Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-02-15 Harbor Commission SummaryKENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Regular Meeting, February 15, 1983 Kenai City Hall John Williams, Chairman AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. AGENDA APPROVAL 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES no minutes available for approval 5. GUEST SPEAKERS 6. COMMUNICATIONS a. Kenai River Task Force Draft Report 7. REPORTS a. Presentation by TAMS Corporation 8. OLD BUS INESS a. Funding for Harbor b. Trip to Juneau 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 11. ADJOURNMENT KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Regular Meeting, February 15, 1983 Kenai City Hall John Williams, Chairman 1. ~LL Tfi..ORDER 2. ROLL CALL Present: John Williams, Tom Thompson, Allen Houtz, Leon Quesnel, and M.W. Thompson Absent: Paul Weller and Marvin Dragseth both excused 3. AGENDA APPROVAL Chairman Williams asked to add 9-a, Property Acquisition There were no objections 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES No Minutes available 5. GUEST SPEAKER Mr. Waldo Coyle asked to speak on the naming of the proposed harbor should it become a reality. The name requested was that of Jimmy Johnson also known as the "Screaming Swede" who drowned while attempting to rescue stranded people. Chairman Williams indicated that it would be fitting to name a harbor after such a person who demonstrated a tenacity that seems typical of many Alaskans. 6. COMMUNICATIONS a. Kenai River Task Force Draft Report Chairman Williams went over the draft report for the Commissioners and explained the reason for the task force for the new members. Chairman Williams requested of administration to have the secretary attend, and report back. Chairman Williams also explained that use of the river is a very hot issue between sport fishermen and enterprises on the Peninsula and especially the Anchorage people. In a letter sent out statewide from a group in Anchorage, they contested the seating of Commissioner Weller on the board on the grounds that 70% of the State's population resided in Anchorage and they should be the body that determines what should be done with the Kenai River, and they felt that that seat was reserved for representatives from Anchorage. KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Regular Meeting, February 15, 1983 ' Page 2 6. REPORTS a. Presentation by TAMS Corporation Chairman Williams introduced the TAMS representatives indicating that the first item to be discussed would be the bid documents that had been prepared at the request of the City. These contract documents will be for the second ramp. Mr. Mike Horton presented~material to the Commission and administration and went on to elaborate on the documents. As to the Corps of Engineers permit, the permit has been applied for to include the fuel float, the boat grid and the dredging, the permits to be forthcoming upon approval. Chairman Williams indicated that it is the contention of the Commission to proceed on to the completion of the contract documents and get it ready for bid, the city manager to oversee the legal aspects of the document itself. Chairman Williams asked Mr. Brighton how to proceed to the City Council in that the money was available to go ahead with just the ramp portion at this time, i.e. go ahead and get the bids and ask the Council for recommendatiOn on the bidding or approach the Council to ask to begin bidding. Mr. Brighton stated that the best procedure would be to get the bids from the contractors and then go to the Council. Mr. Horton went on to point out the schedule set up by TAMS for the bidding, advertisment, etc. The schedule indicated that approximately 30 days after the bid opening the Council should award for approval and that looked feasible. TAMS indicated that alot would rest with the permits from the Corps of Engineers. At this point there seems to be no problem with the permits in that there is no major change to require a modification of this portion. Mr. Brighton indicated that the public works department will be handling most of the Retails and will be working with TAMS on this portion. Chairman Williams asked for a recommendation rather than a motion to proceed with the finalizing of the contract and the advertising for bids, the Commission concurred. Armando Ballofet spoke to the silt and sedimentation study and the progress so far. At the last meeting, there was discussion over the velocity of the river. More tests were made and given to the mathematical model entering 3 sets of data with the end result of 3 knots maximum near the entrance to the estuary. The first samples taken got frozen and had to take more. What these 6 valid or bonafide samples confirmed what TAMS had been thinking all along that most of the silt comes from KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Regular Meeting, February 15, 1983 Page 3 the mouth of the river at the strength of the flood giving TAMS 600 parts per million Before that samples were taken at the bridge, these being easy samples to take, and got a concentration approximately half of that, this makes 5 or 6 times the amount of sediment at the mouth of the river than further back upstream. Mr. Ballofet went on to address the the Corps studies and the TAMS study, TAMS doing an average of the figures developed for all the concentration giving a mean annual sediment concentration more or less at the mouth of this basin of 300 parts per million which is half of the Corps testing. Two methods were applied to determine the sedimentation to the basin which showed a considerable sedimentation but not excessive. Mr. Ballofet introduced a new idea for the eventual harbor which consisted of a channel through the shortest part of the land to a point upriver. The Commission and TAMS discussed the idea at length, with 40% of the water to fill the basin coming from upstream creating a self cleaning situation 'based on uniform flow in the basin with fresher water coming from upstream without the sediment flushing out the water on the opposite tide that brings the sediment' in, the mathematical model predicting the flow back and forth, this becomes an exciting possibility. The question of fish being disturbed and perhaps wildlife arose and the TAMS representatives stated ~that those points are still being looked into, however there would be very little disturbance of either. Mr. Horton also stated that there would be no problem with shutting down construction at any sensitive time. TAMS is still investigating all aspects. The Commission expressed their interest for the idea and would continue to investigate it. One more set of samples are to be taken. Chairman Williams asked if the silt could be controlled on an ecomonical basis should some kind of a harbor situation be built., Mr. Ballofet indicated that in his opinion, it would be.. Mr. Ballofet further indicatd that the idea of~ locks was not his favorite in that it is time consuming and expensive and the amount of sedimentation did not indicate that extreme but a gate situation may be more in order. Commissioner Houtz asked what caused the difference in the Corps samples and TAMS. Mr. Ballofet explained that the Corps sampled only in the spring tides and then in one general place and on one tide plus TAMS will have taken 80 samples when completed. The third part of the presentation dealt with the financial analysis. Mr. Horton presented the data which would answer what the project would cost to construct and operation and what the return could be. The state further wants to know what benefit would result to the local people, KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Regular Meeting, February 15, 1983 Page 4 local fisheries, and basically set up the whole picture that says how mUch comes in and how much goes out, is it worth funding and to do that they require more and more now a sophisticated package · In order to produce a fairly high quality document you will need to outline designs and estimate costs so this document will take care of part of that. Included is an ~environmental assessment or early review of all the things that will be critical to getting a permit. TAMS feels that as things progress toward the overall harbor project there should be some time~ set aside for public participation, their suggestion is to have two public meetings during the process of the study, the first one being a work shop at the beginning and ask people to come in and say what they want and say their peice, both the commercial fishing and the public at large interests. Anchorage people should be involved to a certain extent if they wish or whatever the Commission decides to do. This gives input for ideas to the scheme and to the financial analysis, then TAMS could present the public hearing with the fancy slide show, etc. get the final ideas on record and make the final modifications if needed. Some of the agencies such as the Corps would require this at some time any way and it would be beneficial to be prepared. 8. OLD BUSINESS a... Funding for H~arbor Chairman Williams went over the money that was available through the current budgets for the Commission as presented by the finan'.ce director, the what funds the City will be seeking from Juneau. Discussion went on. as tothe amount of money for future or present projects. Mr. Horton suggested that with the way the funding is set up for the grid and the fuel float, there's no way anything can happen on it until late this year and nothing on-site until next year. If you wait until that happens., and don't do your engineering for the main harbor first you then have another year down the line to look at, so this is a means to speed things up a year or two. Chairman Williams suggested to the Commission that what may be needed is s recommendation to the Council that administration make determinations as to the payment of the contract whether it be a hard number contract or a cost not to exceed contract. Commissioner Houtze asked if the Commission needed to as~ that if it.is not evident, be sure it is that the emphasis is on the general layout of the harbor itself not so much the sediment control techniques. KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Regular Meeting, February 15, 1983 Page 5 MOTION: Commissioner Houtz moved, seconded by Commissioner Quesnel to recommend to the City Council and Administration that the contract as outlined in the proposal by Tippitts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton be entered into. Motion passed by unanimous roll call vote b. Trip to Juneau It was determined that Tom Thompson and M.W. Thompson would be flying down to Juneau on Wednesday 2/23/83 and Leon Quesnel will leave March 26. Reservations 'are to be made for them and a report at a later date. 9. NEW BUSINESS a. Land Acquisition Chairman Williams stated that there are rumors at hand that an independent oil company seeking to drill a well in the cannery loop unit for potential gas production and discovery, exploration, etc. There are also rumors at hand that Union Oil wOuld like to drill another exporatory well in the cannery loop unit, and further rumors that the potential location of those wells are on the Coyles property which is the 37 acres which adjoin the harbor site. Chairman Williams asked for discussion from the Commission as to~ if it would be worth the City's effort to prevent any drilling to take place on that 37 acres .or to prevent that 37 acres from being designated as a drilling site. Chairman Williams suggested a memo be sent to administration that the Harbor Commission opposes the location of a drill site on that property from the standpoint of the good and welfare of the future harbor project. By doing this, the Commission must be. aware that they will be interfering with the property rights of private owners and then have to give some attention to the potential purchase and use of that ground. Along with a harbor are associated industrial lease type ground controlled by the regulators of the harbor that generally are drawn to this type of area. Commissioner Houtz asked for the amount of money it would cost the City to purchase the land in question, Chairman Williams related that last year an appraisal had been done and that while there are no funds available right now, some additional money may be gained from Juneau, and of course there is no way of knowing if 'the funds already needed will be allocated. Something to keep in mind is the fact that the City is trying to get rid of City lands either by lease or sale rather than obtaining more. land, the very nature of real estate is that the land you want is never Where you want it. KENAI ADVISORY HARBOR COMMISSION Regular Meeting, February 15, 1983 Page 6 Mrs. Coyle explained that they had leased to Union and Marathon oil since 1975, renewed the leases in 1978 and unless they do something by May they will have no lease. Chairman Williams asked if there were enough pressure being brought to bear by the independent oil company that they would excer6i, ze their lease by May,. Mrs. Coyle stated that Union, would not let their lease go. Union must drill every 90 days, if they hit a dry hole they must start another one by 90 days or the participating acreage and the lease is lost, as well as their unit. What is bringing all the pressure to bear is that for the first time in the State of Alaska, an independent drilling company is giving competition to the established large oil companies. ~ Chairman Williams explained that part of the request to the City regarding drilling on this land is the fact that the City must issue a permit for the drilling to be done anywhere. Chairman Williams asked if the property owners would object to the Harbor Commission recommending that no permits be issued, the Coyles would not respOnd. Discussed followed regarding condemnation proceedures, fair market appraisal, etc. and the problem lies with not knowing what lies in the future for the harbor. MOT I ON: Commissioner Houtz moved that the Kenai Advisory Harbor Commission recommends to the City Council and the City Administration that no permits for drilling or industrial activities on the Coyle tracts, 37 acres adjacent to the proposed harbor facility until further notice due to the potential use and possible ac.quisition of those properties, seconded by Commissioner Tom Thompson.. Motion passed by unaniomous roll call vote. Commissioner M.W Thompson asked for a dollar amount on the appraisals for the property in question, it was explained that there were two amounts involved, one at $1~5,000 per acre and one at $5,000 per acre. 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 11. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. No meeting date was set. Respectfully submitted: J~et Loper~ Secretary