Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-11-21 P&Z Packet- CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION **AGENDA** Council Chambers, 210 Fidalgo November 21, 1995, 7:00 p.m. Chairman Kevin Walker 1. ROLL CALL: 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 8, 1995 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: a. Lisa Parker, Kenai Peninsula Borough, Planning Director 5. PLANNING: a. Subdivision Plat Approval, Beaver Loop Acres, Add. No. 1, PZ95-60 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. Rezoning Application, J & S Enterprises, Lots 31 & 32, Section 33, PZ95-59 7. NEW BUSINESS: 8. OLD BUSINESS: a. Comp Plan Update 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: 10. REPORTS: a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. Administration 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board, Minutes, October 5, 1995 b. Robbins' Retirement Communities Letter dated November 13, 1995 c. Public Meeting Notice 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: 14. ADJOURNMENT: UNAPPROVED ROLL CALL: Members Present Members Absent: Others Present: APPROVAL OF AGENDA: CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 1995 Carl Glick, Phil Bryson, Teresa Werner-Quade, Ron Goecke, Kevin Walker, Karen Mahurin William Toppa Councilman Smalley, Jack La Shot-City Engineer, Marilyn Kebschull-Administrative Assistant Chairman Walker advised two handouts to be added to the agenda: Comp Plan Update handout, Grants on Future Projects handout, and an excerpt from the Kenai City Council meeting minutes. Chairman Walker asked for a motion for approval of agenda. RON GOECK RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF AGENDA AS AMENDED AND ASKED FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY CARL GLICK. Chairman Walker asked if anyone opposed unanimous consent. None noted. AGENDA APPROVED. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 25, 1995 Chairman Walker asked if any corrections to minutes. Karen Mahurin noted to add to "Person's Present" Kevin Walker, Chair, and Mr. Smalley, council representative. PHIL BRYSON MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 25, 1995 AND REQUESTED UNANIMOUS CONSENT OF AMENDED MINUTES. MOTION SECONDED BY CARL GLICK. Chairman Walker asked if anyone opposed unanimous consent. None noted. MINUTES APPROVED. Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 1 PLANNING: a. Subdivision Plat Approval, Bailey Estates, PZ95-56 RON GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ95-56, SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL, BAILEY ESTATES. MOTION SECONDED BY TERESA WERNER- QUADE. Chairman Walker asked for additional staff comments. Jack La Shot noted nothing additional. Walker noted no persons present in the audience today so brought item back to the Commission for discussion. Mr. Bryson asked if any possibility of allowing a road to pass through and not be blocked. Bryson stated he knew the answer but Norman Street dead ends and he assumes it is coming out of Inlet View. La Shot stated he could not speak for the owner. Continuing, he stated that the Norman Street dead end does come from Inlet View and it was put there for future subdivision of this property, if it needed to go through to Lawton. On Lot 1, the owner has placed his house such that at some future time he could resubdivide Lot 1 and still get the street through there. La Shot stated he felt that if this plat was passed, it is probably unlikely that would ever happen. Mr. Goecke questioned Mr. La Shot if he knew the relationship of the house on Lot 1 . Mr. La Shot stated he knew approximately where it was located. That it is placed just to the east of where Norman Street, if it was projected through, would be. La Shot continued stating that if Norman Street went on through it could be combined with a parcel to the west, there could be lots on both sides of that street. The lot to the west is being developed also into a couple houses, one is under construction now. La Shot stated the two parties did not get together for any kind of a joint subdivision. Goecke stated the way the map is depicted one would have to assume this is close to a legal description as it is laid out; there is not any way they could build to the west of Norman-is there? La Shot stated not on this lot. La Shot stated he would have to work together with or acquire the parcel to the west. Chairman Walker asked if any further questions or discussions. Councilman Smalley added that those parcels immediately to the are west all the way to Lawton Road are owned by a gentleman. Smalley stated the subdivision was discussed at Planning and Zoning approximately two meetings prior. The utility easement comes in by Norman Street. Mr. Bailey allowed that to happen. His electrical comes one way but the gas comes in from Lawton. There is no plan to resubdivide. The way the one house was placed it killed the cul-de-sac idea that was being planned. That builder sold the property to the west to another individual. His plan was to work with Mr. Bailey and one of the original owners to subdivide the entire area and it didn't work out. Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 2 Chairman Walker stated he had one question for Mr. La Shot. Walker stated you can see where Norman Street leads up to this lot. Walker stated he believed, and asked Mr. La Shot to correct him if he was wrong, that there is no dedicated right of way for Norman Street across these lots. La Shot stated no. Walker stated Norman Street is a dedicated right of way for the adjacent property. La Shot responded yes, for Inlet View Subdivision. Walker asked for further discussion. Mr. Bryson added if the city desires that this road be addressed that now is the time to address it as you can't plan on anything else happening. Bryson stated it may be that they can work out something and that maybe they can't. But, the city needs to make their intent known, if it if felt that another access out of Inlet View is desirable. Mr. Goecke stated that Mr. Bryson brought up an item that has been a concern to him regarding this plat. Goecke stated he would have at one time have liked to have seen Norman come out to Lawton but at this point in time he feels the city should is make Norman as far as it is ever going to go. It will not be extended through. Mr. Goecke stated he had initially had aself-serving desire as he owned property in the area and would have liked to have seen an exit that was easier than Paula Street or coming back out on Rogers. Continuing, with this plat as presented, Goecke stated he felt that he personally felt that Norman should not ever be considered to go beyond where it is right now. Mr. Glick asked if Norman Street dead ending without a cul-de-sac caused snow removal problems? Mr. La Shot stated it was not the most desirable. La Shot stated there is a street, Susianna, that goes directly to the left that the blades can pull in and back and it is not tough to turn around there. Mr. Bryson stated he would like to propose an amendment. ADD THE STIPULATION THAT NORMAN STREET BE DEDICATED TO EXTEND PROVIDING ACCESS TO AND FROM LAWTON DRIVE. Chairman Walker asked Mr. Bryson to restate the amendment. BRYSON PROPOSED THAT THE DEDICATION FOR NORMAN STREET BE EXTENDED TO LAWTON DRIVE. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CARL GLICK. Chairman Walker asked if Mr. Bryson wished to speak to the amendment. Mr. Bryson stated his supporting sentiment would be that he feels that Inlet View is served very poorly by it's access. As Inlet View has grown to the west there has been no access developed to an already poor situation. Bryson stated there is one roadway that is probably 32 feet curb to curb and the only access in and j out of that area. Bryson stated he did not feel that was a good situation. Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 3 Mr. Goecke stated he understood Mr. Bryson, that he was referring to Rogers Road going in and out. Goecke stated that Paula Street goes back out to Lawton off of Rogers. Mr. Goecke stated he did not feel this was appreciably different that Redoubt Subdivision; there are only two streets into it, Gill Street and Forest Drive. Continuing, it is no different that Inlet Woods, two streets in there. Both, of them coming out a block apart. Chairman Walker asked for further discussion. Seeing and hearing none, roll call on the amendment. VOTE ON AMENDMENT TO PZ95-56: GLICK YES BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE NO MAHURIN YES WALKER NO AMENDMENT APPROVED. Chairman Walker asked if any further discussion on the main motion as amended? Seeing and hearing none, called for question. Mr. La Shot asked to make one comment. La Shot stated that if they require the owner to dedicate a right of way extending through to Lawton that would require an installation agreement for construction of the street. La Shot stated the Commission may want to comment in this regard. Should the owner be required to construct the new street into Inlet View Subdivision? Mr. Bryson stated, as a point of discussion, the owner has developed paved access to the lots that he fronts on and in no way could it be construed that this is serving his property. Bryson stated he would not feel, in this case, that having the owner go to the expense of developing the roadway would be appropriate. Bryson asked if not addressing an issue would take care of the situation or should direction be requested. La Shot stated it doesn't put the burden of constructing the street on the owner but it does put it on the city probably to construct a new entrance if it is dedicated. La Shot stated the normal procedure when a subdivision is filed and streets are dedicated is that the city require an installation agreement for construction of streets, water, sewer, or whatever is needed for the subdivision. La Shot stated that the city could wave that requirement, but then who would be constructing the entrance. La Shot stated he did not disagree that it is needed into that subdivision. La Shot stated this was a tough plat. The surrounding property around Inlet View was subdivided and the whole area planned as if this parcel would someday be apart of the development. La Shot stated if Inlet View is subdivided and Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 4 developed, this parcel never becomes a part of it and someone else takes ownership, it is a tough situation. Mr. Bryson stated he felt it more appropriately if it had been in common ownership with the land to the south. Bryson noted that that development should have supported the construction of it, but he does not think it is equitable for this small subdivision to support something that doesn't even provide frontage for them. Mr. Goecke asked Mr. La Shot, if the city tells them that the city needs to have that as a dedicated street at this point, does the land owner then have no recourse to get remuneration for that property for that street or where does it end up? Mr. Bryson stated he believed the Planning and Zoning Commissions' comments will go to the Borough as a preference on the street pattern and he assumes that they would probably have the same recommendation. That being, that the road be extended. Bryson noted if the city concurs on something like this, the borough will make it a condition of the plat approval which is not a city affair. Bryson added that this subdivision is giving up a fair amount of value in platting that right of way. Bryson stated he felt they would be contributing their share in a bad situation. Mr. Walker stated he would like to make a comment, due to the amendment, he will not be supporting this resolution, PZ95-56. Walker stated he personally feels that this person is merely trying to subdivide a couple of lots out of one parcel. As there is no section line or dedicated right of way running through this property at this point in time, Walker stated he cannot conceive of asking them to give up a road right of way through their property which would be a fairly large quantity of property. This is not even at the edge of their property but would be taking nearly a third of the lot. Walker commented that he felt very uncomfortable with that and would not support it at this time. Jack La Shot added that one other way that this could be considered would be a note could be put on the plat that says that further resubdivision of Lot 1 would require a dedicated access to Lawton. Then, if the owner did subdivide a row of lots along there and possibly got together with the adjoining property owner, it may be viable. La Shot noted this was just a thought. Mr. Goecke noted he had one comment to add. Goecke noted that at this time he will not be supporting this resolution. He feels that personally the city should have the street right of way or easement cleared on this plat before it is approved. Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 5 Mr. Bryson stated he would like to remind the Commission that they do not approve plats. The Commission makes recommendations to the borough. Mr. Walker stated he felt the Commission was cognizant of the fact that they are recommending approval or not recommending approval. Mr. Walker asked if any further discussion. Seeing none, called for question. VOTE ON PZ95-56, SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL, BAILEY ESTATES: BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE NO MAHURIN YES GLICK YES WALKER NO MOTION PASSED. b. Subdivision Plat Approval, Warehouse Subdivision, PZ95-58 CARL GLICK MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PZ95-58, SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL, WAREHOUSE SUBDIVISION. RON GOECKE SECONDED THE MOTION. Chairman Walker asked for additional staff comments. Mr. La Shot stated nothing additional; however, would call the Commissions' attention to the recommendation that a new site plan and asbuilt be requested. La Shot stated property swapping has been done and he did not feel the landscape/site plan, as submitted, had been followed. Walker asked if the maker of the motion would like to include those comments. Mr. Glick and Mr. Goecke concurred. Chairman Walker noted as no persons in the audience this evening, the item would be brought to the Commission for discussion. Ms. Mahurin noted she had a hard time trying to understand what was being asked in the plat request and if she could have a few minutes with Mr. Bryson or anyone else to explain it to her. Chairman Walker stated perhaps staff could explain it. Jack La Shot advised the best way to describe it is looking at the dotted lines shows the lot as it used to be, Government Lot 67. La Shot explained, some of the land to the north, 42 feet, has been sold to the neighbor. A distance, 25 ,i feet, to the east had been acquired. The owner is the same on both of those lots. La Shot stated he thought the owners did a property swap. La Shot noted Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 6 his concerns were that on Lot 3 there is an old house that looks close to where they have cleared and there may be an encroachment created. There is a house on Lot 1 also. And, the new structure on Lot 2. Mahurin asked if Lot 2 is where Hall is building his new building. La Shot confirmed this. Mahurin stated the lot has been totally cleared of every tree in existence. Mr. La Shot stated that he thought the clearing comes out to the full extent of the new Lot 2 rather than the old Lot 67. Mahurin asked Mr. La Shot to restate this. Mr. La Shot stated that just from looking at the information available, not relying on any survey information, it looks like what is cleared probably include the swapped property. This clearing would be the full extent of Lot 2 past what was Lot 67 and what the previous site plan was submitted for. La Shot noted that is why he is asking for a new site plan and an asbuilt. Continuing, he stated there are three building involved and a previously approved Landscape/Site Plan. Walker asked if there was further discussion. Mr. Goecke asked Mr. La Shot, that if where this plat approval is means that the site plan review that was done is history. La Shot stated that is how he views it. La Shot stated the original site plan was submitted for Lot 67 which, if this plat plan is passed, no longer exists. La Shot stated he felt what has been done coincides more with the new plat rather than Lot 67. Goecke stated what is needed is a new site plan submittal. La Shot agreed and added a new site plan, landscaping review and submission of an asbuilt be required before we allow them to finalize this plat. La Shot stated he did not think this request was unreasonable. Mahurin stated she concurred with this request. Chairman Walker asked for further discussion. Ms. Kebschull advised the Commission that Mr. Hall called city hall today. He wanted to note that if this did come up for discussion tonight he wanted the Commission to know that he felt that he was doing what he had stated he was going to do in the original landscaping plan. And, that he was planning on planting grass and shrubs. Ms. Mahurin asked if Mr. Hall had called and offered the above information only if it came up for discussion. Ms. Kebschull confirmed this. Ms. Mahurin asked if the amendment covers the-Chairman Walker interrupted to note there is not an amendment before the Commission. Ms. Mahurin restated to ask to hear the motion. Kebschull read the motion, "Moved to approve PZ95-58." Chairman Walker noted an addition was made with agreement of the maker of the motion and the second to add the staff recommendations. Ms. Mahurin stated she would like to amend the motion. Mahurin stated she would like to have resubmitted a site plan and a landscaping plan. Bryson seconded the amendment. Chairman Walker asked if Ms. Mahurin was aware that this was part of the main motion? Mahurin stated probably not. She did Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 7 not understand that the Commission was asking that the site plan be j resubmitted. Mahurin clarified that this was stated in the City Engineer's report. Walker confirmed this. Mahurin stated, with the permission of her second, she would take back the site plan but would like to ask for a detailed landscaping plan. Bryson concurred. Chairman Walker for any discussion on the amendment. Ms. Mahurin stated she was getting frustrated. Mahurin stated she felt credibility was important when dealing with the same developer over and over. Mahurin stated she is, as a member of this Commission, beginning to have a problem and she would like to have the asbuilt and landscape/site plan resubmitted so that she can verify the plans. Mahurin stated she would like the record to reflect that she will be very carefully looking at the submittals. Teresa Werner-Quade stated that some of the landscaping plans that have come before the Commission leave a lot to be desired. Werner-Quade stated she felt that as a Commission the plans have been routinely approved and she agrees better scrutiny should be given to the landscaping site plan reviews that come before the Commission. VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO PZ95-58: WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES MAHURIN YES GLICK YES BRYSON YES WALKER YES MOTION PASSED. Bryson stated he had one question for the administration. Bryson asked if the requirement for the site plan is for a building permit approval and asked how this was appropriate to what he is proposing to do, other than updating what he said he was going to do. There were oral modifications at our last meeting. La Shot stated that it is true that the site plan review is required before the building permit is issued. La Shot stated he thought the site plan had probably changed but the city could not take away the building permit but could require a review of the landscape plan. La Shot stated he was not sure he had answered Mr. Bryson's question. Bryson asked if what the Commission would be looking for is an updated site plan; La Shot stated yes, one that is approved by the Commission. Mr. Goecke asked La Shot if a site plan review is supposed to be done prior to issuing a building permit. La Shot stated yes for permits over $10,000 in an ~ industrial zone. Mr. Goecke asked to be corrected if he was wrong but he felt that building was under construction before any permits had been approved by Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 8 the Commission. La Shot advised that Hall had started construction and that sometimes builders get away with this by applying for a footing permit so that they can get started and that this happens quite often. La Shot stated he was not sure how to correct this problem. A lot of times builders are pushed by weather and the builder will come in and get a permit for the least amount so they can get started before winter and before they come to Planning and Zoning. Mr. Bryson stated that concerning the plat approval he believed the city has a requirement that any existing structures need to be shown on the plat. Bryson stated the plat is new as far as the Commission is concerned and that there is probably a statutory requirement there that needs to be met. Ms. Mahurin requested that when this request comes back that the administration supply to the Commission the previous action that was taken so it could be referred to. Chairman Walker stated he agreed that that would be a benefit to all Commissioners. Chairman Walker asked if there was any further discussion. Walker stated the amendment was approved. Before the Commission is the main motion as amended. Walker called for the question: VOTE ON PZ95-58: GOECKE YES MAHURIN YES GLICK YES BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES WALKER YES MOTION APPROVED. OLD BUSINESS: a. Comp Plan Update Chairman Walker stated the Commission had before them a handout of some of the updates that have been approved. And, a listing on public facilities of items that we have completed. A couple items are still missing and one that needs changes. Chairman Walker asked if Teresa Werner-Quade wished to speak to this item. Ms. Werner-Quade stated she had met with Jack and Marilyn last week to bring the Commission the information they had been given. Werner-Quade stated it appeared that Marilyn had worked hard to bring this to the Commission. Ms. Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 9 Werner-Quade stated she felt the Commission should attempt to obtain the missing information and change the parts that need to be changed. She suggested that Marilyn advise the Commission on how she would like to obtain the information. Ms. Werner- Quade stated she had her Comp Plan with all the changes that have been made and she is available to meet any time or offer the information now. Chairman Walker noted there are a couple of items he would like to address first. Walker stated he believed the Commission was on Section X. Walker stated he understood that Ms. Mahurin had actually completed her information; however, it is not in the written form. Mahurin stated she had given a verbal report. Mahurin asked if she could have the information in writing for the meeting of December 13th. Walker stated that would be appropriate with consent of the Commission. Walker continued stating that on the subject of health he didn't feel that Mr. Toppa had completed that section as of yet and asked if anyone on the Commission would like to complete that section. Seeing none, Walker stated the Commission could review that section as a group. Walker noted that regarding Senior Services he had received a memo from the director, Pat Porter and there are some goals mentioned in this memo. Walker stated he believed the memo was in fact published for one of the Planning and Zoning meetings. The memo is very brief. It basically indicates goals would be to increase recreational activities, expand secretarial services, and they would like to see funding for the additional 20 units to Vintage Point Manor. Walker asked if copies of this memo could be placed in the December 13th meeting packet and as a group could decide on the Section X material as a group. Walker asked if there were any comments. Teresa Werner-Quade stated Mr. Walker kept referring to Section X and she is unsure what that is. Mr. Walker stated he thought it was Section X; however, it is Section V. Werner-Quade clarified that he would like to complete Section V. Walker stated yes, complete Section V and have any final discussion on that section. Walker asked what was left to be completed. Werner-Quade stated if the Commission could complete Section V, the review should be done except for getting the figures from administration. Then, the introduction could be amended with new Commissioners and any changes to that section. Walker stated that perhaps the Comp Plan could be finalized on the meeting of December 13th. Mr. La Shot asked Karen Mahurin if she had stated she would have the information on the 13th. Mahurin stated yes. La Shot suggested the Commission review as a group the Health Care section at the next meeting which is the 21St and then could compile a draft of the entire review for the first meeting in December. Mahurin stated she could try sooner if needed; however, she is a little remiss but would do whatever she could do. La Shot stated he thought that would probably be okay so a rough draft of everything could be pulled together. La Shot asked if that was okay with Marilyn. Ms. Kebschull stated she didn't feel there was that much missing. Continuing, noted that when Teresa came in, the Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 10 three of them went through the entire Comp Plan in less than two hours checking all of the changes that have been done and clarifying questions that she had. That is why the list for the update was made. Kebschull stated that pretty much the things that are missing the pages are not that much for the Commission members to look at and given them back for the changes to be made. The EDD information needs to be requested and we are not sure how much we will be able to get from them. We are not sure what the latest year's information EDD has compiled. Kebschull noted she felt the review was for the most part done. Chairman Walker asked if that met with the approval of the Commission? Walker asked if anything further needed to be addressed now. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: a. Klondike Bed & Breakfast Chairman Walker stated he understood the party has in fact picked up an application for a Conditional Use Permit and do not intend on performing any business until sometime next spring. Walker stated he was hoping the Commission would see the permit prior to the spring. Chairman Walker asked if administration had any other comments on code enforcement. La Shot stated it may be a good time to mention that at one time there was a question regarding the Kenai Peninsula Counseling Services program wherein they rent rooms in single family dwellings to individuals in their program. One residence was in the Central Heights area, Sterling Court. The Commission, at one time, asked if we would look into that situation. It was the administrations' view that they were within code. La Shot stated he believed the city attorney had written a memo stating that type of activity could take place and cannot be restricted. One of their program directors have contacted the city stating that they are looking into the possibility of buying three homes in the city of Kenai. La Shot stated he had asked them to submit in writing to the city their proposal and what zone they were located in. The group would like verification from the city that what they are planning is within code. The information will be passed on as the city receives it. La Shot added that the subject of halfway houses has come up again but as yet no applications have been received. REPORTS: a. City Council Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 1 1 Councilman Smalley noted a copy of the agenda is in the packets. Smalley stated that halfway houses was discussed at the last council meeting. Linda Zaugg of the Department of Corrections spoke to the council. There were members of the audience from Anchorage and Nikiski. A gentleman from Nikiski had called most of the council people and insisted that the council require the DOC to put an RFP out in this area. He felt that he had a building that would facilitate such a need and that the city and state government should not be interfering with capital enterprise, private industry. Smalley stated the city has no control over what Department of Corrections is going to do or not do. Smalley stated they will probably file an RFP. They are looking at a facility on the peninsula in this general area to potentially house from 20 to 30 clients/inmates. Ms. Zaugg presented an elaborate package to display the number of felons and number of misdemeanants in the different facilities across the state and the ones that exist at Wildwood and Wildwood Pretrial. Zaugg suggested that 95% of the felons and misdemeanants that are released stay in the area where they live in some cases or where they are released and that these people are being released anyway. So, it would be nice to have a transition facility prior to releasing them. Chances of survival and staying out of prison is met with a much higher success rate after having gone through a halfway facility versus just being released. Smalley stated there has been discussions between the state and city hall with regard the potential of building a facility on Wildwood perhaps with the city assisting in the facilitating of this building through a building bond. Smalley stated this is different than a revenue bond. Smalley noted this was strictly discussion and that no decision was made. This is what promoted people from the community coming to the meeting and suggesting that the RFP be let so other private industry within the communities could possibly apply for it. Smalley stated he is very aware of the discussion that took place at Planning and Zoning and at city council. Smalley stated if you build it they will come, but they are going to come anyway whether it is built or not. It is something that this body and the city or the borough will have to deal with. Smalley noted that the property outside of the city off K Beach that had been proposed did not meet the criteria so it was turned down. Mr. Goecke stated the only thing that did not meet the criteria was who was going to operate the facility. Smalley stated yes. Goecke asked if the city was wanting to build, is Wildwood in the city limits. Smalley stated no. Goecke asked if the city would put city bond money into something outside the city limits. Smalley stated no. Goecke responded good. Kevin Walker asked if the building bond being discussed would require voter approval. Smalley stated he did not think so as it is similar to a state revenue bond. Smalley stated he did not have the legalese as to why the state just doesn't do it except it wouldn't qualify apparently for the funding. This would be similar to the FAA tower where the city built it and then leased it back. Walker added or the courthouse. Smalley stated that is a similar project. It is not money out of the city coffers but strictly money from the state and the city acts as a pass Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 12 through agent with some control. This was only a discussion and it is going no where as he assumes the state is going to put out an RFP. Smalley stated that a counselor at one of the halfway houses in Anchorage talked about the need and impressed that there were individuals in the community who have an interest in pursuing a project on their properties. In addition, the gentleman who spoke from out North, the city received some other queries of the possibilities of applying for an RFP. Smalley stated he felt it was something the state would be considering. Ms. Mahurin stated she would like Mr. Smalley to remind the city council that she believed it cost 526,000 and some dollars to house a prisoner for a year and it only costs about 57,200 a year to educate a student in school. If the city is really eager to do bonding, she would rather see them put their money into a more positive avenue. Mahurin stated she would have a lot of concerns and that she was part of the audience during that discussion previously. When you talk about public dollars, she would like the city to be reminded of those figures. Smalley stated the city is definitely aware of that. Smalley noted that the city has virtually no impact at all on education funds nor Department of Correction funds. Mahurin stated except through lobbying and things like that. Smalley stated the city is aware of it but he will bring it to their attention again. Continuing, Smalley noted that under public hearings there were a couple of additions. Items 3 and 4. Dealing with the liquor license transfer from the Ariang to New Peking and an eating establishment license for the New Peking restaurant. Both approved. Item C1 was modified. An additional 5500 was donated so the amount had to be adjusted from 51355 to 51855. Smalley noted that under Commission and Committee Reports there was a discussion on the position that Planning and Zoning took with regard the commercial strip down Beaver Loop Access and Bridge Access Road. The Mayor made a comment that it is nice to see that Planning and Zoning has come around to realizing that that really is not an appropriate use for a commercial zone. Smalley stated he called a technical and said that is not exactly what was reported, not exactly what they said. That they said that there definitely is a commercial need on that strip. They don't like the way the it is accessed and egressed. They would like to see that commercial zone larger. If there is an unwillingness to make it larger, then that the applicant would utilize the entire piece. That was construed as they should utilize it because the Planning and Zoning Commission doesn't feel that commercial zoning is that important in that area. That was straightened out. Smalley stated he has no idea was is happening with this project as nothing else has come before council nor this body but he is assuming it will. Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 13 Smalley advised letters had been sent from the city clerk to committee and commission members regarding attendance at meetings and the importance. If they are in violation of the code regarding their absenteeism, they are receiving a letter from the city suggesting perhaps if they are unable to attend the meetings as prescribed by code. The letter suggests they may want to reconsider their membership and perhaps apply again at a time that is more convenient and suitable for them. Smalley stated he thought a couple had received letters suggesting that they are in violation and as the code calls for it, their position has been ended. The letters have not come before council but he had just saw a rough draft of the letters that were going to be sent. Smalley noted that the council does get a copy of the attendance records for all the commissions and committees. When there appears to be a problem with attendance and in some cases they can't establish a quorum, then the city needs to try to get other personnel that would be conducive to attending the meetings. Under Item H6, council approved the expenditure not to exceed 510,000 in moving expenses to bring the new finance director and family to Kenai. His name is John Sweeney from Sitka. Smalley stated he brought up a concern if the city had in fact hired other employees in the past and brought them to the city and paid moving expenses. With the State of Alaska statutes and with city code, if an employee coming into the city is a resident of Alaska, we can pay moving expenses. If the employee is a resident out of Alaska, we call it a sign on bonus because if you attach moving expenses to it, it creates problems if a person is no longer employed within a certain time, you have to pay for those moving expenses back. In most contracts with department heads, city clerk, city attorney, city manager, there are clauses in their agreements stating that if they fail to comply within a certain time frame and their employment ceases that portions of funds are returned to the city. Smalley stated he was a little concerned that the city was spending 510,000 to move somebody if it wasn't a common practice. He stated he had been told that other employees had been hired, brought into the city, and portions of their expenses paid. However, no one could come up with a name. They said they were pretty sure that one had been paid for. Jack La Shot stated they had paid for a portion of his expenses but he had to sign a contract. Council approved an agreement to pursue the Challenger Learning Center and that proposal is being worked on by Kathy Scott and Associates. It looks like the final project will be completed in March if not sooner. EDD couldn't handle the project; they felt the time crunch was too much for them. EDD was asked first. Smalley reported that the city received 557,380 in FEMA funds for the recent flooding of the Kenai River. This includes payment for debris removal of Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 14 approximately 515,000, stabilization working on water and sewer, 529,643, and Beluga 513,800. La Shot noted that was for storm outfall. Ms. Mahurin asked Smalley why the city contracted with someone else for the Challenger Center after giving EDD money. Smalley stated the city didn't give EDD money to do this. The EDD money that was given to them was under a different auspices. Smalley stated the city specifically went to EDD and stated the city had deadlines and asked if they could do it. EDD does not work for the city, they work for individuals. The. city felt that may happen and that is why the city had other entities in mind that potentially they could contract for the project. EDD was up front in that they couldn't meet the deadlines. Smalley reported that on the capital projects, that water is the number one concern. This list will be taken on December 13th when Mr. Manninen goes to Juneau. He will give it to our representatives. There was discussion at council as to movement of items 2, 3, 4, and 5 and reprioritizing them. Councilman Bannock and Smalley both spoke in opposition to this and Councilman Bookey also stepped in. Juneau knows that our number one priority is water quality and water improvements. Obviously, it is the new well. Smalley reported it looks like the city will need 51 million even to get that project all finished up and on line next summer. Any money on top of that would be utilized for other projects. Ongoing, the city put in ten or so street lights as has been done for the last few years. Smalley stated it looks like the city will get 15 for the 530,000 that is set aside this time and there are street lights presently being put up throughout the city on lists that are updated all the time. The reason for leaving it like it is and not changing it, Smalley stated he didn't feel anymore money needed to be put into publications. They are very expensive to produce and the listing and priority down (2, 3, 4, 5) can be done with as the city wants to. The question that came up is the animal control shelter and it's importance on this list. That is a facility and an undertaking that the city council feels is a responsibility of the city. The city will try to continue to get funds from the state and from the borough to assist in the development of this project. The number one priority going to Juneau is the well and water quality. Smalley stated he thought it was going okay and asked Mr. La Shot if he had a report on it. La Shot stated they are having some more problems but think they will have it soon. Smalley stated he thought he had brought the Commission's attention to the problems with the other well casing breaking. This well is being drilled at Mr. Kraxberger's expense. Smalley added that the pumper truck sold in two pieces. One man bought both pieces and Smalley assumes he will put them together. ~ Chairman Walker stated he had two questions. Was there any discussion as to the potential future funding for EDD since they are not available to do projects Minutes November 8, 1995 Fage 15 that may very well be needed by the city. Smalley stated no. Walker asked if the city would consider to fund them whether or not they work on projects for the city. Smalley stated he didn't say that. Also, Mr. Walker stated he was curious if there has been any further discussions on the restricted use of ATVs within the city. Smalley stated the city has not yet held a community meeting. It is something that is almost as controversial if not more than halfway houses. Smalley stated it is very important if we have those machines we just can't go anywhere. There will be public hearings held on that with the caveat in the paper suggesting that the city is looking into rewriting the codes governing the use of ATVs, etc. within the city limits. Mr. Walker suggested that Planning and Zoning be included in the adjusting of any laws. Walker stated some persons on this body may be against that as they may have motorcycles and snow machines. Smalley stated that what promoted this discussion is the strip of road on the Spur Highway that is .under construction and the use of vehicles along the end tearing all the new green grass which has happened in the past and also with the vehicles traveling in lanes adjacent to oncoming traffic when all you see if a headlight coming at you causing some confusion for drivers. Smalley stated he thought the contractors had left signs out which could be easily driven around or under. Again, there will be public hearings and this body will definitely be involved in that. b. Borough Planning Mr. Bryson noted that there had not been a meeting since the last city meeting so he had no report. Bryson stated he would like to bring the Commission's attention to two items that have previously been at the borough level and he had previously reported on that are hitting the headlines at this point. One is the mining leases again. Bryson noted the group may have read of the proposed modification of the state regulations concerning mining. The other is an item that the borough assembly had before them Tuesday night. Bryson stated he didn't know what action they took. It concerned river bank renovation on private property. This is a situation where a credit will be allowed for preapproved bank work. Bryson stated this to him, personally, is an effectively an unfunded mandate situation where administrative people can approve a project and the tax base just has to absorb it whether it is approved by the assembly or not. Bryson stated as he had read the draft, that is the situation. Bryson again stated he did not know what action was taken on this. c. Administration Mr. La Shot stated he had nothing to report. COMMISSION COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 16 Ms. Mahurin stated that she hoped Councilman Smalley wouldn't schedule the controversial hearing until after Christmas. Smalley stated he thought they would be in January or February. Mahurin added that she has been following the development on the corner of First and Spruce and have not been real happy about it and it is disturbing to her. Teresa Werner-Quade stated she wanted to read a comment, "About a year ago the Kenai public turned out in force and was adamantly opposed to halfway housing in this community. Is this "need" going to keep coming before us again and again until we are finally worn down or simply not on guard so agree to this. Halfway housing can become a panacea for prison overcrowding, furloughing, and possible premature release of inmates to the community. And, yes Hal, I agree, if we build it, they will come." ADJOURNMENT Karen Mahurin moved for adjournment at approximately 8:30 p.m. Res ctf Ily Submitted: .. _ ~~~~ Marilyn Kebschull Administrative Assistant Minutes Novemk~er 8, 1995 Page 17 .,~-° Cam.. STAFF REPORT To: Planning & Zoning Commission Date: November 14, 1995 Prepared By: JL/mk Res: PZ95-60 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Swan Surveying P.O. Box 987 Soldotna, AK 99669 Owners: Patrick & Mary Doyle Route 1, Box 1225 Kenai, AK 99611 Requested Action: Subdivision Plat Approval Legal Description: Beaver Loop Acres, Addition No. 1 Existing Zoning: Rural Residential Current Land Use: Low Density Residential ANALYSIS City Engineer: This plat adds one lot (Lot 4) to the original Beaver Loop Acres. No installation agreement is needed. ADEC Note - On site waste water disposal needed. Building Official No comment. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommend approval. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. PZ95-60 2. Preliminary Plat CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.;.PZ 95=60> SUBDIVISION 'PLAT A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI RECOMMENDING THAT THE ATTACHED SUBDIVISION PLAT BE APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: WHEREAS, the attached plat Beaver Loog Acres -Addition No. 1 was referred to the City of Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission on November 9, 1995 and received from Swan Surveyina ,and WHEREAS, the City of Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission finds: 1) Plat area is zoned Rural Residential and therefore subject to said zone conditions. 2) Water and sewer: Not available 3) Plat (lees) oes no subdivide property with'n public improvement district subject to specia assessments. There (+s) ~ a delinquency amount owed to the City of Kenai for the referenced property. 4) Installation agreement or construction of improvements (+s) is no required. 5) Status of surrounding land is () artia shown. 6) Utility easements, if required, are (not) shown. 7) Any existing structures must be shown on plat. 8) Street names designated on the plat are (~) correct. 9) INCLUDE STATEMENTS ON ATTACHED STAFF COMMENT SHEET. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI THAT THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE BEAVER LOOP ACRES -ADD. NO. 1 SUBJECT TO ANY NEGATIVE FINDINGS AS STATED ABOVE OR ON ATTACHED STAFF COMMENT SHEET. PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, NOVEMBER 21 , 1995. ~~_ ~ a, -~ CHAIRPERSON i A E T: Planning Secretary ,, _ ;, ~. ~ EVAN N~. LS-6940 SIGNATURE ~~ no~5o~9a• w 2640.07 TE - - ._ - - - - - - 1980.05 '- - - _ - -' 33 Section-Line Easement l TRACT A 89'59'30' E 350.00 l ~sao nsoo OT 1 LOT 2 ~ ~ __ Frs; ' FT10 1.087 ~ ~ 208.Go 7 ?i,h., Acres Acres LOT 3 LOT 4 ,~, ~ ,°'n 1.258 ~ ~ ,°; 1.000 Acres m ~~~ MY6M N~lYb'- ~y Z N Acres N N N O 100' R W BEAVER L00? ROAD A=208.44 = 24.04 R=3324.04 ,6 , ~IFICATE of OWNERSHIP and DE/ICATION nAr~t of the real property -eby certify that we are the ow,,.,~..~ ~nri ~iPSCribed hereon and that w° hereby adopt this M Notary's Acknowledgement D~ U~ Subcribed and sworn before me on th,s ca. of 1994, for _ <: J Y i CAP MONUMENT URVEY BRASS CAP ;E~ %PLASTIC CAP sec 2 sac 11 NOTES 1. No permanent structure shall be constructed or placed within cn easement which would interfere with the ability of a utilityto use the easement. 2. Existing powerlines ore centerline of 20' wide electrical distribution line easement. ZECORDED FNAI RECORDING DISTRICT SATE .1994 IME equested by SWAN SURVEYING P.O. Box 987 Soldotna, Ak. 99669 . ~ r-, r-, ,. , , . , 3 This _~?; BEAKER LOOP ACRD ADDITION No. 1 A Subdivision of the N _' ~:~' Section10,T5N,R11 W, ~.'.'.., ~~ . the city of Kenai any :r,= .~.en_: Peninsula Borough. OWNERS : PATRICK J & MAR'S ~. ~v,~ Route 1 Box 1225 Kenai, Ak. 99611 CITY OF KENAI. ~ 210 FIDALGO AVE., SUITE 200 KENAI, ALASKA 99611-7794 TELEPHONE 907-283-7535 _ FAX 907-283-3014 ~ uFn~~aM 1III~~ 1992 CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The following public hearing has been Scheduled for the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of November 21, 1995: Rezoning application to rezone property described as portions of Government Lots 31 and 32, Section 33, T6N, R1 1 W, SM, Kenai Recording District from Rural Residence 1 (RR1) to General Commercial (CG). The Meeting will commence at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. Anyone wishing to present testimony concerning this permit should do so at the hearing or submit written comments to the City of Kenai, Planning Department, 210 Fidalgo, Suite 200 Kenai Alaska 9961 1-7794 prior to November 21st. For more information please contact Jack La Shot or Marilyn Kebschull at 283-7933. YOU ARE BEING SENT THIS NOTICE BECAUSE YOU OWN/LEASE PROPERTY WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROJECT SITE OR ARE AN INTERESTED PARTY STAFF REPORT To: Planning & Zoning Commission Date: November 3, 1995 Prepared By: JL~mk Res: PZ95-59 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: J & S Enterprise P.O. Box 753 Sterling, AK 99672 Requested Action: Rezoning Application Legal Description: Gov't Lots 31 & 32, Sec 33, T6N, R11 W, SM Existing Zoning: Rural Residential 1 Current Land Use: Medium Density Residential ANALYSIS City Engineer: The applicant wishes to rezone a parcel (approximately 1.06 acres) along the Spur Highway from RR-1 to CG. The lot is across the Spur Highway from the schools, in an area the residents rezoned several years ago to RR-1, to create a zone of less density and less multi-family units to preserve the residential character of the area. The Commission recently reviewed commercial zoning along the Spur Highway. No additional zones were recommended. A rezone across from Thompson Park (Benton) was denied, and later approved by the City Council on appeal This property was across the Spur Highway from a CG zone. The Comprehensive Plan discourages commercial rezones in neighborhoods that can be adversely impacted. Building Official No Comment. RECOMMENDATIONS In light of recent history of the area and other attempts to spot zone along the Spur Highway, recommend denial. Input from adjacent property owners should be weighed accordingly. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. PZ95-59 2. Application 3. Drawings CITY OF' KENAI. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION'PZ 95'-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE KENAI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUESTED REZONING SUBMITTED BY NAME J & S Entemrise LEGAL Portions of Gov't Lots 31 & 32. Sec 33. T6N. R11 W SM Kenai Recording District WHEREAS, the Commission finds the foil 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The subject property is currently The present land use plan The proposed zoning disi~ct is~ CG--General Commercial An appropriate pu~jlic h`a~Al,J1ss required was conducted 11/21/95 facts have been found to exist: 1 Medium Density Residential NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai that the petitioned REZONING of Portions of Gov't Lots 31 & 32. Sec 33, T6N, R11 W, SM, Kenai Recording District is hereby recommended to the Kenai City Council. PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, NOVEMBER 21, 1995. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: Planning Secretary CITY OF KENAI AVE., SUITE 200 KENAI, ALASKA 99611-7794 TELEPHONE 907-283-7535 FAX 907-283-3014 ~ AtMeoa, 'III~1 ,~~ REZONING APPLICATION PETITIONER J & s Enterprise ADDRESS P.o. Box 753, Sterling Alaska 99672 PHONE (907) 262-4668 LEGAL DESCRIPTION POR, SEC33, T~,N, R11W, SB & M Government Lots 31 &32 PRESENT ZONE Residential PROPOSED ZONE Commercial & Residential Intended Use and/or Reason for Rezoning• Front 1/4 of each lot will be for Commercial use. Remaing 3/4 of each lot or approximate t ereof to be used as Residential. Section 14.20.270 Amendment Procedures governs any amendment to the Kenai Zoning Code and Official Map. PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING, COMPLETE THE BLANKS AND INITIAL THE SPACE AFTER THE ITEM NUMBER TO INDI~(CATE THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THESE CONDITIONS. 1. t~ ~"~= Amendments to the Kenai Zoning Code and Official Map may be initiated by petition by a majority of the property owners in the area to be rezoned; or, a petition bearing the signatures of fifty (50) registered voters within the City of Kenai to amend the ordinance text; or, submission of a petition as provided by the Home Rule Charter of the City of Kenai. Rezoning Application Page 2 2 . ~~. ~~ ° Amendments to the Official Zoning Map shall be considered only if the area to be .rezoned contains a minimum of one (1) acre (excluding street or alley right-of-way) unless the amendment enlarge's'ari adjacent district boundary. 3. ~_C A Public Notification and Hearing is required before the issuance of this permit. A $105.00 non-refundable deposit/advertising and administrative services fee is required to cover these notification costs. 4. ~_ A proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance which is substantially the same as any other proposed amendment submitted within the previous nine (9) months and which was not approved shall not be considered. Petitioner's Signature CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: Loretta Harvey, Secretary REZONING CHECKLIST: X a. MAP b. SIGNATURES x c. DEPOSIT/ADVERTISING FEE ($105) x d. APPLICATION FORM OR LETTER ~) I V~~ d `` ~, 1U vl n~ 1 fir,:. ~,,,. .__•\ ~ U M S7 t! LL/ n 77 c. 7 7;(t~ ,'7 ~ 1 ,az~ , °~ E ~l ~ .M ~ `~ ~ ,* ,~ ( ~ ` o ~ ~ ~) ,,, m 6 ~ .981 -- ` • v ,ssz ~~ ~ \o° n ;; ~ G ~ ~:•I t; i 11 I ~~ o U ~~ ~ .;,. .~ o~ ~ ~ ', ~ .oo= - -. I - ~ O ~\ ~ ~ ~?~ ~& ~~. ~ "~' is °-'i_~~jjlilr .k,. . o6E M ,09 F _ M _ _~ \-\T-- M ~ 'lt~ ~. ~ ~ .. I .~" L _I 'i ~ ii' ,t.. ;. vrb ',\ ' . I . j ~ ~ •~i 1\•D/1 ~ I 1 i j ~ rim. .Q „ N ~, ;~ O ~ ~, \ . K Yi ~ - ~ N 1 - ~ I . \ 'f C +I i ~ ~ \ .: ~. . I 4 1 ~ ~ ~., ~t ioI h l; ~~ ~' ` ~ ~ ;o•o9t i~~~ ~- •~ .!': ~' Q ~ ~ ii. ~ 0~ ~ ~ iar I ~L ~~ ~ c71 S .tl;''17 .`t. .~'Y^ . ~.' ' , ~~ ?' .:a: ~:. ;; ..~, '~ i> ~~ 41~ ~ I _ ' ~ -.- v ~ ~ p~ V V C - ~L ~ . I C RR ~,,,~~r l ` ~~2~`n~ (Z2-I d-o G~,ai ~~ /L . _, © ,. ~. _ ~u _ ~J ' _~ ~ t~~ , CAROM M~K (~) I 1 /tN. MO. ~ y 1 j j 1 i Orra' Y ~~ p ~' 11 m ! L •' I R1 "~ _ ~• ~s ~ ~ __ _ ____ ___ _ __ _ _ ~~ a ® 1 I,f ~ ~ ~ '~jl/\A\ Itl Kp~na\ M ~~ N`M~' SA.eal KENAI SPUR ® .. INL ~~ RS R8-2 Q c ~.•~ iA~l ~. ~ , L ~- I ~T G 1 _-;_____ --- RS : , R O] R {~ t ,~ J RR ~~q~ sY ~ ~~~ ps'~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ C ~ C3` eeAA ~ _ NOV 1995 ~~~ F ~~$ /+r ~ ~~~~~ ¢p~~q~~ f ~.. ~!{~~ ,~ P ~ ~ tP` ; ;~R~~ a3/ , .~_ .Q F, ~ ....~ Vii. ~ d.°+ r J`-S~t ., t%1.~ 1 ,-- .. j z vt ~ ~ _- f r ~ .. -.~ _ ~.~~a:__ .~_~_ ..__~~..~ _ _~~~~ ~___.____ .~~°_. __ ~ 4 °~ T _._~ _~_,6~ _--____ _.~~ _ . ~ _ _ ___ _. _ _ . ___~_ _ __ _ _ ~' .~ __ ~ . ~C~ Date: July 25, 1995 To: Kevin Walker From: Pat Porter, Director Subject: Comprehensive Plan Review .~KENA1.. ENIOR CENTS ~.. We established three goals for the senior citizens program in the current Comprehensive Plan. a). To expand Secretarial Services, this goal has been met! The Administrative Assistant job description has been adjusted to include more secretarial skills. b). Increased Recreation Activities was a goal we wished to achieve without additional funding for increased staff. We were able to hire apart-time (20 hours per week) Activity/Volunteer Coordinator to help us reach our goal. It was not possible for us to achieve this goal without additional staff. The additional employee has enabled both the Director and Administrative Assistant to provide "quality" services to our elderly clients. c). The funding for the additional 20 units to Vintage Pointe Manor has not be obtained. We have the plans developed for the complex addition. Memo/Review, cont. c). Continued. Although, it appears it would be possible to apply for Federal funding the Kenai City Council has not been excited about adding Federal funds to the project. Kevin, thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please feel free to contact me should you or the Planning and Zoning Commission have additional questions. KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION BOROUGH ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ASSEMBLY CHAMBERS ,! ~ SOLDOTNA, ALASKA ~ November 13, 1995 7:30 P.M. Tentative Agenda John Hammelman A. CALL TO ORDER Chaimaan Areawide Tema Expires 1996 B. ROLL CALL Philip Bryson vice chairman C. APPROVAL OF REGULAR AGENDA AND ADOPTION OF xena; city CONSENT AGENDA Tema Expires 1998 Ann whitraaore-Painter All items on the consent agenda are considered routine and noncontroversial b the Plannin Parliamentarian Commission and will be a roved b one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these Moose Pass Area Pp Y Tema Expires 1997 items unless a Planning Commissioner or someone from the public so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Peggy ~'a. Boscacci regular agenda. PC Member Seldovia City Tema Expires 1997 If you wish to comment on a consent agenda item or a regular agenda item other than a public hearing, please advise the recording secretary before the meeting begins, and she will inform the Wayne Carpenter Chairman of your wish to comment. PC Member Seward City Tana Expires 1996 1. Time Extension Requests Hobert Clutes PC Member a. Unforgettable Eadie S/D No. 2 Aneh®r Pnint KPB File 94-056 Tema Expires 1998 Location: Halbouty Road west of Daniels Lake we§ Coleman PC Member sofa®tna city b. Rivendale Estates No. 4 Terrra Expires 1996 KFB Fiie 94-173 Ler°y oannaway Location: Cottonwood Lane north of North Ford Road, Pc Member a roximatel four miles east of Anchor Point Homer City pp Y Term Expires 1998 Ellis xen~ley, Jr. c. Puffin Acres S/D No. 2 PC Member KPB File 94-029 Alikiski Location: Homer East Road between Homer and Tema Expires 1996 Kachemak City vaeant §eat PC Member 1Casil®rArea 2. Plats Granted Administrative Approval Term Expires 1997 ~ T®m icn®C~ 3. KPBPC Resolutions -None PC Member Cooper Landing Tama Expires 1998 Don Gilman, Mayor 4. Coastal Management Program Lisa Par Pl a. Coastal Management Program Consistency Reviews Sweppy in. Assistaa ' ( ~ 1) Homer; Beluga Lake 6, Floatplane Dock; Tulin; AK ~ 9509-17AA i b. Conclusive Consistency Determinations Received from _ ~~. DGC c. Administrative Determinations 5. Commissioner Excused Absences a. Ar~rl Whitmore-Painter 6. Minutes a. October 23, 1995 D. PUBLIC COMMENT AND PRESENTATIONS (Items other than those appearing on the agenda. Limited to three minutes per speaker unless previous arrangements are made.) E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. A Resolution in Support of Classification of Borough-Owned Land in Conjunction with Community Land Use Plans F. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Petition to (1) Vacate "bulldozed" trail as shown on U.S. Survey 3373; and (2) Vacate a trail within Lot 1, Nubbleof Hill Subdivision; and (3) Vacate all utility easements within said. Lot 1; and (4) Vacate unused portion often foot wide pedestrian and ATV access easement within said Lot 1. Also within Section 24, Township 8 South, Range 14 West, Seward Meridian, Alaska KPB File 95-167 G. VACATIONS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING -None H. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. Blueberry Hill, Tract 1 P/W Holman/Marchant PC Resolution 95-26: Granting a platting waiver for certain lands 2 within Section 7, Township 5 North, Range 10 West, Seward Meridian, Alaska KPB File 95-172 2. Survey of Record Gov't Lots 1 & 2, Sec 5, T3S, R14W Amendment Request Plat 95-21 Homer Recording District KPB File 95-181 I. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS 1. Bend in The River S/D Soland Addn. Salmon Run Funny River Road; Preliminary Swan Surveying KPB File 95-168 2. Blakley S/D Part Two, Barker-Harris Addn. Cooper Landing; Preliminary Swan Surveying KPB File 95-175 3. Little Kahuna S/D; Caribou Hills Preliminary; Swan Surveying KPB File 95-176 4. Moose Range Meadows Phase II, Addition One Kenai River; Preliminary Swan Surveying KPB File 95-179 5. Alaska State Land Survey 93-150 Cooper Landing; Preliminary R.L. Button KPB File 95-169 6. Soldotna Junction S/D Addition No. 19 Soldotna Junction; Preliminary McLane Consulting Group KPB File 95-086 7. Questa Woods Subdivision No. 5 North of Seward, South of Bear Lake; Preliminary Johnson Land Surveying KPB File 95-170 8. Oceanview S/D Ambulance Corps Replat 3 Seward City; Preliminary Johnson Land Surveying KPB File 95-171 9. Questa Woods Subdivision No. 6 North of Seward, South of Bear Lake; Preliminary Johnson Land Surveying KPB File 95-180 10. Homer United Methodist Church Homer City; Preliminary Roger W. Imhoff KPB File 95-173 11. Kalbea S/D Northway Addn. K-Beach Road, Cook Inlet; Preliminary Whitford Surveying KPB File 95-174 12. Valhalla Heights S/D Wisniewski Addn. Kenai City; Preliminary Wince-Corthell-Bryson KPB File 95-178 13. Holm S/D Arbucci Replat Kasilof River; Preliminary Integrity Surveys KPB File 95-135 J. COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS -None K. OTHERlNEW BUSINESS L. ASSEMBLY COP~IP~IEi•TTS M. DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS N. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS O. ADJOURNMENT The next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting is November 27, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. in the Assembly Chambers at the Borough Administration Building in Soldotna. 4 PLEASE NOTE: The annual election of officers is scheduled for the November 27, 1995 meeting. The December 11 meeting is the only Planning Commission meeting that will be held in December. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATIONAL ITEMS NO ACTION REQUIRED 1. Seward Planning Commission October 4, 1995 Minutes 2. AML Touchstone, Volume 5, No. 5, November 1995 KENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA __ \~ ADVISORY BOARD Thursday, October 5, 1995 Soldotna City Hall Council Chambers -- I. CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call Members Present: Duane Harp, Ben Ellis, Pat Bower, Tom Knock, Jeff King, Jim A. Richardson, Peggy Mullen, Ted Wellman, Gary Liepitz for Lance Trasky, Bill Kent for Mark Chase, Irv Carlisle, Robin Nyce, Barbara Jewell for Ken Lancaster, Jack LaShot, Chris Titus Members Absent: Jim H. Richardson. B. Approval of September 14 minutes. The minutes were approved as written. , C. Agenda Changes and Approval. There were no changes. II. PUBLIC COMMENT III. NEW BUSINESS A. Kenai River Flood Update. Lisa Parker and Chris Titus ' gave an overview of the Kenai River flood. Lisa Parker stated that the two areas hardest hit were the Kenai Keys and Big Eddy. The water levels were recorded to have been above the flood level in Cooper Landing 2.5 feet, in the Kenai Keys 3.5 feet and in Soldotna 2.5 feet. The water is still presently about 1.5 feet above "normal" for this time of year. The reason for the Kenai Keys being hit so hard was due to the large volume of water entering the Kenai River from the Killey River. Heavy rains from this summer saturated the ground and when the rains from Typhoon Oscar hit, the ground was too saturated to absorb more water, hence the flooding was increased. Lisa showed a Borough map of the Kenai River with the 100 year flood plain and the actual flooding delineated. It is clear that the flooding exceeded the floodplain boundaries in many areas, .so new floodplain maps are needed to more clearly identify the.fioodplain. There was a lot of concern expressed by river front residents about the lack of adequate warning to people in low lying areas. This was due in part to watching the floods progress in the Seward area while not realizing this could affect the Kenai River.. The flooding was apparent in the lower river on Thursday September 21st. Chris reported watching an increase in the water rise of 3 inches in about 15 minutes. On Friday, September 22nd Alaska State Parks closed some access points such as Bing's Landing and Izaak Walton to help keep boaters off the river. Midday that day, Parks decided to close the entire river to boat ~ traffic after consulting with US Fish and Wildlife Service, Fish & Game and the Kenai Peninsula Borough Emergency Services. Kenai River Advisory Hoard Meeting October 5, 1995 - Minutes Page 2 Boating was prohibited to protect public safety due to all the floating debris, and to protect fragile river banks from boat wake erosion. Kenai Lake and Skilak Lake remained open to boating. Some controversy resulted due to people wanting to go check on their homes in flooded areas. In all, it appears about 376 structures have received flooding, of which 250 or less are primary residences, with others being secondary residences such as small recreational cabins, trailers, etc. The Borough established an Incident Command System on September 23rd to coordinate the emergency response. State Park rangers patrolled the river to provide public welfare checks, secure hazardous materials, and monitor river traffic. On Saturday September 30 the river was opened from Kenai Lake to Sportsman's Lodge. Two days later the river was opened to Skilak Lake.The Kenai River below Skilak will reopen to boat traffic on October 7 now that the river has dropped below flood stage and the banks have dried out somewhat. One of the surprises was that some of the sites where banks had been revegetated survived very well, although they look a little beaten. New bioengineering projects at Riverbend Campground and at Soldotna Creek Park were two that-were inundated but stayed intact as they were intended. Boardwalks that were anchored well also did fine. From this experience, we will learn about the types of structures that work the best. Gary Liepitz from Fish ~ Game added that Fish and Game flew during peak flooding with a USGS hydrologist. There were obvious locations where there were heavy sheens of petroleum products especially near Dow Island and a few other sites where buried fuel tanks or other types of fuel tanks stored in the flood way area were actually discharging. There was no water quality monitoring done during the flood event but there certainly was some level of contamination which is a concern. Jeff King wondered if the River Quest boat gas tank had any problems, but Gary says no sheen was seen from that one. Chris said that there were hundreds of septic systems that were inundated and are still nonfunctional now because of high ground water levels. Izaak Walton Campground was 80o flooded and one of the outhouses was completely flooded. Chris described the Disaster Assistance Center that has been set up in Soldotna in the Superstructures Building. Agencies such as the Army Corps of Engineers, Parks, ADF&G, DEC, Red Cross, Salvation Army, FEMA, KP Boro, and the IRS are there to answer questions for landowners about how to restore their homes, how to deal with possibly contaminated drinking water, what to do about bank stabilization issues, etc. This may be the precursor for Kenai River Advisory Board Meeting ~~ October 5, 1995 - Minutes the Kenai River Center. Page _..3 Irv Carlisle wanted to know what the prevailing attitude of flood victims? Will they continue to build or live in the flood plain so that instead of 376 residences being affected in the next flood, will we have 600 homes affected? Lisa replied that it does not appear to have made a difference to most folks. People are just cleaning up and going back in. Peggy Mullen stated that she is very concerned that the flood plain map should become more realistic. Secondly, if FEMA and the Boro will allow people to rebuild or to continue to build structures in the flood plain the implications of the pollutants involved should be considered. B. Orientation - Review of Past Projects 1. 1992 Kenai River Carrying Capacity Study, Chris Titus, DPOR. Marty Rutherford, Deputy Commissioner of DNR had asked staff to review some of the past happenings and the 1992 Carrying Capacity was one of them. Chris reviewed the 1992 Kenai River Carrying Capacity for the board. This review can best be summarized by referring to the report titled "Important Findings and Implications of Management". Chris reviewed the management alternatives that this board has suggested. Some of them are as follows: -Limiting guides - limiting the number of guide boats on the river would be ineffective in reducing the overall number of boats on .the river unless the number of guides are drastically reduced. Guide boats make up approximately 1/3 of the total boats on any average day. Better to work on the underlying reasons for guide limitation requests such as inappropriate or aggressive behavior. -Develop more access to less used areas of the river - with growing concerr}s about habitat pro~edtion and interest in maintaining banks in their natural` state, this idea is not considered appropriate until bank angling impacts can be reduced on currently impacted lands. -Educational efforts should be implemented to help people become more responsible users of the river. -Temporarily close public use sites that have been heavily impacted by human use until they are rehabilitated. This has been accomplished at five of our State Parks units, (Bing's Landing, Funny River, Morgan's Landing, Big Eddy and the Pillars) with great success. Occupant limits have been discussed as in closing Kenai River Advisory Board Meeting October 5, 1995 - Minutes areas when the parking areas are full. Page 4 -Implement user fees to pay for improved 'management. Presently there. is no legal authority for Parks to charge user fees of recreational users on the river except at parking lots, boat launches or campgrounds. The Legislature would need to authorize the division to collect a user fee for the river. -Draft new park regulations designed to reduce user conflicts, such as prohibiting guides from leaving clients unattended, prohibiting anchoring in traffic channels or leaving unattended buoys, prohibiting anchor dragging as a fishing method (this last recommendation was made to the Board of Fish). In 1994 and 1995, small scale surveys were done to document any changes in impacts and crowding conditions on the river since the main study was done. The surveys concentrated on bank anglers in the upper river and lower river power boat anglers. The 1994 survey showed people were more willing to accept use permits. The 1995 survey results have not been evaluated yet, and the Board will be briefed at a later date. 2. 1992-93 "An Assessment of the Cumulative Impacts of Development and Human IIses on the Fish Habitat in the Kenai River (also known as the 309 study) Gary Liepitz, ADF&G - H&R Div. Gary gave a slide presentation of the 309 study and summarized the information contained in the handout provided titled: "An Assessment of the Cumulative Impacts of Development and Human Uses on Fish Habitat in the Kenai River, Kenai, Alaska." This study evaluated the relative value of different habitat types and their suitability for providing rearing habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon, and documented the alteration of natural conditions on the river banks to determine how much rearing habitat has been lost due to human impacts. 3. Renai River Water Quality Study (no presentation - .copies of study wild be provided) Due to Dennis Randa's concerns regarding water quality issues that were brought to the board at the last meeting, a copy of the ADF&G Kenai River Water Quality Study was provided. No one from ADF&G was available to present this tonight, but there will be a presenter at a future meeting. C. Board Organization 1. Election of Officers. Jim A. Richardson was nominated for Chairman by Tom Knock. Peggy Mullen was nominated as vice chair by Duane Harp. The Board supported both Kenai River Advisory Board Meeting ,j October 5, 1995 - Minutes Page-5 nominations by providing unanimous consent. Jim and Peggy will~`~ serve as Board officers for the next year. 2. Discussion of state agency representatives -voting privileges. Ted Wellman felt that it is inappropriate for agencies to be voting members as they are voting on advice they are giving to their own agencies. He feels that this Board should be providing advice from the public's perspective for agencies to consider. Duane Harp advised that we need to consider who the board is providing advice to. There may be situations in which the agencies have the responsibility to abstain from a vote, so maybe voting should be on a case by case basis. Irv Carlisle has never been involved in any other process where agencies did vote. In order for a process such as this to work, public perception is one of the most important things. It should not look like a bunch of agency representatives telling the public how to be regulated. Jim A. Richardson suggested that the agency voting issue should be defined in the bylaws. A Bylaws committee should address this before the next meeting and provide recommendations. It was decided to wait on voting on this matter until the committees have been established. 3. Establishment of special and standing committees: ie, bylaw revision committee, Kenai River Center committee, Kenai River Comprehensive Management Plan revision committee, education/information committee, permit review committee. Jeff King recommended that members of the general public be permitted on the committees. The following committees were formed with members as follows: Bylaw Revision ,committee: Ted Well~~ttari as Chairperson, Pat Bower, Robin Nyce, Chris Titus. Kenai River Center Committee: Chris Titus as Chairperson, Ben Ellis, Tom Knock, Lance Trasky, Pat Bower, Peggy Mullen. Kenai River Comprehensive Management Plan Revision Committee: All members of the board will be on this committee. Chairperson to be voted on at next meeting on November 16. Education/Info Committee: Jeff King as Chairperson, Ben Ellis, Robin Nyce, Peggy Mullen, Irv Carlisle, Bill Kent, Jim H. Richardson. Renai River Advisory Board Meeting Page 6 October 5, 1995 - Minutes Permit Review Committee: Suzanne Fisler as Chairperson, Ted Wellman, Lance Trasky, Jack LaShot, Irv Carlisle, Bill Stockwell, Duane Harp, Jim A. Richardson. Legislative Committee: Ben Ellis as Chairperson, Jeff King, Jack LaShot, Jim A. Richardson, Ken Lancaster, Jim H. Richardson. 4. Discussion - how to address "hot button" topics. It was decided most "hot button" items could and should be discussed through committees first. V. PUBLIC CO1~IIrIENT VI. ADJOURNMENT A. Board Comments IRV: Agency members, being the best resource, should keep committees and/or board informed of "hot topics." Reminded the board that public comments should be entertained only at intervals indicated by the agenda respecting the board's discussion of agenda items. TOM: Borough Kenai River Working Group will meet Monday, October 9, 1995. JEFF: Will help to facilitate the float field trip. He will have boats available to take members. DUANE: Thank you to Jim A. Richardson and Peggy Mullen for accepting their new roles as President and Vice President. CHRIS: Suggestion to hold further meetings at Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association building on Kalifornsky Beach Road as it is easier to get people to and from Kenai airport efficiently. B. Date%igenda of Next Meeting. ~ The Kenai River Comprehensive Management Plan Revision Committee (all board members) will meet from 3 pm to 6 pm on November 16, 1995 at Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association Building. The regular board meeting will meet at 7:00 pm at CIAA. A Kenai River Float trip was scheduled for Saturday October 7th. Board members interested should meet at Stewart's Landing at lpm. To Do List: Water Quality report, User Fee legislation, look into teleconferencing for committees, future meeting in Cooper Landing or Sterling. Robbins' Retirement Communities /~~ 430 South 600 West P.O. Box 972 Sarrtayuin, UT 84655 (80 I) 754-5768 FAX (80 I) 754-3233 November 13, 1995 City of Kenai City Council Jack Le Shot Planning and Zoning Board 210 Fidalgo, Suite 200 Kenai, Alaska, 99611-7794 Dear City Council, I recently had a conversation with Kim Howard. I want to thank you for continually updating me on the developments concerning the proposed Daubenspeck property. t was very concerned when the issue of making a section of the property designated commercial property was discussed. This would have seriously jeopardized the project that has been proposed. This is such a beautiful site. Having the designated commercial frontage would have threatened the proposed use of the property as a Retirement Community Development. The issue of having a commercial property would leave open the way for a more heavily used road access. This would have threatened the life and safety of the residents in this Retirement Community. I am very grateful that this is no longer a possibility. I would liked to see the site remain as beautiful as it currently is. The developed property should be an asset to the to the City and should remain in harmony with the nature of this beautiful location. The site plan being developed includes a beautiful club house with an indoor pool and recreation center for Seniors. This should be in keeping with the original intent of the designated use of the property. The condominiums that have been designed are 1300 square feet each with private parking and lawn areas. A Large garden and park area runs through the center of the property.. A running track loops around the park area providing a safe area for outdoor activities for the adventurous. The Seniors most likely to purchase a condominium in this development will be younger than in the Autumn Court and much more active. This will greatly help to establish the Retirement Industry in the City of Kenai. Kenai has a beautiful city with lots of activities that Seniors would benefit from. Kenai has much to offer the senior retiring in their city. The. positive attributes of Kenai will allow the active retiree a priveledged life style that is in great demand. There are many advantages to Kenai for this Retirement Community Industry. Some of the more notable: benefits would be the jobs created for the area, -the property. tax base, the enhanced Senior Resources, increased economic stability, as well as the retirement dollars to be reinvested back into the local economy. This project will be a "Crowning Jewel' for the Kenai Peninsula. I look forward to developing the Daubenspeck property in keeping with the Retirement Living Industry Philosophy that was discussed with the City Officials, and as it was presented to the Planning and Zoning Board at our last presentation. ~ I understandthatthe Parks and Recreation Department must make a recommendation to release the property before the ordinance can be scheduled for council. If the land is released, I will make a formal presentation on this proposed site at the Council's January 3rd, meeting. l have made flight reservations to present the formal project to you at that time. I also understand that the issue of the previously contaminated site must be cleaned up before the lease application can be approved. I will continue to work closely with Kim to insure this is completed before the lease application is submitted. As I understand, the lease application would be available if the Council were to release the property from it's current intended use. I have completed the lease application and will. look forward to submitting it to the Council with a $2,000 good faith deposit. I am also anxious to receive the current Market Appraisal to confirm the price of the land should it be purchased once the project has been completed. I understand that the time frame to complete the new construction of the project would be 2 years from the date of the signing of the lease application. The land would be available for purchase once the project has been completed according to the submitted site plan and final blue print specffications. ff I understand correctly, the Council will meet on December 20 to give their consent to add this proposal tv the agenda. A Public Hearing will take place on January 3rd. I will be at this meeting to present a formal presentation concerning our intended site as well as to give an update on the Autumn Court project. If, approvals are given on January 3rd, then the lease application would become effective February 3rd. A planning and zoning meeting would take place February 14th to review the lease application and then on February 21st, the Council would have an opportunity to approve the requested lease. I look forward to working with the City of Kenai to develop the Senior Retirement Community the City would be proud of. I am grateful for this opportunity to work with you. Sincerely, Lynn E. Robbins President ~~~ PIIBLIC MEETING NOTICE Due to Council participation at the AML Conference in Valdez, the regular Renai City Council meeting scheduled for November 15, 1995 has been changed and will now meet on November 22, 1995. The meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. in the Kenai council chambers. The public is invited to attend and participate. Because of the change in the above-mentioned Kenai City Council meeting date, the Renai Planning ~ Zoning Commission has moved their regular meeting from November 22, 1995 to November 21, 1995. The meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. in the Kenai council chambers. The public is invited to attend and participate. Carol L. Freas City Clerk Publish: November 13 and 20, 1995 ~1 ~ Memorandum Date: 11 /17/95 To: Beautification Committee Council on Aging Harbor Commission Library Commission Parks & Recreation Commission Planning & Zoning Commission Historic District Board CC: Carol Freas, City Clerk From: Marilyn Kebschull, Administrative Assistant RE: Date for Work Session Ms. Freas, has asked all commissions, committees, and boards to select a date for a work session. Ms. Freas will attend this session and conduct a lesson on parliamentary procedure. This will be a joint session for all committees, commissions, and boards. The meeting will be held in council chambers at 7 p.m. on the date chosen. To make the selection process easier, Ms. Freas has provided a list of dates to choose from. They are: January 18, 22, 25, 29, or 31St Each commission, committee, or board should select a first and second choice. After all commissions, committees, and boards have submitted their first and second choices, the date will be set and everyone will be notified. `.> November 17, 199.5 i City Of Kenai Planning Department 210 Fidalgo Suite 200 Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 To: City of Kenai Planning Department Re: Application to rezone property described as portions of Government Lots 31 and 32. Section 33, T6N, R11W, SM Kenai Recording District from Rural Residence 1 (RR1) to General Commerical (CG). I urge you to resist any attempt to rezone this area. We have lived on Lots 25 and 26 for 36 years. This is our home in this area. I have a Duplex on Cinderella Street Lot #40 also a Duplex on Cinderella Street Lot #33 (Tract B Madhatters Subdivision) and a house on Lot #20 at the intersection of Cinderella Street and Magic Avenue. There are five families living in this quiet low traffic area that do not want a commercial unit next door to change the environment they have enjoyed for many years. Anyone having lots #31 and #32 are directly across the street, in the front door, of the homes where children are being raised. There has been other attempts to change the Rural Residential zoning which have failed. We are determined to stop this attempt to REZONE. This not only effects the Cinderella Street area, but we feel the frontage, directly across from the Kenai Central high School and the Kenai Middle School, will eventually resemble the highway between Sterling, Alaska and Soldotna. All types of tourist traps-Garages-Equipment Wards-RV Parks and other miscellaneous businesses. Respectfully, J f. (`+~ ~Florine A. McCollum Florine A. McCollum 399 McCollum Drive Kenai, Alaska 99611 November 16, 1995 City of Kenai Planning Department 210 Fidalgo, Suite 200 Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 To: City of Kenai Planning Department Re: Application to rezone property described as portions of Government Lots 31 and 32, Section 33, T6N, R11 W, SM, Kenai Recording District from Rural Residence 1 (RR1) to General Commercial (CG}. We would like to join the people within 300' of the subject property in objecting to changing the zoning of these lots from Rural Residence 1 (RR1) to General Commercial (CG). It was ten years ago that my neighbor Ingrid Manzek and I canvassed the entire area shown on the map to form a water and sewer district. All the residents, even those not close to the Spur Highway, were very concerned the area keep the Rural Residence disposition. To accomplish this required making several trips around the neighborhood getting signatures, in addition to making sure all the I's were dotted and the T's were crossed, to satisfy the powers that be. Rick Baldin very generously donated the legal work so that all the bases would be covered. Everyone would hate to think that all our work could be so easily undone. We strenuously object to the rezoning proposal which would destroy our residential neighborhood and property values. Thank you for the opportunity to be heard. Respectfully, ~~~ /f Harvey and Jo-An Buzzed` 1103 Aliak Kenai, AK 99611 o~~ ~~~c~/Z~ CITY' OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning application `MAPS' Nov 21, 1995 A majority of the residents and land owners in this section of Kenai petitioned to have this zoned for single family residence only. We were granted our request. Now comes a commercial entity who wants to rezoned it to facilitate commerce. This, was precisely what we wanted to avoid when we asked to have it zoned in the first place. This is a residential area, directly across from a high school and middle school. It is NOT a place for commerce. In the first place we were not advised because we live more than 300 feet away. That is downright silly. Anyone involved in the original zoning. should have been notified. Three hundred feet in proximity of the lots in question (for notification) falls far short of the notification that needs to be done. Not only does it appear arbitrary it makes no sense. The petitioner, I assume, has already ugli~ed the property and in doing so filled the drainage ditch completely full of trees/slash/dirt. It's piled higher than my head. I think they started like they mean to continue and its indicative of what would come This should STAY zoned only for residential. Thank you for your attention Vesta Leigh P.O. Box 905 Kenai, Alaska 99611 DATE: November 21,1995 TO: Planning and Zoning FROM: Barry L. Campbell RE: Proposal to Change Zoning to allow for opening of Convenience Store Across from Middle/High School I am writing to the Planning and Zoning Committee to oppose the changing of zoning across from the Middle/High Schools in Kenai for the opening of a .convenience store. As a parent with children in the Middle School I oppose this for the reasons: 1. In all convenience stores tobacco products are sold and will be accessible to the students. 2. In many of the convenience stores in the area, liquor is sold. I strongly feel that having liquor sold very close to schools should not be permitted. 3. I feel that having a convenience store will create an unhealthy place for the students to hang out and will create an atmosphere where they may be tempted to get into trouble. As a local Medical Practitioner I oppose this change for: 1. At the present time, a two lane road exists to be crossed, but in the near future it will be increase to a four lane with turn lane for the students to cross. This will create a danger both for the the students and drivers. 2. For the reasons above that expose children to tobacco and alcohol, Thank you for allowing me to give my perspectives on this issue. F,~- ~ `_ , Laura Sievert 3329 Beaver Loop Kenai, AK 99611 !~ ~ \.,i /f/~./~~ ~'~ °' " 1 ~~ NOV 1995 ;' e ~ p~~c~i~~s~ ~~ '' ,,; ~~ f~S/~PCi SdI`~q~5 ~~i~ I .. J I 1 ' ~ !/ City of Kenai Planning and Zoning: November 19, 1995 I would like to discourage the Committee from approving the zoning change that has been applied for for the property located across from KCHS and the middle school. Kenai is overrun with vacant stores. Our commercial area is excessively spread out. Over the last few years Kenai has lost its downtown and is beginning to resemble the suburban sprawl that plagues so much of the Lower 48. Our town is not friendly to the pedestrian. These are major problems that need to be addressed by the planning commission. Changing the zoning along Spur Highway from Residential to Residential/Commercial will exacerbate our sprawl problem. I believe I that the commercial area should not drift out of town any further than it already has. Locating a store across from a high school will encourage students to leave campus. Crossing the new highway is extremely dangerous; it will be crossed dozens if not hundreds of times a day by high- and middle- school students. Furthermore, problems will occur if the area near the high school becomes a place to 'hang out'; already intruders are beginning to be a problem at KCHS. Please do not change the zoning here or anywhere along Spur Highway. Sincerely, .~ ~~ r J ~ ~} v ~- D ~' m w ~ m Ot w ~ ~ a x o a a O ~ E C '; G q ~ D W w A a ~ z v ° w w ~ ~ a a~ a a ~ 9 C O D ~ n E _ "~ A w a ~ z ~ ~ w v ~ a ~ ~ ~ m n ~ H D ~`'' <' _ w v m a w ~ ~ a x a' a ~ n ~ E 1 C O D r J D ~ ~ W Aw v z ° a a w v a i a ~ o H c a a+ x a w ~ a Ca9 ~ ~ t ~U' ~ H ~,,/1, Y ~u*? ~~-- V, `~, ,r v~ D . ~ w a ~ z x a w a ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ a a a m ~ ~ c n