HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-02-28 P&Z MinutesCITY OF KENAI
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
**AGENDA**
Council Chambers, 210 Fidalgo
February 28, 1996, 7:00 p.m.
Chairman Kevin Walker
1. ROLL CALL:
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 14, 1996
4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD:
5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS:
a. PZ96-13-Herman Subdivision No. 2
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7. NEW BUSINESS:
a. PZ96-12-Home Occupation Permit-Sweeney
b. Enchanted 9-1-1 Mapping and Addressing Project
8. OLD BUSINESS:
a. PZ96-7 Encroachment Permit, Anglers Acres Lot 17, Part 2
b. Proposed Residential Zone (Michael Christian)
c. Comprehensive Plan
9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS:
a. John and Randee Wolfe, 1114 First Avenue, Kenai
10. REPORTS:
a. City Council
b. Borough Planning
c. Administration
11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED:
12. INFORMATION ITEMS:
a. Kenai River special Management Board Minutes of Jan. 11, 1996
b. Borough Planning Commission Agenda from Feb. 12, 1996
c. Borough Planning Commission Action from Feb. 12, 1996
d. Werner-Quade Seminar Request Memo
e. Shkituk' Village Phase II Work Session Memo
f. Alaska Chapter American Planning Association
13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
14. ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF KENAI ~~: ~ ~~ ~ ~ _ .,
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
February 28, 1996
,~ Minutes
1. ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Carl Glick, Phil Bryson, Teresa Werner-Quade, Ron Goecke, John
Booth, Karen Mahurin
Members Absent: Kevin Walker
Others Present: Councilman Hal Smalley, City Engineer Jack La Shot,
Administrative Assistant Marilyn Kebschull
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Vice-Chair Glick asked if any additions to the agenda. None noted.
RON GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED
AND ASKED FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY JOHN
BOOTH. UNANIMOUS.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 14, 1996
1
PHIL BRYSON MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 14, 1996
AS SUBMITTED AND REQUESTED UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION
SECONDED BY RON GOECKE. UNANIMOUS.
4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD:
No one scheduled to be heard.
5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS:
a. PZ96-13-Herman Subdivision No. 2
RON GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ96-13, PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR HERMAN SUBDIVISION NO. 2. MOTION SECONDED BY JOHN BOOTH.
La Shot reported that this plat takes three existing plats and removes the interior lot lines
to form one large lot. Administration has no problem with the plat. No installation
agreement will be needed and there are no building code issues.
I
Bryson commented that in looking at the plotting on the city map it is indicated as Spruce
Street and that it should be Cheryl Street, an undeveloped easement or right of way.
Bryson stated it is not Spruce Street from the government lot designation. Bryson stated
they show Pine Circle Subdivision which is at Fifth Street which is just above the lot and
would have it plotting further west than the vicinity map shows. Bryson stated that as
long as the government lot is governing it adequately describes where it is there should be
no problem. Glick asked if La Shot agreed with that. La Shot stated he would check on it
again noting that he thought he had looked at it. La Shot asked if it was north of Fourth
Street. Bryson stated Spruce Street is east of this tract. This is north of Fourth Street but
the project of Spruce Street would be to the east of this drawing. Glick asked if it could be
approved with this change. Bryson stated he felt it could be approved and that he has
already mentioned it to the surveyor who said he would look at it.
VOTE:
BRYSON YES
GOECKE YES
MAHURIN YES
UNANIMOUS.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7. NEW BUSINESS:
WERNER-QUADE YES
BOOTH YES
GLICK YES
a. PZ96-12-Home Occupation Permit-Sweeney
KAREN MAHURIN MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PZ96-12.
MOTION SECONDED BY TERESA WERNER-QUADE.
La Shot noted there were no additional comments from the staff report and the application;
however, the applicants are available if the Commission has questions. Glick asked if the
applicants would like to speak to the request. Ms. Sweeney stated she didn't have anything
to add unless there were questions. Glick asked if they expected traffic in and out.
Sweeney stated she expected to do all her deliveries and to conduct business on the phone.
Glick clarified that there won't be people coming and going. Sweeney stated she doesn't
expect to have anyone come to the house and that she will deliver merchandise.
VOTE:
WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES
BOOTH YES MAHURIN YES
BRYSON YES GLICK YES
UNANIMOUS.
b. Enhanced 9-1-1 Mapping and Addressing Project
La Shot stated that in the packet there were several pages of information. There is the
borough code on street naming methods, several pages of street names, and all of the street
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 2
names within the city. La Shot explained that for some time there has been a project called
the 9-1-1 system that the borough has undertaken. They have compiled all the streets
within the city and found quite a number of streets that don't conform necessarily for one
reason or another. The last 2 %2 pages of the list are all the streets that the borough is
recommending revisions of. If the Commission has comments or suggestions on how to
undertake this, administration would appreciate it. La Shot stated he thought the only
way to approach it was to start through the list and note which streets really need to be
changed, which streets may be out in the field with an accepted name that formally have to
be adopted by the city, and which ones might take some other action. La Shot stated he
tentatively would suggest a schedule since the borough would like to have this completed by
May 1St, and recommends that we end up with a final form before council on April 17tH.
That means Planning and Zoning would have to pass a resolution onto council on April 10tH.
La Shot stated it would probably be best to have the Commission review it and set up the
April 10th meeting for a public hearing to give people a chance to comment. La Shot stated
that code doesn't require it and he cannot see the need to notify everybody in the city as you
may be looking at half the people in the city as being affected. La Shot he was thinking
probably a public hearing at Planning and Zoning and at Council as being sufficient. La
Shot stated that the list seems overwhelming but from what he has looked at so far he
doesn't think the names on the street signs will be changed 127 times like is on the list.
Many of those over the years were street names that never got formally passed onto the
borough but were adopted by the city. There were probably a number that never got
adopted. La Shot stated there may also be some suffixes or prefixes that change. It will
take some time to go through the list but that is probably the best way to proceed. Glick
stated that they will need a map they can all look at. La Shot stated the borough sent a
map over with all of the names on it as they show officially. La Shot stated he will do some
highlighting on the map as he goes through it to show what the changes might be. Glick
stated that if he understands then that most of these are probably street names that the
city already adopted but they never passed the information to the borough. La Shot stated
that is what he thought but there may be some that will actually need to be changed. La
Shot stated the best way to do it is as surgically as possible to not cause quite a bit of grief
for people if they have to change addresses, etc. Bryson stated that Redoubt Boulevard is a
good example to use. On some plats it is called Redoubt Boulevard, on some called
Redoubt, some Home Site Loop, I Street NW. Bryson noted that the city had a grid street
naming system in the early 70's that created some awkward names. The borough is trying
to rectify all the plats in a formal way without having to go individually to the source of
those names which in most cases was a platting action. Bryson noted this is being done
borough-wide.
Glick stated they should sit down with a map after La Shot goes through it or what would
the Commission recommend? La Shot recommended that the Commission look at any
changes on March 27th as that will give administration time to get the changes made and
bring it to the Commission on the 10th of April for a public hearing and more input. La Shot
stated that would give administration a month to pick through the list and to come back
with a list that is specific in what should be done. Glick asked if that was acceptable to the
Commission. Booth stated he will be absent on the 27th. Glick asked if everyone else would
be available. No comments. Glick stated to schedule it for the dates La Shot had
recommended. La Shot stated that some of the changes may be recommended by the
borough to coincide with their street naming system, the city doesn't have to name it's
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 3
streets that way. So, the city may chose not to comply. Discussion on how the different
names may have occurred. La Shot stated this project has been needed for a long time to
straighten things out and it is a good time to do it to coincide with the 9-1-1 system. Glick
stated if no objections then it would be on the agenda for the meeting suggested. Glick
asked if La Shot would mind if the Commissioners came in ahead of time to look at the map
which could save time. La Shot stated they were welcome and it was at his desk.
8. OLD BUSINESS:
a. PZ96-7 Encroachment Permit, Anglers Acres Lot 17, Part 2
Glick stated that according to what he read in the minutes and the memorandum that the
Commission would need to rescind the action of the last meeting. Smalley stated they could
ask for reconsideration. Glick stated that no one had asked for reconsideration. La Shot
stated that whoever was on the prevailing side last time, someone that voted no, could ask
for reconsideration. Glick stated that to do that you had to ask for reconsideration at that
meeting before the next meeting. Glick stated he looked at that and talked to his wife who
said from a parliamentarian view of Robert's Rules the proper action would be to rescind
the action from the last meeting and then it would be open again. La Shot stated he felt
that would work.
RON GOECKE ASKED FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT ON ANGLERS ACRES LOT 17, PART 2-PZ96-8.
Glick clarified if that was the conditional use permit request since the encroachment permit
is moot since one doesn't exist.
PHIL BRYSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
La Shot advised they should probably vote on the motion and that he had spoken with the
attorney today about this. The city attorney would like to see a vote on the motion to
reconsider and then not vote until next meeting on the main motion so that parties that
may wish to comment can be notified.
Glick stated it has been moved and seconded to reconsider the Conditional Use Permit on
Lot 17, Anglers Acres, Part 2-PZ96-8. Glick stated if the vote is affirmative, it will be
readvertised and be taken up at the next meeting. If it is a no vote, it will stand as was
passed last meeting.
Bryson stated that speaking to the motion it appears that the conditional use on this lot is
essentially the same use that was requested for the conditional use on several lots away on
the same evening. Bryson stated he feels that the same general situation exists on this
that exists on the other lot and urges approval of the reconsideration motion.
Goecke stated he would like to comment on this also. Goecke noted he was adamant at the
last meeting about this because he at the time felt that because of the encroachment that it
was a moot point to carry this on. Seeing as there is not an encroachment and this area is
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 4
being used for this type of sports activities for two and a half months in the summertime,
Goecke stated he has no problem with conditional uses in the area.
Mahurin, noting that she was not at the last meeting but had read the minutes, stated she
is confused that how at the last meeting there can be an encroachment shown by a surveyor
and at this meeting there is not an encroachment done by a surveyor. La Shot stated it was
his understanding that the McLanes who did the asbuilt rechecked the site and felt they
had made a mistake on the first survey and have recertified another asbuilt. La Shot
stated this can happen and that perhaps Bryson can explain it better. La Shot stated it is
easy to understand how it could happen. Mahurin stated she has a hard time
understanding how the same company and surveyor can survey it one time and it is voted
down and then suddenly the six inches are taken care of. Mahurin stated that before she
votes on this she would like to see the survey herself, a certified survey to know that this is
real. La Shot stated that what she is looking at is a certified asbuilt. Mahurin stated that
so was the last one. Bryson stated he does not feel these items are connected at all or
should they be connected. Mahurin asked what things are connected? Bryson stated the
perceived encroachment and a request for conditional use. Bryson reiterated they are
different issues. Bryson stated the purpose of an encroachment permit is to potentially
clear up encroachments that exist across setbacks. The conditional use is to allow specified
use on a lot. Mahurin asked if this is not the same owner that the Commission had another
request for a Conditional Use Permit earlier this year that had to do with the way a house
was situated and things weren't quite right on that request. Mahurin stated she
remembered the discussion about the sewer problem and the mound, water, etc. La Shot
stated he did not believe the Lowes have been before the Commission within the last year
and it may have been Captain Bligh's operation Mahurin was referring to. Mahurin stated
she is having a hard time with credibility and honesty. Mahurin added that she realizes
that Bryson has a good point that an Encroachment Permit and a Conditional Use Permit
are two separate things. However, if a Conditional Use Permit was denied because of an
encroachment that existed two weeks ago, she would like to have proof that the
encroachment no longer exists before she would vote on the Conditional Use Permit.
Mahurin stated that if she is a minority vote, she will accept that.
Goecke noted that they are not voting on the Conditional Use Permit. The only thing they
will vote on whether it will be voted on at the next meeting. Glick stated he personally
doesn't have a problem with reconsidering it since he wasn't here and at the next meeting
he will hear all the evidence to be able to make a good decision.
Booth asked La Shot if 6 inches was well within the accuracy of surveying property. La
Shot stated it could be that the first time they went out they checked the property corners,
came up with their initial measurement, a lot of times the property corners are just rebarr
stuck in the ground. It is not too hard for those to move sometimes and be shifted. When
they went out the next time, they may have retraced some more corners or some more
points in the subdivision. It is understandable that something like this could happen.
Mahurin asked if it would be germane to request that when it is voted on at the next
meeting to have a new copy of the survey. La Shot stated that the one in the packet is the
new copy that superseded the last one. La Shot asked them to note that the one distance
was 15.1 feet and the last one said 14.5. Glick stated that something similar had happened
to him personally. He had property surveyed in 1964 and he built his fence according to
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 5
that survey. They next asbuilt now shows his fence on the neighbor's property by a couple
inches. Bryson stated that it is possible that they found the two front lot corners and that
is approximately 104 feet long, turned to the record line which is the property line under
question and projected it out that distance. Bryson stated if one of those rebarrs is out the
wrong direction a tenth or two it can make a half foot or a foot difference by the time it gets
to the building. Bryson stated that was pure speculation. Mahurin stated she conceded.
VOTE:
GOECKE YES BOOTH YES
MAHURIN YES BRYSON YES
WERNER-QUADE YES GLICK YES
UNANIMOUS.
b. Proposed Residential Zone (Michael Christian)
La Shot stated he didn't have more to add since the last meeting. If Commission wishes to
pursue, some direction to administration would be appreciated as to how the Commission
would like to proceed. La Shot stated administration would like to get the city attorney to
review the document. La Shot noted that Mr. Christian was available if the Commission
had questions. Glick asked Christian if he would like to speak to the Commission.
Mike Christian-613 Maple Drive, Kenai-Christian asked if the Commission would
like him to go through the information again. Mahurin stated she was comfortable and had
received a letter and had read the packet information. Mahurin stated she supported this.
Christian stated that if the Commission would like to add or modify the information that is
appreciated. This was just a first draft.
Bryson commented that he had tried to research procedures for modifying ordinances.
Bryson stated a zoning change if petitioning that a parcel be zoned to another existing use,
you can delineate the neighborhood of that area of reasonable size. A petition is
appropriate for a situation like that. For instance, if there are 50 owners in the area, that
those individuals be allowed to comment on that. This is a situation wherein a new zone is
being created. You cannot change anyone into a zone until you have a definition of the zone
itself. Bryson stated he feels if people want to create a new zone that is the first issue to
address. Bryson commented he has a strong personal feeling that zones shouldn't be
created where the people in them don't generally conform to those criteria. Bryson stated
he really feels strongly about that. If 90 percent of the people in Woodland don't conform to
that zone, that isn't an appropriate zone for Woodland Subdivision, if it is lot size or
whatever. In this case 95 percent. Bryson stated they are talking about almost 1000 acres,
a lot of it is undeveloped property. There may be large tracts who would very much like to
do this, but there are probably large areas where that don't. Denaina' Subdivision is a
situation of tracts where those people are unable to market that property right now let
alone doubling the lot size requirements and possibly increasing the development costs 25
to 50 percent on a sale. Bryson noted he felt these things should be kept in mind.
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 6
Werner-Quade stated she agrees with Bryson. By placing restrictions on areas that are not
developed, can get sticky. But, noted she agrees with a zone for single family dwellings but
is not sure about the areas denoted. The area creates some hesitancy. Werner-Quade
noted she does not know what the answer is. There is a need for that type of zoning and a
need to get it in Kenai but not sure how to go about it.
Booth stated he also agrees with Bryson and the first step is to work on the proposed zone
type itself and receive public comment to see if this is something that the city wants. Then,
the second step would be to see what regions this type of zone would be applied. If there
are existing people in those areas to see if they would agree with it. Break it up into two
steps.
Bryson stated he very much would like to see what is proposed to be applied in some of
these subdivisions though noted he feels the criteria should conform to the existing
situations in those areas. Bryson stated he felt it would be great if Woodland had
something other than the suburban residential zoning criteria to govern their development
and they didn't have to fall back on covenants.
Glick stated he agreed that having a single family residential zone in the City of Kenai is
something that is needed. Glick noted that is the first thing that should be developed.
Glick noted that the Commission has a start with the information supplied by Christian;
however, there may be a couple items that should be covenants rather than part of the
zoning. Glick stated that can be worked out and once the zoning ordinance is created, the
city can look at what areas want to be in that zone. Glick stated he felt the important thing
is that the people who live in the zones have to be in agreement, at least a majority, to be
zoned in that way. Until the zone is developed and determine the restrictions, etc., the city
cannot ask the residents to vote on it or get their input. Glick stated that maybe the
Commission's instruction to the administration should be to work some more on developing
guidelines for the zone and then look at it to see what needs to be accomplished to create
the zone. Then, go into the second step.
Mahurin asked Christian how he arrived at the minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet.
Christian responded that in the suburban zone you can go down as low as 7500. Christian
explained that what happened in his subdivision is they started out with large lots, the
next development decreased, and in the third development they were squished to as small
as was allowed. Christian stated that all of them were in the same subdivision and it
cheapened the rest of the subdivision. Christian stated they came up with 15,000 because
there is a minimum of 20,000 for a rural residential zone and 7500 for a suburban so they
came to what was in between. Mahurin stated she just wanted a basic understanding.
Mahurin asked Christian if he was saying that when Woodland first went in and there were
all those single family homes, they were pretty much 15,000 square feet. Christian stated
he didn't know that.
Glick stated that some of the reasons that Woodland may have looked good in the beginning
was that they built on every other lot. Christian stated that the covenants also had said
they were not to cut down trees and now they only leave one or two trees on the whole lot.
Christian noted that now it doesn't look like Woodland did at all. Christian asked to add
that it is not just Woodland the same thing is happening to areas around Woodland.
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 7
Glick stated if the Commissioners agree he would ask staff to come back with a proposal on
the zone and then look at that information.
~ Glick asked Bryson if he had something to add. Mahurin stated Bryson was explaining the
history to her that he had researched.
Glick asked if by consensus to agree to ask staff to start working on a zoning ordinance for
single family residences. Bryson asked if it would be reasonable to focus on the lot
situation in Redoubt Terrace, Woodland, and some other subdivision of that quality that
has water and sewer, paved streets, is a well developed community and come up with
something that is appropriate to those areas that would protect their property values.
Bryson stated that by zoning, four plexes could go in those areas. Bryson stated he could
understand expecting covenants to protect you, they won't always protect you unless you
are willing to spend money.
Glick advised La Shot that the Commission was in agreement that staff begin developing a
zoning ordinance. La Shot stated that what staff would do is start with what has been
submitted as a starting point, make administrative recommendations, and ask the attorney
and whoever else needs to be involved to input in the recommendations, and then bring it
back to the Commission as soon as possible. For the time being, locations will be left out for
the zone or zone boundaries.
Glick commented that the Commission appreciated Christian's work on the process and
noted that is what is needed for citizens to supply input.
c. Comprehensive Plan
KAREN MAHURIN MOVED TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH. MOTION
SECONDED BY JOHN BOOTH. MAHURIN REQUESTED UNANIMOUS CONSENT
AND BOOTH SECONDED THE REQUEST.
Councilman Smalley noted he will be unavailable for that meeting but a council person will
be at the meeting.
UNANIMOUS.
9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS:
a. John and Randee Wolfe, 1114 First Avenue, Kenai
La Shot advised that a letter was in the packet dated February 9th to the owners of the
property at the corner of First and Birch. Staff had. received several comments that they
may be running a business there because of the vehicles parked there. The second page is
the owner's response. The owners have an explanation for almost every car that is there;
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 8
however, staff is still not sure that they are being honest. La Shot stated if there are any
suggestions to staff, they would be appreciated.
Mahurin commented that driving by the corner several times a day she noticed he doesn't
mention the cream colored blazer that are in the road, not in the road, etc. Mahurin stated
she knows there are a lot more cars than this. Mahurin stated she doesn't want to stop in
front of the house and jot down license numbers but maybe a city vehicle could do that.
Mahurin noted she had wondered about this for a long, long time. In the wintertime it is
dangerous when they have cars parked in front of that house on the intersection of the
corner.
La Shot commented that he tried to stay to the issue of a business operating out of the
residence because it does pertain to the zoning code. The junk car is not in Title 14 it is in
Title 12 under health and safety. That is something that the city is trying to resolve what
to do with and who is going to take care of the enforcement. The police have been asked to
develop a list of other junk cars in the city and there may be some of these on there. There
are approximately 100 on the list right now. The process to go through with junk cars or
abandoned vehicles is lengthy, and time consuming. La Shot stated one is being appealed
in the courts and is an example of what can happen when you start with junk vehicles. La
Shot noted he has read articles about how Anchorage is handling it. Once they get to the
point of taking action, they go into the field with a code enforcement officer and policeman
and remove those cars or whatever they need to do. The city needs to decide how far they
are going to take it. La Shot reiterated that is why he limited it to the business aspect.
Mahurin stated that is what she meant. She drives by and sees vehicles being worked on in
the garage. It seems obvious to her that they are running a business; however, she has no
proof.
Werner-Quade stated that perhaps the Commission should go ask if he wants to fix a
wrecked car.
Booth stated he also drives by there several times a day and it appears that there is a
business being operated there. Booth stated it is unclear what action the Commission is
being asked to take by receiving the document in the packet. Glick stated that the
procedure is to ask staff to send a letter which they did in this case. If they admit to doing
a business, they can come in and ask for a home occupation if it is allowed in the code. In
this case, Glick noted he doesn't know where to go since the man insists he is not operating
a business. Booth stated for example he is running a business and sticking strictly to the
business aspect of this, would there be an economic cost to the person to get a permit to run
the business. Glick stated he is not sure what the area is zone but not sure he is allowed to
have a garage in that zone. La Shot stated that all he could do is apply for a Conditional
Use Permit and it would be up to the Commission if they wanted to allow it. La Shot stated
that is not normally something the Commission has allowed in this type of zone. Smalley
stated that if it were allowed, he would have to obtain a business license. Glick noted that
the city has actually shut down a couple garages that were in residential areas and noted
Jacksons for example. Bryson stated that has been one area that the city has held the line
on. Bryson noted that decades ago there was a garage on Forest Drive and it burnt down.
The city was emphatic that it could not be rebuilt. Bryson noted that administration is
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 9
merely reporting on the action that has been taken; the Commission is not being asked to
take any action. Glick asked if La Shot was asking for action? La Shot stated that was
correct and the city will continue to keep an eye on it. If the Commissions has suggestions
~ on how to take it further, those could be offered.
Werner-Quade asked if the city had a disposal process for junk vehicles. La Shot stated
that the city has no way to dispose of junk vehicles. Werner-Quade asked how it could be
enforced if there is not solution for the problem. La Shot stated people can have it hauled
away to the dump, pay a fee, and they will take it. It has to have all tanks drained, etc.
Werner-Quade commented that she felt since the city has no options, it is hard for the city
to enforce this and noted she wished that the car crusher was in the area. La Shot stated in
his opinion that was the solution but he heard that it doesn't appear it is going to now;
hopefully, someone in the future will try it again. Glick asked where cars are hauled to. La
Shot stated the borough landfill will take them. They end up taking most of those to
Anchorage. The borough charges a $10 fee. Most of the costs come with getting the vehicle
to the landfill. Bryson stated he thought they were hauled outside by barge and salvaged.
La Shot stated there are places that take them and salvage what they can, the body would
usually be crushed and hauled out. La Shot stated there are crushers in Anchorage. It is a
matter of economics if there are enough cars down here to make it worthwhile for someone
to move in the crusher or haul the cars to the crusher. Werner-Quade asked if the city is
going to enforce, will they send a towing vehicle over and then bill them? What is the
procedure? La Shot stated that the city hasn't done anything like that. Anchorage may be
doing some of that. So far, Kenai has just cited them and gone through the court system to
see if they can be alleviated. La Shot noted there is a fine involved but at yet one hasn't
been paid. La Shot stated the one case that is still dragging on, there has not been a court
order yet. Werner-Quade commented that the vehicles are just still there. Glick stated
that most individuals when sent a notice respond and do something, there are just a few
that don't comply. La Shot stated usually 1/3 will do something fairly quick, 1/3 will after
another letter do something, the last 1/3 maybe nothing will happen or you end up taking it
to court. La Shot stated or you could reach a point where there is an explanation for that
car that you cannot seem to disprove. The whole process starts with a car, take pictures of
it. Then, you need to identify which lot it is sitting on and that may not be easy. Tax
parcels are researched for the owner of the parcel. Then, you start the process of sending
letters and each time you send a letter, the legal department wants another picture taken
to see the status of the vehicle or vehicles. La Shot stated you can see what can happen in
you have a number of them and the time involved. La Shot stated the police have spent a
lot of time just compiling a list of possible junk vehicles.
10. REPORTS:
a. City Council
Councilman Smalley reported at the meeting last week there were four sections of public
comment. Mr. Barlow from CPGH explained the ballots which were sent out. Laura
Measles presented the pamphlet which will be sent to people who may be moving into the
area. Patricia Ryan, Interspace Airport Advertising, presented a possible advertising
program for the airport. Smalley noted that the presentation included prices, etc. and it
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 10
was confidential. Council's response was to have an RFP developed and have people
respond to potentially being involved in the advertising at the airport. Smalley noted they
provide advertising across the country. Smalley advised the city would receive funds from
the agency for the ability to set up displays within the airport. Glick asked if the
advertisement in the city now was owned by the city and the city collected fees. Smalley
stated it is owned by the individuals but they rent the space. Smalley explained the city
would turn the advertising over to an entity and the city would receive a percentage of the
companies fees. Smalley commented that there is a great deal of expense currently to the
city the way the advertising is done and this could be a good deal for the city. Smalley
noted the Airport Commission was impressed with the proposal. Walter Robson of the
Borough Public Works spoke to council about having the city's sanitation system handle the
wash down water from the baler. This would involve some modifications to the current
system (Smalley explained this.) Booth asked for clarification as to what the baler water
was and Smalley explained it. Smalley stated it was approximately 2000 gallons a year.
La Shot stated the water would go through the system but the effluent discharge permit
may need to be modified. (Discussion clarifying what would be required of the city to
accomplish this.) Smalley reported that the borough had provided the funding to have a
study done on this, $12,000 to $13,000. The city is reviewing the impact this may have on
the future disposal for the city. Booth asked if there would be increased cost for testing
based on the new MPDS requirements. Smalley stated there could be and the borough is
willing to meet the cost requirements.
Smalley reviewed some of the public hearings: Transfer of funds to cover cost of land that
storage building sitting on next to Senior Center. La Shot stated it had to be purchased
from the airport lands system. Resolution 96-17 awarded a contract for fuel to Kenai Air
Fuel Service. Smalley explained the history behind this resolution and the decision based
on money that would have been required to fix the city's pumps and the possible liability of
maintaining fuel tanks. Resolution regarding the Alaska Children's Trust was tabled
awaiting more information regarding funding. Resolution 96-20 regarding the North Zone
Hazardous Response Plan was amended stating that if there was an emergency situation
the City of Kenai would respond to the city in it's entirety. Resolution 96-21, the Economic
Importance of Tourism Industry and Sports Fishing on Kenai Peninsula, was amended and
passed in support of uses as they existed with sound biological research and studies.
Smalley noted that signatures were obtained at the state level to put the Fish Initiative on
the ballot so city action was moot as they were in opposition. Smalley noted he had not
supported this and gave information as to why.
Under New Business Item 6, regarding the Animal Control Shelter, decision to go ahead
with design based on the fact that funds may still be available from government for the
well. Council decided to reduce the cost not to exceed one-half million.
Council went into executive session regarding Inlet Woods litigation and instructed legal
counsel to pursue the matter.
Booth asked if going with smaller shelter will undersize the shelter from the beginning by
doing so. Smalley stated they were. Booth asked if a smaller facility which met the present
1 requirements would the city not get itself into a bind with ethical treatment of animals in
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 11
the future. Smalley stated he didn't feel the reductions they were talking about would
impact the facility in that regard. But that is a concern.
b. Borough Planning
Bryson noted two agendas in the packet. The February 12th was reported on at the last
meeting. At the meeting February 26th the consent agenda was approved as presented.
Item E1 a proposed land classification in the Cooper Landing area. This was as a result of
a miner in the area. Administration recommended classifying part of the area as
preservation. The area would have a rider on it that areas that sit on top of mining claim
areas would be noted on the title. Bryson noted the borough doesn't have any say about
curtailing mining in areas where claims already exist. That authority lies with the courts
and the performance of the miner's themselves. Thus, a moot point to try to govern even
though you own the surface rights. If someone owns the mineral rights and they are
utilizing those rights, that is a use that cannot be denied. Action to recommend the area
preservation acknowledging the existence of mining activities if found to be valid.
One plat from the City of Kenai which was addressed at the last meeting, Sprucewood Glen
No. 7, was approved.
No other items pertinent to the city.
c. Administration
La Shot reported on the work session on the Shkituk' Village held on February 27th. La
Shot advised that the plans were postponed until a development plan for the area is
completed. An environmental site investigation of the Daubenspeck property and areas
nearby needs to be completed. The sign may be placed on a temporary basis. La Shot
stated he thought the Mayor was going to ask at the next council meeting that money be set
aside for the sign. La Shot noted that minutes from the Kenai River Advisory Board are in
the packet.
Smalley advised that Werner-Quades funding had been approved to attend the seminar in
Anchorage.
11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED:
No one present.
12. INFORMATION ITEMS:
a. Kenai River special Management Board Minutes of Jan. 11, 1996
b. Borough Planning Commission Agenda from Feb. 12, 1996
c. Borough Planning Commission Action from Feb. 12, 1996
d. Werner-Quade Seminar Request Memo
e. Shkituk' Village Phase II Work Session Memo
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 12
f. Alaska Chapter American Planning Association
13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
Werner-Quade commented noting that Smalley has been on the Commission before, Bryson
has been on the Commission for many years, and Mahurin is fairly new to the Commission
and has a lot of questions. Werner-Quade noted that this evening, and in meetings past,
she has noticed that there is a small meeting taking place within the larger meeting by
these three people. Werner-Quade has no problem with a little chatter but sometimes sees
papers moving about that seem to be important and perhaps should be shared with the
entire Commission. Werner-Quade asked that her comments not be considered petty but
she would like to have the benefit of the information.
Glick asked the status of the borough reclassification of lands. La Shot noted that the city
has been working with them some and the process is apparently still within borough
interdepartmental review before it is returned to the city. La Shot noted he is anxious
because it has a lot to do with the new well site.
14. ADJOURNMENT:
Meeting adjourned at approximately 8:30 p.m.
Res ctfull Submitted:
r
)~
Maril n Kebschull
Administrative Assistant
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 13