please feel free to call on us. Sincerely, APPRAISAL COMPANY OF ALASKA e cSwain, M.A.I. William S. Brown, M.A.I. President —Appraisal tromp of Nttshtt S, • <, , .. - . - _ . CITY OF KENAI P. O. BOX $00 KIMAI, ALASKA 99611 TILIPNONE 363 • 7536 April 1, 1982 MEMORANDUM TO: Wm. J. Brighton, City Manager dmc FROM:, Dana Conley, Administrative Assistant RE: . Redetermination of Leased Lands Per your request, please find attached a summary of the 18 lots to be redetermined this year. I have listed both the old value (.from the 1977 appraisals) and the current appraised value. Please note the following, in regard to these lots: 1. Both SouthCentral Air and Arctic Aviation fall under the 50% cap provision on their lease rate. ** 2. The original lease (signed in 1978) for Salamatof Seafoods had a lease rate of $12,000. This rate was determined by bids received for the proposed lease of the City Dock. Salamatof bid $12,000 annually, and another company, Copper Valley Machine Works, Inc., bid $1,800 annually. When the current appraisal was obtained, the lease rate computes to $5,107.74, which is $6,892.26 lower than the current lease rate. /d Attachment 1 i OLD NEW LESSEE/LOCATION APPRAISAL APPRAISAL Katmai Motel, Lot 1A, Part 3 Aleyeska Subdivision $ 44,945 $ 48,156 i Jack & Mavis Estes, Lot 2, Block 1 CIIAP Subdivision 22,417 56,045 Jack & Mavis Estes, Lot 3, Block 1 CIIAP Subdivision 22,500 56,250 Robert Borgen, Lot 4, Block 1 i CIIAP Subdivision 22,500 61,875 Teamsters 959, Lot 9, Block 1 1 CIIAP Subdivision 30,712 52,650 Thomas & Kobbins, Lot 2, Block 2 CIIAP Subdivision 22,500 61,875 i Baldwin & Arness, Lot 5, Block 3 CIIAP Subdivision 44,850 89,700 ; Baldwin & Arness, Lot 5, Block 3 CIIAP Subdivision 42,695 85,390 Norman Berg, Lot 1, Block 4 CIIAP Subdivision 46,960 70,440 1 Norman Berg, Lot 2, Block 4 CIIAP Subdivision 42,131 63,196 ; Norman Berg, Lot 3, Block 4 CIIAP Subdivision 42,750 64,125 Bielawski Trust, Lot 5, Block 4 CIIAP Subdivision 17,550 54,000 Bielawski Trust, Lot 6, Block 4 CIIAP Subdivision 16,117 47,110 1 o f� r LESSEE/LOCATION D & A Supermarkets, Lot 3 Etolin lot Addition Robert Borgen, Lot 7, Block 2 Pidalgo Subdivision SouthCentral Air, Lot 1, Block 2 General Aviation Apron Arctic Aviation, Lot 1, Block 3 General Aviation Apron Little Ski -No (Ron Yamamoto) Lot 3 Gusty Subdivision Salamatof Seafoods, Lots 1 & 2 US Survey #4563 OLD NEW APPRAISAL APPRAISAL $ 65,366 $148,560 13,328 35,542 25,000 62,500 ** 17,680 36,720 ** 18,795 107,400 85,129 t • _ ; !01' t HAMMOND, QOKAMO/t !lefty ro" POUCH Oil I BIrr• OF 4,N) 111UNITY & 1INGIl/NAL AWWA111iyi JUNEA ,AIA KA60011 4101 0L226 COROOVA STREET, OL00, 0 of vIsIoN of LOCAL oovERNMENT ASSISTANCE ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 90601 1DOIJ 2044201 March 15, 1962 OP,0,80K348 OETNEL,ALASKA 050 1907J 042,X76 ;'. NBML; 6467 ALASKA 09762 1007144 ?• Mr. Jack LaShot lb�,�td►1`��� ' City Engineer City of Kenai P.O. Box 580 - Kenai, AK 99611 Utz w „"�'"t•�-o 0CP' RE: Coastal Energy Impact Program (C.E.I.P,) Grant application reviev! Dear Mr. LaShot: ' i Please be advised that information provided to you in a letter from my office dated March 1, 1982 was in error, The letter stated that the committee review of all C,E,I,P, grant applications would occur during the first week of April and you would be notified on the status of your project shortly thereafter, Rather, the review of grant applicationo will occur during the early part of May. Your application is currently undergoing review in the Federal -State Clearinghouse ("A-95" review), Allowing six weeks from application deadline for the A-95 + review of all applications, May 7th will be the earliest date the Department can publish a list of funded projects. ! Since Federal concurrence in our award list requires a minimum of 60 days, you should antiqlpate that ,.projects cannot hie i initiated before tie early part of July, -� Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience this misinformation may havu caused you. Very sincerely, ' F _ _-- _Carol Akerelrea Coordinator Coastal Energy impact Program i 1 CA;sj j Aiii✓If�iIYY�ifliYw/f�lY� J:NF 1AY f UMMOMO, ROVIRMOR (007) 465-W O DEPARTMVNT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUIIL.IC FACILITIES MUCH z JUNF.AU, ALASKA 00011 Opr[1 01 1#1 GOMMi11/0W /rELEX 49.220) Mamh 12, 1982 �5 RN.: 14XMI .Service Roads & Trails Program '1 Honorable Vincunt O'Reilly _....,...._ .. Mayor rip. City of Kenai P.O. Box 680 `,r? G v .,..................: Kenai, Alar3ka gggli Dua.r %yor O'Reilly,* _. . In 1971 the Alaska Lssgicttttfar#s pans ;d thu Local Service ilnads & Trails (L.S.R. & T.) PMmm. The oubsE,qusnt ten years brought mx&;,qt funding to this worth- while program. With thews funds, the NVartrrrsnt has buen able to provides many direct t>anefits to m�rst Alaska ccmmanit9rys not nttvst�vls3cs avaLlabl<s through normal capital Liflorommmt pr grant;. Thews btinef L to LnclmW km. -ping consatr<ac;tion &),,.ars in this cmminity; training 10ca.l opisrators3, drWurra and annagers; and providing break road and trail improvjswr,,nt3. As you kaw, to recent ytjarr3 t1uJ Alaska L,el LaUturrf han b►sf un to mate substan- tial funds availablFs to Imal govern►mintss through thu bfuniciml Grant Ppry„ram and othusr direct fundIA9 schemmo Tt1%ut f1ml s and dlr(:-etrsd to solve many of ttu3 eatn�s probla:rr,� addrees3rsr�d by the L.M. & T. Program. In an effort V) avoid duplication of fx�rvta,�;, wc-st tuevs trsntutiv-sly determined to WNW nut the L.S.R. & T, Program in favor of the mart: direct funding ms3thods uWsrl by thu 4,70s3laturc;. As of January 1, 19824 this I..4.11. & T. Program hares approxilratisly $7 Million of unoblizated fundq, it jr, thrtt, thr;r3�; fifn�ln wf.l.l tx; ompl.r;te�ly ex(x:nrlr;rf by .:arty 1083. In vLrsa of thins propr>nx>d phim$ out, the Five Ycza.r 1..3.11. As T. Prrg'ram Plan will n"t b3 1VibiLg1V"(i thins ycn.rl r!Lnrt1 allIX3tionr; tr) this rlirstPt4;ts3 anti c�xmrtnitksfl ha,osd on thi: c'urrrsnt Law tfav�: tp.m;n prk;lra.rrsd and will tx sxsnt G� you 13rN" Y«ar OUPWrt of M LeS.M. & T. Prry„ram diarinZ itrs prIxfuctivrs bin ycnr life has i , 1 1 I I I E Mayor A'Hoilly -2. March 12, 1982 bean appreciated gruatty. WO 14xsk forward to working with Alaska's ccxnnunitlus as wOf:mhark on this change of direction for providing nusded road and trail ' prOjucts in the futurts. � Aincartsly, iA)W t W. Ward ., Gxrrniasiunrlr cc: All Alaska .State lssgislaWrs ,i. lo� fE ty '` E' E4� p J i - 1� i i. E j{I i E E I ' carmen vincent gintoli, architect box 4625 professional building suite 110 kena , alaska 99611 907 283.7732 ' AarI1 1 1982 City •of Kenai ' Box 580 Kenai, AK 99611 Attention Charles A Brown, Direc-or Finance Department ' Re invoice for Architectural Services Kenai Senior Citizen's Cowunity Center Desing Development Phase I N V O I C E Design Development Phase per Contract Due B 40%-------------51%f'''�~ ;. Thank you i iijt: 1 I'.i :j?.:A•!•'J it =' Y 4F ttc S a!IF 01 i.? i,• .c. r-�iiI"i::.�.L Gi7Y T7 �nSsr ¢/ '•:!% • a 7 Page 1 of S -TNFoRMAriow ONi y - PAY ESTIMATE NO:P, CITY OF KENAI Project Candlelight Drive and Linwood Lane Contractor P. R. & S., Inc. ' Address 1701 East First Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501-18941'roject No. Phone 272-1543 Period From /1-78/ to 3-Z41-42. ANALYSIS OF ADJUSTED CONTRACT MOUNT TO DATE O1 Original contract amount $ 295,760.00 22 Net change by change orders Q Cr 3 Adjusted contract amount to date 2IS U0,60 ✓ ANALYSIS OF WORK COMPLIiTED d Original contract work completed s n � to, o00 . o0 �5 "Additions from change orders completed Q OG Materials stored at close of period J7, 3$yI, 411/0 ✓ O7 Total carnedOi -OS f D= 22. OLess retainage, of Jp percent 2� 73g. �fS ✓ 1 Total earned less retainage 7 -O= 2�.�•1��,0 ✓ Iti Less amount of previous pa%rients �- 9, DOD.DD 11 Balance due this payment 1S.A41 J "r �c: Contractor P. R. f, S., Inc. Engineer Wince-Corthell-Bryson l Page 2 of a PAY ESTIMATE NO: 2 em� CERTIFICATION OF CONTRACTOR Accordtna to the best of my knowle.fge and belief, I certify that all items and amounts shown an the face of this Periodic Estimate for Partial Payment are correct; that .ill wo6 has been performed and!or material supplied in full accordance with the requsfements dt the retetenced CeniraCt, and•'ot duly authorized deviations, substitutions, alterations, and/of additions; that the fotegoin)t is a true and collect statement of the contract account up to and including the last day of the period covered by this Periodic Estimate; that no part of the "Balance Due This Payment" has been received, and that the undersiitned and his subcontractors haVO-Mileek epp'ipaale fif#0 A. X Complied with all the labor provisions of said contract. b. C Complied with all the labor provisions of said contract except in those instances *bete an honest dispute esists with is. tpect to said labor Provisions. (it (h) le chocked# deecttae ffserly narua or dispute.) P. R. f, S. , Inc. 8y • (Confrarter) 4sanet.ve uthorue Represengttve) , • �/� 3 • wA , 19.9UL Title Ada . •r� CERTIFICATION OF ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER I certify that 1 have chocked and verified the above and leroguinst Periodic Entimwtc for Paftial Payment. #fiat to the best of my kn.ssvledue and Arlie( it i+ a true and correct statement of w..rk perf.smcd at►.i/or material .uppliud by she contractor; that all work and .0 snatcnal rnclu.fed in this Nvria,.fic ►sstsmate has been inspected Ivy me and nr by toy duty autbutiowd representative of assatants and that is ba. been po:tt.rrmvd and'irc msspplicd sn full .sceordanee with rcqusrensents .s the retercnev contract; and that Partt.tl payment Chimed end requs:+red by the contfrctuf.ir.e.rfrucllynconsfueed sn the bash .sl work peffnrmed ad Of mate- tiai •upplivd to date. r y/%/siG. �...� it 41IlnC •' 4 r+fVr4 � O i� l ;' r I ' .,;. .. .. 1 y .........., f •X.... .. ;.. �i�'� ........ ►)rtu i l \LV". 29s t Z ri �/ ;. ;, PRE•PAY►420T CERTIFICATION 8Y FIELD ENGINEER Cheek fvpe or parmene evenllydt ' I fiace .heckv.l this e.ttmAe apaia+.t the cantrr.t..r'+ 4els•.ktla• of Amrmust. lire C,sstNef eSµvrrr•nrs, the notes and report..+# my tn+,t•ctr.m+.A ffsv Nurse's, end site IWfiodsc ta•p.rtt+ +al,nssif.d ly life aschsteet 'en/.sneer. it a nsy opinatn tb.tt the +#.ttvmcnt of wnli. p.ft.KmvJ aisd ..r as.uvnal+ +uf•lr►sa•d s. accurate. that the a..nttactam is .rb+cfvtnF the ra•qusrements of she contfact..snd that thv a•asrttt tefor-hustid be Pat.# file aasuumt ra•yua•.ta•.f abova•. I sertdy that ail w„rk And .a matx•tsals undtf OW c.muract ba. I•a•a•n in+pe.lc.f by me .sod tb.et it ba. fka•n jVrf.Kmed .ssfd'at +up- ptnJ sn,tjdl ar:rtaatice wuh dk a qusa nvnf...f flit a.+itra.s. �" Winc:e•Cor h 11•+B ry.Son') �tn.t.) fC..nrf,. $Uri rltf..,n A& '`I. 7i0, y9-ao, b'oybr Homc3r Electst'iss JLoac vintiont =sne. p.!J. F'.UX 3 1) 0 rl i_!:"T/., A1,A!,KA /i. DISTRICT Ur ICE March 25, 1982 City of Kenai Charles A. Brown P. 0. Box 580 Kenai, Alaska 99611 Res Yard Light at Cedar and Pine Dear Mr. Browns In response to your letter dated March 19, 1982, I have rericarched the problem. I found that on :November 4, 1981, our service crew found that the underground line serving this light had failed and that it wao not feasible to repair until after the Spring thaw, We are processing a disconnect for this yard light dated November 4, 1981 and account 300452 will be adjusted to delete the charges for the yard light from that date. At the time the yard light is repaired, we expect to reoume billing, If you have any questions, please give me a call. ncerely, James A. Eloon ;Member Service JAE/jog cc: John Wise Eugene Collins Member File id • t ��Jf�D .,I�%l�� CITY OF KENAI r y n /1v'r March 15, 1932 ' r Homer Electric Aanociation -rT Attention: Dave Barden lL��'C, gF- Ti,"i a i.a"T l.�l= ft%rr Box 35© fioldotna, Alaska 99069 7//�" /1TT/,'�'i/�'l' /�•7�::��M Re: 11SA's Rulers and Regulationsp '%fit'= i!"i' /'mac:c"�/,fTic'2/:% Dear Alr. Barden: '1r �-,�r• •��.�-,{,i�� The Council of the City of Kenai is continually asking me questions concerning the rules and regulations that llomor Electric Association operates by. Would it be possible to obtain a copy of your rules anti regulations? Tito Council has also, shown an intoregt in tite cost of installation and powar rate:;, '1'liorcrore, if, poi:tsible, could I receive a copy or your rate:i structure? Some of tite most common question.,; itoked concern street lights, flow much dots it coast to i,t:;tall a street light? What i:; the di rrorenc;e bets -wen it yard light and , a street li};lit,? W'Jilch lights doa:s liitA maintain and wrhich li}!ltts do they not maIntaill? Is, the City or Kenai re:;port:table rur vandali:;m to the l iltltts? How often are the :street light:, repaired and maInfaIne•J? 1oe,i !!1's,1 have arty i1ity for the street 1l;;ht;s alm►;; the apar 11h l ay and along, Willow +trout? liuss Inuch dues It ca:ct rut• tite Ifa:;err to tilt• :;trert light" or yard There ha:; hcen so,ne lntere""t exhrv:s:;c•t! by :snr.,c► of tilt• Council viember;; to in:;ta l 1 :; me adili t ins a l ,t rvvt 1 i ght:; around the City of Kenai; and therefore, they need to Show the particulars M l � Homer Blectric As:cociation Page .. March l;i, 19$2 as far as the costs and who is responsible for the maintenance. If I could got this information within the next week or so, I can Rot this information in the Council packet so that the Council will have a chance to go over it and discuss it at the next meeting. I really do appreciate your help in this matter. Sincerely, D Keith Kornolis, Director --- Department of Public Works KK/jet cc: Wm. J. Brighton, City Manager a R , Womer Mectvic JLoaociaEatiozz, Zssc. P.O. anx 350 n ';0I.0'11NA, Ai_A';Y.A 91) 61) a 26 j- °i8 11 DISTRICT OFFICE March 25, 082 `..; ` Ir L ���� l's-u.,.-� �'..�,�. Cam,.,,,<•, City of Kenai ..... . P.O. Sox 5SO Kenai, A. 99611 Attention: Keith Kornelis Dear Keith: In response to your letter of March 18, 1982, concerning llomer Electric's Rules and Regulations, please find attached a copy of our Rules and Reg- ulations including our current rate schedules. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Sincerely, David R. Barden District Distribution Engineer D7B/jjw Enc . cc: Eugene R. Collins District Manager I I I • -r.•,..r. -:T ,.:ter. ,..�!...�:'... .............. .. ...... '. � .�.. ...._ ._ . 32 ORIGINAL she' M. u awl11 D 1.2 HOMER ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. I I I 1 .. I TARIFF NUMBER. 3 CANCELLING TARIFF NUMBER 2 OF HOMER ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. P.O. BOX 429 HOMER, ALASKA 99603 Providing Electric Service to the Woatern Ronal Poninoula • Pursuant to Order No. 3, U-81-14 loom nr oral Elec ric Association, Inc. OrGeneral Xanagor • rr.�. i y f APVC #40 32 Ffr�.t- RewiredNs • Original 33 $host No HOMER ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONONC. RULES AND REGULATIONS Installation Fee. Conditions for service are (C) subject to the conditions specified in the Yard Light Rate Schedule. .4. 2. If Yard Light construction is required without existing secondary service, the consumer will a be required to pay all the estimated additional construction costs allowed in Section 6.10.1. These costs will be paid prior to construction as a Contribution -In -Aid -Of -Construction. The Yard Light service will be constructed and billed as an individual• non -metered service. 6.11 Estimating Service Extension Costs The Association estimate used in determining service extension costs will be calculated on an average per foot cost based on the most recent actual construe- tion costs plus the cost of transformers. Costs will vary based on the physical characteristics of the extension as detailed in Section 6.1. For non-stand- ard construction the estimates will reflect extra- d inary costs for materials, transportation and/or labor. 6.12 General Service Extension Provisions 1. The Association reserves the right to refuse service to any lead or location determined to be detrimental to the existing Association's aystem. 2. Applications for service and service extension agreements must be signed by the legal property owner or the lessee of State, Federal or Hunici- pal property. Lessee/Renters on private property only with the consent of owner in tign writing,. 3. Service Extension Agreements may be assumed by another consumer providing that the consumer is the now legal owner or lessee of the property to which :he service extension was made, and further1 providing that it is agreed to in writing by the Association, the assignor and the assignee of the Agreement. (C) ursuant to Order No. 6, U-81-14 V#ect.de January 11, 1932 _.tPVSQ ELECTRIC ASSOCiATiOls, INC 8a■ Mama, Alaska 99603 Ilk Z419', llt i 92t!tjonS 6 ?--d 7 eonqti,ure inivfor clanpc4 frA- tho Av,4vinpl t­" i iAPut No 32 i rst Revised Shelf No, 32 .. I C-cow • +:iiiiw 4is+r%e3iMslll'rb�itt > %r+t'i� ri inal Shei1 Ne 32 H0� ER LECTRIC ASSOCIATIOM,IMC. I RULES AND REGULATIONS 2•, If a new service extension is added to an exist- (G) l ing extension after the applicable repayment period of the completion of the original exten- sion there will be no refund or adjustments. 3. New service extensions added to existing service extensions regardless of age will be treated i a•, under the provisions of Section 6.2 and estimated costs will be calculated only on construction of _ f •' the new extension from the existing lines plus any necessary existing system upgrading. i 6.8 Consumer Requested Facility Changes Any consumer requested changes to existing Association facilities, other than for service upgrades, will be paid in full based on the estimated costs of construc- Lion as a Contribution -In -Aid -Of -Construction. =• 6.9 Conversion of Temporary Service Extensions to Permanent f-... cry cc xtens ons If a service has been installed at a temporary location { -� '•= - •• -' -�^`�'•'r-' for construction power at a building site, the consumer •d+a�"9?!!�"'f;s•RE!a!'itil!+! may request it be converted to permanent setvi.ce. The { cost of the service shall be re -calculated in accord- ance with Section 6.2 and fees and charges adjusted . for a permanent service installation. Excess money already paid will be refunded, or deficiency paid. In addition, the consumer will be required to pav costs associated with making the conversion from temporary to permanent, independent of any refund. Except as noted herein, other temporary installations are not eligible for conversion or refund, •7 ' I 6.10 Yard Light Construction 1. The Association will provide Yard Light Service to custonors by ys installing a sinple light and fixture on an existing pole only, with no more than one secondary span from the consumer's in- stalled existing overhead service facilities at -}` no charge other than the standard Yard Light W Old--: 'ursuant to Order No. 6, U-81-14 January y 11, 1982 Iee.eeeJ ! 0VER ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC, - i' 1 t PO P c 9, >•o,^ r, Alosko 99603 t j 6r •�� Gentrol Manager ••, ��t C./ T,N, =-...,•- :." i Sections 6 and 7 constitute major changes froc the original tariff, �.' r - - APUC Ne 32 — Original atde. 46 -�i�i1V1t��92t��s�ti'�!�s�: toeas��o• ? � C I'1 D ,� a 1 tool �1 l 2 f:i�ia s i Ueat No ..1 ') a .I-.,:3 C';rr.!�•ts � ; HOMER ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION,INC. Public (::: i''1 RULES AIM RECULATi s 11. SC1mxu OF FEES AND CILIP.M Membership Fee $ 5.00 Account Deposit (2 months average class usage or 2 cnnths historical usage at that location) Service Call Charges - During Regular Business flours Oneman crew ---------------- 45.CO Each add'1 man required------ 15.00 After Regular Business Fours One man crew ---------------- 160.00 Each add'l man required------ 125 00 Plater Test Fee 35,C Records Fee 10.00 Record Analysis Fee u,00 Dishonored Check (NSF) 7.50 Delayed PaMent Charge (added to all accounts over 30 days old) 10: of current amt. Authorized Breaking of Meter Seal 20.00 Unauthorized Breaking of Meter Seal I 100.00 Yard Light Installation Fee 25.00 Pursuant to order No. 3, U-41-14 Effect..! •,rr 23, 10-1 866064 HONFR F,ECTRIC ASSOC'ATlOrt. IyC PO 8,e a2 r+oner, Alosko 99603 8/ / • T,11e General Manager B.K .ck i O �I.K+.�r,.. Mr�w.I.�Wf•�.�,WY/��4�+..__��.,f1,..YMYI.!..w•. .� I.� • MriM •� ,(1�Y •�,7•.r, � • . 3PUC +:0 32 _ ,Ol'i!•im1 r Sf7MME ru-Mit 8 Km..z: r_tir 11119 r•tte Sclip 1 - rtpplten to Till dtt::k to ,!nz1 attdnor L,,..__�„ mthject to the Titles and rt,pilat ions of tIt.• A—CLat. ton. 11'pli OF "FMCli: 51ti-Ac ph.•tsa, GO hertz~. service, dolivvred at s(mutird secondary vo1'6v-pz, for use in omd•xv light.itty„ is pt•)vided ulder this Schc-Till.•. 111is Shcmlittle applies to thin-m-U-1-ed our.,bor lighting. Clvgmu:r Clntrto Arty o tt6x-)r 1 ipht tx>t billed in ronj+au.ti,m frith Tin active +inter will he, elctrt,•d n $12.50 cnsrcrm-r chtrpe for every billin, period service is retut,•red. 11A,; charge is tint a:hject to proration. Pat-m rlun•r.!ki for madoor lighting; are h.•med on ooats to supply and Irtintaln Imips ami fixtvros on eximAtte, poles with no tmre titan n stnrle 15o fcxtt, s1t.•n1 of secnmirlr, comiuctor frcnt an existing st:m&ird ecatu!tt•y valt.:n;e nource. Merg;y costs are inmrlvrrated in encit rate and aro variable by 1-rop sire. 115 csytr, burp S9.35 per 1 orp per mmth 400 •.:nt.t 1r911 $11.0 1w•r Imp per nt+nth ClosrKi to Furtl--••r l'.e ti+ntracrs for Unc5xlr Unfit inp, 1 - I ,,,,,Q �Inriff ltdgiee�21 [feeu,.e ttwfst+r HOMER ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION INC- ' P ea 42 . Homer atesro 99603 •e t- _ t.tre (,erfol woee9e1 t10,,r �.: n, Kenai Peninsula Community Care tenter Drawer 3573 Kenai. Alaska 99611 907.283.7635 March 29, 1982 - - —1 l 1 r1;1, YI17-t Jt� ✓! Charles Brown, Finance Director City of Kenai Box 580 Kenai, Alaska 99611 Dear Mr. Brown: This is a request for our fourth progress payment from the City of Kenai for our workshop construction project and equipment. Itemized amounts being requested are as follows: Decor Industries - furniture 1459.00 Barrett Office Supply - furniture 892.00 ✓ 1.,;// jf%�� Dan's TV - Intercom System 182.04 ✓ wait oa Fred Braun Sport Shoppe - recreation equip.10243 34- J/,Q y-� je,17j �. pp -lies— 4%lee: 4/tr s�l,,N Jr NAr'/ trT�� t/ Total Request-$094.3-8 � s/,I /- 3S.70 y.1; /o st4tF f��rro.4 (2666.28 of the Fred Braun request is from the same �`� `w invoice submitted with my January 27 request which was not approved. Since the City has been given approval to amend the grant, 1 am resubmitting it.) This is where we stand as of today's dates Todal grant from City 82,000.00 Progress payments to date 64,629.80 Balance after payment-9;,+73-s-82•• Will you please present this regeust for consideration at the next council meeting. Sincerely, Billie Hardy + 'r.'•.:'^, ..'n::. ,_,,,.�«.. I' •'� ".►� ...«.... Director r:1'r ::' ._. _..._._._.. ». ...»...._........»...... . , A Gommunity residential tr(>atRent t+rograrq for the Venirlsulat Youth. I r CITY OF KENAI FOR COUNCIL INFORMATION Transfers of Funds under $1,000 under KMC 7.25.020 (a) Any Special Date Dept. Amount From To Explanation 3/23/92 Library $975.00 4531 4532 3/26/02 Recreation 100.00 5041 4533 3/31/82 Fire 200.00 2024 2023 -�a t � *Unless some special explanation is filled in, the reason for necessity or desirability of the transfer can be assumed to be due to the normal condition that expense estimates during the budget process were over estimated in one or more accounts and r under estimated in one or more accounts. n"A Box 3507 Soldotna, 99669 flarch 18, 1.7,12 wiLlf�m ilri,htoii City Box 530 Kenai, 'roar ar, SrLoiton, Tao often in our sociA. the tiara and effort of )rofessLor Is go unreco3nized for taj s not normally part of their daily routine. The :,urpose of this lattar is to convey gist thinks to the men auJ women of ti:% -Wivii Police and Fire itatio.is who reclntl/ 33va the SOIJotna Cooperative li:?schaol a tour of their facilitias. The .)r)fessLonalisn exhLAtud by the st.tf in deaLing with throw-, four- and five- ,mr-olds and convayinQ, positive me*);a ;es that all took home with than is greatly appreciated. A job well dune deserves a sincere thanks and we hope that the staff recognizes they are well thought of. Sincerely Connie A. Tarbox Class Representative Soldotna Cooperative Preschool cc Wolter Winston, fire Chief kichard (toss, Uii,d of Police -a� .Y r TO: O�illiam Brighton, City Manager FROMs Richard Ross, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Annual Report 1981 DATEt March 9, 1982 Attached is the Annual Report for calander year 1981 on Police activities. Incorportated in the report is data on reported criminal offences, arrest activity and traffic activity in the City of Kenai. POLICE ANNUAL RLPCRT - 1981 As reflected on the following pages total overall demands on Police services have increased significantly during 1981. During this period citizen'initiated requests for services have increased by 10%. The serious crime category, the Part I Crimes, registered on 8% increase during this same period. Part II Crimes registered a very high 74% increase in 1981 over 1980. Some of the conditions which affect the volume and type of crime that occur and total demands on Police service within the City of Kenai are briefly outlined as follows: 1. Density and size of community population and the total area of which it is a part. 2. Composition of the population with reference particularly to age and sex. 3. Stability of the population, including commuters, seasonal and other transient types. 4. Climate, including seasonal weather conditions. 5. Effective strength and area covered by the Police force. 6. Administrative and investigative efficiency of law enforcement and the training provided for the police officers. 7. Policies of prosecuting officials and attitudes and policies of the court and corrections. Economic development - it is expected that the trends reflected over the last severap years will continue into the 1980's. Transient work force and age of the population , average age of approximately 25 years, all contribute heavily to a higher Part I and Part 11 crime rate than would normally be expected in a city of the size of Kenai. These factors as well as others, i.e. population growth and distribution within the city in relation to the size of the patrol force, will all contribute to this trend. r PART I AND PART 11 CRI14L•' RI•:POPT Part I Crimes are the more serious crimes dealt with by a Police agency. They do not include traffic arrests, vice crimes (i.e. drugs, prostitution, qamblinq). And with the exception of larcany, the majority of other misdemeanor crimes reported (i.e. vandalism, etc.). Each crime reported in the category represents from several hours to hundreds of manhours of police investigation and court time. In the last several years Part I crimes have gone from just under 10% of the De- partments total requests for service to just over 10%. However, they represent a very significant investment of the Departments available manhours in their inves- tigation and subsequent court proceedings. During 1981 the Part I crime rate in- crease was 8% over that reflected in 1980. The property crime areas are those in which Kenai's rate is very high. These are primarily crimes of opportunity. The larger geographical area incorporated in the -- city, approximately 40 square miles, and the wide dispersion of the population in this area makes adequate patrol difficult. The city of Kenai has by far fewer of- ficors per square mile than any other city in south central Alaska. In addition there are fewer officers/1000 population (2.6 in Kenai versus an average of 3.2 in other cities of south central). That this creates greater opportunity for property ; crimes is represented below: PROPERTY CRIMES KENAI 1981 1980 STATE AVG./4500 pop. BURGLARY 72 63.5 LARCENY 208 165. AUTO THEFT 33 27.3 In the last several years there has been a significant increase in the numbers of burglaries and larcenies. Residential burglaries have increased during this period to the point that the majority of reported burglaries are now occuring in residences and not to commercial establishments as in prior years. TYPE OF BURGLARY 1980 1981 ;. RESIDENTIAL 29 42 COMMERCIAL 30 30 TOTAL......59 ...................72 PART I CRIME RESOLUTION RATE In 1981 the resolution rate for Part I crimes was 25.4%. Of the 365 Part I crimes reported arrests were made for 93 of them. since 1975 the rate has steadily dropped from a high of 42.9%. While this is still above the Statewide average of 241 reso- lution rate for Part I crimes, it is disappointing within the department to have ex- perienced the drop. It is felt that some of the following factors contributed heavi- ly to this decline in resolution rate: 1. The significant increases over the last several years in Part 1 Crimes and the number of manhours involved in their investigations. Ianhours available for in- vestigation, evidense processing and court time have been spread much thinner. r - - PART I CRTMF: RESOLUTION PATE CONTINUED -2- It has become necessary to prioritize those cases that are to receive in depth case investigation and close others that in years past would have received more in depth treatment when the case volume was lower. 2. The accident severity rate over the last several years has made it impossible to divert any further manhours from traffic enforcement to investigations. 3. Changing population over the last several years. Many more people are moving into and out of the area than in prior years making individual offender identi- fication and apprehension more difficult. Representative of this is the in- creasing number of extradition requests placed by the Kenai Police Department for offenders charged that have fled not only the local area, but the State of Alaska. PART II OFFENCES Part iI offences increased at a very high rate in 1981 over 1980. As the present system of reporting of these offences has only been in use for two years it would be difficult to make any valid statements concerning this increase. Part II offences consist of most of the misdemeanor offences and several non-violent felony offences. DWI is the only traffic related offence included in this category. There was a 42% increase in this offence during 1981. See offence cases, other than rape, obscene phone call cases, disorderly conduct, and vandalism also increased significantly during this last year. On the following pages are the statistics on the reported Part I and Part II offence The figures reported do not include those reports determined to be unfounded or thos, determined to be civil in nature, although many manhours are often involved before this finding is made. ARRESTS Following the reporting of criminal offences investigated is a reporting of arrests. In 1981 there was a 37% increase in arrests reported over 1980. Of the 318 non- tcaffic arrests 85 or 27% were juvenile arrests. 73% of the arrests were of adult, primarily young adult 18-25 years of age, offenders. Arrest data is provided as a matter of interest. For many reasons (i.e. one arrest could clear multiple offences; multiple arrests could clear one offence) it cannot be used as a productivity or efficiency measure. It does contribute to work loading and overall activity. L _ti CRIMINAL OF'FxNbES ,. (Traffic Not Included) r PART I 1980 1981 " HOMICIDE 1 -0- RAPE -0- 1 ROBBERY -0- 1 AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 42 50 BURGLARY 59 72 LARCENY 210 208 MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 26 33 TOTAL 338 365 `9 -- PART II 1980 OTHER ASSAULTS 8 ARSON 1 FORGERY 5 FRAUD/CHECKS 29 EMBEZZLEMENT 1 " VANDALIS14 120 WEAPONS 12 SEX OFFENSES/OBSCENE CALLS 10 DRUG ABUSE 30 GAMBLING 1 �7 CHILD ABUSE 3 DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE 74 LIQUOR LAWS 40 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 65 'J OTHER MISCELLANEOUS 48 TOTAL 447 PART I & II TOTAL 785 for 1980 14 , o 7, t i 1- 1981 10 1 10 22 2 143 35 60 40 -0- 3 105 43 197 105 776 PART I & II l lq 1 For 1981 r� a ' ARRI l'S 1:)SU ADULT ,)UVL. '10'I'A1, ROBBERY 0 0 0 AG. ASSAULT 9 2 11 BURGLARY 6 4 10 LARCENY 22 27 49 MV THEFT 4 0 4 OTHER ASSAULTS 0 0 0 - FORGERY 0 0 0 FRAUD 0 () 0 STOLEN PROP. 2 0 2 VANDALISM 3 5 8 ' WEAPONS 3 0 3 SEX OFFENSE 1 0 1 ` DRUGS 11 11 22 GAMBLING S 0 5 ply= 65 6 71 LIQUOR LAWS 19 24 43 DISORDERLY 8 1 9 OTHER CRIMINAL 9 t> 15 167 86 253 �- IAR, RECKLESS, NEG. DRIVING 23 WARRANTS, FUGITIVES 67 TOTAL ARRESTS 343 1JR1 ADULT IUVI:, TOTAL, /i, 4 1 0 1 21 1 22 2 9 11 14 19 33 6 3 9 8 0 8 3 1 4 3 0 7 0 0 0 8 10 18 3 0 3 2 0 2 5 14 19 0 0 0 103 2 105 20 24 44 22 0 22 17 2 19 233 85 318 33 115 471 0 Tf2AFF1C ENFORCEMENT 1980 1981 change Verbal Warnings 1788 2293 + 28% Citations 961 1030 + 7% 2749 3323 20% 1981 recorded a 20% increase in the number of traffic violator contacts from 1980. During this same period the issuance of traffic citations increased by TRAFFIC ARRESTS 1980 1981 change OMVI 71 105 + 47% Hit & Run, Negligent, Reckless 23 33 + 43% 94 138 The arrests cited above only included arrests made by Kenai Police Department for the offences specified. Where a summons was issued and served by another agency for an offence investigated by Kenai Police Department no charge is reported. In 1981 there was a significant increase in the number of OMVI arrests over 1980 (+47%). Many factors contribute to this such as local economic conditions, decrease in deterrence value of three day mandatory sentence as a media tool, etc. An increase in the mandatory minimum has been discussed as a possible solution to the problem. This with proper media coverage would no doubt again be of short term value in reducing the incidents. Judges at present have the discretionary power to exceed the present minimum for "first" offences based on previous driving record, arrest record, and circumstances surrounding the O.MII arrest. The use of this discretion would definitely be in order in that 76% of Kenai Police Department OMVI arrests were "first" offenders. TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS INVESTIGATED 1980 1981 Accidents Investigated 162 190 Hit & Run Accidents 53 60 Injuries 44 52 Fatalities 0 2 Economic Damage (vehicles) 222,135 338,773 TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS INUSTICATE'D continued , During 1981 a total of 249 accidents were reported to the Kenai Police Depart- j ment. Sixty of these occurred in parking; lots, this includes thirty seven of the sixty reported hit and runs. Approximately 31% of the accidents reported (59 out of 249) were not investigated by the Kenai Police Department. These were minor damage (under $1000. total damage), non injury accidents on streets, accidents where both vehicles left scene prior to contacting Kenai Police Depart- ment, or non injury accidents occurring on private property. A significant amount of departmental manhours is utilized in traffic accident investigation, especially those involvinn injuries or fatalities. In 1981 there were two fatality accidents in the City of Kenai. The first occurred on 8/6/81 at mile 13.5 of the Kenai Spour. Contributing factors to the accident were speed and high level of drugs and alcohol -in the driver/victim. The second occurred on 11/18/81 at mile 6.5 on the Kenai Spur in which the operator struck a moose with a sports car while traveling at a high speed for the conditions , present. Seven intersections in Kenai accounted for sixty of the investigated accidents (20% of those investigated). The following intersections were the leading accident intersections in Kenai: I 1980 1981 zJ 1) Bridge Access b Kenai Spur 9 12 1 2) Bain Street b Kenai Spur 14 12 3) Willow Street b Kenai Spur 13 9 4) Wildwood Dr. b Kenai Spur 6 9 , 5) Forest Dr. b Kenai Spur 8 7 6) *lain Street b Peninsula Street 9 6 7) Walker Lane - Airport Way b Kenai Spur 5 5 Heavy traffic volumes and operator impatience have kept the three downtown inter- sections in the top accident intersections over the last several years. They will be kept under close review during the next year. The addition of several other improved streets onto the Spur and onto the Bridge Access Road could result in reduced investigation and resultant problems during the next year. The Bridge Access and Kenai Spur intersections; is scheduled for redesign by the State and possible installation of control lights if warranted. S fF i M IR.- �. j M •�7 Prince William Sound's Oldest Newspaper Established in 1914 ._.. �, ALASKA, THURSDAY. MARCH. 11. 1982 (c) 1982 by Bonner Co. Inc. 16 PAGES 50 CENTS Opp�osition to harbor -- - project is unanimous J i BY NANCY BIRD number of years and would pro- .• "� Times Editor vide easy access for "sports - __ • % . proposal A r by the Department P fishermen to Prince William 'i "�- •yam . +vf="'•: of Transportation and Public Sound without the unnecessary -� cam' •. f%rJs� ;Facilities to build a 300400 slip expense of constructing a ferry . harbor at Latouche Island receiv- terminal as suggested at ed overwhelming opposition at a L public hearing Monday in Cor. , The public hearing was 'attend- r ;,>t ., *• ^��: =., Bova. ed by about 25 residents, eight of . The Cordova City Council whom testified. Two of those took scheduled the hearing after being no position on the issue but gave asked for comments by DOT/PF information pertinent to It, while on the proposed project. Follow.' the other six unanimously oppos- ing the hearing, Mayor Jim Poor ed the project. ' drafted a letter to DOT/PF Tuna Tapley, a resident of stating that the City of Cordova is Prince William Sound for 63 on record "as opposing any ex. Yearn. said, "I object to using penditures of state funds for the state money to build a harbor for development of facilities at a community that isn't there." Latouche Island." Marla Adkins said she felt a In the letter Poor summarizes "harborof this magnitude is a lit- t ' f , public's o p opposition to the pro- He premature. There are better LATOUCHE... ject as being based on both• philosophical and environmental locations." When asked to name a better reasons. location, fisherman Bandy (Continued from p.1) reereationists, fishermen and His letter says that one 14year Barnes :aid, "My recommenda- tion harbor development because we others, have used the terry ser• salmon seiner expressed concern that the proposed harbor site is a would be Port San Juan/Sawmill Bay." do not take stands on issues vice and dock for access to the unrelated to fisheries. but we do southwestern area of Prince schooling ground for salmon and 'However. Armand Koernig. want to make it clear that we are William Sound. that others expressed concern ova expenditure of up to f9 president of Prince William Sound Aquaculture Corpora• not Interested in seeing a harbor "The small boat harbor at built at Port San Juan." said Latouehe has nothing to do with million for a harbor where there are no full-time residents, --while tion—which owns and operates a Private —non —Profit fish hatchery Koernig. the dock." said Koernig. Koernig said the corporation Oliver Osborn, President of the many high -volume harbors re- main undersize or without ade• at Port San Juan on Evans Island, two miles west of ss asked the state for f9oo,000 to Cordova lands Coalition, stated quate dock facilities." Latouche Island —strongly stated _,,)grade the existing dock at Port that the group —which has about Poor also questions why "the that PWSAC does not support a San Juan which has been used for 65 members —was on record as funds proposed for Latouche are harbor at Pod San Juan. 1 the past two years by the ferry opposing the harbor develop• not being used to construct the "PWSAC cannot adopt a posi- ' 1 stemena' during the sum. went. Shotgun Cove Harbor and access tion on the proposed Latouche mer. I think most of the group's op• road near Whittier which have Property owners at the position is based on the large been on :he drawing boards for a t See LATOUCHE. p. 2) Latouche townsite—a private amount of money the prcect will �- subdivision —in addition to cost." said Osborn. L 44 W ' w,�t �.• G. �? /` ad Awnu -8 -1--t t. Aluska 911574 Railro .32 Jam-.4 A. Paur Department of -Transportation and Slayer Public Facilities ATTN: T. R. Mining RE; 242C-2531 Manager Pouch 6900 Project K-32409 • Anchorage, AK 99502 LaTouche Island Js4rbo0'.,` Dinina W filserby. Clo k /Trossurur Dear Mr. Flemi C�ret glomlsors J,p Its's kWh" U14f The City of Cordova is on record d:, OPI)osinq any expenditures of State funds for the development of facilities at LaTouche'-%jand'. J. owwwwo You have ask;:d in your letters of February Isth and March 5, for us to respond to the proposal to construct * a 300 400, s I I p harbor known as Alternate 0 at LaTouche. Thti City held a public he March 8, 1942, at which Some twer.tY-f i ve (25) people attended. `%Ekcept for two People who took no position. Lhe comments were '#00',; aqMnit the use of State funds to develop a fliji-bor, at LaTouche., Philosophical against the harbor; several mtvw.nts were; zoncerning the environment.. It was pointed out that Haydeh.-', -it is -L,0 Cruck, whit. talillco" sPawt,ing 1.t iirw.-diaLely nor of :;h harbor site. wou affected by -01totJoyi fl'()':' the harbor 'coh9tructior The harbor site it- If is a traditioisal willing and coitmier64I,.*q-shjP site.. A ton -year salmon seiner stated that the proposed harbor si t I' schooling ground for saliwn. Other pertinent comitients concerti high -wave action and northwestjOl winds (which you lidVO apparelitly at,j�aq)ted to addoress Vjj1t,1j 14, change fro:i, Altern'ate C to Alternate D). tr Other conzients expressed serious concern of expending up to $9,000,000 for a harbor and dock where there are no full-time residents 'while' - many high -volume harbors remain undersize or without adequato-dock' facilities. for eXdlflple, Cordova has operated and acco.Uwdate over"' 650 vessels in a harbor designed fur 310 boats. It was only this past year that part!ul funds were made avlilable to correct this problem. We are curit)us why the funds proposed for LaTouche are not being used -cess road real- Whittier'whic- to conStr,.4,:t Urf Shotgun Cove Birbur ind af. /4 have been of, the drav--,inq board5 for a nt.;%ber rof years and would'provide • easy access for spurts fishermen to Prit-ce William Sound without -the unnecessary of constructing a ferry terminal as suggested. at fez LaTouche. Ue apparent reason frr tn& LaTouche Harbor In the first.; f H Place it *-., Mcanrnodate Anchorage-: ased sportsmen, - - .111, y'- .1 , --, I # pal � lie seriously question the justification for the inicroiise In harbor size from 50-100 slips to 300-400 slips, III the shirt period of time from the first letter dated February 180 to the second letter dated March 5th. What infonnation have you amassed that could J1ustifj.',i*;,,, .1.4 such a large increase in harbor size? Tapes of the public hearing can be made available to you upon request. LAO,% ,tic,,, the COT/PF plans W, Please keep us advised as to what 4( at LaTouche island, Very truly yourst, 4`11 16 CITY OF KENAI „ail eap4W oj 44u4a„ F. O. BOX NO KENAL AIA$XA 99611 TELIPHONE 3B3 • 763E I 1 ! March 31, 1982 TO: Wm. J. Brighton, City Manager FROM: Keith Kornelis, Director of Public Works SUBJECT.: Wolverton Termination At the last Council meeting, there was a request by Council for a copy of Wolverton's appeal and the City's response. Attached is a copy of: 1. Wolverton's appeal dated February 22, 1982 2. City of Kenai's response, Keith Kornelis, dated February 26 and March 1,.1982 3. CH2M Hill's response.dated March 23, 1982 4. Arbitration Board's Decision dated March 26, 1982 1' Additional information is available upon request. KK/jet s, t. i 14 i James N. Wolverton Wastewater Treatment Plant Qperitor III Pox 342.3 Kenai, Alas;ra 99611 February 22, 1962 ' aa Janet Whelan City Clerk r City of Kenai Box 530 Xmnai, Alaska 99611 Re: Appeal of Disciplinary Action Dear Mrs. Whelan; This appeal is being made in accordance with Title 23: Personnel Regulations. Backprnund Mr. Keith Kornelis, Public Works Director, advised me February 19, 1982 at 9:00 a.m. -that he intends to terminate my employment with the city on February 23, 1962. ties Ptxted that the reason for this action is his perception of my mechanical ability as it relates to the level of :mechanical ability required by the treatment plant expansion. He stated that his perception of ray mechanical ability is based upon a letter he received December 30, 1981 from Mr. Gordon Vicholsen, an engineer for Cu2M dill. Mr. Kornelis also stated that I%e wanted me to continue operating, the treatment plant for a. period of three weeks following day termination. Disciplinary Action Mr. ?.ornelis is terminating my employment with the city. Reasons for ADUeal fir. rornelis, to this date, has failed to comply with the regulations concerning Forms of Disciplinary Action outlined in Chapter 23, Section.23.35.0 30, paragraph (b) of Title 23: Personnel Regulations, henceforth referred to as the iersonneL Crdi nonce. Specifically, ::r. Kornelis has ust diescussed improper or inadenuate performance with the employee, myself, in an offort to avoid disciplinary aetian; thus, he has violated tho intent of Section 23.35.030, paragraph (c). Page 2 Mr. Kornelis has not provided written notice of thin disciplinary action to the employee, as of this date; thus, he has violated Section 23.35.030, paragraph (d). Mr. Kornelis has not yet provided me with a performance evaluation for the period of January 1, 1981 to December 31, 1981 as called for in Chapter 23, Section 23.45.010. According to this section, I understand that the "performance evaluation shall be considered in decisions affecting ... dusmissals..." 9urthernore, Mr. Kornelis has failed to comply with Section 23.45.020, paragraph (b). My anniversary date with the city in March 5, 1976. 4e has not provided a performance evaluation 30 days prior to my anniversary date. Rather, he has postponed the evaluation, implying that it was dependent upon my resignation from my position with the city. Regarding Section 23.45.030, paragraph (a), 1 understand that Vr. Kornelis is my rating officer. Not only has he foiled to complete a performance evaluation as required by this paragraph, he has inferred to me that a letter written by Mr. Nicholson is the basis for his decision to take this diaciplinory action. Please note that Mir. Kornelis has openly stated t}:is to another city employee; thus violating my right to privacy. Tyr. Michelson does state in the letter that he has oba,�rvzd and evaluated my performance. I was not aware that Ire. Nicholson has been eripowered by the city to evaluate my performance in the operation of my duties as a treatment plant operator. Furthermore, if this letter in the basis for terminating my employment, let it be noted that Mr. 23icholson did not recommend termination, but rather a, strengthening of any apparent weaknesses in my job performance. He streneed tY:e well -recognized need for direct supervision at the treatment plant. Mr. Kornellss has not provided two (2) consecutive annual performance evalurtions with unzatisfactorV ratings as rtipul:tted in Section 23.45.350 of this ordi:Lance. Ou the ' contrary, past evalua.tionn :3igned by Fr. 'Kornelis indicate his satisfaction with my Job performance. Aecatiae I have not received a, perferwonce evaluation as specified in this ordinance, I have flee" denied the opportunity to appeal what may be an unfair evaluation report. TYtis .is in violation of C.::pter 23, section - -` 23.45.060. 10001% L I =` Fare 3 In 1979 the treatment plant operraters were informed by Xr. ;Nicholson that the engineers connected with Cs12;: Hill would not become involved with the treatment plant operators in the performance of the operators' duties. For reasons unknown to me, irx. ::icholson has evaluated my performance as a treatment plant operator. According to Mr. Laren Leman, Project Administratar, this action is outride the scope of his fire's contract with the City of Fenai, and it was not authorized by hi:a nor u:ndertake.a wit'i his knowledge or c3nsent. At this time T a+n unaware that amj other treatment plant operator has bet-n evaluated by fir. 1'icholson during t::e past year. In light of recent levelopmeats around the country as discussed in the April 1981 issue of the Water Pollution Control. Federati2r,'s publication, uighlia•hts, I have reason zo believe that Mr. Mcholson may have had an ulterior motive for writing the letter to 'r. Y.ernelis. Pe may be directing the city ad:zinistration's attention away from the following design problems evident in the treatment plant expansion: 1. Unnecessary digester boiler and related piping: intenders to prevent freezing in the digester; howtver., the solid waste content plus bacteria plus blower dry prevent freezing by maintaining temperatures in the 50-70 degree F. range. 2. t.nneeensaxy chlorine building, cylinders and related piping: intended to ;till filamentous bacteria in the aeration basins; hawever,.if the procesp control is effectively T.aiyzained by a good operator, there is no need for these measures. In fact, the treatment plant has not required chlorine in th4 a mannner. zi la •1977; the SPA renuirecent to chlorinate the effluent was cropped. If chlorine would se ue*.ded In t:se a.eratio l bania9, HTAV powder or ferric chl*ri::a powder would je as effective and much less costly. 3. Poorly 8mtsigasd regtage recei-int station: iAtenlo,d :o accept waste from insi:le the city limits, i.i unusa.Lle in winter under cold climatic conditinnrs with*ut major onodi:icatians and constant attentiou to prevent it from freezing. 4. Dig"ter blowers: inteiOell to mix oxygen with solid wastes and bat;teria; Lawever, these need to be o; z v:.rioble speed type like tare ones oa the aeratisn basins brc:au-ee the conrst:ant speed of tl.e prevent blowers creitas n :f•.a w-.ich freezes acave th.e digester. Pape 4 5. Convtvyor belts: istended to carry influirtt rcreen- ings from the rotary screens into the sludge trailer; however, the manufacturer's represent- ative states that these belts require 24-hour attentian or an alarm system. There is no alarm system for these and there are not enough operators to maintain a 24-hour observation of them. It may be that my termination would draw attention away fr*n, the large amounts of cash th:.t are being passed "under the table" as well as away from TCI's weans of taking tax write-offs on this project. I expect to continue servinthe City of Kenai as I have done during the past six (65 years, in whatever capacity the administration deems advisable. This appeal is respectfully submitted this 22nd day of February, 1982. 4 James N. Wolverton a L» %L-rDbIbLion Control ,,, , lion A hlontnly Supplement toWPCF Highlights r Specific Ways to Save Energy in Plant Operations All costs for Operation of wastewater reatment plants have been escalating 1t a rapid rate over the past few ;tiers. =uel and energy costs represent a •ubstant,al portion of these plant Op. :rating costs. Don Bowersox Burgess & Niple, Ltd., Columbus, Ohio energy costs remained fairly stzble many years and Ewen decreased in rice when measured against the Col- a index. This was accomplished by the :velopment of larger, more efficient ansm,ss,On lines. inexponsove Middle istern oil, and ample natural gas sup. '!us. all competing for the energy mar• .4. Since the eariy 1970s. there has ':en a dramatic shift in energy costs :cause of shortago Of supply, higher bor and materials Costs, higher cost interest on money to finance im- /ovoments, increasing regulatory .strictions, and morO stringent anti. "I:uliOn requ,roments. Thus, ,t Is prudent to carefully review lergy costs and operational proce. rfes to reduce energy costs where 'iss,ble. Reducing energy use heips in p very important areas: (a) Savu,94 in erall operational costs, and (b) con. %vation of our natural resources. ro determine and control energy $is. It is necessary to understand the rnients making up a rate schedule d to understand tho utAuation of uipment pith rOgard to efficiency J required time of Operation. After termination of these facts• it is neces. y to wwgh this information to esta!>- " R list Of various trade-o'fs as to the! _ed mode of operation. For Ox- rle. Sludge ir:lnSrer from One unit to liner could possibly be Cone durinq -peak hogs. AL loin Each power company has its own set Of regulations and rate schedule, and they do not all make their charges to the same way. The same power company may. have different rates in different areas, and the rates and charges will vary from one plant to another. Thus. In order to consider electrical energy savings. the rate schedule for each plant must be carefully examined and understood. The best way to reach this understanding Is meet with a repre- sentative of the power company and discuss all charges and the method of their determination. (300 Sewing EaNgl, p. 11) Stab Planning for 2° Treatment Conversion at New London, Conn. New London. Conn., is a community Of some 30 000 people with Only 9.4 kntr (7.5 sq mi) of land. Founded in 1648. it lies On the: shore of Long Island Sound to the south and the Thames Rover to the east. Its other two sides are bounatud by the town of Waterford, a burgeoning bedroom and industrial community rich in land and blessed w,ut an extremely favorable tax rate. Mantis to the presence of three nuclear generating facilities. Andrew H. Sims, jr, Executive Orroctor. SOWef Authority. CIty of New London, Conn. Emile J. Hamwoy Principal fngineor Fay. S00110rd A I:.Ornotke, Inc. Boston, Miss. New London is a fully developed COmmundy with a Collector Sewer sys• tem serving the entire city. Altnough founded in 1790, :latesford had retained its essentially rural character until fsef t(on AtiniNep, P. 13) %I No+e +R"s a4irile The field speaks O&PA—In Defense of the Operator One can scarcely draw a breath without being exposed to the subject of operations and maintenance (O&M). ' Meetings, classes, seminars. schools, texts, speeches, books. magazines, newspapers. even inspections, are con- ducted, all emphasizing O&M. 1 have no quarrel with the Importance of O&M. but do believe that some reanalysis is required. W. A. Bryant Superintendent, 6YWTP C/arksdale, Mich. Personnel in the State B•rreau of Pol- lut,on Control and EPA alike are aghast and skeptical when, in answer to their query, -what percentage of personnel time ,s spent on maintenance?" 1 reply 90 to 95%. Yet ,t is true. It is true here in this 19-MI/d (5-mgd) plant, and, if anaiyred. I'm Sure it is true at most plants. To begin with, we need to define maintenance. The idea that mainte- nance is repair only, is nonsense. Re. Pair is the part of maintenance that must be reduced. Maintenance is cleaning, dusting, washing, waxing, sweeping, lubricating, adjusting, ob- serving. Inspecting• investigating, fis- tening-to. "feeling -of," "smell,ng•of," being suspicious -of, reporting about, monitoring, and a host of other activ,. ties. which, sadly. Include continual Paris replacement and repairing. All these things must be done before any equipment can be successfully oper- ated. It enough time is spent On the 161", then the "O" is a matter of momentary routine. consuming little time and ef- fort. The "0" ss easy, if the "M" has had enough time. thought, and attention given to it. All of the maintenarce is the most in, portent part of the O&M, and should - over --p Diggs & DATA U not be done hourly, daily, weekly, or annually. It should be done continually. Just to keep equipment operating at peak efficiency requires this 90 to 95% time element of maintenance. There is always something that call be done to any given piece of equipment to make it perform better, faster, or longer. Equipment Breakdown it is the wear-out/break-down of equipment that is a maddening bedevil- ment. and is responsible for creating by-passing, ineffective treatment. and denying operators the ability to op- erate Repair/replacement of equip- ment is time. and attention -consuming far in excess of what at should be. Cost- effectiveness studies seldom take into con:aderation the cost of parts -repair and down -time: the valuelessness of In- efficient treatment. and the time and attention of personnel to fix, bottle feed. and Mother this kind Of equipment. "it is high time we removed some of the 'M' from OW — the almost continual repair!" People's time, engaged in ceaseless repair, could be certainly used else- where. Perhaps they might even "operate"' It is high time we removed some of the 1-11" from 03M—the almost con- tinual repair' A very minor, but indica- tive example I recertify had trouble with an automatic sampler. I called the tech- mcaf department of the manufacturer. "Did you replace the hose in the pert- stallic pump?" he asked. "No. not yet," 1 replied. "Those hoses should be re- placed every 6 months." he said. 1 did so. and that solvetd file problem. But. it the Insides of the, oil pump on my auto- mohile had to be replaced every 6 months, the manufacturer would hear front my attorney! Very minor, but a maddening repair that should be un. necessary Another examph): the main lift sta- tion that supplies all the flow for the plant has three large pumps that are controlled by an alternator. These con- trols embody pneumatic, hydr:luhc. marinette, mechanical. and electrical forces Thm equipment must operate in a damp atn:o: nhere. There are two Small bpnrtgs that employ the meCh- anical ¢oiler to turn the :alternator, once some elecirical/pneumatic%maq- netiC sensors activate) them. These •q•nneN rest lose power. and t!-eak. ::hv it thtr %%tirld wetent the,, mtae of .ta.ntess ita ei) An operator has to de- %OtN lit hour of ao t0 reach in amongst tr•e tS6'•ldrt yM•tC•^try (t0 Shut thorn (i}e shuts down the plant) and manually Vti...%.•A'A repair or change thin sprinrls. 11 he doesn t touch any of the hot switches (880 volts), he lives to do some more "M- Somewhere else. But durinq that hour, even if he survives, no certainly is not "operating." There is enough necessary "M" in O&M without the added burden of maxi- mum ropair/replacement. Millions and millions of automobiles run thousands of miles each, in all kinds of weather, on all kinds of surfaces, at all kinds of speeds and loads. yet only a very few ever have to have the universal joints on the drive shaft replaced. But oper- ators must continually baby U-joints on (NhOfO: Allis-Clialiners) pump drive shafts, running at constant speeds. constant load, and sometimes ideal environment. Why can't one be as long-lasting as the other? Universal joints are only one example of literally hundreds Of items OI equipment sit a treatment plant. In Defense of Operators There is hardly one issue of a trade publication that doesn't bemoan waste- water treatment plants' inability to meet or maintain operations within CPA para- meters. The smug and glib explanation. more often than not. is that the opera- tors of these plants were "negligert on their O&M.- It Is surely just possible that the operators were busy repairing, fix- Ing, sonic shiny, new, but worthless pieces Of machinery that they were un. able) to finis the time for the Other part Of the "M.- lest alone the "0.- 1 fear that nits rticepalaws and the. EPA grants pro9cims do not get their money'-. worth tit bu7ntg oquipment Teo many manufacturers build Ina- chireiy for some thr ttteticai immediate result without a case for the long-range. ldsbriq, maintenince-free gii011111e!5 Of their machinery! They (the manufac- !� 1 turers) are delighted with "planned - obsolescence." They sell shiny new "Tin Lizzies" for Rolls Royce prices! While th6y are secretly pleased with break- down/replacement/repair (41 additional' profits to them), they point a "holier than thou" finger at the operators and cry, "Poor O&M." Some consultant engineers, who never worked in. or ran a treatment plant, are in unofficial "cahoots" with the manufacturers of shoddy equip- ment. If the equipment doesn't work the way the manufacturer's literature and/ or salesman claimed it would, or as the engineer's text hooks say it should, the engineers point the accusing finger at the operators• and proclaim, -The OSM was poor!" Again, far too much "M", of the wrong kind• and not enough time for the "0" and the right kind Of "M". The engineers (with a few wonderful ex- ceptions) don't know any better, and the manufacturers don't care (with a few exceptions) so long as they get their Rolls Royce profits for the Tin tizzies they design, manufacture, and market! I know of some very dedicated, able, and conscientious operators who have physically run representatives of some large manufacturers off the premises. i know of similar instances of operators chasing consultant engineers out of the plant. Just as there are too many man?, ufacturers unfit to build and sell anyi., "If we already have mandatory certification in 44 States and voluntary in all the rest, how come the treatment plants aren't working?" —Overheard at a high-level EPA staff meeting, as reported in the ABC News- letter, January 1981. thing, there 21`0 also engineers incom- petent to design a two-holer. But both have a universal alibi and a common whippinq-boy. Unfortunately. EPA and state pollution control bureau people join in the) all -encompassing platitude. "The operators are negligent in per- forming their 08 v" Let us have at least some manufac- turers who build, with pride, equipment t0 last. antl last, and last. Equipment that doe!sn't break down in 90 days, or that must be over -hauled in 6 months — or even 6 years! If municipalities and EPA grants pay Bolls Royce prices, then let us have Rolls Royce dependability and lonq•range performance! Let engi• nee.rs come, out Of their "ivory towers." 111d. ashen thPy study c?st efteetiv�. ne•S5, prele!Ct the expected He Of equip- rnent uver a maintenance - free extended peirtod of time. Let's insist that equip- VeelilMi "I NIPAIIEn t E` ment meet. or exceed, some very stringent requirt'nients before R s de- signed nito a plant The sword of Damocles hangs over operators heads If ,InVthing it all goes wrorq with the manufacturers pet shottdv machinery. or with the consist. taut engineers air-conditioned drawing - board and slide -rule that glows-in-tne- dark. She operator. Obviously, was "negngenf in his OSM"! And if the engineers and the equipment manufac. turers say so. then it must be true, and the EPA and pollution control people join the 'amen" Chorus. There are lazy. incompetent oper- ator. They Should be rooted out and replaced. But i dont believe 03M is ne•CeSSBrdv the indicator that will identi- fy them—, O will, perhaps, more than *V However. a number of -poor' op- eralors might be good operators if they had something to work with. Don't use 0351 vtiith the operators' built-in vul• nerabaity to poor design and junk ma. chinery. as the judgment factor. This is not a tirade of self-defense. This writer. and this plant. have not had a nerve- aggravated by OW criticism. In tact. we have had many commenda- hoes and compliments on our O&M. But we, too. suffer from too much "M and �t :ne wrong kind. We spend an in- ordinate amount of time fixing and re. pasting machinery that shouldn't have to be fixets. •f it had been built right to be- gin with We also cope with some idiotic facets Of design that are maddening and increase the difficulties of the '•M" ti104 tat Let its remove the repairirebuilding from the '14- of '10SG1". Let us perform the %1 ' as rt should he. even at the 90 Ili 45'i, of worwe-rs' time. it we must seek sornedno to blame for ineftieion- r nos. inen analy. a the ptob1cm. place tfie blame where it belongs, but not autnmaticalty On the shoulders of the operator. in this way perhaps manufac- turers might be goaded to make and malkol worthwhile equipment. engi- rit• f-s aol .lestgn w,th minimal Mamte•- natiee in mind. and operator. ; will t:ampetently nerfor m ()s .I Data welcomes respnnses to r!•a tortt•r 7M Crrtir-isin of present fen- deer,es m . qurpmrtlf m.lnielaetumnq and Want tresrgrs Can wet reeoncife firm-r;u.Itdv equipment with either .in hi-fi pilated marnet JfrangemCnt in equ'pirrent rnanul.lthifr•!q Of with a sit- renl 1;rOCtiremQnt W!W1.1110rl5� if not .t•'dt .%;*es O! regtet.1huns Ile needed ire Me •"miter? of erlu,rment prnrutement .' i•.:r�:i .•,I .assure trrhe r•ip:.udv rn,nn- r u'r'eT ?rev equpment), Ifew m:I,rr ••',lrtl iu•t+id lire? JdJ 10 JN! COSt Of lid •.n t-.:r►tref. Or Seim.? .t .W!,r eat, 1011147t• t^d -JOG-term Cost feren d it raised the errrmr•di.dg pufrh.rsrr pneeh 0o equipment m inuhtehiraf!, really make firdls n,rvcn. pratrts' l Doe,; pre-1 - ent equniment Often reHecr a "dime - wise but dothtf-foolish' ipproaCh. exemplified by the rusbnq springs) Lets heir from you. the operator, the quy who's got to live with if alf (W A Bryant can he rearherl at 1905 Sun Flower Extended, Cfarkrdafe. tits 38614) Saving Energy (from 0 9► The two most important n-lementf,, of the rate schedule are the Demand Charge and the Energy Charge. Let us take a look at the various types of Charges. their definitions, and examples of energy savings Demand Charges The demand charge is determined by the maximum power drawn for a 15- or 30-minute period during a given billing period. This charge is made because the power company is required to maintain its system to meet the in- stantaneous demand of the customer. The demand is measured in kilowatts and billed per kilowatt. To keep the demand down, the maximum power use must be kept down. For example. a 100-horsepower motor at a demand charge of $5.50/kw, would represent a fixed cost of y-157.50 per month It, in- stead of operating the 100-none aciwer motor for 4 hours a day, the same work could be done by a 50-hourspower motor in 9 hours a day, the demand would he one. -half, or $233 75 per month. It must be rememb..N.•d that the demand charge is in addition to file energy charge. At the LeSourdsvilfe Butler County wastewater treatment plaint. the follow- ing procedure is used to reduce the demand charge, When the tertiary ftiliKs are backwasheid, the furr.in,:s and blowere, in the aerobrC dine At;r> are out off. This takes two 40-hot:;epawer blowers and two 60-hopes--power file- bine-i off line when the 100-hud^erpUwrN hackwasn and 5-horsepower surface wash pumps are runrnnq If fro. t:lf,•f Is backwabfied with frig blowers and tur- bint.•s runniag. the demand Cnareltl far Mat montn tncre1.1Ser, nt•ithy at 60 Tr-e aerobic d•ftester's Jeratinn trust be stopped e_'.tch d)y anyw.ry to ,dk,vi settling for decar,b"J. Hit r-oord'nat,net this fuitcboo and Inc Mlrr b.iCl wesn:nrf- tonstderat:le savir:.vg are areanipbsred Anome•r a xarre!e- of Jiir ,s of de- mand ch,irreees amid t e me co'iteni of raw vi.iSte Mrdf.!r pump, U,u4av e smai.e i vum.p i5 u:,ed fur nofrr,.ti bows perhaps 50 horsepower. W.in an .n- a "ease in flow. the larrjev pump :,tarm and run: for a snort p00,64 of little Lr•T u: Say the second pump is tQ0 newso- pOwrrr With both pump; runntng, wet are, fookinej at 1% non,Fpovror err a snort lime—wniCh IS all ins, it takes. 05 raise the demand chant. for the wh4tes, month If the smaller pump st60Ge*;d when the t00-nrrr4power pump tomes, On. demand rKnald bit Iryapr and'JWAtld put less, of a hydraulic, Limy 1436 on the plant. Thee, is a device avaiiab!e rear Cart tle connected to me demand master and which will stop certain ptedo-, of elump. most as the presenf defnser6 i. ap prraC11e6 In this case. inn, Gwar ion and equipment .s evaluatad and a prinrity fist established Thp icwex- priority equipment mat ran re takeln out of ,ervtre W from f r4 4 Mdurl- 4, connected to the& unit The maximum acceptable demand is a nwe6 iota the unit and as the mainfru n demand is aporoa,fled, the uart will madmariret- Iy turn aft file lower -priority equrpme rill to prevent exeee.6ing the tn"imunt 6p� mand. The cost of one of These titian plus the installation will tie around S5 0t10 to 56 coo. to masr plants whit flows aver 7.6 Ulyd 12 mg6), me saving; in demand charges will pay for me atilt in less than 1 year. if muss bit stressed mat me demand charge rs ter the maximum use donna, a 15- to 30-minutF Wind during; me "l- ing period. With some power ram- panies. the oft-pel>ak hour Schedule Gan affect the demand charge Trie aft -peak times uSSuatly are holidays, Sundays, and from 10 pant. US $ a.m, dash/ It a: high demand aCCurs during 0-04-U hours, the demand enargie is I&Aff For example, if fie on -punk 6CMUdC313in& is SS.50 per kilowatt. the estt-peak charryr may only be !-:2 06 per ktidwait However. 1Rere, must be a separate dexr-r.rrid roger for the off-peak time period. it is, re ac;i- ble in fame Cases to delay fie high 6ei mand to me, oft -peak ndurf and rrrdfe some savine'S, Emwgy Charge The mrsasfoed one•rry :S me, taftt watt; consumed over a prried as Timer The basil unit of one kil6waif hour iS .i rr1.u1 of f ceo watts for a: period 6f T hrur The enerrTj Cnareys .4 ire rharf;o­w made for fin frAft power "d d4ftne, the rAlic.5 period TRe way to seep m.S enargc as tow as FoSSit ie IS sertip!y ten Yeej: tnrA,it W.O. aS low as, possebie There, are many R,rrs to ,aye Srnait amrurirs of energy that when adet-4 for eme r can eecrml a usn%.Cerlti►e savinrp Some of trrxe rre-tnr, is air. • Turn oft unniided I•eiirfs, • U•,n sm.rrter rv.04rye burr,:. fir er- amj;,:e, Le.$bt;rdsv-ile replaced au i!ii1- ,rr:/,.I.. - l=e�r�asx Yfi, Il98� 0 CITY OF KENAI I'M igrzya" 64 4"ff V. O, 80X 5f0 KEHAI, ALASKA 99611 TELEPHONE 413 - 7635 . ice,",.';' ;�t✓ i�/rrMv �• tMK S tJr S4r4, �an� Zw1an, City Cleric �.ai, A1a�l�a 99b11 Vrilten Ur5ver to Volverton's Appeal of Disciplinary Action Ve-zr Zro, IRlelans As-r,.�-.jt f w, 1bare been appointed as the City Manager's designee rain . i:nlrearton's appeal. The following is the written i�13. 3Svlversorias appeal that he filed with the City Clerk fa�mury y., 19$2, Slant of the items that Mr. Wolverton brings o<ss nn hn_-� appeal are :not really pertinent to the issue of his ��raua zatI-on, Elmn though some items are not pertinent, I will go � r iliQ letter and try to address each issue as Mr. Wolverton pre ate tivrn, besides answering Mr. Wolv+erton's questions, I a ro1d npe mre than liappr to answer any questions that the appeal tgard rmn:&bt lure on this xuhject. I do plan to present to the ap ala b.wxd wxjttsn eviditnce, oral testimony, and witnesses a n� ac�st�nsl as allowed in the personnel ordinance. SLR, 1solrer ai"ss p,,;ra;grnpJj entitled, "Background" and his first p9f1tjiyz of tbV `%VasVn forA ezi" is somewiat confusing, incorrect, �1 5 �g eyuerise, 1v fd losri g is the sequence of events, q fall C24mir r a" Alie f_in tely more ,accurate, Mr. Wolverton �tiaatc�4 Qr�dsiug in t-tv 5vv r Treatment Plant on march 3, 1976. I, Xvatj Agr'ngj1_-;0 s$atr"d to viurk for the City of Kenai as the Public on 03c1to1)rr 10, 1977, At that time, sic had two S;�r'✓�a ilreataoQ:it plc on t operators at tite plant. The other operator, �uasalu, ffza3 started in t31s se's^.er Treatment Plant just three �rr�tti%v i Lfo7�° 1 ssarvc.si tQ uorl, for the Cite. Jim tfolverton had opYr'vtnr�g the :>ew- r rr-ntnent Plant for one and a half years &>.'1 5anr111 stsrtvd at the plant, During this one and a half s3-m" pl.az.it xas .out of S:Qinpjjan,:e more than it eras in compliance. ,i�3 3 zt tian4, Slis S."tr r .Trs'a ment Plant was in an incredible mess. 1; ;9 1x� a a°6su t a4:ain�t the city of Kcsia! for being out of compliance r,:iyh s;;s Ss�:ses' T.eatl�ent rlunt effluent permit sshich amounted to ;,ter der fQr ea.cb Lay that we were in sson-compliance. The �o.<si?: r flee co ll: 113ye ix-t,11 in excess of o:se million .collars. 0 Mrs. Janet Whelan, City Clerk Page 2 February 26, 1982 I met with the operators, and we set about cleaning up the plant and getting into compliance. After much hard work and determination, the plant did start meeting the effluent limitations set by EPA. Unfortunately, Mr. Wolverton did not perform his share of the duties, and becasue of it, he did not receive his 1978 merit increase. ,fr. Wolverton did receive his 1979 and 1980 merit increases mainly due to the completion of correspondence and workshop courses that the City of Kenai was making available to him. His book knowledge did increase, but unfortunately, he has been unable and/or unwilling to apply that to his work. Prior to my trip outside during the latter part of January, 1982, I asked Jim Wolverton if it would be all right with him to wait until after I returned from my vacation in the latter part of February to do his evaluation. I explained that I wanted to incorporate CIUM Hill's feglings about what was happening at the Sewer Treatment Plant into the evaluation. Mr. Wolverton stated that there was no problem as far as he was concerned in waiting for this evaluation. Mr. Wolverton was aware that the evaluation for 1931 would be late, but he agreed to waiting until I returned from outside. I continued to explain that CH23%IHill had indicated to me their concern that Jim Wolverton could not handle the operation of the Sewer Treatment Plant and that I had my doubts too. I further explained that there might be some major changes when I returned. Mr. Wolverton wanted to know what kind of changes, to which I replied that there was a possibility that the City would try to find someone more mechanically minded and able to run the new Sewer Treatment Plant. On the first working day of my return, I was unable to reach Mr. Wolverton at the Sewer Treatment Plant to discuss his evaluation. Ile then took the second and third days off. On the fourth day, Friday, February 19,.1982, at 9 a.m., I talked with Mr. Wolverton about replacing him at the Sewer Treatment Plant. I explained that my decision was based upon my own obsei-vatioiis plus the rec:ommendatioii from the two different inspectors and the operator/trainer from C112M Itill and his fellow worker at the Sewer Treatment Plant. During this meeting, I not only mentioned his poor mechanical ability but his unwi 11 ingnc::s to do any work. I was during this meeting that Mr. Wolverton asked me about the possihlity of transfcring to another position within the City. I explained to him that the only position that I had available at this ti'110 was that of the Kennel 1lelper in the Animal Control. I went on to explain that it was a part-time job of only 14 hours per week; and only S4.7�) per hour. I did sav that I had hoped to make it a frill -time joh :it a higher rate of pay for next year's budget but that f did not c;arit to encourage him since the Council had turned we down on a similar request last year. Mr. Wolverton continued to express an interest in transfering to the animal (tv", Mrs. .Janet Whelan, Cit% Clerk Pace 3 February 26, 1982 Control Program. lie did say that he was involved with Soldotna's Animal Control Program at one time. Since Mr. Wolverton was hesitant and not too sure what lie wanted to do, I decided to give him until i tlhe next day that we were both working for him to give me his decision as to whether or not he was going to request a transfer. Later on that day, I received a note from Mr. Wolverton requesting a copy of CIIZNlHill's letter and a copy of his personnel evaluation. I called Air. Wolverton on the phone and told him that CIi21\1 hill's letter was here available for him. The personnel evaluation could very easily have been completed, but I explained that I had planned on waiting to see if he was going to request transfer to Animal Control so that the final evaluation and personnel transaction would _ read as a transfer rather than a termination. Mr. Wolverton indicated that there was no problem with that and in fact, said that, "it sounded like it would be better to wait." On February 22, 1982, which is Mr. Wolverton's day off, the City of Kenai received his appeal of disciplinary action. This gave me an indication that }he did not plan to request a transfer. On February 22, 1982, I completed Mr. Wolverton's evaluation by checking; disciplinary action on the evaluation form and recommending termination. The personnel transaction form that is attached to all evaluations was completed by checking dismissal. I wrote my February 22 letter of termination !- to %ir. Wolverton and on February 23, Mr. Wolverton, Mr. Brighton, and myself met to discuss his evaluation and termination. \Ir. Wolverton under his "Reasons for Appeal" states some instances that he feels that I have not followed the personnel regulations. His first reference is to Section 23.35.030, Paragraph (e) which states that I have not discussed with him his improper or inadequate performance. This is not correct in that I have discussed his inadequacy with him many times. In 1973, he did not get his merit increase for reasons very similar to those that have led uP to his termination. His 1-978 performance evaluation that was discussed with him thoroughly states, "Jim needs to work harder and not be afraid to get his hands dirty. There are two men in the Sewer Treatment Plant. Both should be doing their share of dirty work and yet I have never seen .Jim down in the basins or clarifiers cleanin,-. lie needs d to tackle the messier, dirty work harder and complete it on schedule. There has to be more observance to working hours. There have been times when }he was not at the Sei.er Treatment Plant or oil City business 3- but should have been." In 1979, 1 talked with Ili,:, man% tines about his sln•ihding many ltottrs ;tt.:i) from the Sewer Treatment Plant oil his own personal business. It was .luring that time period that I asked him to he sure to call .,- City Hall to let us know where he would be should 11e leave the plant. . Mrs. .Janet Whelan, City Clerk Paoc d February 26, 1982 r . n In 1980 anti 1981, 1 continually asked him to fret out and work in the Sewer Treatment Plant taking special note to watch the contractor while fie was working so that he scould have a better grasp of what the nee.: Sewer Treatment Plant was all about. Even though I continually asked Jim Wolverton to set out and work in the old Sewer Treatment Plant and observe the construction of the now Sower Treatment Plant, he was never more than a few feet from the office. In October 1981, the Sewer Treatment Plant inspector, Jim Maciariello, expressed to me how worried lie was over the future operation of the Sewer Treatment Plant. He stated to me that Mr.'Wolverton was doing very little and that it was going to take more than just Ken Siirila to keep the plant running properly. I had talked with Air. Wolverton prior to this date about his poor performance and talked with him again shortly after this date. In January, 1982, the discussion that I have already explained above took place concerning his inability to handle the job. The Sewer Treatment Plant has been in a period of construction for the last two years. It has not been until the last three months that I have been so drastically aware of Mr. Wolverton's incompetency in handling the plant. Based upon the above instances, Mr. Wolverton cannot very well say that I did not discuss any improper or inadequate performance on his part. Mr. Wolverton talks about Section 23.35.030 , Paragraph (d) of the Code inferring that I did not provide written notice of this disciplinary action. This is simply not so. That paragraph states that "the notice shall be given the employee at the time such action is taken." No action had been taken nor was taken until February 23, 1932 when Xr. Wolvorton's termination letter (his written notice of disciplinary action) was given to him. Mr. Wolverton filed his appeal prematurely. The tieing of the evaluation for Dar. Wolverton has been discus!:od earl icr in this letter. Mr, Wolverton did give his approval for the timing that the evaluation took place in. The Code does provide for evaluation sit the time of separation. Mr. Wolverton'.,; annual evaluation was combined with his evaluation at his time of separation. Section 25.45.030, Paragraph (a) of the Code statex that the rating officer shall normally he the employee's immediate supervisor. Since I am his immediate supervisor, and I am the one s;tso evaluated hint, I do not see his point. Maybe lie is concerned over 012M Hill's input, but a supervisor's evaluation may he base.l upon the information from any or many different sources. tar. Sichol.;on'y Iettcr was only one of many different reasons that i have for basins; my decision of Mr. lsolverton's termination. i might point out that not only Mrs. Janet 10ivlan, (tL.%, Clcrk Page S February 26, 1982 Mr. Nicholson, but '-fr. Maciariello, and %fr. Siirila all had concerns about damage and operational problems at the Sewer Treatment Plant caused by %Ir. Wolverton. C112}I lli l l's contract does provide for operator training in the new Sewer Treatment Plant and I consider operator evaluation as part of this operator training. Mr. Wolverton's reference to Section 23.45.050 of the Ordinance and the statement that I have not provided two consecutive unsatisfactory performance ratings arc really not pertinent to his appeal since two unsatisfactory evaluations may be a basis for dismissal i)ut there are also many other grounds for dismissal. ;fr. Wolverton's reference to Section 23.45.060 concerning performance evaluations is not pertinent to an evaluation on termination. This Section concerns an appeal for an evaluation of an employee that is still remaining with the City and calls for a decision by the City Manager not the Appeals Board. On Pages 3 and 4 of Mr. Wolverton's appeal he attacks the firm of i C112M bill. lie insinuates that the firm of CH2M Hill operates improperly, attacks the integrity of their design ability, and finally questions their honesty. The items listed on Pages 3 and 4 really • should be answered by Mr. Gordon Nicholson of CH2M hill. Unfortunately, Mr. Nicholson is on vacation and unavailable at this time. Since i the answers to Mr. Wolverton's appeal of disciplinary action has to come within five working days, I will attempt to address these items on a general basis. The firm of C112M lbill was the design engineering firm for the new Sewer Treatment Plant and also the construction inspectors for the plant. Mr. Gordon Nicholson, of C112M hill, was the design engineer for the plant and also the resident construction inspector during 1980. Mr. Jim Maciariello was the resident construction inspector during 1981. fir. Nicholson may have very likely told Mr. Wolverton that C112M hill would not do his work during; construction. i doubt very much that Mr. Nicholson would have said that they were not going to bet involved in the operation since C11_M Hill had the responsibility for coordinating the old Sewer 'Treatment Plant and the new Sewer Treatment Plant operation during the construction of the plant and also during the operator training. Evidently, Mr. Wolverton talked to Loren Leman of CII-'M Hill but unfortunately, I have no knowledge of this conversation. I .icy know that fir. Leman has not been directly involved with the construction of the Sewer Treatment Plant. The next paragraph of Mr. Wolverton's appeal tallhs about all April :i, 19SI issue of Water Pollution Control Federation's Publication called, "Ili Alli ;ht:.." I have read the article that he has included, and T :iFt sRY7c hat confused as to what he is trying to say. '►here have been times when :yeti Si it i la bi:►s asked Jim Wolverton to do some work around the Sewer rreatmen: Plant and has i Ctrs. Janet Who Iin, CitN Clerk Page 6 February 26, 198-' received the reply from Mr. Wolverton that lie is not a maintenance man but an operator-. Mlaybe he is trying to imply here that he is an operator and sh:.uldn't be rcquricd to get his hands dirty in maintaining the plant. The article talks about equipment breakdown and that many manufacturers of Sewer Treatment Plant equipment do not manufacture a good quality product. Surely, Mr. Wolverton is not suggesting that his problem stems from poorly manufactured equipment? The article continues to say, "Some consultant engineers, who have never worked in, or ran a treatment plant, are in unofficial 'cahoots' with the manufacturers of shoddy equipment." The article continues and says, "Just as there are too many manufacturers unfit to build and sell anything, there are also engineers incompetent to design a two-holer." Surely Mr. Wolverton isn't suggesting that this is the case. The article states in the second paragraph on Page 11, "There are lazy, incompetent operators. They should be rooted out and replaced. But I don't believe 0 £, M is necessarily the indicator that will identify them--110" will, perhaps, more than 11D1." However, a number of "poor" operators might be good operators if they had something to work with. Don't use 0 f, M with the operators built-in vulnerability to poor design and junk machinery as the judgment factor." Maybe that is the part of the article that Mr. Wolverton is trying to point out. I do want to point out though that the City of Kenai did instruct CH2M Hill that low maintenance costs were a high goal in designing the Sewer Treatment Plant. I feel that CH2M Hill has done a good job in doing just that. After reading the article and the paragraph that Mr. Wolverton has written in reference to the article, I an, very much confused. The article is written by an operator who says don't blame the operators for poorly manufactured equipment, but Mr. Wolverton is trying to use the article to say that C112M Bill is trying to direct the City Administration's attention away fro m design problems and the design problems that lie lists do not have anything to do with the manufacturers of equipment. The next five items that he lists are what lie think.; are design Problems in our new Sewer Treatment Plant. It is at this point that I should point out that C11-7-1 Ili ll is probably the foremost expert in the field of wastewater treatment plaint design. During the design phase of the Sewer Treatment Plant, the City of Kenai was given preliminary and final drawings of the Plant. Copies of these preliminary drawings and final drawings were given to the Sewer Treatment Plant operators by the City :Administration for their comments, changes, additions, or whatever. "rile only changes made to the preliminary drawings were fairly minor, none of the fire listed items were iacntioned by Mr. Wolverton at that time. 1 might al_o •point out that the desi;,n plans were approved by the Alaska Department of Environ:,rental Conservation. This State agency leas experts iii the field of wastewater treatment that go over sewer treatmcr.t plant designs with a fine toothed corib. lop" 13 ®Y - Mrs. .1:lnet 1thelan, City Clerk Page 7 February 26, 1982 Eighty seven and a half percent (871;",) of the cost of the new Sewer Treatment Plant is funded by EPA and DEC. The five areas that Mr. Wolverton has listed as design errors is just another example of how Mr. Wolverton is completely out of touch with the operation of the Sewer Treatment Plant. I will attempt to give a brief explanation for each one of the five points, but I would like to reserve the opportunity for CI12,%1 Hill to properly address each item at a later date. 1. The digester/blowers and related piping is necessary to prevent freeing during periods of extremely cold temperatures. The City of Kenai has been very fortunate in the last few years of not having to have to deal with long, cold winters, but should this ever occur, and we were not protected as we are, the plant would suffer possible damage and improper treatment. 2. CH2M Hill and ADEC felt that the chlorine building, cylinders, and related piping was a necessity and that is why it was designed into the plant. Mr. Wolverton then talks about the requirement for chlorine in the effluent which was being added prior to 1977. The chlorine added at that time was for a completely different reason. fir. Wolverton is wrong if he thinks that powdered chlorine would be a better way to go. Powdered chlorine is not only expensive and hard to handle but can be very dangerous. 3. 01r. Wolverton may think that the septage receiving station is poorly designed because he doesn't know how to operate or maintain :t. The receiving station sat idle all throul;ll the hinter and has not been used, heated, or operated, the water in it has turned to ice. Mr. Wolverton has asked to place a space heater in the tank to thaur it out but was unable to accomplish that task. d. Diester/blowers. During the start up of the new Sewer Treatment Plant, we experienced a period of time where there was a considerable amount of foan► forming; in the Aeration b:l::itts. This foaul was caused by the six month_; of sludge that built ttp ill the plant since we were unable to waste. Kett Siirila, the present Sewer Treatment Plant Operator has been able to reduce the sludge l)lanket and the foam in the aeration basins to the proper operating level. S. 'There are two conveyer belts in the plant to carry effluent screenings to the slud,c trailer. 1 :tm not awarL• of any manufacturer's statements that these belts need 2-1-hotir attention al';; an alarn syster..l. There have been no I)roblcros uitll these belts :Ind I don't atlticipate :Illy. If the rnanuiacturer made this statement, Mr. t:olverton sltoiilkl have contacted me immedi:itely so that it could hart been straightened otit at the time the inattu .1cturer representative was here. - -:=1 Mrs. Janet Whelan, City Clerk Page 3 February 26, 1982 This next statement was quite a shock to me and seems very much out of character for Mr. Wolverton. I realize that Mr. Wolverton maybe grasping at straws but this is somewhat unexcusable. If Mr. Wolverton has had any knoulcdge of any fraudulent or illegal dealings, he should have inforned me immediately. I have no idea what he is talking about when he says, "It may be my termination would draw attention away from the large amounts of cash that are being passed under the table as well as away from TCI's means of taking tax write offs on this project." I have complete faith in C112M Hill's honesty and am very anxious to question fir. Wolverton as to how in the world he could justify making such a statement. I am just as curious to find out what he means by TCI, the contractor, being able to take some kind of a tax write off on this proj-ect. Attached to this letter is a copy of Mr. Wolverton's evaluation and a copy of Mr. Wolverton's letter of termination. Sincerely, DD .I..�IL• �, �rc.Gvi.' Keith Kornelis, Director Department of Public Works KK cc: James Wolverton I 1 E C CITY OF KENAI " ad G?apd-ai 4 4"a' P. O. SOX $80 KENAI. ALASKA 99611 TELEPHONE 283 . 7533 Q March 1 1982 f ' TO: City Clerk, Janet Whelan FROM: Keith Kornelis, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Written Answer to Wolverton's Appeal of Disciplinary action I have just received the attached memo from Jim Maciariello, of CII2M bill answering the design questions Mr. Wolverton mentions in his appeal letter. Mr. Jim Maciariello was the 1981 construction inspector for the Sewer Treatment Plant. KF: - i i , �%•i�N.GQ-vlfis tic-r!rf �h..�.C1!`„� .�� ./�-f'tP ��%" � �`�F ,�iclLtyL �'ycC'.G'Sd u�-• ur-I- ,/',�c!'ir.�j al.>��4l� Ca:2�ty= ��.'�4«1i�1 �1C ,.��/�C•r� ..D/•ri� �z�� CE"�'L'G�v� ��t.G C�j -l--L y � �,/ ✓: c�:. G!.� �'l L'tJ•:Jc�.�' 72� �!'�'t•�i7?ljrs'f� ���� ���'�'�w siL: ���C�!!%/J��., !'rl'U ,�.L �.At� r ✓" s ..� r s.�'t' Gtil�� �KLL /.�� yt �:�ltii�flt�=� G' i '�'� �s� i 704 eZ, Aloe 'Ur4 ;n AAA- 4-yn Ata Al& —lot 'Zu 464W A47 W41V-4c Iola, lee - "le wt��•�r•�ww�ww� I ", .-i r A _� _ . _.._.._.. _. �L•'t[- (;CiL�� 1, ,,Y�t��T ���...1ttc.��LG�Gc�IL.I.. _ Lv'-/L.�-GG�, r_.�GS''!�1/% � _ _. .. ... - - - --''� � i1 �,u•L •Q.,cjkLt`W,L�7'1 � _ Gta.:- _K°,71-�r-u,/s�l.:L. __ �1 .. �1'�J . -- -- - - - .. __ __/�^ate- /)j�t�',':c/.-�,.,z� �:n.� .. �,c,-r.,�-f.,�.� . ,,�•..� .«�L� -----..._�._ !�'+-L CLIP- .�%•wv-C.6� ��.c.¢i»•r�,.� G9�r6� �� �-�u�L IAI /,tc�(� /h,,�, .�•'4tc�f:•n,,�sLf ,a.cc.�� _ a.� � �-�usA:.ti� ��. . A-n! lN�i.C. �c.� .. �i;�'vA iJ_ aj�w /y�P1Le` /�'�"•a'u .li%�ca'yr��i�r�y� ��2�1+ea�- JC4""4�1 i - i _ a? LH /! -v- i INS HI LL engineers planners economists scientists March 23, 1982 K15054.A0 Keith Kornelis Public Works Director City of Kenai Box 580 Kenai, AK 99611 Dear Keith: Subject: Kenai Sewage Treatment Plant Expansion This letter is in response to Mr. James Wolverton's allegations of five design errors at the expanded Kenai Sewage Treatment Plant. Mr. Wolverton's allegations are presented in his disci- plinary action appeal letter dated February 22, 1982. I will briefly paraphrase and respond to each of Mr. Wolverton's five allegations. Allegation No. 1: The digester boiler and related piping is not needed to prevent digester freezing. Response: The purpose of digester heating is not to prevent freezing, but rather to keep an optimum temperature for microbial activity. The digester bacteria stabilize the excess solids produced in the secondary treatment activated sludge system. The bacteria must have favorable environment conditions to do this. Temperature is one of those conditions. As the digester temperature decreases, the bacteria activity rate decreases, requiring more time for the bacteria to do their job. A general rule of thumb is: Each 10OF drop in digester temperature reduces the bacteria activity rate by one-half. Stated differently, if the digester is operated at 50°F rather than the design temperature of 60°F, the digester would have to be twice the present size. This would provide sufficient capacity and detention time to allow the bacteria adequate time to stabilize the solids at the lower level of microbial activity. The digester is now operating near 60OF without using the digester boiler system. This is because the plant is not presently operating at design capacity and the daily amount of waste solids being pumped to the digester is minimal. The heat transferred by the digester compressed air is presently sufficient to heat the digester. As the plant nears design capacity and Cwv&lU$ office IWO S.W. Westam Blvd.. PO. Box 42& COIYIII6. Orezon 97330 503i752-4271 Cable. CMZM C%O Keith Kornelis Page 2 March 23, 1982 K15054.A0 the amount of daily waste solids pumped to the digester increases, supplemental digester heat will be required. The digester boiler system will provide the added heat. Allegation No. 2: The chlorination facility is unnecessary for filamentous bacteria control. Filamentous bacteria can be prevented by "good" operator control. Should filamentous bacteria occur, they can be controlled by adding HTH powder or ferric chloride powder. Response: Excessive amounts of filamentous bacteria in a secondary treatment system can cause "bulking" in the secondary clarifiers. This "bulking" may lead to a reduction of treatment efficiency and a violation of the plant discharge permit. Good process control can generally keep the amount of filamentous bacteria to an acceptable level. However, some variables which may cause an increase of filamentous bacteria are beyond the of control of the operator. Examples are organic shock loadings, hydraulic overloading, and toxic spills. Prudent design requires providing the operator with the tools to control increases in filamentous bacteria caused by these variables. Chlorination of the return activated sludge is the most commonly accepted method for controlling the amount of filamentous bacteria in an activated sludge system. This is the method provided at the expanded Kenai Sewage Treatment. During the design stage, gaseous chlorine was determined to be the most desirable form of chlorine to use. Adding powdered chlorine, commonly referred to as HTH, to the aeration basins, as recommended by Mr. Wolverton, is not eco- nomical, could not be adequately regulated, and could be a ` health hazard to the operators. Ferric chloride, the coagulant or settling aid recommended by Mr. Wolverton, is not effective in controlling the amount of filamentous bacteria. Ferric chloride can be effective in managing excessive amounts of filamentous bacteria for a short term. Ferric chloride for this purpose is analogous to pain medication; it makes the injury more tolerable but does not help the healing process. Allegation No. 3: The septage receiving station is unuseable in the winter because of freezing. Response: All aboveground piping at the septage facility is heat traced and insulated to prevent freezing. Keith Kornelis Page 3 March 23, 1982 K15054.A0 The belowground septage holding vault does not have to have freeze protection. Each time a septic tank pumper empties his truck contents into the holding vault, the treatment plant operator should pump the vault contents into the digester. Granted, if the operator does not do this, the vault contents could freeze. The amount of liquid, about 40 gallons, which stays in the bottom of the vault and cannot be pumped to the digester, may freeze during cold weather. However, this liquid will melt when the next load of septic tank contents is emptied into the vault, permitting normal operation of the septage facility. Allegation No. 4: The digester blowers must be variable -speed blowers, rather than constant -speed blowers, to prevent digester foaming. Response: The cause of digester foaming is not the blowers, either variable or constant speed blowers, but instead is the result of the digester sludge being very old. Prior to start-up of the entire plant, excess solids could not be removed from the digester because the sludge dewatering equipment was inoperable. Solids were kept in the digester, under aeration, for about 6 months. Biological solids break down under such conditions, often becoming "light and fluffy." Aeration which is needed for biological activity, can aggrevate the situation by causing excessive foaming. I understand the solids dewatering equipment is now operational, digester solids have been removed, and excessive digester foaming is no longer a problem. Allegation No. 5: The influent screenings conveyors should have a failure alarm system if not attended 24 hours per day. Response: Attached is a copy of the manufacturer's letter of certification for the conveyors. I discussed the operation of the conveyors with the manufacturer's representative at the time of his visit to the Kenai Sewage Treatment Plant. Require- ments for and types of conveyor failure alarms were specifically discussed. The treatment plant operators and construction contractor were present during a portion of the discussions. Recognizing the conveyors were already installed, the added cost of installing the alarms, the conveyors each serve as redundant units, and the conveyors will operate on a intermittant cycle, I decided not to recommend installing failure alarms on each conveyor. j Keith Kornelis I Page 4 March 23, 1982 K15054.A0 After receiving Mr. Wolverton's letter, I telephoned the conveyor manufacturer to reassess my previous decision. A copy of the telephone conservation record is attached. Based upon this telephone conversation, the above cited reasons, and now 3 months of trouble -free operation, I believe my decision to not recommend Installing conveyor failure alarms was appropriate. Mr. Wolverton, in his letter of appeal, makes reference to "cash being passed under the table" and tax write-offs. I do not know what he is referring to. If you have a clarification or more information concerning this allegation, I would like to know the specifics. Mr. Wolverton has also made reference to me and my responsi- bilities as a resident engineer on the Kenai Sewage Treatment Plant project. I would like to respond in this letter to these statements. Mr. Wolverton states that in 197.9 I said CH2M HILL would not become involved with the treatment plant operators in the performance of their duties. This is essentially correct, in that I was not there to supervise their daily activities. M't Xesponsibility, as it relates to plant operations, was primarily, but not exclusively, to oversee the construction sequencing and=, operational changes from the old treatment plant to the new one. However, after having been at the treatment plant for 6 months during construction and observing the plant operators daily during the course of my work, I was able to evaluate the performance of each treatment plant operator. Having recognized this, you requested from me a performance evaluation of each plant operator. I see the request and response as being proper. Mr. Wolverton infers my evaluation of the plant operators was not within the scope of CH2M HILL's contract with the City nor was it authorized by Mr. Loren Leman, our Project Administrator. I responded to your request as I would to any other contract special service or other service request that we invariably receive from owners on our projects. Should you have any questions concerning my response to Mr. Wolverton's five design error allegations, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sin rgl�y,`` Gordon A. Nicholson Jd/TC60B cc: Loren Leman i Jim Maciariello i i i -- F �;- -7iA7-4WACTURFRS OF "BUCK-EV PRODUCTS '01435,0600 THE BUCKET ELEVATOR COMPANY P. 0. 13OX :36, 24 COMMERCE STREET CHATHAM. NEW JERSEY 019.18 ti December 21, 1981 Tanana Mechanical Inc. ,1601 East 84th Court, Suite 101 Anchorage, Alaska 99502 Attn: Mr. Keith 'oWch He: Serial No's CA-3216 Rems*106, 107 and 406 Conveyors Kenai, Alaska Your P.O. 02375 Gentlemen: -I have inspected the installation of the subject conveyors and have found �the installation to be satisfactory. Having operated these units for a pericd of 24 hours at the job site, them were no apparent prcblems with their operation. I have instructed the plant operators, Jim Wolverton and Man Silrila, on the operaticn and maintenance of these units and feel that they understand these procedures. Shank you for your help and cooperation during, aW visit. Very truly yours. VE BUCKET MEIATOR Cul-TANY r br ,,,ec;eive .1c.1 T.C.I. LTO. i lCH2.`1: TELEPHONE CONVERSATION RECORD .6HILL Date --:LL�l Wiz._.Time • + 1'21 ap.m. Phone No. � w )�o Project No. :_ ` a -'To -- O From d.> L«.C.'r �. q • Cc*. O To .From �o.Lnoa N,�C�i��or� L�•^c�. / Subject — (L+c ti •� + Sew �.:. Z �, .ii�1TMC aT Y •v C�cA•.I V It u •2. 1 T� . S t .a E O G7 P •C L A e• . p.•y cb� A. Irk.1t+ T ✓vCt T�•�. t� �..��.ac+v ► S�+Z%L ZN,-0.C.S CONv�Y �•LS AT �`..�vc., of �a•� y1p+.�'`�n�5 (Z�:..C�oti.T�O "p+�r•7 .Gj?c.Lr�T•c:� UrvATT �wi qE.D Cc�NT � ti.v u`1S `.Y 0.?�cta►T • �►G.-- C;;..+vv+c.. Y c�ZS _ A%,AfZrA S A U. -mg + (k<A. tb SLE 3 �+ � ,.� nT '2L. CZ- %J. 14 AP'? S1 1�-r C•.i S . (,�;,,�,LL c %L- r� v t _.a E �. Lc�L•o �., 7c•ia S'v�t�t� A•v� ��C.LT �,++��'� Sw,T_CSL'� �JW��ti + N 1L �, .. + S 1 Alo G Ma i1 NC- •C . 'TAL-N 1kA%j VNF�TTE.N nfc� IevSn AL�/J •OUP W \T H wtizWc�v'i la•Lu(LC A j:b-L t-.> 1 ;"J AC. t 'T2G A- Anc.v'T ?V>svT G�2,T ,t`.. S`n' ST - M (I: 14C 2>;CA``S 5,�`=��. vct "^c ��Cj�_r�b+L>T`� �� a:.��1M`n. •,ram! •'— ►i tV\�/ 5 �. rr 4tv :. `esG TG7•2. P'v7 �jVtL.IA .7+t.�i RE i.. 73 =;-I• VW4WS?:V.' �-,IWWW.V4 T CITY OF KENAI ARBITRATION BOARD DECISION Appeal from Termination by James N. Wolverton On March 26. 1982 the City of Kenai Personr.al Arbitration Board comes forth with the following decision on the Personnel Appeal (See. 23.35-034) for former City employee Jim Wolverton. It is this Boards decision that Mr. Jim Wolverton's termination stands. The following facts presented before this Board brought us to the above determination: 1) that there was insubordination in Mr. Wolverton's case. 2) that he was absent from work an numerous occasions without first notifying and securing permission from his supervisor, 3) that he was habitually absent or tardy from his job. 4) that he demonstrated an inability and unwillingness to perform his job. 5) we find that the City of Kenai was correct in following the personnel ordinances. If within the legal scope and power of this Board it is the unanimous iii decision of the Board to make the following recommendations for consideration by the City of Kenai. 1) that Mr. Jim Wolverton be offered the opportunity to submit a letter of resignation including a letter of waiver for rehiring as a Waste Treatment Operator for the City of Kenai. This is 0 10 requested in order that Mr. Wolverton's future employment will be enhanced. However, we do note that Mr. Wolverton must take a strong hard look at his work style. 2) We feel to diminish further problems in any future hearings that the City of Kenai recommend to department heads the following: p /r Arbitration Board Doicision Page 2 A) make all duties clear through job descriptions at the time of employment. B) that job announcements be clear as to qualifications required, C) that any discussion of job performance between Supervisor and Employee be noted and dated an utilized at year end evaluations and attached to those evaluations. _ ....� City of Kenai Arbitration Board: %f ::. ".✓•"w.:.'::'• I •4 ATTEST: _•�� _ , __,__. Janet A. Loper. Acting City Clerk DATE: i. . ' March 26, 1982 • Wes, '�Mr••� �.w :f..t:L .. • 1 Lance Cox. Spokesgai� a �nn t. (!% a. Rogen' eks, Board Member Chester Cone,BoArd Member CAPITAL IN(PRove mMIT PROJECTS PARKS i RECREATION , Ball Fields - Youth Center lop $ 600 Water Fountains 12,000 Fencing at Little League Fields 1,500 seeding 23,900 Parking 81000 Sidewalks 4,000 Landscaping 50.000 ON-$12,000 Enclose Ramp Area 10,000 Glass Windows for raquetball courts " 15,400 Concession stands (192 sq. ft. at $80) Park Improvements Old Town 4th St. Beaver Cr. Municipal E. Kenai $ 15,000 Multipurpose Courts X X X - 3,000 Basketball goals X(2) X(2) X(2) - - 61000 Fencing X - - - 22,000 open field areas (grassed) - X X - - DUn. 5,000 sq. yds. Tap soil 6 prep.) 51000 Water lines i fountains - 2,000 3,000 - - 6,000 Parking Areas _ 7,500 1,000 - 7,500 2,500 Barrier on Hill 2,500 8,000 Playground equipment 3,500 5,000 9,500 5,000 5,000 61000 Shelters 2,000 2,000 2,000 - - 4,500 Culvert t trail - - - - 4,500 2,400 Grills X X X X X -Tables - - X X X � 38 400 (Spur Park) or (East Kenai Clearing) I $150,000 $800,000 Gymnasium 50,000 Ryans Creek Clearing - fitness trail t picnic area • April 7, 1982 Villiam Brighton City of Kenai City Manager Dear .Sir: I am the current owner of lots five, six, seven, and eight block one Simpson sub. (Parcel numbers 045-150-59 thru 045-t50-62). I propose to the City of Kenai to instal water and sewar lines under Borealis st./Steelhead ct. The length of the lines would extend aproxamently 590 feet (one block) and start at Tinker Lane. This would be a large expense to an individual, but a service to at least eleven other properties. The City of Kenai having at its disposal an equitable means of distributing the costs. I am looking forward to your response. Sincerly, Steven R. Crites Box 4142 Kenai, Ak. ph. 283.7065 '.1 .�� kT. ,...�-•„-.,;may carmen Vincent gintoll, architect 0ox 4625 professional building suite 110 ena , alaska 99611 907 283.7732 April 7th 1982 KENA I SENIOR -C 1 T I ZEN rS COMMUNITY CENTER DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE —FINAL COST SUMMARY CONSTRUCTION COST $667,762 (Clark -Graves Est) MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING 86,250 -_ ELECTRICAL 56,120 KITCHEN 48,500 TOTAL ----- 1;-----5858,632 10% CONTINGENCY 85.863 GRAND TOTAL -------- $9440,495 $944,495 DELETE PORTECOCHERE - -E 25,200• DELETE SOLARIUM ->; 35,600 TOTAL DELETE - 60,200 -E 60,200 E884,295 IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE SOLARIUM AND PORTECOCHERE BE ISSUED AS • ADDITVE ALTERNATES. -� w r ' ! r� I I I f I I f ra i i KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS COMMUNITY CENTER I ''. CARMEN VINCENT GINTOLI, ARCHITECT i SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE f r ! CLARK-GRAVES, INC. Anchorage, Alaska i is r s' i ! J (i i l,. 4 � i'J i� KM SEKOM CrIT LL® CaNJ lyys CENIER StMM EURM DIVISMM Qg1S -- $140,844.00 W r045.00 i $47,606.00 5-HOW ,180.00 8-D0 && S4i $104r301.00 $99r287.00 9-F� $78r851.00 $118,050.00 rZ69.00 u' r3C 7.00 nft�� 3,14,15b16 �71AL ffiAi9�D Q3 $741,957.00. ARUL 6s, IM i 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337.2767 I 1-GENERAL REQIJIRIIK@TtB Engineering Supervision Building Permit submittals Schedule Quality Control Expediting Freight Financing Equipment Reserve Temporary Utilities Temporary Field Facilities Final � up KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCFNP Gn0DLI, AT=ITECT SaIEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 1 QUANTITY DESCR. MATERIAL UNIT 1 month 6 months $500.00 1 job $3,000.00 1 job $500.00 1 job $2,000.00 1 job $1,500.00 6 months $500.00 508,000 lbs $0.20 8 months $1r000.00 6 months $4,000.00 8 months $500.00 8 months $400.00 1 job $100.00 1 job $500.00 10% Cb9RK-GR9VES,1A 10% LABOR RATE $3r000.00 $5,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $500.00 $50.00 $150.00 $i f000.00 $1,000.00 10% MATERIAL COST $0.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $500.00 $2r000.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $24,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,200.00 $100.00 $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $62,800.00 $6,280.00 $69,080.00 LABOR COST $3,000.00 $30,000.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $12,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $400.00 $1,200.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $53r600.00 $5,360.00 $58,960.00 TDM COST $3r000.00 $33,000.00 03,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $11500.00 $0.00 $15000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $27,000.00 $4r400.00 $4400.00 $1,100.00 01,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $116r400.00 $11,640.00 $128040.00 $12r804.00 $140,844.00 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337-2767 UNAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CALMEN Vnxm GI=LI, AWHITECT SC12MATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 2 2-SIR�UIiit QU11N1'ITY SUBOONntACT DESCZt. UNIT SUBOONMRACT COST Clearing & Grubbing Rough Excavation 50,000 2,500 of $0.05 $0.00 52,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fill & Grading Curbs &Sidewalks 5 000 sf $4.00 $7.00 $10,000.00 $35,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 1"200 50 cy $3.50 $20.00 $4,200.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 - - Asphalt C�oncrete 75 $4; pT 1.57. a o $0.00 $0.00 00.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 PAGE WUU $0.00 A=SDW FACMRS $53,000.00 $0.00 i AA7 snw ANoams $7,950.00 $0.00 T RBEfl $60,950.00 $0.00 �flZNGPNCY 108 Y mm Eammm . ,'• i DAME Vr EViiYYAiE i CLPRK-GR vEg. , w �r f; I TMZ,! O*i $0.00,' $2,900.00 $10,000.00� $35,000.00� $4,200,00 $1,O00.00� 6368-.r6A�' $0.00 I $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 j $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $53,000.00' $7,950.00 060,950.00 $6,095.00 $67,045.00 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 WN �'.ixi. � i, "aJ•, ..a • _. ,....... _ � ..., .- . .,�.. . , . , , , , .... . _ . . - ..-. _.�.. ....... - - --•-�- a =a�.""���"�i KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCE TP GINTOLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 3 1 Y 3-CONCRETE QUANTITY DESCR. MATERIAL UNIT LABOR RATE MATERIAL COST LABOR COST 'ANAL i COST $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Footings & Foundation Wall 18 Cy $93.00 $60.00 $1,674.00 $1,080.00 $2,754.00 i Main Building Slab 76 Cy $93.00 $50.00 $7,068.00 $3,800.00 $10,868.00 Solarium Slab 6 Cy $93.00 $50.00 $558.00 $300.00 $858.00 Portocochere Slab 14 cy $93.00 $50.00 $1,302.00 $700.00 $2,002.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 j _ Forms, Footing 2,000 bf $0.30 $0.50 $600.00 $1,000.00 $1,600.00 Fors, Foundation 3,500 of $1.00 $0.30 $3,500.00 $1450.00 $4,550.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 I "teal 4,000 lbs $0.40 $0.50 $1,600.00 $2,000.00 $3t600.00 Mesh 10,000 sf $0.25 $0.10 $2,500.00 $1,000.00 $3,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ' ' Finish 80,000 of $0.05 $0.40 $400.00 $3,200.00 $3,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 � $0.00 • $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 40.00 $0.00 ; PAGE TOTALS $19,202.00 $14,130.00 $33,332.010 A=STM TP FACTORS 15% 50% ; A=SDW ANDWIS $2,880.30 $7,065.00 $9,945.30 FBrIlKATEfl COST $22,082.30 $21,195.00 $43,27730 i raxommimm CON!'INGENcr 10% $4,327:73 ` TDM ESPIN M $47,605.03 . DAM OF ESTIMATE APRIL 6, 1982 ``•` CLRRK-GRRVE91AC. 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 3372767 i KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CFNM CARMEN Vncw Gnmm, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 4 SUBCONTRACT LABOR MATERIAL LABOR 'TOTAL 4-MAS0W QUANl'ITY DESCR. UNIT RASE COST COST �9r Concrete Masonry Units 11,630 PAGE 'AyMW - - AWUSDm FAMRS ADJU8116F2TP AbiO M zvznvm Om nommmi) commmom 10% TOM 207nm DATE OF ESImE CLARK-GRRVE5ovc of $3.50 $0.00 15$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,705.00 $0.00 $5r705.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 a $0.00 $0.00 $0:00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 i $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 { $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 .$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5o705.00 $0.00 $5,705.00 50% $855.75 $0.00 $855.75 $6,560.75 $0.00 $6,560.75 I $7,256.08 6.83 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337-2767 i KM SENIOR CITIZW CENTER CARMF.Rd VINCENT GMLI, ARMITE(T saiMyMC ESTIMATET PAGE 5 MATERIAL LABOR QUANTITY DESCR. UNIT RATE 1 allowance $2,000.00 $1,000.00 10% CLARK-GRPVF5,4c, •r i t 5 i 15% 50% MATERIAL LABOR 00sr con TmL cost $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $1000.00 $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 ! $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 t $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 , $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 �• $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 i $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $1000.00 03,000.00 $300.00 $500.00 $800.00 l $2,300.00 $1,500.00 $31800.00 $380.00 j $4,180.00 i APRI , 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337.2767 I KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENMR CARMEN VnMU GI mi. ARMITECT SCHEMAMC ESTIMATE PAGE 6 MAME'RTAL QUANTITY DESCR. UNIT Prwdng Lumber 17,000 bf $0.50 Wood Siding 3,500 of $1.20 Pinish Wood Surfaces 1,000 bf $2.00 Roof Plywood 10,000 of $0.50 Portocochere Soffit 1,000 sf $1.00 16, mn 4,920 if $3.00 Sf Wood Decking (Stoop & Porto) 12,000 bf $0.45 Nails & Praming Accessories 1,000 lbs $1.00 10% ! iH 11I CLRRK-GRRVE51AC 15% LABOR RATE $0.80 $0.80 $1.00 $0.40 $0.60 $1.00 $0.35 50% MATERIAL COW $0.00 $0.00 $8,500.00 $4,200.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $14,760.00 $0.00 $5,400.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 01,860.00 $6,279.00 $46,139.00 �� I� con i TDM ASP $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $13,600.00 $22,100.00 s $2,800.00 $7,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,000.00 $9,000.00 $600.00 $1400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,920.00 $19,680.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,200.00 $9,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 -$0.00 $0.00 .$0.00 $0.00 a $31,120.00 $72,980.00 $15,560.00 $21,839.00 $46,680.00 $94,819,00 $9,481.90 ; $104,300.90 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENM CAR= Vnxm GnmLI, ARC n7m saiE VATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 7 7-7HW%AL & MOISTURE CWWL QUANTITY DESCR. MATERIAL UNIT LABOR RATE Gype= Sheathing 4,500 of $0.35 $0.40 Vapor Barrier 20,000 sf $0.05 $0.10 Wall Insulation 4,000 of $0.50 $0,15 Ceiling Insulation 81,000 Sf $0.90 00.20 Sound -proof Insulation 11000 of $0.30 00.10 Metal Roofing (w/soffit etc.) 10,000 of $4.00 $1.25 Built-up Roof - 11000 of $1.50 $0.50 f0 ;44" •;" fYlyl; Yi Cb9RK-GRPVE94w. a r 15% 50% MATERIAL COST $0.00 $1,575.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $7,200.00 $300.00 $0.00 $40,000.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $53,575.00 08,036.25 $61,011.25 COST COST $0.00 $0.00 $1,800.00 $3,375:00 $2,000.00 $3,000.00 $600.00 $2400.00 I� 61,600.00 $8,800000 !, 0100.00 $400.00 !� j $0.00 $0.00 $12,500.00 $52,500:00 $500.00 02,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 i $0.00 $0.00 ' $0.00 $0.00 4 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,100.00 $72,675.00 $9,550.00 $17,586.25 $28450.00 $90,261.25 $9,026.13 $99,287.38 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 3372767 i i J 1 j KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER 1 CARMEN Vn CEJT GnWLI, ARCfiITE(.T SCHEMA1IC ESTIMATE � PAGE 8 8-DOORS & WINDOWS QUANTITY DESCR. MATERIAL LABOR UNIT RATE MATERIAL $OCOS LABOR am $ Tom C $0 OS i Exterior Doors (w/frames) 9 18 ea $300.00 $150.00 $250.00 $120.00 $2,700.00 $4,500.00 $1,350.00 $2,160.00 $4,050.00 $6,660.00 Interior Doors (w/frames) ea $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Windows 450 350 of sf $22.00 $3.00 $12.00 $5.00 $90900.00 $4,200.00 $1,350.00 $1,750.00 $11,250.00 $5,950.00 Re -liter $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Kitchen Paw -through 1 ea $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 $600.00 $0.00 { solarium Glass 580 of $40.00 $3.00 $23,200.00 $0.00 $1,740.00 $0.00 $24,940.00 $0.00 Hardware 25 Sets $250.00 $0.00 $6,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $60,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ••r. �•v F IN I7 IY 1• ••. 1 1• Y71 ..: to' VA �•�Y' •' I,h Y' $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 , $0.00 '$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 40.00 $0.00 $511050.00 $80,650.00 $59,700.00 158 50$ $7,657.50 $4,325.00 •' $11,982.50 i $58,707.50 $12,975.00 I $71,682.50 $7,168.25 $78,850.75 APRIL 6, 1982 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 i �I la= SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VnEW GnITOLI, ARCHITECT SaMiATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 9 9-FINISHES QUANTITY DESCR. MATERIAL UNIT LABOR RATE MATERIAL COST LABOR COST 77TAL COST " $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 d 18,000 sf $0.45 $0.40 $8,100.00 $7,200.00 $15,300.00 Gyp -board (w/r) 2,000 sf $0.50 $0.40 $1,000.00 $800.00 $1,800.00 Fire Taping 1,200 sf $0.10 $0.20 $120.00 $240.00 $360.00 Finish Taping 17,300 of $0.15 $0.30 $2,595.00 $5,190.00 $70,785.00 Quarry Tile 1,060 sf $3.00 $4.00 $3,180.00 $4,240.00 $7,42000 Ceramic Tile 2,060 sf $3.00 $4.00 $6,180.00 $80,240.00 $14,420:00 Resilient Floor 20,000 sf $1.00 $1.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 Carpeting 140 sy $22.00 $6.00 $3,080.00 $840.00 $3,920.00 Concrete Hardener 1,000 sf $0.12 $0.20 $120.00 $200.00 $320.00 Painting $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Exterior Walls 3,500 of $0.12 $0.50 $420.00 $1,750.00 $2,170.00 Facia/Soffit 1,000 of $0.15 $0.50 $150.00 $500.00 $650.00 Deck 1,000 sf $0.20 $0.40 $200.00 $400.00 $600.00 Gyp -board 13,400 sf $0.12 $0.60 $1,608.00 $8,040.00 $9,648.00 Misc. 1 job $250.00 $1,500.00 $250.00 $1,500.00 $1,75000 Vinyl Wall Covering 3,800 sf $1.50 $1.00 $5,700.00 $3,800.00 $9,500:00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 PACE TOTALS $34,703.00 044,940.00 $79,643.00 AWUS7MENP FACTORS 15% 50% AUMXDM AMMY S $5,205.45 $22,470.00 $27,675.45 EST11"m cm $39,908.45 $67,410.00 0107,318.45 RESIDED OONTlNG = 10% $10,731.85 7= ESTTImm $118,050.30 DATE OF ggUMMg APRIL 6, 1982 CLRRK-GRRVE51Ac. 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337 2767 KENAI SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER CARMEN VINCENT GII�TIOLI, ARC'I rMM SCHITIC ESTIMATE: PAGE 10 10 SPECIALTIES QUANTITY DESM., MATERIAL UNIT LABOR RATE MATERIAL COST LABOR 00ST TOTAL Com $0.00 $0.00 $0.001 Chalk/Tackboards 40 of $7.00 $2.00 $280.00 $60.00 $360.00 Toilet Partitions 6 sets $600.00 $120.00 $3,600.00 $720.00 $4,320.00 Louvres & Vents 25 of $40.00 $5.00 $1000.00 $125.00 $1,125.00' Fireplace & Stave 1 ea $1,000.00 $150.00 $1,000.00 $150.00 $1,150.00� Flagpole 1 ea $1,000.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 $500.00 $10,500.001 Identifying Devices 1 allowance $1,000.00 $300.00 $11000.00 $300.00 $1,300.00� Lockers 1 allowance $1,000.00 $300.00 $1,000000 $300.00 $1,300.00 Fire Extinguishers & Cabinets 1 allowance $1,000.00 $300.00 $1400.00 $300.00 $.,300.00 Storage Shelving 400 if $50.00 $5.00 $20,000.00 $2,000.00 $22,00000 Wepb ne Enclosures 1 ea $750.00 $200.00 $750.00 $200.00 $950:00 Toilet & Bath Accessories 6 sets $250.00 $100000 $1,500.00 $600.00 $2,100.00 Wardrobe Specialties 1 allowmwee $5,000.00 $500000 $5,000.00 $500.00 $5,500.00, Entry Benches 23 if $30.00 $50.00 $690000 $1,150.00 $1,840.00'• $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 PAGE WMU $37,820.00 $6,925.00 $44,745.00 ADJUSlMFdJT PACIORS 15% 50$ AnswAm AMOIJNIS $5,673.00 $3,462.50 $9,135.50 ESTIIyFMD COST $43,493.00 $10,387.50 $53,880.50, REED 108 $5,388.05 �7TAL F.S!' mm $59,268.55 DAME OF EST111AME APRIL 6, 198: I CLRRK-GRj9VE.91AC. 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337-2767 RENAL SENIOR CITlzm COM cmm Vnrm GnMLI, ARCHITECT SCHEMATIC ESTIMATE PAGE 11 u � QUANTITY DESCR. UNIT ALLAWANCE LABOR MATERIAL. RATE 00 $0.00 LABOR OOST $0.00 'ANAL Co $0.00 Food Service EquiPnent No allowance 0. 0 $0.00 .0 $000 00 j $0�0 I 1 $0.00 Nurses Fquipnent No allowance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,000.00 p Misc. &Casework 80 if $100.00 $8,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,600.0 Window Treatment 450 of $8.00 $3,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 Furniture &Accessories No allowance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 Rugs b Mats 1 allowance $500.00 $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ' 00 $0 $0.00 $0.00 . $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 i 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 9 $12,100.00 $0.00 $121,100.00 PACE 'Dom U 15% 0$ AMUMUNT FAMRs $1,815.00 $0.00 $1,815.00 AWUSnGNr AMovNTs • $13,915.00 $0.00 $13415.00ESTDPM OW $1,391.50 10% $15,306.50 j �►rAL APRIL 61 1982 DATE OF ESZTIIM i > , > [(ARK-(jF RVE.. 1AC. 5902 Buckner Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 (907) 337-2767