The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009-03-18 Council PacketKENAI CITY COUNCIL — REGULAR MEETING MARCH 18, 2009 7:00 P.M. KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS http: / /www.ci,kenai.ak.us ITEM A: CALL TO ORDER 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Approval 4. Consent Agenda 5. *All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non- controversial by the council and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a council member so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders. ITEM B: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS (10 minutes) 1. David Horton -- ATV and Snow Machine Use on City Streets ............................ ITEM C: UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS (3 minutes) ITEM D: REPORTS OF KPB ASSEMBLY LEGISLATORS AND COUNCILS ITEM E: PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimony limited to 3 minutes per speaker.) 1. Ordinance No. 2389-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.260 to Better Provide for Enforcement for Violations of the Kenai City Code and to Provide for Appeal of Administrative Enforcement Orders to the Board of Adjustment ....................... (Clerk's Note: At its March 4, 2009 meeting, Council moved to adopt Ordinance No. 2389-2009 and subsequently postponed action to allow time to correct wording omitted from Attachment A. The motion to adopt is active.) 1 W a. Substitute Ordinance No. 2389-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.260 to Better Provide for Enforcement for Violations of the Kenai City Code and to Provide for Appeal of Administrative Enforcement Orders to the Board ofAdjustment..................................................................................... 12 2. Ordinance No. 2391-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) to Allow an Extension for the Ninety (90) Day Time Limit for Skirting in Mobile Homes Placed in Mobile Home Parks.......................................................................... 16 3. Ordinance No. 2392-2009 -- Amending KMC 21.05.085, Airport Fuel Flowage Fee................................................................................................................ 18 4. Resolution No. 2009-06 -- Supporting the Efforts of the Kenai Watershed Forum to Secure Financial Support, Both Private and Public, for Renovation of the House and Adjacent Property at Soldotna Creek Park Leased to the Kenai Watershed Forum and Owned by the City of Soldotna...................................... 21 5. Resolution No. 2009-07 -- Supporting the Continued Use of the Cultural and Historical Name of Shk'ituk'tnu for the Creek Situated Approximately One Mile North of the Kenai Spur Highway, East of Marathon Road ................................ 22 6. Resolution No. 2009-08 -- Awarding the Bid to Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc. for Vintage Pointe Dry Sprinkler System Replacement - 2009 for the Total Amount of$49,574.00...................................................................... 40 7. Resolution No. 2009-09 -- Awarding the bid to World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc. for Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement - 2009 for the Total Amount of$94,297.00...................................................................... 42 8. Resolution No. 2009-10 -- Authorizing the Kenai Police Department to Participate With the Bureau of Highway Patrol Traffic Team and to Authorize the Kenai Police Department to Hire a New Officer to Meet Staffing Needs Within the City of Kenai as a Result of the Department's Participation with the Bureau of Highway Patrol Traffic Team............................................................ 44 9. Resolution No. 2009-11 -- Authorizing a Budget Transfer Within the City Shop Department to Cover Costs in Excess of Budgeted Amounts for Operating andRepair Supplies....................................................................................... 49 ITEM F: MINUTES 1. "Regular Meeting of March 4, 2009.................................................................. 51 ITEM G: UNFINISHED BUSINESS ITEM H: NEW BUSINESS 1. Ratification of Bills......................................................................................... 72 2. Approval of Purchase Orders Exceeding$15,000.............................................. 73 3. Ordinance No. 2393-2009 -- Amending the Official Kenai Zoning Map by Rezoning Approximately 22 Acres Located North of the Kenai Spur Highway From McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek From Rural Residential 1 (RR1) and Conservation (C) to Limited Commercial(LC)............................................. 75 4. *Ordinance No. 2394-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Reve Appropriations by $45,501 in the Airport Fund and by in the Runway Improvement Capital Project Fund for Additional Phases of the Airport Apron Pavement Rehabilitation Project............................................................ 326 5. *Ordinance No. 2395-2009 -- Increasing Revenues and Appropriations by $2,415,000 in the Airport Apron Rehabilitation— Stimulus Fund for the Grant Funds Awarded Through the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) StimulusPackage."......................................................................................... 328 6. Discussion -- Schedule Work Session/Kenai Salmon Task Force Presentation... 329 7. Discussion -- Draft Ordinance -- KMC 14.20.270/Amendment Procedures........ 332 ITEM I: COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Council on Aging............................................................................................ 2. Airport Commission........................................................................................ 3. Harbor Commission....................................................................................... 335 4. Library Commission....................................................................................... 339 5. Parks 8a Recreation Commission.................................................................... . 6. Planning & Zoning Commission...................................................................... 345 7. Miscellaneous Commissions and Committees a. Beautification Committee........................................................................... 352 b. Alaska Municipal League Report................................................................. -- c. Mini -Grant Steering Committee.................................................................. d. Advisory Cemetery Committee.................................................................... e. Kenai Convention & Visitors Bureau........................................................... f. Salmon Task Force..................................................................................... ITEM J: REPORT OF THE MAYOR ........................................................ ITEM K: ADMINISTRATION REPORTS 1. City Manager................................................................................................. 356 2. City Attorney.................................................................................................. 3. City Clerk...................................................................................................... ITEM L: 1. Citizens (five minutes) 2. Council ITEM M: PENDING LEGISLATION (Items listed below are legislation which will be addressed at a later date as noted and are not action items for this meeting.) Ordinance No. 2362-2008 -- Amending the Official Kenai Zoning Map by Rezoning Tract A, Papa Joe's Subdivision, Chumley Replat From Rural Residential 1 (RR I) to Limited Commercial (LC. Ordinance No. 2365-2008 -- Amending KMC 1.80.010 by Increasing the Mayor's Salary From $900 to $1,000 Per Month and Council Members' Salaries From $400 to $500 Per Month. (Clerk's Note: Ordinance No. 2365-2008 was tabled to the first meeting in July, 2009, to allow for further consideration of a salary increase during the budget FYI 0 budget process.) Ordinance No. 2347-2008 -- Repealing the Existing KMC 1.15.040 and KMC 1.15.050(c) Regarding Preparation, Distribution a_nd Publication of the Agenda and Replacing Them with a New Section KMC 1.15.040 Entitled, Agenda and Packet - Development -Preparation -Distribution -Publication -Late Materials. (Clerk's Note: Ordinance No. 2347-2008, Substitute B was moved for adoption at the January 21, 2009 Council Meeting and subsequently tabled, no time certain. Within 60 days, items from the ordinance are to be incorporated into a suggested policy as well as an ordinance identifying those items to codify.) EXECUTIVE SESSION -- None Scheduled, ITEM N: ADJOURNMENT INFORMATION ITEMS MARCH 18, 2009 Page No. 3/ 18/2009 Purchase Orders Between $2,500 and $15,000 for council review............................................................................................................ 367 2/9/09 Commissioner Irwin, DNR letter related to discharge of firearm regulation proposed change............................................................................. 370 3. 3/09 Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board meeting agenda and 2/ 12/09 meeting minutes........................................................................ 371 13.40.010 Chapter 13.40 impose a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00). OFF -ROAD OPERATIONS OF MOTOR (c) On a City or State maintained roadway, VEHICLES sidewalk, or on a path or trail designated for bicycles or pedestrians, unless such travel is Sections: necessary to go around an obstruction or 13.40.010 Definitions. hazard. Upon conviction of a violation of 13.40.020 Off --road vehicle operation. this section, the court shall impose a fine of 13.40.030 Special stops required. not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00), 13.40.040 Speed limits. (d) On any City or State road right-of-way that 13.40.050 Helmets. has been landscaped, seeded, or otherwise 13.40.055 Requirement that minors wear improved. Upon conviction of a violation of certified protective helmets. this section, the court shall impose a fine of 13.40.060 Operator. not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00). 13.40.070 Parental and guardian (e) In such a manner as to produce sufficient responsibility. noise to disturb the peace and quiet of 13.40.080 Penalty. another. (f) In such a manner as to cause damage to 13.40.010 Definitions. improved property or destruction to the An off -road motor vehicle is: terrain. (a) Any motor vehicle not authorized for (g) The court may offer a defendant convicted operation on a public roadway according to of a violation of this section the option of State law or regulation. performing community work in lieu of a fine (b) Any motorized vehicle that is being operated or a portion of the fine if the court finds the off of the maintained streets and roadways. defendant is unable to pay the fine. The (Ord. 883) hourly value of community work in lieu of fine is to be the Alaska minimum wage. 1.3.40,020 Off -road vehicle operation. (h) The court may order a defendant convicted It small be unlawful for any person to operate of a violation of this section to make an off -road vehicle in the City of Kenai: restitution to the victim or other person (a) On public or private property without the injured by the offense. Prior to ordering any express or implied consent of the owner, his such restitution, the court must make an authorized agent, or representative. Upon inquiry into the amount of restitution the conviction of a violation of this section, the defendant could reasonably be expected to court shall impose a fine of not less than one pay. A defendant is prosumed to have the hundred dollars ($100.00). ability to pay restitution unless the defendant (b) On municipal park lands, except where establishes the inability to pay by a specifically authorized, municipal preponderance of the evidence. An order of playgrounds and school playgrounds areas restitution under this section does not limit except by special authorization or in a any civil liability of the defendant arising specially designated area. Upon conviction out of the defendant's conduct. of a violation of this section, the court shall (i) For purposes of this section, the term impose a fine of not less than one hundred "person" includes the State of Alaska or a dollars ($100.00). Upon conviction of a political subdivision thereof in addition to violation of this section, the court shall the meaning set forth in KMC 10.05.030. (Kenai Sopp. No. 88,?-06) 230 -1- 13.40.020 (j) Not withstanding the provisions of this see- 6on, the City or state, or their agents, may operate machinery or off -road vehicles in otherwise prohibited areas for public safety, maintenance, repair, cleaning and upkeep. (Orris. 983, 1171, 171.9-96, 2284-2008) 13.40.030 Special stops required. In addition to obedience of all state traffic regulations, an off -road vehicle operated on a City or State road right-of-way must come to a full stop prior to crossing any street, road, or private drive. (Ord. 883) 13.40.040 Speed limits. The speed limit shall be ten (10) mph while riding in a right-of-way of a residential or busi- ness area, a parking lot, or as authorized in KMC 1.3.40.020(c), or in close proximity of another person(s). (Ord. 883) 13.40.050 Helmets. No person under the age of eighteen (18) shall be allowed to ride an off -road vehicle in the City without wearing a helmet which meets safety standards set by the State of Alaska. (Ord. 883) 13.40.055 Requirement that minors wear certified, protective helmets. (a) It is unlawful for any person under sixteen (16) years of age to operate or ride upon in - line or roller skates, skateboards, scooters, coasters, toy motorized vehicles, gasoline or electric motor -driven cycles or scooters, bi- cycles, tricycles, unicycles, or any similar vehicles on any highways, streets, roads, bike -ways or trails, unless that person wears a certified, protective helmet that is properly fitted and that is properly fastened. This re- quirement also applies to any minor who rides in a restraining seat, trailer, backpack, or similar child -restraining device, used by someone who operates in -line or roller skates, skateboards, scooters, coasters, toy motor vehicles, gasoline or electric motor- 230-1 driven cycles or scooters, bicycles, tricycles, unicycles, or any similar vehicles. A parent or guardian having control or custody of an unemancipated minor whose conduct vio- lates this section shall be liable for the fine imposed by this section. (b) No parent or guardian of any unemancipated minor shall allow the minor under sixteen (16) years of age to violate this section. (c) The fine for the first violation of this section shall be twenty-five dollars ($25.00). The fine for a second violation of this section shall be thirty-five dollars ($35.00). The fine for a third or subsequent violation shall be fifty dollars ($50.00). (d) The first time a person is charged with a vio- lation of this section, the Court or City may dismiss the charge upon presentation of evi- dence that the person has purchased or ob- tained a certified, protective helmet. (e) A certified, protective helmet is a helmet containing a manufacturer certification that it meets the standards of the American Na- tional Standards Institute, American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). (f) A violation of this section cannot be used as evidence of negligence or comparative neg- ligence. (Ord. 2052-2004) 13.40.060 Operator. The vehicle operator must be able to reach and operate all controls necessary for safety. (Ord. 883) 13.40.070 Parental and guardian responsibility. When a person under the age of eighteen (18) years violates any part of this chapter, his or her parent or guardian is also in violation if: (a) The parent or guardian knowingly allows the violation to take place; or (Kenai supp. No. 93. 16-08) 13,40.070 (b) The parent or guardian fails to take reason- able precautions to prevent the violation. (Ord. 883) 13.40.080 Penalty. A violation of any provision of this chapter shall be punishable by a fine as provided for vio- lationsin KMC 13.05.010. (Ords. 883, 1240) (Kmt Supp. No. 93, I04)8) 230-2 -3- Suggested by: Planning & Zoning/Administration ehe aiyaf CITY OF KENAI AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING KMC 14.20.260 TO BETTER PROVIDE FOR ENFORCEMENT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE KENAI CITY CODE AND TO PROVIDE FOR APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT ORDERS TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. WHEREAS, KMC 1.4.20.260 provides for the administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 does mention the role of the City's Planner in administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 should be amended to define the role of the Planner in administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 also needs to be amended to better provide for administrative enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code and other portions of the City Code; and, including enforcement orders and administrative fines; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 should include the ability of a person served with an enforcement order to appeal that order to the City's Board of Adjustment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that KMC 14.20.060 is hereby amended as shown on Attachment "A." PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 18+h day of March, 2009. PAT PORTER, MAYOR ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk Introduced: February 18, 2009 Second Reading: March 4, 2009 Adopted: March 18, 2009 Effective: April 18, 2009 New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT W Ordinance No.2389-2009 Attachtnent "A" [Type text] Page 1 of 3 14.20.260 Administration, enforcement, and penalties. [(A) THE CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF KENAI IS NAMED AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMINISTERING AND ENFORCING THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER (B) IF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL FINDS THAT ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER ARE BEING VIOLATED, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY IN WRITING THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH VIOLATIONS. INDICATING THE NATURE OF THE VIOLATION AND ORDERING THE ACTION NECESSARY TO CORRECT IT. HE OR SHE SHALL ORDER DISCONTINUANCE OF ILLEGAL USES OF LAND, BUILDING, OR STRUCTURES; REMOVAL OF ILLEGAL BUILDINGS, OR STRUCTURES OR OF ADDITIONS, ALTERATIONS, OR STRUCTURAL CHANGES THERETO; DISCONTINUANCE OF ANY ILLEGAL WORK BEING DONE; OR SHALL TAKE ANY OTHER ACTION AUTHORIZED BY THIS CHAPTER TO INSURE COMPLIANCE WITH OR TO PREVENT VIOLATIONS OF ITS PROVISIONS.] a. Planning and Zoning Administration and Enforcement.. The administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code is a function of the Planner under the supervision of the City Manager. b. City Planner — Functions and Powers. 1. The City Manager may appoint a City Planner and one or more assistants however denominated. 2. If appointed by the City Manager, the City Planner shall have all functions and may exercise all powers necessary to administer and enforce the zoning code. Assistants to the City Planner may exercise the administration and enforcement functions and powers of the Citv Planner under the City Planner's supervision. 3. Administration and enforcement functions and powers of the Citv Planner include, but are not limited to maintaining records of all zoning text and district changes related to this title C. Enforcement orders. 1, In addition to anv other remedv or other method of enforcement available under the Kenai Zoning Code or other provision of the Kenai City Code or other law, the City Manager or the Citv Planner mav order: (A) The discontinuation of a use of land or a structure that is in violation of the Kenai (B). The abatement or removal of a structure or part of a structure that is -in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code, a reeulation or a permit. (C). The discontinuation of construction or other activity preparatory to a structure or use of real property that is in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code. a regulation or a permit. (E): The suspension or revocation of a permit wider which a violation of the Homer Zoning Code or regulations is occupied, maintained, constructed or established (FF. The restoration of any structure, veq,etation, land, water body or other thing u own the land thatis destroved, damaged, altered or removed in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code regulations or a permit. Any other action necessary to prevent. abate or discontinue a violation of the Kenai 2. An enforcement order issued under subsection (c) of this section may be directed to one or more violators. 3. A written enforcement order issued under subsection (c) of this section that is served on a violator personally or by certified mail is immediately appealable_ to the Board of Adjustment, -5- Ordinance No. 2389-2009 Attachment ".A" [Type text] Page 2 of Air appeal must be filed within 15 days of service of the written enforcement order. Failure to appeal to the Board of Adjustment within 15 days of service shall constitute a waiver of all rights 4. During such time that an enforcement order is under appeal, no further use or development contrary to the order may continue. 5. Upon correction of the condition or termination of the activity that caused the issuance of an enforcement order under subsection (c). the officer who issued the order may terminate the order or issue written confirmation of satisfactory compliance with the order. 6. An enforcement order need not be issued before a prosecution or legal action is commenced with respect to a violation of the Kenai Zoning Code, a regulation or a permit. The pendenev of any proceeding regarding an enforcement order issued under subsection (e) of this section does not stay any prosecution or other legal action with respect to the violation that is the subiect of the enforcement order. d. Whenever a written enforcement order is in effect that has not been annealed, or if annealed. remains in effect during an anneal or after all appeals are exhausted. and a violation continues to exist. the City Manager may; Commence proceeding>s to cause the abatement of the violation or, (2) Assess an administrative fine not exceeding $250,00 per day. for failure to comply with an enforcement order. e.[C] No permit for the erection, alteration, moving, or repair of any building or other structure shall be issued until an application has been made for a certificate of zoning compliance, and the certificate has been issued by the administrative official in conformity with the provisions of this chapter. The administrative official shall maintain a record of all certificates of zoning compliance and copies shall be furnished upon request to any person. Failure to obtain a certificate of zoning compliance shall be a violation of this chapter and shall be punishable as provided in this section. All applications for certificates of zoning compliance shall be accompanied by plans in duplicate, drawn to scale, showing the actual dimensions and shape of the lot to be built upon; the exact sizes and location, and dimensions of the proposed building or alteration. The application shall include such other information as lawfully may be required by the administrative official, including existing or proposed buildings or alterations, existing or proposed uses of the building and land; the number of family housekeeping units, or rental units the building is designed to accommodate; conditions existing on the lot; and such other matters as may be necessary to determine conformance with and provide for the enforcement of this chapter. The administrative official shall render his decision within thirty (30) days of the filing of the application for a certificate of zoning compliance. However, this time limit may be extended by common consent and agreement signed by both the applicant and the administrative official. One copy of said plans shall be returned to the applicant by the administrative official, after he or she hall have either attached a certificate of zoning compliance or marked the plans as disapproved and attested to the same by his or her signature on such copy. The second copy of the plans, similarly marked, shall be retained by the administrative official. ff [D] Complaints Regarding Violations. Any person may file a complaint regarding an alleged violation thereto. All such complaints shall be brought to the attention of the administrative official who shall record such complaint and immediately investigate and report thereon to the Commission and take any action required by this section. H Ordinance No. 2389-2009 Attachment "A" [Type text] Page 3 of 3 (gU] Penalties for Violations. For any and every violation of the provisions of this chapter, the owner, agent, or contractor of a building or premise where such violations have been committed or shall exist, or any other person who maintains any building or premises in which any violation exists, shall be subject to a [CIVIL] penalty in an amount as provided in KMC 13.05.010. Each and every day that such violation continues shall be deemed a separate and distinct violation. All remedies provided for herein shall be cumulative and not exclusive. The issuance or granting of a building permit or approval of plans or specifications under the authority of the building code without a certificate of zoning compliance shall not be deemed or construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this chapter or any amendment hereto. No permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel any of the provisions of this chapter shall be valid except insofar as the work or use which is authorized is lawful and permitted. -7- x .. CITE OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION " RESOLUTION NO. PZ09-04 KERALALASKA u«yf A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNCIL THAT KMC 14.20.260 BE AMENDED TO BETTER PROVIDE FOR ENFORCEMENT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE KENAI CITY CODE AND TO PROVIDE FOR APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT ORDERS TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 provides for the administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 does mention the role of the City's Planner in administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 should be amended to define the role of the Planner in administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 also needs to be amended to better provide for administrative enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code and other portions of the City Code; and, including enforcement orders and administrative fines; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 should include the ability of a person served with an enforcement order to appeal that order to the city's Board of Adjustment. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RECOMMENDED THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA amend KMC 14.20.060 as shown on Attachment "A." PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF 'HE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 11TH day of February 2009. n � cI-IAIRMaN A STD New text underlined [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED AND ALL CAPS] 14.20.260 Administration, enforcement, and penalties. [(A) THE CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF KENAI IS NAMED AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMINISTERING AND ENFORCING THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER. (B) IF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL FINDS THAT ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER ARE BEING VIOLATED, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY IN WRITING THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH VIOLATIONS, INDICATING THE NATURE OF THE VIOLATION AND ORDERING THE ACTION NECESSARY TO CORRECT IT. HE OR SHE SHALL ORDER DISCONTINUANCE OF ILLEGAL USES OF LAND, BUILDING, OR STRUCTURES; REMOVAL OF ILLEGAL BUILDINGS, OR STRUCTURES OR OF ADDITIONS, ALTERATIONS, OR STRUCTURAL CHANGES THERETO; DISCONTINUANCE OF ANY ILLEGAL WORK BEING DONE; OR SHALL TAKE ANY OTHER ACTION AUTHORIZED BY THIS CHAPTER TO INSURE COMPLIANCE WITH OR TO PREVENT VIOLATIONS OF ITS PROVISIONS.] A-. Planning and Zoning Adm nistration and Enforcement.. The administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code is a function of the Planner under the supervision of the City Manager, b. City Planner — Functions and Powers. 1. The City Manager may appoint a City Planner and one or more assistants, however denominated. 2. If appointed by the City Manager. the City Planner shall have all functions and may exercise all rowers necessary to administer and enforce the zoning code. Assistants to the Citv Planner may exercise the administration and enforcement functions and powers of the Citv Planner under the Citv Planner's supervision. 3 Administration and enforcement functions and powers of the City Planner include but are not limited to maintaining records of all zoning text and district changes related to this title. c. Enforcement orders. 1. In addition to any other remedy or other method of enforcement available under the Kenai Zoning Code or other provision of the Kenai City Code or other law, the Citv Manager or the CitvPlanner may order: The discontinuation of a use of land or a structure that is in violation of the Kenai. zoning Code, a regulation or a perm t, (B), The abatement or removal of a structure orpart of a structure that is in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code, a regulation or a permit. (CC).. The discontinuation of construction or other activity preparatory to a structure or use of real property that is in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code. a regulation or apermit. E{).. The suspension or revocation of a permit under which a violation of the Kenai Zoning Code or regulations is occupied. maintained. constructed or established. The restoration of any structure, vegetation, land, water body or other thing upon the land that is destroyed. damaged, altered or removed in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code, regulations or a permit. (FZ. Any other action necessary to prevent, abate or discontinue a violation of the Kenai Zoning Code, a regulation or a_permit. (G). Correction or abatement of a violation of KMC 12,25.030. Ili . Correction or abatement of a violation of KMC 12.20.20-50. 2. An enforcement order issued under subsection (c) of this section may be directed to one or more violators. 3_ A written enforcement order issued under subsection (c) of this section that is served on a violator personally or by certified mail is immediately appealable to the Board of Adiustment. An appeal must be filed within 15 days of service of the written enforcement order. Failure to PZ09-04 Attachment A Pa.-e 1 me anneal to the Board of Adiustment within 15 days of service shall constitute a waiver of all rights of appeal from the order. The procedure for appeals is set forth in KMC 14.20:290, 4. During such time that an enforcement order is under appeal, no further use or development contrary to the order may continue. 5. Upon correction of the condition or termination of the activity that caused the issuance of an enforcement order under subsection (c), the officer who issued the order may terminate the order or issue written confirmation of satisfactory compliance with the order. 6. An enforcement order need not be issued before a nrosecution or legal action is commenced with respect to a violation of the Kenai Zoning Code. a regulation or a pennit. The pendency of anv proceeding regarding an enforcement order issued under subsection (c) of this section does not stay any prosecution or other legal action with respect to the violation that is the subject of tha enforcement order. d, Whenever a written enforcement order is in effect that has not been appealed, or if appealed, remains in effect during an appeal or after all appeals are exhausted and a violation continues to exist, the City Manager mav: (1) Commence proceedings to cause the abatement of the violation or. L2) Assess an administrative fine, not exceedingg250.00 per day, for failure to comply with an enforcement order. g. [C] No permit for the erection, alteration, moving, or repair of any building or other structure shall be issued until an application has been made for a certificate of zoning compliance, and the certificate has been issued by the administrative official in conformity with the provisions of this chapter. The administrative official shall maintain a record of all certificates of zoning compliance and copies shall be furnished upon request to any person. Failure to obtain a certificate of zoning compliance shall be a violation of this chapter and shall be punishable as provided in this section. All applications for certificates of zoning compliance shall be accompanied by plans in duplicate, drawn to scale, showing the actual dimensions and shape of the lot to be built upon; the exact sizes and location, and dimensions of the proposed building or alteration. The application shall include such other information as lawfully may be required by the administrative official, including existing or proposed, buildings or alterations, existing or proposed uses of the building and land; the number of family housekeeping units, or rental units the building is designed to accommodate; conditions existing on the Iot; and such other matters as may be necessary to determine conformance with and provide for the enforcement of this chapter. The administrative official shall render his decision within thirty (30) days of the filing of the application for a certificate of zoning compliance, However, this time limit may be extended by common consent and agreement signed by both the applicant and the administrative official. One copy of said plans shall be returned to the applicant by the administrative official, after he or she hall have either attached a certificate of zoning compliance or marked the plans as disapproved and attested to the same by his or her signature on such copy. The second copy of the plans, similarly marked, shall be retained by the adm nisn ative official. ffD] Complaints Regarding Violations. Any person may file a complaint regarding an alleged violation thereto. All such complaints shall be brought to the attention of the administrative official who shall record such complaint and iimnediately investigate and report thereon to the Commission and take any action required by this section. g[E] Penalties for Violations. For any and every violation of the provisions of this chapter, the owner, agent, or contractor of a building or premise where such violations have been committed or shall exist, or any other person who maintains any building or premises in which any violation exists, shall be subject to a [CIVIL] penalty in an amount as provided in I MC 13.05,010, Each and PZ09-04 Attachment A Page 2 -10- every day that such violation continues shall be deemed a separate and distinct violation. All remedies provided for herein shall be cumulative and not exclusive. The issuance or granting of a building permit or approval of plans or specifications under the authority of the building code without a certificate of zoning compliance shall not be deemed or construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this chapter or any amendment hereto. No permit presuming to give authority to violate or eanceI any of the provisions of this chapter shall be valid except insofar as the work or use which is authorized is lawful and permitted. PZ09-04 Attachment A Page 3 -11- SUBSTITUTE Suggested by: Planning & Zoning/Administration he«tydf CITY OF KENAI AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING KMC 14.20.260 TO BETTER PROVIDE FOR ENFORCEMENT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE KENAI CITY CODE AND TO PROVIDE FOR APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT ORDERS TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. WHEREAS, KMC 14,20.260 provides for the administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 does mention the role of the City's Planner in administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 should be amended to define the role of the Planner in administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 also needs to be amended to better provide for administrative enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code and other portions of the City Code; and, including enforcement orders and administrative fines; and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.260 should include the ability of a person served with an enforcement order to appeal that order to the City's Board of Adjustment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ,6 LASKA, that KMC 14.20.060 is hereby amended as shown on Attachment "A." PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 18th day of March, 2009. ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk PAT PORTER, MAYOR Introduced: February 18, 2009 Adopted: March 4, 2009 Effective: April 4, 2009 New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] -12- SUBSTITUTE Ordinance No. 2389-2009 Attachment "A" Pagel of 3 14.20.260 Administration, enforcement, and penalties. [(A) THE CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF KENAI IS NAMED AS T14E ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMINISTERING AND ENFORCING THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER. (B) IF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL FINDS THAT ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER ARE BEING VIOLATED, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY IN WRITING THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH VIOLATIONS, INDICATING THE NATURE OF THE VIOLATION AND ORDERING THE ACTION NECESSARY TO CORRECT IT, HE OR SHE SHALL ORDER DISCONTINUANCE OF ILLEGAL USES OF LAND, BUILDING, OR STRUCTURES; REMOVAL OF ILLEGAL BUILDINGS, OR STRUCTURES OR OF ADDITION'S, ALTERATIONS, OR STRUCTURAL CHANGES THERETO; DISCONTINUANCE OF ANY ILLEGAL WORK BEING DONE; OR SHALL TAKE ANY OTHER ACTION AUTHORIZED BY THIS CHAPTER TO INSURE COMPLIANCE WITH OR TO PREVENT VIOLATIONS OF ITS PROVISIONS.] a. Planning and Zoning Administration and Enforcement- The administration and enforcement of the Kenai Zoning Code is a f ntetion of the Planner under the supervision f the City Manager. b. City Planner -Functions and Powers. 1. The City Manager may appoint a City Planner and one or more assistants, however denominated. 2. If appointed by the City Manager, the City Planner shall have all functions and may exercise all powers necessary to administer and enforce the zoning code. Assistants to the City Planter may exercise the administration and enforcement functions and powers of the City Planner under the City Planner's supervision. 3. Administration and enforcement functions and powers of the City Planner include, but are not limited to maintaining records of all zoning text and district changes related to this title. o. Enforcement orders. 1. In addition to anv other remedv or other method of enforcement available under the Kenai Zoning Code or other provision of the Kenai Citv Code or other Iaw. the City Manager or the City Planner may order: (A) The discontinuation of a use of land or a structure that is in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code. a regulation or a ep rmit. (B). The abatement or removal of a structure or part of a structure that is in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code, a regulation or a permit. The discontinuation of construction or other activity preparatory to a structure or, use of real roperty that is in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code. a regulation or a permit. The suspension or revocation of a permit under which a violation of the Kenai Zoning Code or regulations is occupied, maintained, constructed or established. (E)The restoration of any structure, vegetation, land, water body or other thing upon the land that is destroyed, damaged, altered or removed in violation of the Kenai Zoning Code, regulations or a permit. (F). Any other action necessary to prevent, abate or discontinue a violation of the Kenai Zoning Code. a regulation or a permit. (G). Correction or abatement of a violation of KMC 12.25.030. (H)Correction or abatement of a violation of KMC 12,20.20-50. -13- SUBSTITUTE Ordinance No, 2389-2009 Attachment. "A" Page 2 of 3 2. An enforcement order issued under subsection (c) of this section may be directed to one or more violators. 3. A written enforcement order issued under subsection (c,) of this section that is served on a violator personally or by certified mail is immediately appealable to the Board of Adjustment. An appeal must be filed within 15 days of service of the written enforcement order. Failure to appeal to the Board of Adjustment with n 15 days of servioe shall oonstitute a waiver of all rights of appeal from the order. The procedure for appeals is set forth in KMC 1420 290. 4. During such time that an enforcement order is under appeal, no further use or development contrary to dig order may continue. 5. Upon correction of the condition or termination of the activity that caused the issuance of an enforcement order under subsection (c), the officer who issued the order may terminate the order or issue written confirmation of satisfacton� compliance with the order. 6. An enforcement order need not be issued before a prosecution or legal action is commenced. with respect to a violation of the Kenai Zoning Code, a regulation or a permit. The pendency of any proceeding regarding an enforcement order issued under subsection (c) of this section does not stay any prosecution or other legal action with respect to the violation that is the subject of the enforcement order. d. Whenever a written enforcement order is in effect that has not been appealed. or if appealed. remains in effect during an appeal or after all appeals are exhausted, and a violation continues to exist, the City Manager may; (1) Commence proceedings to cause the abatement of the violation or, (2) Assess an administrative fine, not exceeding $250.00 Der day, for failure to comply with an enforcement order. e.[C] No permit for the erection, alteration, moving, or repair of any building or other structure shall be issued unt'iI an application has been made for a certificate of zoning compliance, and the certificate has been issued by the administrative official in conformity with the provisions of this chapter. The administrative official shall maintain a record of all certificates of zoning compliance and copies shall be furnished upon request to any person. Failure to obtain a certificate of zoning compliance shall be a violation of this chapter and shall be punishable as provided in this section. All applications for certificates of zoning compliance shall be accompanied by plans in duplicate, drawn to scale, showing the actual dimensions and shape of the Iot to be built upon; the exact sizes and location; and dimensions of the proposed building or alteration. The application shall include such other information as lawfully may be required by the administrative official, including existing or proposed buildings or alterations, existing or proposed uses of the building and land; the number of family housekeeping units, or rental units the building is designed to accommodate; conditions existing on the lot; and such other matters as may be necessary to determine conformance with and provide for the enforcement of this chapter. The administrative official shall render his decision within thirty (30) days of the filing of the application for a certificate of zoning compliance. However, this time limit may be extended by common consent and agreement signed by both the applicant and the administrative official. One copy of said plans shall be returned to the applicant by the administrative official, after he or she hall have either attached a certificate of zoning compliance or marked the plans as disapproved -14- SUBSTITUTE Ordinance No. 2389-2009 Attachment "A" Page 3 of') and attested to the same by his or her signature on such copy. The second copy of the plans, similarly marked, shall be retained by the administrative official. jf�' [D] Complaints Regarding Violations. Any person may file a complaint regarding an alleged violation thereto. All such complaints shall be brought to the attention of the administrative official who shall record such complaint and immediately investigate and report thereon to the Commission and take any action required by this section. je_)[E] Penalties for Violations. For any and every violation of the provisions of this chapter, the owner, agent, or contractor of a building or premise where such violations have been committed or shall exist, or any other person who maintains any building or promises in which any violation exists, shall be subject to a [CIVIL] penalty in an amount as provided in KMC 13.05.010. Each and every day that such violation continues shall be deemed a separate and distinct violation. All remedies provided for herein shall be cumulative and not exclusive. The issuance or granting of a building permit or approval of plans or specifications under the authority of the building code without a certificate of zoning compliance shall not be deemed or construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this chapter or any amendment hereto. No permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel any of the provisions of this chapter shall be valid except insofar as the work or use which is authorized is lawful and permitted. -15- Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENP,.I y.► AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) TO ALLOW AN EXTENSION FOR THE NINETY (90) DAY TIME LIMIT FOR SKIRTING IN MOBILE HOMES PLACED IN MOBILE HOME PARKS. WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) provides that mobile homes placed in mobile home parks must be skirted within ninety (90) days of placement in the mobile home park; and, WHEREAS, during the winter months, the weather can make it difficult to skirt mobile homes placed in mobile home parks within the ninety (90) day period; and, WHEREAS, the Building Official should have the authority to grant an extension of the ninety (90) day period. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) of the City of Kenai Code of Ordinances is hereby amended as follows: (6) Skirting. All mobile homes shall be skirted within ninety (90) days of placement in a mobile home park unless an extension is granted, The skirting shall be in such a manner as to iarithstand the elements and all access openings in skirting shall be closed when not in use and made of solid panels. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this day 18th day of March, 2009. ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk PAT PORTER, MAYOR Introduced: March 4, 2009 Adopted: March 18, 2009 Effective: April 18, 2009 New Text Underlined; (DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] mo CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 1PZ09-08 \\ fHc^cely of A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNCIL THAT KMC 14.20.240(c) (6) BE AMENDED TO ALLOW AN EXTENSION FOR THE NINETY (90) DAY TIME LIMIT FOR SKIRTING IN MOBILE HOMES PLACED IN MOBILE HOME PARKS. WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) provides that mobile homes placed in mobile home parks must be skirted within ninety (90) days of placement in the mobile home park; and, WHEREAS, during the winter months, the weather can make it difficult to skirt mobile homes placed in mobile home parks within the ninety (90) day period; and, WHEREAS, the Building Official should have the authority to grant an extension of the nuzety (90) day period. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RECOMMENDED THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, amend KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) of the City of Kenai Code of Ordinances as follows: (6) Skirting. All mobile homes shall be skirted within ninety (90) days of placement in a mobile home park unless an extension is Granted. The skirting shall be in such a manner as to withstand the elements and all access openings in skirting shall be closed when not in use and made of solid panels. PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 25th day of February 2009. AT2 ES CHAIRMAN f New text underlined [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED AND ALL CAPS] -17- t(,e c<ty of KENALALASKA \mil CITY OF KENAI Suggested by: Administration AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING KMC 21.05.085, AIRPORT FUEL FLOWAGE FEE. WHEREAS, the City of Kenai Municipal Airport budget for FY 2009 includes a fuel flowage fee of three cents ($0.03) for each gallon of aviation gasoline, motor vehicle gasoline, diesel fuel, kerosene, aviation jet fuel or like substances; and, WHEREAS, the quantity of fuel delivered to the Kenai Municipal Airport has exceeded the estimates on which the FY08 budget was based; and, WHEREAS, the fuel flowage fee can be reduced from three cents ($0.03) per gallon to two cents ($0.02) per gallon and achieve the revenue required to support airport maintenance, airport crash fire and rescue, and other required airport support activities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that KMC 21.05.085(a) be amended as follows: (a) Any person, firm or corporation who delivers aviation gasoline, motor vehicle gasoline, diesel fuel, kerosene, aviation jet fuel or like substance (hereafter referred to as fuel) to any person, firm or corporation at the Kenai Municipal Airport shall pay a fuel flowage fee of [THREE CENTS ($0.03)1 two cents 0.02 for each gallon of fuel. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 18th day of March, 2009. ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk PAT PORTER, MAYOR Introduced: March 4, 2009 Adopted: March 18, 2009 Effective: May 1, 2009 New Text Underlined; (DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] i "'Village with a Past C# wA a Futare" 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794!o„ _ Telephone: 907-283-7535 / FAX; 907-283-3014 1992 the city' a/ KENAI,ALASKA TO: City Council FROM: Rick Koch DATE: February 26, 2009 SUBJECT: Kenai Municipal Airport Fuel Flowage Fees The purpose of this memorandum is to provide information and recommend Council approval of an ordinance to lower the airport fuel flowage fee from tbere cents ($ 0.03) per gallon to two cents ($ 0.02) per gallon. As you may recall the airport has operated at a deficit from FY 2002 through FY2008, and had fees, leases and rents that were in most cases significantly below industry standards and what was charged at other similar Alaskan airports. We increased and instituted many fees and charges in order to begin to bring our pricing stricture in -line with other Alaskan airports and the industry in order to reduce our operational deficit. One of the fees instituted was a fuel flowage fee. The fuel flowage fee was estimated to produce approximately $ 75,000 of revenue based on an estimated volume of 2,500,000 gallons of fuel. The fuel flowage fee is based on all fuel delivered to the airport including but not limited to fuel that goes "into the wing' of aircraft, but also fuel that into "bulk fuel tanks" for re -sale at other locations. Through the first seven months (July 08-January 09) of the fiscal year the City has received $ 61,295.04 in revenue from fuel flowage fees based on 2,043,167.23 gallons of fuel, or an average of $ 8,756.43 and 291, 881.03 gallons per month. If we project the monthly average over the twelve months of the fiscal year, total estimated fuel flowage revenues for FY 09 would be $ 105,077.16. Total estimated volume of fuel would be 3,502,596,36 gallons. M A reduction in fuel flowage fees by one cent for the remainder of FY 09 would decrease fuel flowage fees by an estimated $ 5,837.62 slid for FY 10 would result in total estimated revenues of $ 70,05193. Administration recommends the reduction in fuel flowage fees as tyre services provided by the airport remain essentially unchanged by the increase in volume. If you have any questions please contact me at your convenience. -20- Via E-Mail March 18, 2009 Ms. Mary Bondurant, Airport Manager Kenai Municipal Airport 305 N. Willow, Suite 200 Kenai, AK 99611 Re: Ordinance No. 2392-2009 - Fuel Flowage Fees Dear Ms. Bondurant: Having been out of the State since February 28, 2009, I just received your March 11, 2009 letter this date. White we appreciate your reduction in the fuel flowage fee charge, we. do feel that this is a very unusual situation. We understand that the fuel flowage fee should apply to fuel going into the operation of our aircraft; however, we do not feel that this charge should apply to fuel being sold to customers, particularly since you do not charge any additional fee for freight being delivered to customers. The State of Alaska eliminated their 8% fuel tax on all fuel products until September 2009 because of the high fuel prices and to help out the Alaskan residents. It does not seem reasonable in these trying times to assess yet another charge to customers who require fuel to live on a day-to-day basis. Your landing fees have already been increased to $100.00 for every landing and in addition, the City and Borough charge 6% sales tax. Thank you for recognizing there is a need for a reduction in costs; however, again we feel that the fuel flowage fee should be limited to our operation of aircraft, but should not be assessed to customers purchasing fuel from us for their own use. This is a very unusual situation because of the definition of delivery of "freight" versus delivery of "fueP' since delivery of fuel by air is primarily only done in Alaska. Your consideration of the foregoing comments/circumstances will be appreciated. Very truly yours, EVERTS AIR FUEL, INC. BY � W-Pr�' Cliffo d esident " (907) 450.2375 • Fax (907) 450.2326 • P.O. Box 60908, 5525 Airport Industrial Road - Fairbanks, AK 99706-0908 r" Suggested by: Council Member Moore PIPE LtryUf KENAI, ALASKA CITY OF KENAI A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, SUPPORTING THE EFFORTS OF THE KENAI WATERSHED FORUM TO SECURE FINACIAL SUPPORT, BOTH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC, FOR RENOVATION OF THE HOUSE AND ADJACENT PROPERTY AT SOLDOTNA CREEK PARK LEASED TO THE KENAI WATERSHED FORUM AND OWNED BY THE CITY OF SOLDOTNA. WHEREAS, the Kenai City Council recognizes the value the Kenai Watershed Forum, Inc. (KWF) provides toward maintaining and supporting healthy watersheds on the Kenai Peninsula; and, WHEREAS, the Kenai City Council acknowledges the economic impact the KWF's research, restoration, and educational programs have on our communities; and, WHEREAS, the Kenai City Council recognizes the importance of the KWF's work to the quality of life of our citizens and area residents; and, WHEREAS, events presented by the KWF have brought people from around the world to our community; and, WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Kenai to support the renovation of this building; and, WHEREAS, the capital improvements necessary to convert this building into a functional headquarters and water quality laboratory for the KWF are significant and will provide local jobs. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, the Kenai City Council supports the efforts of the Kenai Watershed Forum to secure financial support from both private and public sources of funding for the renovation of the house and adjacent property at the Soldotna Creek Park. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this i$th day of March, 2009. PAT PORTER, MAYOR ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk -21- Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENAI A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, SUPPORTING THE CONTINUED USE OF THE CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL NAME OF SHK'ITUK'TNU FOR THE CREEK SITUATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE NORTH OF THE KENI SPUR HIGHWAY, EAST OF MARATHON ROAD, AND APPROXIMATELY ONE AND ONE-HALF MILES IN LENGTH, AND FLOWING SOUTH TO THE KENAI RIVER ABOUT ONE MILE ABOVE ITS MOUTH. WHEREAS, the City of Kenai received notification from the Alaska Historical Commission that an application had been received to name a creek in the City of Kenai situated approximately one mile north of the Kenai Spur Highway, east of Marathon Road, and approximately one and one-half miles in length, and flowing south to the Kenai River about one mile above its mouth; and, WHEREAS, a request was made to extend the deadline for commenting to allow the City of Kenai Planning & Zoning Commission to provide its historical preservation review as identified in KMC 14.20.106(I)(6) and the Kenaitze Indian Tribe to review and comment; and, WHEREAS, with its letter of March 3, 2009, the Kenaitze Indian Tribal Council reported the subject creek was originally named Shk'ituk'tnu, documented with the 1900 Census and reported by Dr. Alan Boraas of the Kenai Peninsula College, and culturally and historically translated from Kenaitze Dena'ina as "we slide down place;" WHEREAS, at its March 11, 2009 meeting, the Kenai Planning &, Zoning Commission reviewed the application for naming the creek along with information submitted by the Kenaitze Indian Tribal Council and recommended the Kenai City Council support the name of the creek as Shk'ituk'tnu. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, the creek, estimated to be one and one-half miles in length and situated approximately one mile north of the Kenai Spur Highway, east of Marathon Road, and flowing south into the Kenai River about one mile above its mouth, retain its cultural and historical name of Shk'ituk'tnu, translated as "we slide down place." PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 18th day of March, 2009. ATTEST: Carol L. Frees, City Clerk -22- PAT PORTER, MAYOR KENAITZE INDIAN TRIBE c x c �a H z w x 3 3 RECEIVED March 3, 2009 MAR 1.1 2009 KENAI CITY CLERK Carol Freas, City Clerk City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Street Kenai, Alaska 99611 Dear Ms. Freas, Re: 3050-3 Reds Creek The Kenaitze Indian Tribe's Executive Council does not support the above referenced name proposal. Instead the Tribe recommends the original Kenaitze Dena'ina name Shk'ituk'tnu. This name has cultural and historical significance and translates as "we slide down place." In documentation of our request we are attaching a report prepared by Dr. Alan Boraas, of Kenai Peninsula College. Chiqinik, thank you, for considering our request and consulting with the Tribe. Lrson Nyren Executive Director Kenaitze Indian Tribe -23- Sasha, These are some notes about the renaming of the creel, at Shk'ituk't to Red's Creek. I will object based on the fact that it has a name, the creek name is Shk'ituk'mu as indicated on the following chart. Alan Boraas Dena'ina Name Meaning SourceEnglish Name Notes Kahtnu Kaq' River mouth t Kalifornsky Kenai River i 1991:343 Mouth Tsathu'unt Rock is there Kalifornsky: Rocky Point ! place 1991:341 _ Kahtnu River -mouth Kalifornsky river 1991:347 Kenai River Qughuzdlent Current Kalifornsky sand bar in Flows around 1991:347 Kenai River it place mouth, north side Shqit Slopingflat Kalifornsky Flat north of j Redoubt (?) j 1991:343 Fort Kenai at Terrace Redoubt I subdivision is Terrace west, not north, of Fort Kenai She -kit A. Wilson Rocky Point 1967:4 Shqit Tsatnu Sloping flat Kalifornsky Unnamed creek Creek flows cliff river 1991:343 north of Shqit past Shqit on the east and would be north ofShqit as one proeeedes Kili Bena Kalifornsky 1 Pond at head of -Upstream 19917347 Ryan's Creek Kili Betou Kalifornsky Ryan's Creek I Not a Dena'ina 1991:347 name, possibly Kelley, from which Killy River may be derived Shk'ituk't we slide I�alifornsky Dena'ina village Ch'k'ituki't down place 1991:347 site at Skittok, I Northwest Chkihdc Fisheries Cannery �� SIAICAuk'tnu - we slide ! Ka[iforxisky creek into old i C 11 k'ituk'tnu &oval river 11991347 village, west of ', £oriner FAA station Kiith-keez ? A. Wilson I Northwestern 1967:1 Fisheries Cannery Beghdeq i above it is Kalifornsky creek forks on q' yet = Ghetq'eyt covered with 1991:347 north side of birchbark birchbark Shk'ituk'tnu [the it refers Possibly Weasel to above the Creek, ARC river fork name via AB] Herman Hennanson Dgheghaq a stickleback north side of �- hole Kenai River i just above Shk'ituk't Shk'ituk't The placename shk'ituk't is a nominalized verb, a verb turned into a noun by the addition of the suffix "-t" which means, "the place that. The verb stem "Auk'" means to slide on snow or ice, A different stem is used to slide on dirt or mud. The postposition "k... means movement on the surface and the object of the postposition "sh" means me. The entire please is in past or perfect tense, although the suffix nominalizing the verb seems to make tense meaningless. Theme: k' + #1 +0 classifier + tuk' Meaning: slide (usually on ice or snow), skate, ski Note: to slide on dirt or mud requires a different stein, "-guk" Root: tuk' Meaning Category: move multiple objects object of Postpositio ft Mode Classifie stem encliti postpositio n r c a -25- Morpheme s I sh k' Disjuct boundai Ghe + i 0 j ink, t Sound changes Meaning I me/I movement Perftct/nas t Slide on snow The on the t tesnse Aspect: s place surface momentaneou that... s Tense: past i � I The complete meaning would be: "Place we slide down on the snow" usually translated as "we slide down place" Shk' ituk'tnu The name of the creels has an additional suffix "-nu" which means creek. History Shk'ituk't appears on the 1900 census as "Old Kenai" and does not appear on the 1910 census as a separate place. Up to the very early 20t" Century is was the main Dena'ina village at the mouth of the Kenai River and its abandonment reflected negative influences of the canneries built just below the hill in close proximity to the village. The following people lived at Shk'ituk't in 1900.and would have, of course, known of the creek name "Shk'ituknu. M* Name Family Relationship Ancestry Gender Age Birthdate Marital Status Tribal Affiliation Mishikoff, Peter Bead Mixed M 22 'Unkn.,1877 Married Mishikoff, Mary Wife Mixed F 21 'Unkn., 1874 Married Kenaites Mishikoff, Nicholal Son Mixed M 2 Jan., 1898 _ Single i Ivlishikoff,'Fekar Son Mixed M i June, 1899" Single Mishikoff„Stephen Father White M 100 'Unkn., 1800 1 Widower Mishikoff, Alexandria - Mother in Law Indian F 68 -Unkn., 1832 Widow Kenaites Mishikofi;'Gemoska " ', -- Brother in Law Indian M 19 = Unkn, 1881 Single Kenaites 1vlishikofi;-Nadahlia -. Sister in Law Indian F v 16 - Unkn., 1884 Single Kenaites -j Mishikoff, Affanana Partner Indian M 24 Unkn., 1876 { Single Kenaites Mishikoff Ilya Partner" Indian M 22 iUnkn.,1878 Single Kenaites Tejana Bead . Indian F 42 Unkn., I858 Widow Kenaites Aruska Son ' Indian M 20 Urucu, 1880 Single Kenaites Eugenia Daughter Indian F 9 Dec., 1890 Single Kenaites Basilia Son Indian M 6 Mar, 1894 Single Kenaites Nekautc Son Indian M I MOV., 1898 Single ' Kenaites Nayesta Daughter Indian F 0.3 Jan., 1900 Single Kenaites Duneka -: Head : Indian: - M 37 aUnkit, f.863 Married I Kenaites Abesenid Wife Indian P 38 Unkn, 1862 Married 1Ceuaites Stephen - -I, Son Indian - M 1 20. Sept., 1,879 '- Single t Kenaites `-"Micar -': Son Indian M '.. 15 Sept., 1884: - 1 Single Kenaites Nahiah i Daughter Indian F a12 Mar, 1888 ,' Single -. Kenaites. Pblishka Daughter Indian F 8 Sept., 1891 '` (Single Kenaites Garda '. Daughter-' `Indian F -. f :5:1 July, 1894 ''.'. Single Kenaites Nekife Son Indian M 0.4 : Nov.,1899 : F Single Kenaites FTind, Alex ? Head Mixed M 21 Unkn., 1879 Single J Nichoiia i Head :; Indian M 4° .Unkn., 1851 Mwricd Kcnaftes Madronaa. '{ Wife Indian F - 4$ -Unkn., 1.852 Married Kenaites Bedka Son Indian M 22 'Unkn., 1878 .'Single Kenaites Katrina :' Daughter lndiani F 9 Unkn., 1891 Single -" : Kenaites Vasela Son Indian M 5 July, 1895 Single Kenaites Kili Betnu In Kelly, Mar., 1996 James j Toronto, i Canada I Head White M 36 Feb., '1864 Marled Coon Kelly, Alaska Wife Indian F I8 Unkn, 1882 Married Kenaites Irei;a Kosnikoff, Alaska Father in White M 55 Unkn., 1845 Widower John Law i ., 7 L, 1 i DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION OFFICE OF HIS70RY AND ARCHAEOLOGY February 10, 2009 Re: 3050-3 Reds Creek Pat Porter, Mayor City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Avenue Kenai, AK 99611 Dear Ms. Porter: SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR 550 W. 7TH AVENUE, SUITE 1310 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99507-3565 PHONE: (907) 269-8721 FAX' W7) 269-8908 KENAI C1 Y CLERK I received several requests to have the comment period for the proposed geographic name Reds Creek in the City of Kenai extended. Public support for a name is very important to the members of the Alaska Historical Commission, the state review board. As a result, the proposal will not be considered at the meeting scheduled for February 1.9, 2009. The comment period has been extended to March 15, 2009, and the proposal will be considered at the subsequent meeting of the Alaska Historical Commission. If ,you have any questions about the geographic names program or the Reds Creek proposal please contact nie at 907-269-871 A or email lo.aztonsontyalaska.gov. Sincerely, I Joan M. Antonson Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Lou Yost, Executive Secretary, Domestic Geographic Names, U.S. Geological Survey, 523 National Center, Reston, VA 22092 -29- DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION OFFICE OF HIS70RY AND ARCHAEOLOGY February 10, 2009 Re: 3050-3 Reds Creek Pat Porter, Mayor City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Avenue Kenai, AK 99611 Dear Ms. Porter: SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR 550 W. 7TH AVENUE, SUITE 1310 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99507-3565 PHONE: (907) 269-8721 FAX' W7) 269-8908 KENAI C1 Y CLERK I received several requests to have the comment period for the proposed geographic name Reds Creek in the City of Kenai extended. Public support for a name is very important to the members of the Alaska Historical Commission, the state review board. As a result, the proposal will not be considered at the meeting scheduled for February 1.9, 2009. The comment period has been extended to March 15, 2009, and the proposal will be considered at the subsequent meeting of the Alaska Historical Commission. If ,you have any questions about the geographic names program or the Reds Creek proposal please contact nie at 907-269-871 A or email lo.aztonsontyalaska.gov. Sincerely, I Joan M. Antonson Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Lou Yost, Executive Secretary, Domestic Geographic Names, U.S. Geological Survey, 523 National Center, Reston, VA 22092 -29- rp ti1 C .; r , i, 4 u r r r t yy .a Al 1 �� .� �.�...a ��„�� t tt t!f.°::'17 DE ARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION OFFICE OF HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY January 21, 2009 Re:3050-3 Reds Creek Pat Porter, Mayor City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Avenue Kenai, AK 99611 Dear Ms. Porter: 4f ex p��f Cau�u 1 SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR 550 W. 7THA'✓ENUE, SUITE 1370 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501-3565 PHONE: (907) 269-8721 FAX.: 1907) 269-8908 RECEIVE JAN 2 3 20g9 The Alaska Historical Commission has received a geographic name proposal to make official the name Reds Creek for an unnamed creek in the City of Kenai. This creek is approximately a mile and a half long, heads about a mile north of the Kenai Spur Highway, east of Marathon. Road, and flows south into the Kenai River about a mile above its mouth. Enclosed is a copy of the proposal for your review, a map showing the creek's location, and a program brochure with the guidelines for geographic names Alaska Historical Commission members have established. The commission would appreciate your comments on the proposed name. To object or to endorse the proposed name, please respond in writing by February 9, 2009. You can respond with a letter, by e-mail, or by writing your comments in the space provided below. 'P 1_... nV C i_ nlii" tlr iiiF m__fi' r --i f IL 1�olS SSQ.�l' �_ rrJe„t irijs _ Jl!t e "eO�ra- . !_a_ r�.GCJe CJnLaet rnC aL errian J I b b tr esprogfaf,,'r io.antonson(a+alaska.irov or by phone at 907-269-8714. Thank you. Sincerely, Joan M. AntonsOn Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer enclosures object 1 endorse the proposed name because: Date: —30— U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Domestic Geographic Name Report I Use this form to recartmend a feature arms or to 3. On the m erse aide of this form give refonnatlor 5, Return fhi,9 fern to: suggest a name change. on the local usage and authority for recnmmeuded name. 2xecnlive seemfary for Doo'c"l c Geographic 2, For memaes on Federal lands. coordinate Names retluests whh the agency ars. Forest Ser'rim 4. Per more iomr tma, shear the Gwmao nc U.S. Geological Sunny Natioual Park Setvice- Bureau of Land Nromes fnfomnefion Svstem or the Miners) 523 National Canter Mamirmucat, em.) For the adminisuctive area m Geutteor Program, contact the U.S. Board on Reston, VA. 22092 which On land is located. Geographic, Names at 703- 494544.. Action Requested proton ed New Name: X A plication Change: Name Change: Other: Recommended Name: Reds Creek State: i Alaska County or F uivaient: '�Ke ai eninsula or u h Administrative Area: __� City mill _ Type of Feature (stream, mountain, populated place, eta); Creels Is the Feature identified (including other names), in the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS)? Yes � No I I I t X Unknown I i If Yes, how is it listed? I Deseri tfon of feature hvsical shape, length, width, direction of flow, etc,): This creek is approximately a mite long and flows south. From its head in wetlands, it flows south about a half mile before it cuts through a neighborhood for about a half mile, then flows under the Kenai Spur Highway, andflows south about another half mile between neighborhoods, then through a culvert before joining the Kenai River about a mile above its month. Also in Sections 33, T6N, R11 W, and Section 4, T5N, RI I W. Maps and other sources using reeom- mended name (including scale and date). Other name (variants) i Maps and other sources using other name '..... or application (including scale and date). Maus C7ee(c Kenai Watershed Forum -31- Name information such as origin, meaning of the recommended name, historical significance, biographic data (if commemorative), nature of usage or application, or any other pertinent information: The name proposed is, in part, for Olen Rex "Red" McCollun Sr., a long-time Kenai resident who died January 3, 2002, McCollum moved to Kenai in May 1959, He drilled some of the first producing wells in the Swanson River oil field, for over 20 years hada roustabout company, and was a commercial fisherman. He served on the Kenai Harbor Commission. The name proposed also recognizes the red salmon that return to Kenai Peninsula streams every year, although the creek is coho salmon habitat. The proposer indicates the neighborhood bordering the creek would like to "adopt" it and work with the Kenai. Watershed Forum to protect andreclam it. The creek is shown on the Kenai Watershed Forum map as Maps Creek, an acronym derived from the first letters of several neighborhood streets: Magic, Ahak, Princess, and Spur. The proposer indicates the neighborhood would like a more endearing name for the creek, and she has spoken with a representative of the Kenai Watershed Foram about the proposed name. Is the recommended name in local usage? ( Yea No I x I If Yes,- approximately how many years? Is there local opposition to, or conflict with the recommended name (as located)? The name appears as Maps Creek on Kenai Watershed Forran maps. For proposed new name, please provide evidence that feature is unnamed: The creek is uninsured on USGS Kenai (B-4) 1:63,360; Kenai (B-4 NE) 1:25,000; or Kenai 1:125,000 maps. It is not identified in DeLonne Mapping's Alaska Atlas & Gazetteer (1998). The proposed name is not listed in Schorr's Alaska Place ,Names (1991). GNIS and Orth's Dictionary of Alaska Place Naines (1967) list a Reds Lake north of Chandalar in the Brooks Range, and five Red Creeks around the state although none on the Kenai Peninsula, and a number of other places using the word Red singular, one a. Red River 46 miles northwest of Homer across Cook Inlet and another Red Bluff near Seldovia. Additional information: Proposal for review sent with letter indicating must respond in writing to object or endorse the proposed name: Kenai Peninsula Borough - comment requested by February 9, 2009 City of Kenai - comment requested by February 9, 2009 Cook Inlet Region, Inc. - comment requested by February 9, 2009 Kenaitze Indian Tribe IRA - comment requested by February 9, 2009 Kenai Native Association, Ltd. - comment requested by February 9, 2009 Salamatof Native Association, Inc. - comment requested by February 9, 2009 Kenai Historical Society - comment requested by February 9, 2009 Kenai Chamber of Commerce - comrnent requested by February 9, 2009 Kenai Watershed Forum — comment requested by February 9, 2009 The Alaska Historical Commission is expected to consider the pro2osed name at its February 19, 2009, triectina in Juneau. Copy Rt,mmmd to Name first. M.1,. Inst Tithe Phcv,c da) Date Debbie Sonberg 907-283-5880 12/19/08 Corn env or Aaen v ! i Addross(oitV state nod ZtnL_ 410 Cinderella Street, Kenai. AK 99611. Co Pm aced br fif other thwr a6ovo T'tle Ph000 da Date _ Judith E. Sinner SHPO 907 269-8721 1/21 /09 Comoanvor'A=J ,, Address tutv.statc, and Zio) 1 Alaska Department ofNaotrnt Rcsonrcros/Ohce of nimry and Ardnenlogy i 550 West 7"' Ave., Suite 1310, Anchorage AK 99501-3565 AuthoriCy Por R000nmmnded Nnine: ! MOM, Address artd Tdephane Ooonpntion Years in Aeea i � I j I i I -32- Kenai Peninsula Online - Alaska NeivspaperGlen McCollum 01/09/02 Page 1 of 2 Powered by �+' . ""., :-AK10N-W� Web posted Wednesday, January 9, 2002 LceM Interest Glen McCollum m Home Political *. News . Outdoors Obituary e Sports a People Obituaries Q Classifieds E Editorial : Letters to Editor s Pulse g, schools Longtime Kenai resident Glen Rex'Red' McCollum Sr, died * Legals peacefully Thursday, Jan. 3, 2002, at his home. He was 84. Features e Business a ME e Religion , Dispatch Memorial services will be at noon Friday, Jan. 11, 2002, at the Seniors R TV Listings Peninsula Grace Brethren Church on Kalifornsky Beach Road. Stocks For Kids All are invited to stay and share in a meal with family and Movies s Pets friends after the service. Peninsula Guido •. Advertising c Circulation r Forms , Archives Mr. McCollum was born Oct. 11, 1917, to Otis Dewey and • Exploring � About Us Phoebe Jane (Crook) McCollum in Savage, Mont. His parents e churches then moved the family to Red Lodge, Mont., where he spent many of his teen years. ---- Nadhorse Fairbanks Moroi age 14` Kenai Horner Juneau Choosi ecity 2;l December S M T w T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 .7.....a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 During World War I1, he served with the Civilian Conservation Corps in Yellowstone National Park -- Company 939 -- Camp Nine Mile F38 -- A€berton, Mont., where he performed duties as an axeman, mechanic and subsection foreman. He was described on his discharge paper as an excellent workman. Given an honorable discharge May 2, 1937, his next adventure was to navigate the big mining trucks that hauled chrome, silver and sulfur throughout the Montana basin country. In 1947, he was offered a job as a roughneck on an oil rig in the Little Grass Creek Field in Wyoming. Quickly promoted too driller for the next 10 years, he averaged three moves a year throughout the western and southern states. In April 1959, at Naturita, Cola, he was offered a Job by C our stories Mountain States Drillino to move his family to Alaska. In May I- web of that year they settled in Kenai. He drilled some of the first r Yellow Pages producing wells in Swanson River Field. (e Stocks When the rig was sold to another contractor, he left and Classifieds started a roustabout company -- Northern Oil Operations Inc. This company held the maintenance contracts for Standard Oil Search, of California for the next 24 year. Reluctant to retire, he decided to take up commercial fishing In Cook Inlet for the next four year. Never one to be idle in recent years, he had quite a political voice, Because of his knowledge of construction, in 2001 he was appointed to the Kenai Harbor Commission. httu://wvww.peninsulaclarion.corn/stories/010902/obi 010902obi001000I.shtml 12/22/2008 -33- I4enai Peninsula Online -Alaska NewspaperGlen McCollum 01/09/02 Page 2 of 2 "This was exciting, and he enjoyed keeping abreast of the need for some answers concerning the bluff erosion problem or any other civic matters," his family said. "May God now grant you eternal rest, our dear father." Mr. McCollum was preceded death by his Parents; his beloved wife, Florine A. (Vannoy) McCollum; daughter Lavonne Kuebler; sister, Blanche Gibson and brother, Clyde. He is survived by his son and daughter-in-law, Donald and Trudy Lee; sons Glen Rex Jr. and Troy Lee; daughters and sons-in-law Patricia and Cecil Falkenberg and Cindy and Roger Trepanier; sister and brother-in-law, Evelyn and Don Oswald cf Longview, Wash.; brother, Leo of Walla Walla, Wash. and sister-in-law Neoma of Yakima, Wash,; grandchildren, Shane Falkenberg, Don Lee McCollum Jr., Kellie McCollum, Cora Leigh McCollum, Cody Otis McCollum, Shane Kuebler, Heath Trepanier and Troy Lee Trepanier; great-grandchiidren, Curt Lis, Mitchell, Kourtney, Justin, Reiss, Stephen, Miranda, Brittany, Courtney, Cameron, Aaron, Andrea, Heather, Matthew and Nathaniel; nieces and nephews, Dale, David, Connie, Rhonda, Leanne, Denise and Diane, and numerous church families and children from both Kenai Grace Brethren and Peninsula Grace Brethren Churches. The family requests that all donations be directed to Love INC. Kenai Chapter, the Love INC. breakfast program or the Kenai Senior Center. Arrangements were made by Peninsula Memorial Chapel Discuss this story in our Discussion Forum. �.., —a 9, :. E-mail this Story Email a message Read our paper Have our Headlines a friend to the editor on your PDA e-matted to you Comments or questions? Far questions about the website contact the vaeb master at Kenai Peninsula online Box 3009 Kenai, AK 99611 907•293JS61 Copyrighted by Peninsula Clarion, a Divisfort of Morris Communications Privacy and terms of use. httD://wu>w.peninsulac-larion,corn/stories/010902/'obi 0?0902obi0ol000i_,s,A l ?.2./2212008 -34- 6Cenai C4 1:63,360 T6N; R 19 W, SM T5N, R11W, SM Creek Mouth - Lot: 600 33'04,96" N Lang: -151' 13' 47,87" W -35- -36- Alaska's Native people, along with explorers and settlers from Europe and America, gave names to many Alaskan geographic features_ A record of these names can be found in the Dictionary ofAlaska Place Names by Donald Orth (1967) and the Geographic Names Information System (littp!//geotiames.usgs.gov/index.litmi). Not all ibatures in the state have been named. Naming geographic features, or changing established names, needs to be done - carefullyandthoughtfully. Place names should identify significant places. Reasons to name a 6jeature include safety, education, and area CQdministration. It is important that a proposed nano have air association with the location. The Alaska Historical Cor mtission, a citizen board of the State of Alaska, reviews names proposed for lakes, streams, mountains, and other physical features in the state. The commission coordinates its program with the U.-S. Board on Geographic Names. o 8 h O yam^ ro 5 G [� p C C g is ro '04eQ �a m 0 x 20 cv q ¢ u o s !y =4:s, ao go 3Zz ♦ ♦ c GEOGRAPHIC TIAMES PROGRAM A responsibility of the ALASKA HISTORICAL COMMISSION The Alaska Historical Guidelines Commission The Alaska Historical Commission has established guidelines, which it uses along with the Since 1993 the Alaska Historical Commission has policies of the U.S, Board on Geographic Names. served as the geographic names board for the State of - Alaska. Its powers, dories, and authority in the naming § Local Usage of geographic features in Alaska are defined in Alaska The none has been used for years by the Statute ,11.35.350_ The commission has been directed community to; _ The name is supported by local residents and there is published evidence of verbal or --- ♦ Determine the correct and most appropriate names - written usage § Descriptive Names of geographic features in the state and their • The name is relevoin to and descriptive of the spelling; ._fcanne, . - - - The name is not to use elsewhere in the ♦ Pass upon and give names to geographic features region in the state for which no single generally - § Commemorative Names t W acceptable name has been in use; " 7hp, individual has been deceased for at � least five years t The.person made a noteworthy ♦ Cooperate with the local subdivisions of , .,, contribution in Alaska government mid, with their approval, change the The individual has a direct, long term names of geographic features to eliminate association with the feature duplication of names in the state; - The name is supported by residents of - nearby communities ♦ Serve as the state representative of the U-S. Board § Historical Names - The hentidt� of the name can be on Geographic Names and cooperate with that - established board so that there is no conflict between stme,and The name is clearly associated with Elie federal designations of geographic features in the area state. § Alaska Native Names • 'I he name is in common local usage In addition, the stable directs the Alaska The more is linguistically appropriate to Historical Commission to consider using Alaska Native - the area in which it is to be applied place names for geographic features in the state that _- The name is pronounceable without- - considerable difficulty have not been named. ,, - The land owner, if on Native land supports the proposed name in writing - ' § Name Changes - -• The current official name is derogatory to any. racial, ethnic, gender; or religious group • The current nfficial name is duplicative and causing confusion Evidence of extensive local support by authm'ities and residents is provided Otter • There is overriding need to time a feature within a wilderness area (for purposes of safety, education, or area administration), acid the land manager has been consulted and given the opportunity to comment on the proposed name • An existing name is applied to a related feature, i.e, the name of a mountain is applied to an unnamed glacier that is part of it • A spelling that includes diacritical marks includes substantial evidence of active local use, stick as official records, maps, and signs, in die area where the feature is located Application Process Applicants are encouraged to study the guidelines. before they complete an application. Supplemental information, such as letters from community leaders, area residents, and local organizations, is often helpful. Prior to review by the Alaska Historical Commission, staff contact appropriate land managers, Native corporations and councils, and communities to obtain comments on proposed names. The Alaska Historical Commission meets three times a year_ The commission's recommendation is forwarded with the proposal to the U.S. Board on Geographic Names for review. The U.S. Board sets national policies and procedures relating to both domestic and foreign place names. It is the final word on choice, spelling, and official use of place names in the U.S. - - The process of naming a geographic feature takes at least a year. Anthropology Laboratory Kenai Peninsula College 156 College Road Soldotna, Alaska 99669 907-262-0360 March 9, 2009 Rick Koch, City Manager City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Avenue Kenai, Alaska 99611 Received MAR 13 2UN Dear Mr, Koch: Attached is a report on traditional place names at the Kenai River Mouth. On the basis that "Shk'ituk'nu" is a traditional Dena'ina name, I object to the proposal now before the Alaska Historical Commission to rename it "Reds Creek." Thank you. Sincerely, Dr. Alan Boraas Professor of Anthropology Cc: Gary Turner Director, Kenai Peninsula College DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RE SOURCES DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION OFFICE OF HI STORY AND AR CHAEO! OGY' February 12, 2009 Re: 3050-3 Reds Creek Dr. Alan"$oraas Kenai Peninsula College 156 College Road Soldoma, AK 99669-6400 A" Dear Dias: PALIN, GOVERNOR 550 W. 7THAVENUE, ,SUITE 7370 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99507-3565 PHONE: (907) 269-8721 The Alaska Historical Commission has received a geographic name proposal to make official the name Reels Creek for an unnamed creek in the City of Kenai. This creek is approximately a mile and a half long, heads about a mile north of the Kenai Spur Highway, east of Marathon Road, and flows south into the Kenai River about a mile above its mouth. Enclosed is a copy of the proposal for your review, a reap showing the creek's location, and a program brochure with the guidelines for geographic names Alaska Historical Commission members have established. The commission would appreciate your comments on the proposed name. To object or to endorse the proposed name, please respond in writing by March 15, 2009. You can respond with a letter, by e-mail, or by writing your comments in the space provided below. If you have any questiops about the geographic names program, please contact me at email io.antonsonaa alaska,M or by phone at 907-269-8714. Thank you. Sincerely, 7� �6 Joan M. Antonson Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer enclosures I object / endorse the proposed name because: _ fhb G (� v K ) b a1, h qr 4 4,- d1 f l skK- 144 �"919A - •`W s1; doS)-�, IacL curet Signed: --�� Date: k'k Executive Summary The Alaska Historical Commission has received a proposal to rename a creek at the mouth of the Kenai River, "Red's Creek" (3050-3 Reds Creek) in part based on the fact that the creek is unnamed. The creek does, in fact, have a Dena'inaname that dates back into prehistory: Shk'ituk'tnu which means "we slide down place creek" or, more specifically, "we slide down on snow place creek." The creek is adjacent to one of the major Dena'ina villages at the Kenai River mouth, now abandoned, Shk'ituk't "we slide down place" which has a long, important history. The place name Shk'ituk'tnu should be retained and the proposed place name "Red's Creek" should be rejected. Description and Location of Shk'ituk't and Shk'ituk'tnu Known on the Alaska Historic Resources Survey data base as KEN-002 (with a second entry KEN-217 see below), Shk'ituk't translates as "place where we slide down" (Kalifomsky 1991:347) specifically referencing sliding on snow and was the primary Kenai River mouth Dena'ina village during the 19`h century and perhaps earlier. The site is on a wave -cut terrace underlain by Pleistocene -era glacial deposits. Today, Shk'ituk't is abandoned with little surface indication or likely recoverable archaeological information because of extensive industrial activity related to commercial fishing canneries, the former CAA/FAA facility, and road building. The CAA/FAA area is reportedly contaminated by subsurface disposal of hazardous products. Table 1 identifies the Dena'ina place names at the Kenai River mouth, including Shk'ituk't and Shk'ituk'tnu and Figure 1 follows with map locations. Tnhln 1 W.—i Anrar Mnnfh n... Zinn Vlarr Nmmpa Dena'ina Name Meaning Source English Name Notes Kahtnu Kaq' River mouth Kalifomsky 1991:343 Kenai River Mouth Tsatni'unt Rock is there Kalifomsky: Rocky Point place 1991:343; Kari/Kaliforsky nd Ken Ka'a Big Flat Kalifomsky large flat north of 1991:351; Kenai Kari/Kalifomsky nd big flat east of Wildwood Kahtnu River -mouth Kalifomsky Kenai River, 2 river 1991:347; Kenai Kari/Kalifornsky nd Qughuzdlent Current Flows around it place Kalifornsky 1991:347; sand bar in Kenai River mouth, north Kari/Kalifornsky nd side Shqit Sloping flat (?) Kalifornsky 1991:343 Flat north of Fort Redoubt Terrace Kenai at Redoubt subdivision is Terrace west, not north, of Port Kenai A. Wilson 1967:4; She -kit Shqit Tsatnu Sloping flat Kalifornsky 1991:343 Unnamed creek Creek flows past cliff river north of Shqit Shqit on the east and would be north of Shqit as one proceeds Kari/Kalifornsky nd creek north of Shqit Flat upstream Kili Bena Kalifornsky Pond at head of 1991:347: Ryan's Creek Kari/Kalifornsky nd Kilt Beirut Kalifornsky Ryan's Creek Not a Dena'ina 1991:347; name, possibly Kari/Kalifornsky nd Kelley; from which Killy River may be derived Shk'ituk't we slide down Kalifornsky 1991:347 Dena'ina village literally slide on Ch'k'ituk't place site at Northwest snow or ice Skittok, Fisheries Cannery nd Old Kenai Village Chkituk at Dobbinsbeck EsliddownKari/Kalifomsky armery site Shk'ituk'tnu Kahfornsky 1991:347 creek into old west" is Ch'k'ituk'tnu village, west of confusing, former FAA station perhaps an Kari/Kalifornsky nd creek into old editing error creek village, by FAA K'elkizt Fabric -like Kalifornsky 1991:348 Northwestern object place Cannery (fish netting place) A. Wilson 1967:1; Kilth-keez Beghdeq Ghetq'eyt above it is Kalifornsky 1991:347 creek forks on q'yet= birchbark covered with i north side of birchbark Shk'ituk'tnu [the it refers to above the place Kari/Kalifornsky nd creek forks with at the river fork Shk'ituk'tnu AB] Dgheqhaq'a stickleback hole north side of Kenai River just above Shk'ituk't 3 Figure 1 Map of Kenai River Mouth Dena'ina Place Names (see Table 1) Figure 2. To hear the Dena'ina place names spoken, find this map at http://genaga.org/kq/pages/territory_pages/map_pages/kenai_river_map.htmi. Use Firefox browser. Q@uN Qmm.��.. 4ocam9omp �G��isdC3°i� �(F Y, a � ill v qF =gar x 5 The stream just to the wee t of SShk'ituk't is called Shk'ituk'tnu (the —nu suffix refers to stream or creek) and thus translates as "we slide down place creek" (Kalifornsky 1991:347). The creek drains a large swampy area several miles to the north. Figure 5. Shk'ituk'tnu "We Slide Down Place Creek" looking southwest where it empties into the Kenai River. Alan Boraas photograph Extensive construction activity has taken place in the area just upstream from the mouth of Shk'ituk'tnu including cannery buildings that date back to 1888, the building of Beaver Creek Road (this portion now Bridge Access Road), and a large gravel pad at the Jareg Construction facility. Some of this construction appears to have diverted the streambed from its natural location. In addition the stream is crossed by Lawton Drive (culvert) and the Kenai Spur Highway (culvert) and is impacted by the current construction of the Kenai Wal-Mart building. r Figure 6. Shk'ituk'tnu where it is crossed by Lawton Drive, Kenai. Looking south. Alan Boraas photograph Figure 7. Shk'ituk'tnu where the creek is crossed by the Kenai Spur Highway, looking north. Alan Boraas photograph Shk'ituk't History The earliest European reference to a Dena'ina village in the vicinity of Shk'ituk't village is from the 1861 Pavil Golovin report in which Golovin states he walked on a trail upriver from Redoubt St. Nicholas and visited the Dena'ina. Golovin (1983: 139-140) writes: ...we took the ship to Kenai Bay, which we reached on the 2 1 " [ 1861 ], after our noon dinner. I left Kostlivtsov to inspect the coal mines [they apparently landed at Alexandrovsk Redoubt and Kostlivtsov inspected the coal mines at nearby Port Graham] and went on by ship farther into the interior of the Bay for about 70 miles, to a place where there is a redoubt and the Kenais live. We reached that place at dawn the next day, and I immediately went ashore. I inspected the awesome redoubt, which would require several old women armed with oven forks to capture. I then went through the forest to the Kenai settlement. The day was clear, and it seemed too hot to wear a coat, so I took it off and hung it up in the forest on the first fir tree I came to. Furuhjelm followed my example and we went on. The Kenais live in a poorer condition than the Aleuts, but by contrast they are more vivacious... [describes the people in a short paragraph] ...and then I returned to the ship, picking up my coat on the way, which I found just where I had left it. Lt. DeMuller's 1869 Fort Kenay map of the newly built army post at Kenai indicates a trail "to Indian Village" with an arrow pointing to the vicinity of Shk'ituk't. Ivan Petroffs 1880 census identifies 40 "Athabaskans" and 10 creoles living at "Chkutk and Chernilla," the latter a village site across the river (Petroff 1882:29). The spelling "Chkutk" was later used by de Laguna'11930:72 )who re c.ences Petroff and refers to Shk'ituk't the alternate spelling of which is Ch'k'ituk't (see Morphophonemics) In 1888 the Northern Packing Company cannery was built at Kenai at the mouth of Shk'itukt'nu where it flows into the Kenai River and in 1893 becarne part of the Alaska Packers Association (Moser 1899:140). De Laguna reports that formerly the village was on the west side of the creek as well as on the upper bench west of the creek (de Laguna 1930:72; see below). The cannery apparently displaced part of the village and an Alaska Packers Association plat of the cannery show's "Aleut Village" on the bench at Shk'ituk't. ... mow.: was- d6afe qA A o 0 C e e. e O e e e �� P\ s 664.g• J 4 A R W Figure 8. Plat of the Northwest Cannery, Kenai ca 1890, Alaska Packers Association Records. Over the years up to three canneries have used the site simultaneously and, because they have changed hands often, the canneries have had many names including Northern Packing Co, Northwestern Cannery, Pacific Steam Whaling Company, Kenai Packing Co., Hansen Packing Co, and Dobbensbek Cannery. Today the Salarnatof Seafoods Inc. has a cannery (fish freezing) operation at the site. In 1888 Alaska's second American territorial governor, Alfred P. Swineford, visited Kenai and distinguished between Kenai and the Dena'ina village apparently Shk'ituk't. Swineford wrote: Kenai is now a station of the Alaska Commercial Company. There are two settlements, one native and one creole, with a Greek (sic) Chapel or Church and a priest. The creole [Kenai] settlement consists of 20 to 25 substantial log houses and the native town [Shk'ituk't] of about as many of log, but mostly straw - thatched. A new salmon cannery has just gone into operation at the mouth of the river ... (Swineford 1888:1). The enumeration of the 1900 census distinguishes between Kenai, identified as "Fort Kenay" and Shk'ituk't is identified as "Old Kenai." Thirty people, mostly Dena'ina (listed as Kenaiutes) lived at "Old Kenai." (see Appendix A) The 1910 census does not list "Old Kenai" or Shk'ituk't; the people had moved a mile and a half west to where Kenai is today and the place was largely abandoned. H.M. Wetherbee was a cannery superintendent at various canneries in Cook Inlet between ca 1890 and 1900 as well as Alaska Commercial Company store manager at Kenai. Firgure 9 is one of Wetherbee's photos which was probably taken at Shk'ituk't during that time period (Boraas and McClain 1996). The family is unidentified, but the age's generally conform to Duneka family listed in the Appendix A 1900 census. Figure 9 Unidentified Dena'ina Family possibly taken at Shk'ituk't by H.M. Wetherbee about 1890- 1900. Wetherbee Collection, University of Alaska Polar Regions Archives, UAF-866-32 Figure 10 is Wetherbee's photo of the Northern Packing Company at the mouth of Shk'ituk'tnu also taken between 1890 and 1900. Part of the village was displaced by cannery construction and the remained of the village of Shk'ituk't would have been on the ridge on the left of the photo. In all likelihood, the boys were from Shk'tiuk't village. 10 Figure 10. Northern Packing Company at the mouth of Shk'ituk'tnu photographed between 1890 and 1900. University of Alaska Polar Regions Archives, UAF-866-35n Anthropologist Frederica de Laguna visited Kenai in 1930 identifying numerous archaeological sites including Shk'ituk't. In her published "Archaeology of Cook Inlet" De Laguna writes: The prehistoric village was on both sides of a small stream flowing into Kenai River from the north, where the cannery of the Kenai Packing Company is now located. The village was calledYa'nuq in pre -Russian days, afterwards Te"x'itu'x'. It was inhabited until 1910 when the priest moved the natives to the present village of Kenai. (de Laguna 1975:133). From de Laguna's field notes 1930:72 she writes: On the hillside above and west of Hansen's cannery, the Kenai Packing Co. is the site of Yanmk, the pre -Russian village, called Chkituk. The village was inhabited until 1910 when the priest moved the natives to the present village of Kenai, or Qraxnu. The houses of Chkituk were not only on the west bank of the stream at Hansen's cannery, but also on the high land on the east bank along the river bluff. The graveyard of Chkituk was on the high land about 1\4 mile west of the cannery. Dr. Cannon, dentist at Seldovia, is said to have a stone adze from Yanunk, which was hollowed out on both sides for hafting on a split stick. (clerk at Palmer's store, Kenai) 11 Z Facing page 71 Figure IL Be. Laguna's sketch map of Kcrai River iJlouth Sites. (de Laguna 1930: facing p.11) There is no doubt the priest told de Laguna he moved the people to Kenai, but this should not be taken too literally; it is much more likely the people moved for their own reasons, only some, of which, the priest was aware of. The abandonment of Shk'ituk't had more to do with influences of the Northwestern cannery The Orthodox Cemetery at Shk'ituk't mentioned by de Laguna was platted in 1904 by Albert Lascy who identified it as Tract B. Tract A is the Orthodox Cemetery currently in use north of the Kenai Orthodox Church about a mile and a half to the west. Lascy wrote the following in his cryptic field notes (Lascy 1904): 12 Tract B is located on a level plateau about 70 feet above highwater mark on right bank of the Kenai River about 1 % miles easterly from Tract A, north of the trail leading up the river. It is known as the old cemetery grounds, but at present is not used for such purposes. Quite a large settlement existed formerly in the immediate vicinity near the eastern boundary [of the cemetery]. Most of the natives having died, the village was deserted and only ruins of former houses and barrabaries [sic, barabaras, a common term for Native houses] remain. Graves are scattered over all parts of the tract and only pieces of broken fences indicating former enclosures remain. There is no timber and very little brush within the cemeteries. Figure 12 is a scan of Lascy's 1904 cemetery plat. z Ua V}st r III n -? 1 �yssren 6reaA-C6r�YrorSssim Reacr�%e' f u n o # .: Trscf B lj �t +I Figure 12. 1904 plat of the Orthodox Cemetery at Shk'ituk't (Lasey 1904). The print west (above) of the cemetery in Figure 12 reads "Ryan Homestead Selection." The creek immediately west of Shk'ituk'tnu in that vicinity is sometimes called Ryan's Creek after the tum-of-the-century storekeeper who was notorious for his 13 bullying tactics toward Kenai Dena'ina. Orthodox historian Sister Victoria writes (1974:64-65): On April 22, 1895, Ryan, who was the local storekeeper for the North American Commercial Company [sic, Alaska Commercial Company] forced several men away from their work of bringing in logs for construction of the new church building, threatening to kill them. The men fled to the church, where a service was in progress. Ryan followed them in with cries and profanity, and started to drive the people at worship out of the building. He was rushed and disarmed and removed from the church, shouting all the time that he would kill the church warden, Ivan Ivanov, if his weapons were not returned to him. Sister Victoria further states that Ryan and his associates regularly tyrannized the Kenai Dena'ina: Brewing vodka, they often got drunk and would fire pistols. The people would hide; but Ryan would break into their houses, sometimes in the middle of the night. Without regard for children or for the ill he would force the people to get up and dance, beating them if they refused. Now Ryan was spreading the rumor that he had the authority from the Unites States government to hang people; and, indeed, there had already been one such incident at his hands up at Knik.... Two years later [ 1897] he is mentioned again in a missionary journal for having beaten and threatened to kill a Kenai resident. The Dena'ina name for Ryan's Creek is Kili Betnu (see Table 1), a name that derives from an immigrant from Toronto, Ontario named James Kelly who married into a Dena'ina family and appears on the 1900 census (see Table D. It is likely the place name Killy River, an important river in the Stepanka's Village area of the upper Kenai River, derives from the same individual. Sven Hakkinson of Kodiak has a grandfather (great- grandfather?) from Kenai named Kelly and this is possibly the same individual. The place name, Kili Betnu should officially replace Ryan's Creek. Table 2 Portion of the 1900 census for Kasilof Name Immigration origin Family Ethnicity Gender Age Biithdate, Marital Tribal Occupation date relationshipStatus affiliation Kelly, Mar.,1896 ! Toronto, Head White M 36 Feb- 1864 Married Cook James Canada Kelly, Alaska Wife Indian F 18 Unkn., Married Kenaites Irma 1882 Kosnikoff, Alaska Fatherin White M 55 Unlm, Widower John Law 1845 14 During World War II the then. Civil Aeronautics Administration (now Federal Aeronautics Administration, built an airstrip and air tracking facility on the site of Shk'ituk't. Much of the area was bulldozed over the bluff. Ken Jordan and his wife lived at the CAAJFAA station in the 1950s and collected numerous 18`h and early 201h century artifacts from their garden. The Alaska Heritage Resources Survey has a duplicate site designation of KEN-217 for this site. On the AHRS records, KEN-002 refers to Shk'ituk't (Chkituk ) of de Laguna's report, and KEN-217 refers to the Jordan collection. Figure 13 The Site of Shk'ituk't in 1946 after building the CAA Station. As part of the CAA construction, the Orthodox Cemetery at Shk'ituk't was bulldozed. Tom Kizzia (1991:A1), writing in the Anchorage Daily News in 1991, recounts the tragic story of the cemetery's destruction: The winter of 1941 got off to a mild start and by Christmas the Kenai River hadn't iced up. Military barges were able to pull beyond the little village and unload at the canneries. Though it was December, the earth yielded easily to the bulldozers as they scraped through the mounds of the old Indian village. When the blades turned up the first human skulls, Alex Ivanoff put down his shovel and went to consult with the priest. Ivanoff was the son and grandson of songleaders in the village's Russian Orthodox church. Short, dark and strong, by heritage both Native and Russian, by trade a cook, Ivanoff was 45, married with a large family, and a religious man. 15 He was one of the few villagers lucky enough to be hired to do shovel work and cleanup on the airport job. Pearl Harbor had just been bombed, and the Army was constructing a major airstrip atop the bluff. Bombers would soon be able to land at Kenai when bad weather kept them from reaching Elmendorf. But now they were cutting roads and preparing to build airport housing where the old Dena'ina village of Ski'tuk (sic) used to sit. Ivanoff could not simply look the other way while an Indian burial ground was bulldozed over the eliff. The local hired men talked about the bones as the bulldozers pushed on. Today, such a discovery would bring an immediate halt to work. Native elders would be convened, teams of archeologists summoned. The Kenaitze men did not protest. Instead, as the bones of their ancestors appeared, they stooped over and set them aside. "If we didn't see it, they just spread them on the road," recalls George Miller, a laborer in the group. Every so often, Ivanoff would gather up the bones and slip into the woods with his shovel. tinder the spruce trees he reburied the first Kenai people and prayed for their souls. Thus did the war come to Kenai. Morphophonemics of Shk'ituk't and Shk'ituk'tnu The plaeenarne Shk'ituk't is a nominalized verb, a verb turned into a noun by the addition of the suffix "-t" which means, "the place that." The verb stem "-tuk"' means to slide on snow or ice. A different stem is used to slide on dirt or mud. The postposition "k"' means movement on the surface and the object of the postposition "sh" means "me." Note that in the alternate spelling "Ch'k'ituk'tnu" the "ch'-" morpheme means "we" and is close to the actual meaning. The entire phrase is in past or perfect tense, although the suffix "t" nominalizing the verb seems to make tense meaningless. (verb information from Kari nd) Root: tuk' Meaning: move multiple objects ect 5 u k#esent . 3'asS , . Fuiire,. Prb 'esstve Ivezus M : Tux tuk' Tex Tux dr ss..? Tex nalusrve Tux tuk' Tux Tux stottiano is , tek' tek' tek' tek' tek' tek' Tek tek' Theme: k' + # +0 classifier + tuk' Meaning: slide (usually on ice or snow), skate, ski Note: to slide on dirt or mud requires a different stem, "-guk" 16 Shk'ituk't "Place I/we slide down on the snow" usually translated as "we slide down nlace" object of Postposition p` Mode Classifier Stem enclitic postposition Morphemes sh k' Disjuct Ghe+i m tuk' t ell' boundary Sound changes ghe preceded by a disjunct boundary is deleted Meaning metl movement on Perfect/past Slide on snow The place we the surface tense Aspect: that.. momentaneous Tense: past Shk'ituk'tnu The name of the creek has an additional suffix "-nu" which means creek. object (it Postposition P Mode Classifier Stem enclitic Areal ostposition suffix Morphemes sh k' Disjunct Ghe+i 6 tuk' t an ch' boundary Sound ghe changes preceded by a disjunct boundary_ is deleted Meaning me/1 movement on Perfect/past Slide on snow The creek we the surface tense Aspect: place momentaneous that... Tense: past 17 Appendix A. 1900 Occupants of Shk'ituk't, the village identified on the census as "Old Kenai" Name Family Relationship Ancestry Gender Age Birthdate Marital Status Tribal Affiliation Mishikoff, Peter Head Mixed 'M 22 Unkn., 1877 Married Mishikoff, Mary Wife Mixed F 21 Unkn., 1874 Married Kenaites Mishikoff; Nicholai Son `` Mixed M 2 : Jan., 1898 Single Mishikoff, Fekar Son Mixed M I June,1899 Single Mishikoff, Stephen Father White M 100 Unkn, 1800 Widower Mishikoff, Alexandria Mother in Law Indian F" 68 ` Unkn., 1832 Widow Kenaites " Mishikoff, Gemoska Brother in Law Indian M '- 19 Unkn, 1881 Single Kenaites Mishikoff,' Nadahlia Sister in Law Indian F 16' Unkn., 1884 Single Kenaites Mishikoff, Affanana Partner - Indian M - 24 Unkn.,1876 Single Kenaites Mishikoff, Ilya Partner ' Indian M' 22` Unkn., 1878 Single Kenaites Tejana j Head Indian F 42 Unkn., 1858 Widow Kenaites Aruska Son i Indian M 20 Unkn., 1880 Single Kenaites Eugenia Daughter Indian F 9 Dec., 1890 Single Kenaites Basilia Son Indian M 6 Mar.; 1894 Single Kenaites Nekaute Son Indian M I Mov., 1898 Single Kenaites Nayesta Daughter Indian F 0.3 Jan., 1900 Single Kenaites Duneka Head - Indian M 37' Unkn., 1863 Maned 'Kenaites Abesenid Wife Indian F 38- Unkn., 1862 Married Kenaites Stephen Son Indian M 20 Sept.,'1879 Single Kenaites Micar Son Indian M '- 15' Sept,1884 Single Kenaites Nahiah Daughter Indian F 12: Mar., 1888 Single Kenaites Pblishka Daughter Indian F 8 : Sept., 1891 Single Kenaites Garilia Daughter Indian F 5 July, 1894 Single Kenaites Nekife Son Indian M 0.4 Nov., 1899 Single Kenaites Hind, Alex 7 Head Mixed M 21 Unlat., 1879 Single Nicholia Head Indian M 49 Unkn., 1851 Married Kenaites Madrona Wife Indian F 48 Unkn.,'1852 Married Kenaites` Bedka Son Indian M 22> Unkn, 1878 Single Kenaites Katrina Daughter Indian F 9 Unkn., 1891 Single Kenaites Vasela Son Indian M 5 July, 1895 Single Kenaites 18 References Cited APA Records Alaska Packers Association Records on Microfiche, 1897-1937, Alaska State Library, Juneau. Boraas, Alan and Penny Mcclain 1996 "Canneries of Kasilof and Kenai, 1889-1900: Photographs of the Wetherbee Collection" de Laguna, Frederica 1976 The Archaeology of Cook Inlet, Alaska. 2 d edition. Anchorage: Alaska Historical Society 1930 Transcribed field notes, Cook Inlet Archaeological Survey. ins 101 pages. Golovin, Pavel N. 1983 Civil and Savage Encounters. translated and annotated by Basil Dmytryshyn and E.A.P. Crownhart-Vaughn. Portland: Oregon Historical Society Press. Kalifornsky, Peter 1991 K'tl'egh'i Sukdu: The Collected Writings of Peter Kalifornsky. edited by James Kari and Alan Boraas. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center. Kari, James nd Dena'ina Verb Stem Dictionary, electronic draft. Kari, Jaynes & Peter Kalifornsky nd unpublished draft of Kenai Peninsula place names. ms. Kizzia, Tom 1991 "Death in Old Town" Anchorage Daily News, Dec 20, 1991 page A 1 Lascy, Albert 1904 Field Notes of the U.S. Survey No. 192 of the Russian Greek Church Mission Reserve at Kenai, Alaska. Executed by Albert Lascy, U.S. Deputy Surveyor. June 30, 1904 to July 9, 1904. Moser, Jefferson F. 1899 The Sahnon Fisheries ofAlaska, Bulletin of the United States Fish Commission for 1898, pp 1-178. Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office. Petroff, Ivan 1882 Report of the Population, Industries, and Resources of Alaska (1880 Census) Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office. 19 Sister Victoria 1974 "The Russian Experience" in The Native, Russian and American Experiences of the Kenai Area ofAlaslaz (2 d edition) edited by Jarnes C. Hornaday, Proceedings of the Conference on Kenai Area History, 1974. Swineford, A.P. 1888 Governor Swineford's Report. The Alaskan. February 18:1. Wilson, Alexander 1967 Alexander Wilson's Map (descriptions, no map attached). Transcribed by June Lindgren [Gagnon]. Author's files. s\ Suggested by: Administration \\ tk«yaf // CITY OF KENAI KENAI. ALASKA RESOLUTION NO. 2009-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AWARDING THE BID TO ALASKA AUTOMATIC FIRE PROTECTION, INC. FOR VINTAGE POINTE DRY SPRINKLER SYSTEM REPLACEMENT - 2009 FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $49,574.00. WHEREAS, the following bids were received on March 3, 2009: BIDDER TOTAL Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc. 49,574.00 Accel Fire Systems, Inc. 81,900.00 Harri Plumbing & Heating, Inc. 103,653.00 Blazv Construction, Inc. 109,592.00 ;and, WHEREAS, Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc.'s bid meets the bid specifications; and, WHEREAS, the recommendation from the City Administration is to award the bid to Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc.; and, WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Kenai has determined that Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc.'s bid is a responsible bid and award to this bidder would be in the best interest of the City; and, WHEREAS, sufficient monies are appropriated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the bid for Vintage Pointe Dry Sprinkler System Replacement - 2009 be awarded to Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc. for the total amount of $49,574.00. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 18th day of March, 2009. PAT PORTER, MAYOR ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk y Approved by Finance: lVilfa e wdh a Past, Ci with aFuture' 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 �iEGI Telephone: (907) 283-7535, Ext. 236 / FAX: (907) 283-3014 1992 MEMORANDUM I��unr n� dun LTO: Rick Koch, City Manager FROM: Wayne Ogle, Public Works Director " DATE: March 11, 2009 SUBJECT: Vintage Pointe Dry Sprinkler System Replacement - 2009; Council Resolution 2009-08 to Award Contract Rick, The City opened sealed bids on 3 March 2009 at 2 PM regarding the subject project. Four construction companies submitted bids: Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc., Accel Fire Systems, Inc., Hard Plumbing & Heating, Inc. and Blazy Construction, Inc. Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc. was the apparent low bidder with the Bid: $491574.00. The City has determined the contractor is a responsible bidder. I recommend City Council award the contract to Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc. This is a request to issue a Resolution to Council for a P.Q. for $14, 016 from Line Item 010-466-4999 (Sewer Contingency) for the following equipment: in Suggested by: Administration rke4#- eA// CITY OF KENAI 1-140f4*1114r , • • �..,. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AWARDING THE BID TO WORLD WIDE ROOFING & CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR VINTAGE POINTE CASEMENT WINDOW REPLACEMENT - 2009 FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $94,297.00, WHEREAS, the following bids were received on March 3, 2009: BIDDER TOTAL World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc. 94,297.00 Alaska Earthmovers LLC 97,807.00 Dan Sterchi Construction 144,113.00 Watson & Sons General Construction, Inc. 150,989.00 Blazy Construction, Inc. 158,851.00 Sterling Custom Homes, Inc 188,558.23 Holden Company 281,844.00 ;and, WHEREAS, World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc.'s bid meets the bid specifications; and, WHEREAS, the recommendation from the City Administration is to award the bid to World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc.; and, WHEREAS, + n f the Ci},, of Kenai has t ed that World T' =e Council o. h F , de e.min. V o. Tide Construction, Inc.'s bid is a responsible bid and award to this bidder would be in the best interest of the City; and, WHEREAS, sufficient monies are appropriated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the bid for Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement - 2009 be awarded to World Wide Construction, Inc. for the total amount of $94,297.00. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 18th day of March, 2009. ATTEST: PAT PORTER, MAYOR Carol L. Freas, City Clerk Approved by Finance: f -42- ""Villaye with a Past; Ci witk a iture " 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 Telephone: (907) 283-7535, Ext. 236 / FAX: (907) 283-3014 \\ the ei�'0f // MEMORANDUM NUM KENAI, ALASKA / V IkTO: Rick Koch, City Manager FROM: Wayne Ogle, Public Works Directorw DATE: March 11, 2009 SUBJECT: Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement - 2009; Council Resolution 2009-09 to Award Contract Rick, The City opened sealed bids on 3 March 2009 at 2 PM regarding the subject project. Seven construction companies submitted bids: World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc., Alaska Earthmovers LLC, Dan Sterchi Construction, Watson & Sons General Construction, Inc., Blazy Construction, Inc., Sterling Customs Homes, Inc. and Holden Company. World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc. was the apparent low bidder with the Bid: $94,297,00. The contractor bid the contract using a window model not specifically called out in the bid. The City allows substitutions as long as the City agrees the substitution is equivalent to the specifications in the Bid document. We have conducted a line by line comparison of the substitute and determined there is an equivalency. I recommend City Council award the contract to World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc. -43- March 18, 2009 RE: Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement- 2009 Advertisement for Bid TO: The City of Kenai and Kenai City Council: KET,AI CITY CLERK I formally protest Resolution No. 2009-09 that suggests awarding a contract to Worldwide Roofing & Construction, Inc. for the Vintage Pointe Casement. Replacement-2009, Advertisement for Bid. World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc, cannot and has not produced the necessary documentation to show that the windows they used in their bid meet specifications set forth by the City of Kenai. The Fairbank window supplier says that they can build these windows to meet the city's specification for the Solar Heat Gain Coefficient, Sound Transition Class and Visible Light Transmittance. But they have not included the test results that say these windows were tested by a independent test lab such as Fenestration Testing Laboratory ( AAMA Accredited Laboratories). Where are their engineers stamps and test results? 1 strongly urge you to throw out all bids using windows that do not meet specifications and to award the bid to the lowest bidding contractor who included qualified windows for this project. Thank you. Sinc ly, Dan Sterchi Dan Sterchi Construction 907-283-3878 nHK-1ti-0008 Will IU;L�4 H11 bbb N NHl 111LLWUXU rHn NU. JJ=Dou r, Ur Re: Kenai Sr. Center This letter has been drafted in an effort to clarify and better understand the decision of Larry Floyd and the City of Kenai on the Kenai Sr. Center project. it is my understand that the Milgard Ultra Fiberglass product line was specified for use in this project and that proposals for work including the Milgard Windows were received from several firms bidding the work. Over the past few weeks I came to understand that the city was entertaining alternate bids fromwindowmanufactures that 00 NOT meet the specified requirements for this project. This wasconfirmedby Mr. Floyd today in an e-mail response to a message l sent earlier in the clay, f have reviewed the Information provided by the aftemate window manufacturer and have confirmed that they absolutely do not meet the requirements for this project. What concerns me most is that ultimately, the residents of this building will be the ones who have to suffer because of a poor decision. I can only guess that this decision was made sotely based on price, not quality, performance; warranty, reputation, service, and sales support. I had a conversation with Mr. Floyd over two weeks ago making sure that he understood the, requirements of the project as they relate to windowsand he responded that "Actually, l don't really know what any of that stud means". t took the initiative to help him along by answering questions anddirected him to our webslte for further clarification and support. Rook the time to explain the features, advantages, and berets to tuhre Milgard Fiberglass produfuM Lastly, I explained that we at Milgard understand Thai times are challenging for everyone right now and that we would be happy to revise our proposal to try and better meet the budgetary needs of the city if needed', l followed' this conversation up with an e-mail as well, but never got a response I was left worrying that this decision would be made based on a prig, without any consideration to the spec or the actual product. It appears that my worries have been confirmed. I fait it necessary to share the facts of this window supplier decision for the Kenai Sr. Center because just couldn't sit back and watch the well ,being, comfort, and peace of mind of the residents at the Kenai Sr. Center slip away and, not say anything. I look forward to the opportunity to sere the city on this and future projects. Should there be any questions regarding this or any other correspondence, please feet free to contact me at the below listed information. MHgard, as well as our preferred window vendors in Kenai; are excited about the opportunity to ear your business on this project and will do whatever it takes to make sure that this project gets the windows that it deserves, Milgard Fiberglass, Jason McCook Sales Manager, Northern Territories Milgard Manufacturing, Inc. 425-766-2066 asonmccook .mil ard.com Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENAI A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AUTHORIZING THE KENAI POLICE DEPARTMENT TO PARTICIPATE WITH THE BUREAU OF HIGHWAY PATROL TRAFFIC TEAM AND TO AUTHORIZE THE KENAI POLICE DEPARTMENT TO HIRE A NEW OFFICER TO MEET STAFFING NEEDS WITHIN THE CITY OF KENAI AS A RESULT OF THE DEPARTMENT'S PARTICIPATION WITH THE BUREAU OF HIGHWAY PATROL TRAFFIC TEAM. WHEREAS, the Alaska State Troopers has recently formed the Bureau of Highway Patrol (BHP) in order to improve traffic safety patrol operations in Alaska; and, WHEREAS, the BHP has requested a multi -jurisdictional partnership with local law enforcement agencies throughout Alaska to increase and improve traffic law enforcement efforts in order to prevent fatality crashes, reduce major injury crashes, conduct impaired driving apprehension and prevention programs, increase the use of seatbelts, and take enforcement action on aggressive and speeding drivers; and, WHEREAS, the BHP has requested one officer of the Kenai Police Department to participate with the BHP Kenai Peninsula Traffic team, and the BHP will pay the officer's salary and benefits, as well as provide a police cruiser and work station, all through grant funding from the Alaska Highway Safety Office for a period of two to five years; and, WHEREAS, the BHP has agreed to provide the Kenai officer with major crash investigation training in order for BHP team members to respond to, and investigate, fatal and major crashes on the Kenai Peninsula; and, WHEREAS, the Kenai Police Department requests permission to send a veteran officer to the BHP team, effective July 1, 2009, and to hire a new officer, with a hire date of July 1, 2009, in order to meet police staffing needs within the City of Kenai. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, as follows: Section 1: To authorize the Kenai Police Department to participate with the Bureau of Highway Patrol Traffic Team, who will provide the officer's salary and benefits, police cruiser and work station, through grant funding from the Alaska Highway Safety Office for a period of two to five years; and, Section 2: To authorize the Kenai Police Department to hire a new officer to meet staffing needs within the City of Kenai as a result of the Department's participation with the BHP Traffic Team.. E. Resolution No. 2009-10 Page 2 of 2 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 18th day of March, 2009. PAT PORTER, MAYOR ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City CIerk New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] -45- MAi114MIS• A44i�i � w a 4 OF Pl i k A STATE TROOPERS BUREAU OF HIGHWAY PATROL t THE KENAI POLICE DEP49TITENT This letter of agreement recognizes the need for coordination in enforcement of state laws and regulations in Alaska, specifically issues related to traffic law enforcement. This agreement is entered into with the intent of promoting cooperation between the Department of Public Safety (DPS), Alaska State Troopers (AST), Bureau of Highway Patrol (BHP) and the Kenai Police Department (KPD). It is recognized that Title 29 and 12.60.020 of the Alaska Statutes authorizes the formation of police forces, which has been done by the City of Kenai, in all respects to perform all duties pertaining to public safety. It is further recognized, Alaska Statute 18.65.090 authorizes DPS to assist other departments of state, municipal and federal governments in the enforcement of criminal laws and regulations. DPS and the KPD have a commitment to effective enforcement of laws and regulations, specifically issues related to traffic law enforcement in Alaska. The parties agree that one method of providing effective enforcement is the establishment of officers assigned to the BHP to enforce state traffic laws and regulations, investigate fatal and major injury crashes, participate in public education programs, and investigate other crimes encountered while conducting traffic law enforcement on a statewide, regional and local basis. The parties agree that establishing a multi -jurisdictional partnership will enhance the presence of traffic lava-en{crcement efforts throe ugh h;gk ,;is;hilrty — susta!red enforcement, better utilization of available resources, increased communications, data driven enforcement programs, and improved coordination provided by a unified direction and balanced traffic safety effort. The goal of this agreement is to facilitate the following activities: a) Prevent fatalities and reduce major injury crashes through traffic law -enforcement programs in Alaska. b) Gather statistical data related to traffic safety and use such data to develop effective enforcement programs in Alaska. c) Conduct impaired driving apprehension and prevention programs, improve the use of occupant protection devices through enforcement and education programs, coordinate aggressive driving and speeding enforcement and improve youth driving behaviors. Throughout the life of this program, the goals will be reviewed on a regular basis and are subject to modification to best meet the needs of the state and local communities to include identified traffic safety issues outlined in the Alaska Strategic Highway Safety Plan. 1 of 3 iM This partnership will encourage the involvement of additional agencies and jurisdictions in cooperative enforcement and prosecutorial efforts whenever possible. In order to facilitate a more efficient utilization of resources, both parties agree that a formal Letter of Agreement would be beneficial to establish and support the temporary addition of KPD officers to BHP Parties to this letter agree: 1) The BHP shall conduct traffic law enforcement programs in Alaska and assist other police agencies with traffic law enforcement. Supervision and direction of BHP members while conducting traffic law enforcement efforts statewide shall be under the control of the BHP Commander and the commander's subordinates 2) One officer from KPD will be assigned to the BHP supervised by an Alaska State Trooper Sergeant. The KPD officer shall fall under their department's chain of command and report to the officer's immediate supervisor on any current events. The officer's agency supervisor will complete that officer's performance evaluation with input provided by the assigned BHP sergeant. 3) DPS/AST/BHP agrees to provide the KPD officer's pay and overtime, including benefits. KPD will provide basic personal equipment, including duty -issue weapons, ammunition, handcuffs, baton, OC spray and ballistic vest and will be reimbursed through their first year cost. BHP will also provide and maintain a vehicle for the officer. 4) DPS/AST/BHP will provide office space, including all utilities, a work area, a computer, and other office and investigative supplies, as needed. Secure evidence storage for BHP cases will be provided by BHP and all items of evidence will remain in the custody of BHP. BHP will provide a cell phone, however the officer will be responsible for reimbursement for personal calls. 5) DPS/AST/BHP will provide travel and per diem at the State rate for the officer traveling outside their assigned area on authorized BHP programs. 6) DPS/AST/BHP agrees to provide KPD officer with specialized training to include but not limited to major crash investigation. 7) DPS/AST/BHP and KPD agree to share all statistical data and case reports on investigations conducted within the perspective officer's municipal area and jurisdiction. 8) Any seizures or forfeitures produced by the BHP will be shared in an equitable manner by the state and the participating agencies. It is agreed that the BHP members and KPD will coordinate completion of all asset forfeiture paperwork with the BHP Administrative Supervisor. 2of3 M 9) The State agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the KPD officer assigned to BHP and KPD in the same manner and to the same extent the State protects itself and its employees from any claim, demand, suit for property damages or personal injury including death allegedly caused by the KPD officer if: a) at the time of the occurrence he/she was acting in good faith within the course and scope of their BHP duties and in accordance with the directions of the BHP Team Leader; b) the KPD officer provides immediate notice to the State of any claim; c) the KPD officer and KPD cooperate in the defense and do not stipulate to any judgments or settlements without the State's approval BHP will supervise all operations. Approval of overtime shall remain the responsibility of BHP supervisor. The KPD supervisor of the KPD officer will address all other personnel issues not covered in this agreement. TERM OF AGREEMENT - The term of this agreement shall be from the date of signature by the participating agency representatives for a period of 5 years. BHP will continue to provide funding for the KPD officer as long as the federal funding is available. BHP will continue to apply for federal funding on an annual basis. This agreement can be dissolved with a 60 day written notice signed by the participating agency's representative. Alaska state Troopers Colonel Audie Holloway, Director, Alaska State Troopers Date Signed 3of3 i • Kenai Police Department Chief Gus Sandahl Kenai Police Chief Date Signed f` _ Suggested by: Administration rho crry of - KENAI. ALASKA CITY OF KENAI RESOLUTION NO. 2009-II A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AUTHORIZING A BUDGET TRANSFER WITHIN THE CITY SHOP DEPARTMENT TO COVER COSTS IN EXCESS OF BUDGETED AMOUNTS FOR OPERATING AND REPAIR SUPPLIES. WHEREAS, the City Shop has expended the majority of its Operating and Repair Supply account on several large repairs that were not projected at the time of the budget; and, WHEREAS, with nearly 1 /3 of the year remaining the department needs additional funds for the remainder of the operating year; and, WHEREAS, due to the low amount of contracted repairs there are funds available in the Repair and Maintenance account that can be transferred. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, the following budget transfers be made: From: General Fund - Shop Department Repair and Maintenance $15,000 To: General Fund - Shop Department Operating and Repair Supplies $15,000 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 18th day of March, 2009. PAT PORTER, MAYOR ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk Approved by Finance:_ New Text Underlines; (DELETED TEXT BRACIffs E • "Vi'flage wA a Past C# wiM a Future" f 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794� ^ Telephone: (907) 283-7535, Ext. 2361 FAX: (907) 283-3014 1992 \� tlrcclaynf // MEMOPANDUM KENO ALASKA V TO: Rick Koch, City Manager FROM: Wayne Ogle, Public Works Director DATE: March 11, 2009 SUBJECT: Line Item Transfer Request; City Shop Budget-'ie5o(Abv) �bN- H This is a request to issue a resolution to Council for a line item transfer of $15,000 of FY2009 City Shop funds. The following is a summary of this transfer request: From: Account 001 A32.4538 Shop Repair and Maintenance To: Account 001.432.2022 Shop Operating Supplies The Shop has experienced a larger than normal demand for repairs of heavy equipment and also the need to replace tires. The Rain{{ account has sufficient funds to cover this transfer. Please let me know if you have any questions. ME KENAI CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 7:00 P.M. KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS hap: / /www.ci.kenai.ak.us 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Approval 4. Consent Agenda *All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non- controversial by the council and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a council member so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders. ITEM B: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS (10 minutes) ITEM C: UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS (3 minutes) ITEM D: REPORTS OF KPB ASSEMBLY LEGISLATORS AND COUNCILS ITEM E: PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimony limited to 3 minutes per speaker.) 1. Ordinance No. 2382-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $5,200 in the General Fund for a Library Grant. 2. Ordinance No. 2383-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $54,230 in the Airport Fund Equipment Capital Project Fund for the Purchase of Snow Removal Equipment. 3. Ordinance No. 2384-2009 -- Reducing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations Previously Appropriated by Ordinance No. 2342-2008 by $63,609 in the Airport Fund and in the Airport Equipment Capital Project Fund for the Purchase of Snow Removal Equipment. 4. Ordinance No. 2395-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $22,973 in the Airport Fund and by $918,899 in the Airport Equipment Capital Project Fund for the Purchase of an Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) Truck. -51- 5. Ordinance No. 2386-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by 8740,832 in the Runway Improvement Capital Project Fund for Phase A of the Airport Apron Pavement Rehabilitation Project. 6. Ordinance No. 2387-2009 -- Reducing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations Previously Appropriated by Ordinance No. 2341-2008 by $179,004 in the Airport Fund and in the Airport Equipment Capital Project Fund for the Apron Pavement Rehabilitation Project. 7. Ordinance No. 2388-2009 -- Amending KMC 7.15.060 to Allow Surplus or Obsolete Supplies, Materials or Equipment to be Sold by Internet Bidding Process or by a Broker When the Council Determines it is in the Best Interest of the City. 8. Ordinance No. 2389-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.260 to Better Provide for Enforcement for Violations of the Kenai City Code and to Provide for Appeal of Administrative Enforcement Orders to the Board of Adjustment. 9. Resolution No. 2009-04 -- Awarding the Bid to Kodiak Island Native Supply for North Beach Fence Materials - 2009 for the Total Amount of $35,303.26. 10. Resolution No. 2009-05 -- Authorizing the Use of the Equipment Replacement Fund to Purchase a 4X4 Articulating Multipurpose Municipal Tractor with Snow Blower and Ditch Mower Attachment. 11. WITHDRAWAL OF PROTEST OF CONTINUATION OF OPERATION - Kenai Landin.-Inc., d/b/a Kenai L ayid ng /,License # 4 'Kl / Rayarnge Dispensary -- Tourism/Seasonal. 12, WITHDRAWAL OF PROTESTS. CONTINUATION OF OPERATION, RENEWAL OF LIQUOR LICENSE, AND TRANSFER OF LIQUOR LICENSE-- Amy & George Bowen, d/b/a One Stop Liquors (License #2319)/Package Store. 13. *LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS -- o Pizza Paradisos #3032 -- Beverage Dispensary • Don Jose's Me:�dcan Restaurant #3039 -- Beverage Dispensary • Oaken Keg Spirit Shop #1808 (Lic. #3218) -- Package Store ® Three Bears #4118 -- Package Store s 2 Go Mart #4544 -- Package Store ITEM F: MINUTES 1. *Regular Meeting of February 18, 2009. ITEM G- UNFINISHED BUSINESS -52- Ratification of Bills 2. Approval of Purchase Orders Exceeding S 15,000 3. *Ordinance No. 2390-2009 -- Amending Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 12.40 to Eliminate Secondhand Tobacco Smoke Exposure in Places of Employment and Other Public Places. 4. *Ordinance No. 2391-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) to Allow an Extension for the Ninety (90) Day Time Limit for Skirting in Mobile Homes Placed in Mobile Home Parks. *Ordinance No. 2392-2009 -- Amending KMC 21.05.085, Airport Fuel Flowage Fee. Approval -- Extension of Homer Electric Association, Inc. Lease/Alaska Fire Training Center -- 459 Marathon Road, Kenai. 7. Approval -- Mutual Termination of Lease and Asset Purchase Agreement/University of Alaska Lease -- Tract A-1, Baron Park Subdivision No. 7 (a Re -subdivision of Tract A, Baron Park Subdivision No. 5). 8. Discussion -- Letter of Agreement/Department of Public Safety, Alaska State Troopers, Bureau of Highway Patrol and Kenai Police Department; °.lash State Trooper Traffic Team. ITEM I: COMMISSIONlCOMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Council on Aging 2. Airport Commission 3. Harbor Commission 4, Library Commission S. Parks & Recreation Commission 6. Planning & Zoning Commission 7. Miscellaneous Commissions and Committees a. Beautification Committee b. Alaska Municipal League Report C. Mini -Grant Steering Committee d. Advisory Cemetery Committee C. Kenai Convention & Visitors Bureau f. Salmon Task Force -53- 1. City Manager 2. Attorney 3. City Clerk ITEM L: DISCUSSION 1. Citizens (five minutes) 2. Council ITEM M: PENDING LEGISLATION (This item lists legislation which will be addressed at a later date as noted.) Ordinance No. 2362-2008 -- Amending the Official Kenai Zoning Map by Rezoning Tract A, Papa Joe's Subdivision, Chumley Replat From Rural Residential 1 (RRI) to Limited Commercial (LC). Ordinance No. 2365-2008 -- Amending KMC 1.80.010 by Increasing the Mayor's Salary From $900 to $1,000 Per Month and Council Members' Salaries From $400 to $500 Per Month. (Clerk's Note: Ordinance No. 2365-2008 was tabled to the first meeting in July, 2009, to allow for further consideration of a salary increase during the budget FY10 budget process.) Ordinance No. 2347-2008 -- Repealing the Existing KMC 1.15.040 and KMC 1.15.050(c) Regarding Preparation, Distribution and Publication of the Agenda and Replacing Them with a New Section KMC 1.15.040 Entitled, Agenda and Packet - Development -Preparation -Distribution -Publication -Late Materials. (Clerk's Note: Ordinance No. 2347-2008, Substitute B was mo*ved for adoption, at the January 21, 2009 Council Meeting and subsequently tabled, no time certain. Within 60 days, items from the ordinance are to be incorporated into a suggested policy as well as an ordinance identifying those items to codify.) EXECUTIVE SESSION -- None Scheduled ITEM N: ADJOURNMENT -54- r •i as MARCH�� li Isla, 00 a+• I CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MAYOR PAT PORTER,DIN MINUTES ITEM A: GALL TO ORDER Mayor Porter called the meeting to order at approximately 7:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the Kenai City Hall Building. A-1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Porter led those assembled in the Pledge of Allegiance. A-2. ROLL CALL The City Clerk took roll. Present were: A quorum was present. Also present: Student. Representative Maya Johnson A-3. AGENDA APPROVAL The following changes were requested: SUBSTITUTE: H-2, Purchase Orders Exceeding $15,000 --New list moves Kodiak Island Native Supply from Increase of Existing Purchase Order. ADD TO: H-3, Ordinance No. 2390-2009 -- Letters of support from G. Delgaizo, B. Ahlberg (Boys &, Girls Club), and A. Sappah (Substance Abuse Directors Association), and S. Pfaffe, ADD AS: Information Item No. 5 -- Correspondence related to the proposed, rezone of property along Kenai Spur Highway Corridor from: C. Winegarden, P. Falkenberg, J. Espy, with some council responses. MOTION: Council Member Moore MOVED for approval of the agenda with the requested changes and Council Member Smalley SECONDED the motion. -55- KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 2 • sk r ;tt k� Council Member Ross MOVED to remove Ordinance No. 2390-2009 from the consent agenda and move it to be the first item under public hearings. Council Member Eldridge SECONDED the motion. VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT: *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldridge Yes Ross Yes Molloy Yes Boyle Yes Porter Yes Smalley Yes Moore ;Yes j ( � MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. There were no objections. SO ORDERED, A-4. CONSENT AGENDA is (oil4)10WA Council Member Eldridge MOVED to approve the consent agenda and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Council Member Smalley SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. ITEM B: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS -- None. ITEM C: (3 minutes) Debbie Sonberg, 410 Cinderella, Kenai -- Having signed in prior to the meeting, was not certain of what items she wanted to speak. Russell Sonberg, 410 Cinderella, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the proposed rezone of properties along the Kenai Spur Highway. Mark Schrag, 312 Princess Lane, Kenai -- Spoke in relation to the proposed rezone and requested clarification of the schedule. Mayor Porter reported the ordinance for proposed rezone of properties along the Kenai Spur Highway would be included on the March 18, 2009 council meeting agenda for introduction and had not yet been addressed by council. At that time, amendments could be considered. -56- KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 3 None. ITEM E: PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimony limited to 3 minutes per speaker.) H-3. Ordinance No. 2390-2009 -- Amending Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 12.40 to Eliminate Secondhand Tobacco Smoke Exposure in Places of Employment and Other Public Places. Item removed from consent agenda and moved forward for public hearing. MOTION TO INTRODUCE: Council Member Smalley MOVED to introduce Ordinance No. 2390-2009 and Council Member Eldridge SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. Pamela Howard, 48966 Minnick, Soldotna -- Stated her support for the ordinance. Patrick A. Hawkins, 36115 Pioneer Drive, Soldotna -- Stated he was representing the VFW, spoke in opposition to the ordinance, and felt it was a borough -wide issue. Gary Superman, P.O. Box 8425, Nikiski - Stated he was representing the Kenai Peninsula Borough CHARR as its president and spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Paul Morrison, 850 Auk, Apt. 2, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Levi Superman, 51661, Nikiski -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Bill Osborn, 423 Rogers Road, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the ordinance. Chrystal Schoenrock, 55335 Bell Avenue, Box 8583, Nikiski -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Joe Stanford, 46875 S. Miller Loop Road, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Grace Olendorff, 37555 Stone Hollow Drive, Soldotna -- Spoke in support of the ordinance. Cindy Stonecypher, 47117 Lexington, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Emily Nenon, American Cancer Society =- Spoke in support of the ordinance and offered assistance to the council. -57- KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 4 Jenny Olendorff, 37555 Stone Hollow Drive, Soldotna -- Spoke in support of the ordinance. Mike Henry, 10800 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Margaret Gilman, 216 Susienanna Lane, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the ordinance. Ramon Barrett, 53220 Jahwa Lane, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Aaron Parker, P.O. Box 1337, Sterling -- Spoke in support of the ordinance. Don Pearce, 155 Richfield Drive, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. John C. Parker, 908 Highland Avenue, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the ordinance, Teresa Hanson, 45055 Holt Lamplight Road, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the ordinance. Blaine Gilman, 216 Susieanna Lane, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the ordinance. Kate Shultz, Cherry Circle, Soldotna -- Spoke in support of the ordinance. There be no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Council discussion followed with comments including: • Request for the city attorney to research the concerns spoken related to rights and civil liberties. • Concern the ordinance was too broad, trying to protect adults from their own actions, and felt the current ordinance could be amended. • Support for a work session to further review and discuss the ordinance. • Support for a work session to review the current ordinance and develop amendments to it. • Support of a work session after the introduction of Ordinance No. 2390- 2009. • Support of the ordinance and the concept that it would protect the rights of people. • Agreed the ordinance was too broad and supported amending the existing ordinance. • To be effective, felt there should be a borough -wide ordinance. • Supported encouraging the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly to present it as a borough -wide ballot issue. on KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 5 Council Member Smalley MOVED to table Ordinance No. 2390-2009 and have it be part of a work session. Council Member Boyle SECONDED the motion. Elplali •K s 'Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldridge �No7 Ross . No MolloyYes Boyle Yes Porter No Smalley Yes Moore ! No MOTION FAILED. VOTE ON INTRODUCTION: *Student Representative Johnson: Yes MOTION FAILED. 1 seagir- rn the rT1rre t i sriic. „I-d c_._ r " n c be hcM A work _ n_ crdlnance 'aa c - .u: .J cy t,a, 2 0 , tv tic ti iu in the council chambers and begin. at 6:00 p.m. E-I. Ordinance No. 2382-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $5,200 in the General Fund for a Library Grant, MOTION: Council Member Eldridge MOVED for adoption of Ordinance No. 2382-2009 and Council Member Moore SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. Bolo Peters, Old Town, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the ordinance. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. There were no council comments. VOTE: -59- KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 6 *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldridge Yes Ross Yes Molloy Yes Bogle Yes Porter Yes Smalley I Yes ,I Moore Yes MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. E-2. Ordinance No. 2383-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $54,230 in the Airport Fund Equipment Capital Project Fund for the Purchase of Snow Removal Equipment. MOTION: Council Member Eldridge MOVED for adoption of Ordinance No. 2383-2009 and Council Member Molloy SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. There were no council comments. VOTE: *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldr� id e 1 Yes ixsls Mollo Yes Boi yle Yes Porter Yes Smalley Yes Maare Yes E-3. Ordinance No. 2384-2009 -- Reducing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations Previously Appropriated by Ordinance No. 2342-2008 by $63,609 in the Airport Fund and in the Airport Equipment Capital Project Fund for the Purchase of Snow Removal Equipment. MOTION: Council Member Eldridge MOVED for adoption of Ordinance No. 2384-2009 and Council Member Molloy SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. There were no council comments. *Student Representative Johnson: Yes KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 7 Eldridge Boyle Yes Yes Ross Yes Molloy Porter Yes ; Smalley i—Yes 17yes Moore Yes E-4. Ordinance No. 2385-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $22,973 in the Airport Fund and by $918,899 in the Airport Equipment Capital Project Fund for the Purchase of an Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) Truck. it�filtil�sA Council Member Eldridge MOVED for adoption of Ordinance No. 2385-2009 and Council Member Molloy SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. It was noted, the local contribution would be 2.5% and it would be a year before a new truck would be received, leaving a lot of time to decide how to dispose of the current truck. VOTE: *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldridge i Yes 1 Ross ;Yes ;Molloy Yes � Boyle � Yes � Porter i Yes �,,,anP.> , vFc Moore Y i i �.... E-5. Ordinance No. 2386-2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $740,832 in the Runway Improvement Capital Project Fund for Phase A of the Airport Apron Pavement Rehabilitation Project, MOTION: Council Member Eldridge MOVED for adoption of Ordinance No. 2386-2009 and Council Member Moore SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. There were no council comments. -61- KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 8 sly *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldridge Yes Ross Yes Mollo Yes Boyle Yes Porter Yes Smalley Yes Moore Yes MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. E-6. Ordinance No. 2387-2009 -- Reducing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations Previously Appropriated by Ordinance No. 2341-2008 by $179,004 in the Airport Fund and in the Airport Equipment Capital Project Fund for the Apron Pavement Rehabilitation Project. Council Member Eldridge MOVED for adoption of Ordinance No. 2387-2009 and Council Member Molloy SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. There were no council comments. *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldrid e Yes Ross Yes Molloy Yes Boyle Yes Porter Yes Smalley Yes Moore Yes IT, 1611 calk, E-7. Ordinance No. 2388-2009 -- Amending KMC 7.15.060 to Allow Surplus or Obsolete Supplies, Materials or Equipment to be Sold by Internet Bidding Process or by a Broker When the Council Determines it is in the Best Interest of the City. Council Member Eldridge MOVED for adoption of Ordinance No. 2388-2009 and Council Member Molloy SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. There were no council comments. IN KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 9 VOTE: *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldridge Yes _ Ross Yes MolloyYes Boyle Yes Porter Yes Smalley Yes Moore Yes—� E-8. Ordinance No. 2389-2009 -- Amending KMC 14,20.260 to Better Provide for Enforcement for Violations of the Kenai City Code and to Provide for Appeal of Administrative Enforcement Orders to the Board of Adjustment. F,rr*Tf st Council Member Eldridge MOVED for adoption of Ordinance No. 2389-2009 and Council Member Moore SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. Marilyn Kebschull, City Planner -- Noted some wording was omitted from the attachment. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Ross MOVED to postpone Ordinance No. 2389-2009 until the next meeting to correct the attachment. Council Member Eldridge SECONDED the motion. Kebschull discussed the intent of the ordinance, noting the ordinance identified the code enforcement position, provided for a civil fine instead of having to move through the court system, and provided for an appeal process through the Board of Adjustment. *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldridge 1 Yes Ross Yes Molloy Yes Boyle Yes Porter Yes Smallev Yes Moore Yes MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSIV -63- KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 10 E-9. Resolution No. 2009-04 -- Awarding the Bid to Kodiak Island Native Supply for North Beach Fence Materials - 2009 for the Total Amount of $35,303.26. MOTION: Council Member Smalley MOVED for approval of Resolution No, 2009-04 and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Council Member Eldridge SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. Bob Peters, Old Town, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the resolution. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. There were no council comments. City Manager Koch reported on the difference in the bids and the award of the bid to Kodiak Island Native Supply. VOTE: There were no objections. SO ORDERED. E-10. Resolution No. 2009-05 -- Authorizing the Use of the Equipment Replacement Fund to Purchase a 4114 Articulating Multipurpose Municipal Tractor with Snow Blower and Ditch Mower Attachment. MOTION: Council Member Eldridge MOVED for approval of Resolution No. 2009-05 and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Council Member Smalley SECONDED the motion. The floor was opened for public hearing. Bob Peters, Old Town, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the resolution. VOTE: There were no objections. SO ORDERED. E-11, WITHDRAWAL, OF PROTEST OF CONTINUATION OF OPERATION -- Kenai Landing Inc., d/b/a Kenai Landing (License #4355)/Beverage Dispensary -- Tourism/Seasonal. M KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 11 Council Member Ross MOVED to withdraw the protest of the Liquor License Continuation of Operation for Kenai Landing Inc., d/b/a Kenai Landing (License #4355) and Council Member Eldridge SECONDED the motion. Council Member Moore requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. E-12. WITHDRAWAL OF PROTESTS: CONTINUATION OF OPERATION, RENEWAL OF LIQUOR LICENSE, AND TRANSFER OF LIQUOR LICENSE -- Amy & George Bowen, d/b/a One Stop Liquors (License #2319)/Package Store. Council Member Eldridge MOVED to withdraw protests of the liquor license continuation of operation and renewal of liquor license of Amy &, George Bowen, d/b/a One Stop Liquors #2319 and the transfer of liquor license from Amy & George Bowen, d/b/a One Stop Liquors to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. d/b/a Wal-Mart Supercenter #4474. Council Member Moore SECONDED the motion and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. VOTE: There were no objections. SO ORDERED. E-13. LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS -- • Pizza Paradises #3032 -- Beverage Dispensary i Don Jose's Mexican Restaurant #3039 -- Beverage Dispensary • Oaken Keg Spirit Shop #1808 (Lic. #3218) -- Package Store ® Three Bears #4118 -- Package Store • 2 Go Mart #4544 -- Package Store Approved by consent agenda. ITEM F: MINUTES F-1. Regular Meeting of February 18, 2009 -- Approved by consent agenda. ITEM G: UNFINISHED BUSINESS -- None. ITEM H: NEW BUSINESS -65- KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 12 H-1. Ratification of Bills MOTION: Council Member Molloy MOVED to ratify the bills and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Council Member Eldridge SECONDED the motion. VOTE: There were no objections. SO ORDERED. H-2. Approval of Purchase Orders Exceeding $ 15,000 MOTION: Council Member Eldridge MOVED to approve the rec sed list of purchase orders exceeding $15,000. Council Member Moore SECONDED the motion and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. VOTE: There were no objections. SO ORDERED. H-3. Ordinance No. 2390-2009 -- Amending Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 12.40 to Eliminate Secondhand Tobacco Smoke Exposure in Places of Employment and Other Public Places. Removed from the consent agenda and heard immediately prior to item E-1. H-4. Ordinance No. 2391-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) to Allow an Extension for the Ninety (90) Day Time Limit for Skirting in Mobile Homes Placed in Mobile Home Parks. Introduced by approval of the consent agenda. H-5. Ordinance No. 2392-2009 -- Amending KMC 21,05,085, Ail -port Fuel Flowage Fee. Introduced by approval of the consent agenda. H-6. Approval -- Extension of Homer Electric Association, Inc. Lease/Alaska Fire Training Center -- 459 Marathon Road, Kenai. MOTION: Council Member Eldridge MOVED for approval of the Extension of Lease with Homer Electric Association and Council Member Smalley SECONDED the motion. KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 13 Koch reviewed his memorandum included in the packet which discussed how the rental rate was determined, i.e. factoring in utility costs, square footage and cost of HEA developing an additional parking lot. He also noted, Beacon approved of the arrangement. A report was requested from Beacon to council. The floor was opened for public hearing. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. *Student Representative Johnson: Yes Eldridge Yes Ross Yes Molloy Yes Boyle Yes Porter Yes Smalley 1 Yes �oore Yes � I MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. H-7. Approval -- Mutual Termination of Lease and Asset Purchase Agreement/University of Alaska Lease -- Tract A-1, Baron Park Subdivision No. 7 (a Re -Subdivision of Tract A, Baron Park Subdivision No. 5). 1001111 Council Member Eldridge MOVED for the approval cf tl,e. termmat Gii of lease with :h e University of Alaska Anchorage and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT, Council Member Molloy SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. H-S. Discussion -- Letter of Agreement/Department of Public Safety, Alaska State Troopers, Bureau of Highway Patrol and Kenai Police Department/Alaska State Trooper Traffic Team, Police Chief Sandahl reviewed his memorandum included in the packet discussing the makeup of the proposed traffic team, benefits to the Department, as well as the Peninsula, funding for the officer who would be appointed to the Team, etc. Council comments included: • Benefits would outweigh the problems. o The Team would continue with federal funding availability. • The Letter of Agreement included satisfactory 'but" options for the City -67- KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 14 ® If approved, the City's officer would not join the Team until July 1 when current new officers return from policetrainingschool. ® A resolution was requested to approve the Letter of Agreement at the March 18, 2009 council meeting, along with the Letter of Agreement with the Alaska State Trooper signature. ITEM I: COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS I - I. Council on Aging -- Council Member Ross reported the March meeting was cancelled. I-2. Airport Commission -- No report I-3. Harbor Commission -- Council Member Smalley reported the next meeting would be held on Monday, March 9, 2009. I-4. Library Commission -- Council Member Molloy reported on actions and discussions taken at the March 3, 2009 meeting. He noted, there was a vacancy on the Commission. I-5. Parks & Recreation Commission -- Council Member Moore reviewed the February 24, 2009 special meeting summary which was included in the packet. I-6. Planning & Zoning Commission -- Council Member Molloy reviewed the February 25, 2009 meeting minutes which were included in the packet. I-7. Miscellaneous Commissions and Committees I-7a. Beautification Committee -- No report. I-7b. Alaska Municipal League Report -- No report. I-7e. Mini -Grant Steering Committee -- No report. I -lei. Advisory Cemetery Committee -- Council Member Eldridge reviewed the February 12, 2009 meeting summary which was included in the packet. I-7e. Kenai Convention & Visitors Bureau -- Council Member Smalley reported a meeting was scheduled to be held on March 20, 2009. I-7f. Salmon Task Force -- Council Member Moore reported a meeting was scheduled to be held on. March 12, 2009 at 3:00 p.m. ITEM 3: REPORT OF THE MAYOR -- Mayor Porter reported the following items: e She visited victims of the recent car crash at the Anchorage hospital. KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 15 B Met with Soldotna Mayor Miccichie and discussed the 50tb State Anniversary and sharing costs for and building a float between the City of Kenai and City of Soidotna for both the Fourth of July and Progress Days parades, She would be reporting back with estimated costs. i She was interviewed for an article in the Alaska Business Monthly magazine. s She participated in the Kenai Chamber's Job Shadow Day. s She made a presentation to the high school leadership class and at the Kenai Rotary Club. S Met with Senator Wagoner and discussed the city's priorities. K-1. City Manager -- City Manager Koch reported the following: • The schematic design report for the library expansion project would be distributed at the next meeting and negotiations were continuing with the architect for the second phase of the project. s Noted copies of the 2008 Kenai Police Department Annual Report were distributed to council. • Updated council on the economic stimulus package process and noted the $500,000 previously identified for the bluff erosion project had been reduced to $96,000. e He submitted an application for funding to the Alaska Drinking Water Fund. Reported he would be absent from March 15-27, 2009. Administration was requested to work d0selyivitb the Alaska Department of Corrections in relation to the proposed minimum security addition to the prison. Koch stated he would gather information and update council. K-2. Attorney -- Attorney Graves reminded council of the work session scheduled for March 10, 2009, beginning at 6:00 p.m., to review city attorney applications. K-3. City Clerk -- City Clerk Freas reported the following: • The records request draft ordinance was being reviewed by administration. f The increase to the city's bandwidth had been wired by the phone company and would be connected in the building very soon. o Requests for information made by the residents of the proposed rezone properties were being filled. s Meeting space had been made available to aides of Senator Murkowski and Congressman Young earlier in the week. ITEM L: DISCUSSION .• KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 16 L-1. Citizens (five minutes) -- None. L-2. Council Smalley -- « Gave a brief report of actions taken during the Borough Assembly meeting of March 2, 2009. • Stated concerns of Ordinance No. 2390-2009 failing to be introduced and withdrew his request for City Attorney Graves to research civil rights issues. Moore -- Stated he was disappointed with the potential reduction of federal funding for the bluff erosion project. Eldridge -- • Thanked Porter and. Moore for covering commission meetings for him during his absence. • Stated he appreciated the public participation during the meeting. Johnson -- • She participated in Job Shadow Day with the mayor. • Noted upcoming events at the high school. Ross -- Stated he had serious concerns with the proposed Molloy ordinance included in the packet as an information item, i.e. proposed super majority requirement. Malloy -- a Stated he would be discussing his proposed ordinance with administration and include it in the next packet as a discussion item or ordinance and then forward it to the Planning & Zoning Commission. It was also suggested the issue be forwarded to the Airport Commission for recommendation as well Boyle -- No report. Porter -- Stated she looked forward to further discussions and proposed amendments to the smoking ordinance. ITEM M: PENDING LEGISLATION (This item lists legislation which will be addressed at a later date as noted.) Ordinance No. 2362-2008 -- Amending the Official Kenai Zoning Map by Rezoning Tract A, Papa Joe's Subdivision, Chumley Replat From Rural Residential i (RR1) to Limited Commercial (LC). Ordinance No. 2365-2008 -- Amending KMC 1.80.010 by Increasing the Mayor's Salary From $900 to $1,000 Per Month and Council Members' Salaries From $400 to $500 Per Month. (Clerk's Note: Ordinance No. 2365-2008 was tabled to the first meeting in July, 2009, to allow for further consideration of a salary increase during the budget FY10 budget process.) W" KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 4, 2009 PAGE 17 Ordinance No. 2347-2008 -- Repealing the Existing KMC 1.15.040 and KMC 1.15.050(e) Regarding Preparation, Distribution and Publication of the Agenda and Replacing Them with a New Section KMC I.15.040 Entitled, Agenda and Packet - Development -Preparation -Distribution -Publication -Late Materials. (Clerk's Note: Ordinance No. 2347-2008, Substitute D was mooed for adoption at the January 21, 2009 Council Meeting and subsequently tabled, no time certain. Within 60 days, items from the ordinance are to be incorporated into a suggested policy as well as an ordinance identifying those items to codify.) EXECUTIVE SESSION -- None Scheduled ITEM N: ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Council, the meeting adjourned at approximately 10:55 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk *The student may cast advisory votes on all matters except those subject to executive session discussion. Advisory votes shall be cast prior to the official council vote and shall not affect the outcome of a vote. Advisory votes shall be recorded in the minutes. A student representative may not move or second items during a council meeting. -71- PAYMENTS OVER $15,000.00 WHICH NEED COUNCIL RATIFICATION COUNCIL MEETING OF: MARCH 18, 2009 VENDOR DESCRIPTION DEPARTMENT ACCOUNT AMOUNT AETNA INVESTMENTS HEALTH INSURANCE VARIOUS HEALTH INSURANCE 61,303,99 VENDOR DESCRIPTION MATURITY DATE AMOUNT Effect Int i N RBC CAPITAL MARKETS U.S. GOVT SECURITY 3/26/2014 2,000,000,00 2.50% ' RBC CAPITAL MARKERS U.S. GOVT SECURITY 9/25/2012 1,999,000,00 2-00% PURCHASE ORDERS OVER $15,000.00 WHICH NEED COUNCIL APPROVAL COUNCIL MEETING OF. MARCH 18, 2009 VENDOR DESCRIPTION DEPT. ACCOUNT AMOUNT INCREASE OF EXISTING PURCHASE ORDER YUKON EQUIPMENT TRACTOR WJATTACHMENTS 89872 - EQUIP_ REPLACEMENT FREIGHT 5,000.00 177,00uo P ci�y of KENAI, ALASKA To: Rick Koch, City Manager IlVill ye with a Pst Cagy'with a Fature �r !! FINANCE DEPARTMENT 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 Telephone: 907-283-7535 ext 221 / FAX: 907-283-3014 From: Terry Eubank, Finance Director /SE — Date: March 11, 2009 Re: PO# 89872 — Yukon Equipment Resolution 2009-05 authorized use of the City's Equipment Replacement Fund for the purchase of a 4X4 articulating multipurpose municipal tractor with snow blower and ditch mower attachment. The estimated cost of the tractor was $172,000. Upon finalizing the order with Yukon Equipment it was determined that freight costs were onutted from the previously estimated amount. The result is that actual purchase order for the tractor totaling $177,000. The $5,000 increase is reported on the "Increase of Existing Purchase Orders" report to the Council in the March 18, 2009 meeting packet. -74- REVISED LIST 3/13109 - ITEM IN BOLD PURCHASE ORDERS OVER $15,000.00 WHICH NEED COUNCIL APPROVAL COUNCIL MEETING OF: MARCH 18, 2009 VENDOR DESCRIPTION DEPT. ACCOUNT AMOUNT OF EXISTING PURCHASE ORDER VENDOR DESCRIPTION P.O. # - DEPT. REASON AMOUNT TOTAL PO AMT YUKON EQUIPMENT RSA ENGINEERING TRACTOR W/ATTACHMENTS 89872 - EQUIP. REPLACEMENT VISITOR CENTER HEATING SYSTEM REPLACEMENT 87603 -VISITOR CENTER HEATING FREIGHT 5,000.00 177,000.00 LIMITED REMODEL OF EXISTING KITCHEN 4,695.00 63,835.00 ""Village with a past, C# witk a Future 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 L�,-_ Telephone: (907) 283-7535, Ext. 236 / FAX: (907) 283-3014 �IIR► 1992 \ Mee#of MEMORANDUM KENAL ALASKA U TO: Rick Koch, City Manager FROM: Wayne Ogle, Public Works Directo* SUBJECT: Kenai Visitor's Center Heating System Replacement — 2009; Request for additional engineering services Rick, The Kenai Visitor Center's kitchen is in need of remodeling. At our request, RSA Engineering, Inc. has submitted a proposal in the amount of $4,695 for the engineering work. The design would be for a limited remodel of the existing kitchen at the Visitor's Center. This would constitute an amendment to RSA's original contract for the design of the heating system replacement. I recommend approval of this amendment to RSA Engineering's contract for this limited remodel of the kitchen by the not -to -exceed amount of $4,695. Please let me know if you have any questions. Suggested by: Administration \\ CITY OF KENAI KENAI, KA ORDINANCE NO. 2393-2009 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KEAtAI, ALASKA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL KENAI ZONING MAP BY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 22 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF THE KENAI SPUR HIGHWAY FROM MCCOLLUM DRIVE WEST TO NO -NAME CREEK FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL I (RR1) AND CONSERVATION (C) TO LIMITED COMMERCIAL (LC). WHEREAS, on September 24 and November 12, 2008, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on a request from the owner of Tract A, Papa Joe"s Subdivision Chumley Replat and the Commission's recommendation was forwarded to City Council; and, WHEREAS, City Council held a public hearing on December 3, 2008, and tabled action on the ordinance and requested that administration bring back a more comprehensive plan for rezoning the area; and, WHEREAS, administration's recommendation was to consider the area located north of the Kenai Spur Highway West of McCollum Drive to No -Name Creek; and, WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Rick Koch, Kenai City Manager, to rezone the properties recommended by administration; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on February 11, 2009, received public testimony and voted 3 to 4 against rezoning the parcels; anti WHEREAS, the area to be rezoned is approximately 22 acres and meets the size requirements of KMC 14.20.270; and, WHEREAS, the area to be rezoned includes parcels zoned both. Rural Residential I (RR1) and Conservation (C); and, WHEREAS, increased traffic along the Kenai Spur Highway has limited the residential development in the area to be rezoned; and, WHEREAS, limiting development along the highway to solely residential may result in vacant and run-down homes along the highway; and, WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan recommends zoning suitable for all land uses and to prepare criteria and standards under which compatible mixed uses are allowed to ensure that the uses are compatible with surrounding uses; and, New Test Underlined; (DELETED TEXT BRACKETED; -75- Ordinance No. 2393-2009 Page 2 of 2 WHEREAS, the Limited Commercial (LC) was developed to provide a transition area between commercial and residential districts, allowing low to medium volume business, mitred residential and other compatible uses and specifies development criteria for separate uses; and, WHEREAS, rezoning these parcels will provide a transition area between the commercial/light industrial districts and the residential districts along the Kenai Spur Highway; and, WHEREAS, rezoning these parcels to Limited Commercial (LC) is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA that the official Kenai Zoning Map is amended by rezoning the properties as shown on Attachment "A" and Attachment "B" from Rural Residential 1 (RR I) and Conservation (C)to Limited Commercial (LC). PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this first day of April, 2009. ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk PAT PORTER, MAYOR Introduced: March 18, 2009 Adopted: April 1, 2009 Effective: May 1, 2009 New Test Underlined; [DELETED TEX] BRACKETED] -76- Ordinance No. 2393-2009 Attachment A PROPOSED REZONE Ordinance No. 2393-2009 - Attachment B IT 6NR71W SEC 335EWARD MERIDIAN IKN THAI PORTION OF THE W112 SWI/4 Al1ASKA MENTAL HEALTH 13745 COMMUNITY (ANCHORAGE. AK KENAI SPUR HWY 5.51 SEt/4 LYING N OF KENAI SPUR ROAD TRUST AUTHORITY !PARK LOOP STE 200 199508 .___. T6NRiiW SEC 33SEWARD MERIDIAN i _ ._ KN PORTIONS OF THE W 112 BE114 SET 14 8 t ( Ell SWIM SE1/4 LYING N OP KENAI SPUR KENAI SPUR HWY 1,37 HWY KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 1144 N BINKLEY ST SOLDOTNA AK W61 — INDLRELLA ST T 6NR11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN 1 KN GOVI' LOT 40 !E 7 MANAGEMENT LL C 2.50 P� O BOX 3233 KENAI, AK 99611 .1 _ _. T6NRiiWSEC335EWARDMERIDIAN i y-.— ASTLE ST 149 KN GOVT LOT 29 BISSET LOIS E 1309 CASTLE ST KENAI, AK 99611 T6NR iiW SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN i 1 IKN GOVT LOT 28 LYING NORTH OF KENAI KENAI SPUR HWY 1.32 SPUR HWY 113ISSFT MARC 309 CASTLE ST :KENAI, AK 99611 T 6N R 11 W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN GOVT LOT 27 LYING NORTH OF KENAI KENAI SPUR HWY 1 0.93 SPUR HWY LA.SHOT BILLY JACK PO BOX 473 1KENAI AK 99611 T 6NRi1W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN i - IKN 0830096 TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT i 68B BEAVER LOOP KENAI SPUR HWY 0.501 GONZALEZ ROBERTM RDA2 KENAI AK 99611 I T 6N R 1 iW SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN OWM96 TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT (ANCHOR POINT, AK 1AOIC AVE 0402 DUSTIN DENNIS IPO BOX 209 ?99556 _ _ T6NR11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN i ;KN 0830096 TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT: 1 IAGIC AVE RICKMANSIEVENA 49630 REXS RD ISSOLDOTNA AK.9961 y..__04013 T 6N R i t W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN 0830096 TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT KENAI SPUR HWY 04414 ANDERSON SCOTII, PO BOX 302 ,SOLDOTNA AK 996, 1 6N R ii W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN - ANAKTUVUK PASS, II AVE 0_46 KN 0970023 PAPA JOE'S SUB LOT 3 IGE RKE ERIC N PO BOX 210]] AK 99721 _ T MR 17 W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN iFPt KENBCRG CECIL C & 1 7CCOLLUM UR 1.11 KN 2000057 REDFLO SUB L0T7 I!PPTRICIA APO BOX 3293 (KENAI, AK 99617. r6NR 11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN 2002113 PAPA JOE'S SUB CHUMLEY KENAI_SPUR HWY 2.97 REPEAT TRACT A IWORfHAM FRANKLINT PO BOX 1284 IKENAI,AK99611 1 �21 D RDALGO 2.31 �Pw11on of 4501029 (CITY OF KENAI !AVENUE (KENAI, AK 99611 $1 % CITY OF KENAI -' PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION f RESOLUTION NO. PZ09-06 Ehea o REZONE PEP NUT BERM LASKA �f A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMN�RSSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE KENAI C TtY COUNCIL OF THE REQUESTED REZONING SUBMITTED BY NAME: Rick Koch CityManager, Cityof Kenai for Ken Ci Council ADDRESS: 210 Fidalgo Avenue LEGAL: See Attached Spreadsheet & Ma PARCEL #: See Attached Spreadsheet & M'an WHEREAS, the Commission finds the 1. The subject properly is 2. The present land use plan desYgnaO *is Neighborhood Residential & Conservation/Open 1 The proposed 4. An appropriate 5. That the following 6. Applicant must comply required was conducted February 11, 2009 facts have been found to exist: all Federal, State, and local regulations. NOW, THEREFORE BE,IT RESOLVED, by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai that the petitioned REZONING of PROPERTIES SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED MAP AND SPREADSHEET are hereby recotmnended to the Kenai City Council. PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA FEBRUARY 11, 2009. CHAIRPERSON: ATTEST: -79- CITY OF KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA CITI' COUNCIL CHAMBERS February 11, 2009 - 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER: a. Roll Call b. Agenda Approval c. Consent Agenda d. *Excused Absences *All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non -controversial by the Commission and ,,vilI be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its nonnal sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders. 2. *APPROVAL OF MINUTES: a. *January 28, 2009 3. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT: (10 Minutes) 4. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony limited to 3 minutes per speaker.) a. PZ09-04 - A Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai, Alaska, recommending to the Council that KMC 14.20.260 be amended to better provide for e orcemem for violations of the Kenai City Code and to provide for appeal of administrative enforcement orders to the Board of Adjustment. b. PZ09-05 - An application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Vocational Center from the property known as Tract A-1A, Cone Tracts A-lA & A-1B (2880 Beaver Loop Road), Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Frontier Community Services, 43335 K- Beach Road, Suite 36, Soldotna, Alaska 99669. c. PZ09-06 — An application to rezone properties North of the Kenai Spur Highway corridor from McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek from Rural Residential 1(RRl) and Conservation (C) to Limited Commercial (LC). Application submitted by Rick Koch, City Manager for Kenai City Council, City of Kenai, 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai; Alaska. 6. NEW BUSINESS: a. PZ09-08 — A resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai, Alaska, recommending to the Council that KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) be amended to allow an extension for the ninety (90) day time limit for skirting in mobile homes placed in mobile home parks — Discussion — Set Public Hearing. 7. PENDING ITEMS: 1 a. PZ07-25 — Recommending Council enact KMC 9,10.015 to require dumpsters be screened on at least three sides. 8. REPORTS: a` City Council b. Borough Planning c. Administration 9. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: (3 Minutes) 10. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. 2008 Annual Report —Extraction of Natural Resources b. 2008 Annual Certified Local Government Report c. Reappointment letters Commissioners Rogers, Koester & Twait d. "Zoning Bulletin" — 1/10/09 11. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: 12. ADJOURNMENT: me CITY OF KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 11, 2009 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CHAIR JEFF TWAIT, PRESIDING MINUTES ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER Chair Twait called the meeting to order at approximately 7:01 p.m. 1-a. Roll Call Roll was confirmed as follows: Commissioners present: Staff/Council Liaison present: A quorum was present. 1-b. Agenda Approval S. Romain, R. Wells, J. Twait, P. Bryson, K. Rogers, J. Brockman, K. Koester City Planner M. Kebschull, Planning & Zoning Administrative Assistant N. Carver, Council Liaison R. Molloy Commissioner Bryson read the following requested changes to the agenda: ADD TO: 5-b. Letter from Mavis Cone Email Correspondence (Winegarden/Graves) F • • Commissioner Brockman MOVED to approve the agenda with the above -mentioned lay downs and Commissioner Romain SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. I-c. Consent Agenda MOTION: Commissioner Romain MOVED to approve the consent agenda and Commissioner Weiss SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 1-d. *Excused Absences Approved by the consent agenda. *All. items listed with an asterisk (*f are considered to be routine and non- controversial by the Commission and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders. ITEM 2: *APPROVAL OF MINUTES -- January 28, 2009 Approved by the consent agenda. ITEM 3: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT -- None ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF PLATS -- None ITEM 5: PUBLIC HEARINGS 5-a. PZ09-04 - A Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai, Alaska, recommending to the Council that KMC 14.20.260 be amended to better provide for enforcement for violations of the Kenai City Code and to provide for appeal of administrative enforcement orders to the Board of Adjustment. Kebschull reviewed. the staff report included in the packet. Twait read the rules for public hearing and opened the meeting to public hearing. The following people spoke in opposition to the resolution: Debbie Sonberg, 410 Cinderella, Kenai Becky Espy, 903 Magic, Kenai Roy Espy, 403 McCollum, Kenai There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson MOVED to approve PZ09-04 and Commissioner Remain SECONDED the motion. Commissioner comments included • The Code had been made more specific regarding junk and debris. • Civil fines would be lowered from $1000 to $250 per day. • The process of code enforcement was complaint driven and included a site visit, contacting the individual, following up with a letter, and working with the individual to bring the situation into compliance. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2009 PAGE 2 IN There was no appeal process currently and once cited, the individual must go to court. • In the new resolution, there would be 15 days to appeal to the Board of Adjustment. Remain YES I Wells YES I Tait YES Bryson YES 1 Rogers YES I Brookman YES Koester YES 5-b. PZ09-05 - An application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Vocational Center from the property known as Tract A- IA, Cone Tracts A-lA & A-113 (2880 Beaver Loop Road, Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Frontier Community Services, 43335 K-Beach Road, Suite 36, Soldotna, Alaska 99669. Kebschull reviewed the staff report included in the packet, noting the history of the property and the list of requirements from the building official necessary prior to permitting. Twait opened the meeting to public hearing. The following people spoke in opposition to the application: Laura Sievert, 3329 Beaver Loop, Kenai -- concerned with increased traffic and felt the application did not fit into the Comprehensive Plan. Curt Wilcox, 3329 Beaver Loop, Kenai Mark Schrag, 312 Princess, Kenai Kellie Kelso, 117 Walker Lane, Kenai Debbie Sonberg, 410 Cinderella, Kenai There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Romain MOVED to approve PZ09-05 and Commissioner Wells SECONDED the motion. MOTION TO AMEND: Commissioner Bryson MOVED to amend the motion to include staff recommendations and Commissioner Remain SECONDED the motion, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2009 PAGE 3 ff f ',J VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT: Romain YES Wells YES Twait YES Bryso�YES Ro eog rs YES Brookman YES Koester YES MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: 11 Romain i YES I Wells YES Twait YES Bryson �JYESS�J Rogers YES Brookman YES Koester i YES MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Twait explained an appeal of the preceding action may be filed with the City Clerk within 15 days of the action taken. 5-c. PZ09-46 - An application to rezone properties North of the Kenai Spur Highway corridor from McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek from Rural Residential I(RR 1.) and Conservation (C) to Limited Commercial (LC). Application submitted by Rick Koch, City Manager for Kenai City Council, City of Kenai, 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska. Chair Twait passed the gavel to Vice Chair Romain. Vice Chair Romain reported his agreement with the City Attorney's findings regarding the conflict of interest, noting Twait did not have a monetary conflict of interest and neither Twait nor Koester were guilty of prejudgment. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson MOVED to overturn the prejudgment and Commissioner Brockman SECONDED the motion. VOTE: Romain Bryson NO Wells ogers NO Twait ABSTAIN NO Brookman NO KoesterI ABSTAIN MOTION FAILED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2009 PAGE 4 no +a Commissioner Bryson MOVED to overturn the monetary conflict of interest and attach the February 4, 2009 memo from the City Attorney, Commissioner Brookman SECONDED the motion. VOTE: Romain NO Wells NO Twait ABSTAIN Bryson Rogers NO Brockman NO MOTION FAILED UNANIMOUSLY. Vice Chair Romain returned the gavel to Chair Twait. Kebschull reviewed the staff report included in the packet. Twait opened the meeting to public hearing. Glenn Clifford, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the rezone. Sherri James, 303 Cinderella, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the rezone, noting traffic issues and possible rent increases. Peter Klauder, 40195 Frogberry, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the rezone, believing it to be a positive move for the city. The following people spoke in opposition to the rezone, noting concerns expressed in the packet of information submitted by the MAPS residents and included in the Commission packet: Ray Espy, 403 McColl :m, Kenai Chuck Winegarden, 309 Princess, Kenai Dave Spence, former Kenai Central High School Principal Don Wright, 604 McCollum, Kenai Greg Daniels, 426 Rogers Road, Kenai JoAnn Buzzell, 381 Senior Court, #103, Kenai Wally Ward, 708 Magic, Kenai Kellie Kelso, 117 Walker Lane, Kenai John Espy, 403 McCollum, Kenai Ed Steiner, 4192 Beaver Loop, Kenai -- Stated he enjoyed a compact city center allowing for pedestrian traffic. Sylvia Stewart, 401 McCollum, Kenai Justin Wilhusen, 306 Hutto, Kenai Glenda Feeken -- Spoke in support of the rezone. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2009 PAGE 5 10 Additional people who spoke in opposition to the rezone: Jessica Wilhusen, 306 Hutto, Kenai Richard Kelso, 117 Walker Lane, Kenai Kevin Dix, 306 Princess, Kenai Janine Espy, 403 McCollum, Kenai Walt Ward, 708 Magic, Kenai Todd Wortham, 47586 Grant Avenue, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the rezone, Colleen Ward, 708 Magic, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the rezone. Blaine Gilman, 216 Susieanna, Kenai -- Spoke in support of the rezone, noting a mix of low volume businesses and residences was part of the Comprehensive Plan. Patricia Falkenberg, 399 McCollum, Kenai -- Spoke in opposition to the rezone. BREAK: 9.20 P.M. BACK TO ORDER: 9:35 P.M. Additional people who spoke in opposition to the rezone: Debbie Sonberg, 410 Cinderella, Kenai Mark Schrag, 312 Princess, Kenai Becky Espy, 903 Magic, Kenai Kellie Wannamaker, 603 Magic, Kenai Kristine Schmidt, 513 Ash, Kenai Leonora Praiser, 391 W. Rockwell, Soldotna There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. a. Commissioner Romain MOVED to approve PZ09-06 and Commissioner Wells SECONDED the motion. Commissioner comments included: The highway could serve as a buffer. • Thanked all citizens for their input. Concerned over further strip zoning along the highway, • Need to consider the best interest of all citizens. • Traffic concerns are understood. • Some were not in support of all parts of the Limited Commercial Zone. • The civility of the public was appreciated. VOTE: PLANNING AND ZONING- COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2009 PAGE 6 FOU Romain YES Wells NO Twait YES Bryson NO Rogers NO Brockman NO Koester YES BREAK: 10:16 P.M. BACK TO ORDER: 10:20 P.M. ITEM 6: NEW BUSINESS 6-a. PZ09-08 - Discussion, Set Public Bearing -- A resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai, AIaska, recommending to the Council that KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) be amended to allow an extension for the ninety (90) day time limit for skirting in mobile homes placed in mobile home parks. Kebschull reviewed the staff report included in the packet, noting a public hearing would be during the February 25, 2009 meeting. ITEM 7: PENDING ITEMS 7-a. PZ07-25 - Recommending Council enact KMC 9.10.015 to require dumpsters be screened on at least three sides. ITEM 8: REPORTS 8-a. City Council -- Council Member Molloy reviewed the action agenda of the February 4, 2009 City Council meeting. 8-b. Borough Planning -- Borough Planning Commissioner Bryson reviewed the agenda of the February 9, 2009 Borough Planning meeting. 8-c. Administration -- Kebschull reviewed the materials listed under Information Items and noted the cell tower ordinance would probably be postponed. ITEM 9: PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED -- None ITEM 10: 10-a. 2008 Annual Report - Extraction of Natural Resources 10-b. 2008 Annual Certified Local Government Report 10-c. Reappointment letters Commissioners Rogers, Koester & Twait PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2009 PAGE 7 10-d. "Zoning Bulletin" - 1/ 10 /09 FT i s COMMISSION COMMENTS i QUESTIONS Koester -- None Wells -- Reported the Kenai Historical Society was busy planning the relocation of historical cabins from the Ft. Kenay property. Bryson -- Apologized to Wells for interrupting earlier in the meeting. Rogers -- None ITEM 12: ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Commissioner Romain MOVED to adjourn and Commissioner Wells SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:30 p.m. Minutes prepared and subratted by: Corene Hall, Deputy City Clerk e2rfp9vZc . rn«Re se d« haro6Y C�wr W "n �G___ q c tron and tolled mP, of th¢ o`flciol re<ardt d rtia Cuv Alceko, on lIle in mY off,ct PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2009 PAGE 8 Carol Freas From: Bob Malloy [bob@molloyforcouncii.com] Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 11:09 AM To: Carol Frees Cc: Patricia Porter; Charles Winegarden; Rick Koch Subject: Fwd: Rezone Application Hi Carol: Please add this email request as a lay -down late rec'd item for addition to the packet for the 3-4-09 Council meeting under Information Items, since there is no related agenda item for the 3-04-09 Council meeting. Thank you. Bob Molloy cc: Charles Winegarden Begin forwarded message: From: Winegarden & Walton <wfwlaw@.aesalaska.net> Date: March 2, 2009 10:47:09 AM AST To: bob@,molloyforcouncil.com Subject: Rezone Application Please delay action on the Application to rezone properties North of the Kenai Spur Highway corridor from McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek from Rural Residentiall(RR1) and Conservation (C) to Limited Commercial (LC) until, at least, after the P & Z work session on April 8, 2009 as that is presently, an application to modify the LC zone to eliminate some of permitted commercial uses. The modification is allegedly based upon public comment and the perceived danger to students in the high school and middle school being enticed to iaywalk across the busy Kenai Spur Highway to paaiw'ke of the wars offered by the commercial establishments teat are proposed to be eiirninated. Such modification, if allowed, is an arbitrary use of zoning. It puts restrictions on the area that has already be zoned LC that were not there when originally zoned and, more important, it shows that the conditions set forth in a zone can not be relied upon as they certainly can be changed depending on the political circumstances. Rather than modifying the LC zone, it would be better to develop an new zone which recognizes the unique situation presented in the above defined rezone area. Voting on the application at this point in time is premature, In the alternative, if the council insists on voting on the Application, please remove the Application from the consent agenda so that the public may comment upon it. Charles A. Winegarden Winegarden & Walton 220 Main Steet Loop, Suite B Kenai, Alaska 99611 Phone: (907) 283-5774 Fax: (907) 283-5771 NEW EMAIL: wfwlaw(a)acsalaska.net 1 -90- Carol Freas From: Patricia Porter [kenaimayorl0@msn.com] Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 5:02 PM To: Winegarden & Walton Cc: Mike Boyle; Hal Smalley; Robert Molloy; Rick Ross; Barry Eldridge; Joe Moore; Carol Freas; Cary Graves; Rick Koch Subject: Re: Rezone Application Mr. Winegarden, I would support removing the rezone ordinance from a consent agenda to allow for two public hearings, however will not support a delay. Pat Porter ---- Original Message ---- From: Winegarden & Walton To: kenaimavorl0(a)msn.com Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 10:45 AM Subject: Rezone Application Please delay action on the Application to rezone properties North of the Kenai Spur Highway corridor from McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek from Rural Residentiall (RR9) and conservation (C) to Limited Commercial (LC) until, at least, after the P & Z work session on April $ 2009 as that is presently, an application to modify the LC zone to eliminate some of permitted commercial uses. The modification is allegedly based upon public comment and the perceived danger to students in the high school and middle school being enticed to jaywalk across the busy Kenai Spur Highway to partake of the wares offered by the commercial establishments that are proposed to be eliminated. Such modification, if allowed, is an arbitrary use of zoning, It puts restrictions on the area that has already be zoned LC that were not there when originally zoned and, more Important, it shows that the conditions set forth in a zone can not be relied upon as they certainly can be changed depending on the political circumstances. Rather than modifying the LC zone, it would be better to develop an new zone which recognizes the unique situation presented in the above defined rezone area. Voting on the application at this point in time is premature. In the alternative, if the council insists on voting on the Application, please remove the Application from the consent agenda so that the public may comment upon it. Charles A. Winegarden Winegarden & Walton 220 Main Steet Loop, Suite B Kenai, Alaska 99611 Phone: (907)283-5774 Fax: (907) 283-5771 NEW EMAIL: wfwlawCcDacsalaska.net THIS MESSAGE, INCLUDING ANY ATTACHMENTS, IS FOR THE SOLE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) AND MAY CONTAIN ATTORNEY -CLIENT CONFIDENTIAL OR PRIVELEDGED INFORMATION. ANY UNAUTHORIZED REVIEW, USE, DICSLOSURE OR DISTRIBUTION IS PROHIBITED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, PLEASE CONTACT THE SENDER BY REPLY E-MAIL, DELETE THIS MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENTS, AND DESTROY ALL COPIES. -91- Carol Freas From: Joe Moore jjoem@altrogco.com] Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 1:15 PM To: 'P. Falkenberg' Cc: Carol Frees Subject: RE: Two Requests Patricia, I am not opposed to removing any item from the consent agenda to allow for public input. I am not in favor of postponement of the process any further. I am only one vote of seven. Joe Moore From: P. Falkenberg [mailto:pet_rainbow@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Joe Moore Subject: Two Requests Dear Councilman Moore: I would like to make the following requests: • Removal of the rezone application from the consent agenda so that a public heating is possible. • Rezone vote be postponed until after the April 8th work session on the proposed revision of the Limited Commercial Zone. I would appreciate a reply and comments. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Cherish the Day!!!! Patricia Falkenberg t -92- Yahoo! Mail - hvsmalleykahoo.com http://us.f302.maiLy,ahoo.com/yrn/ShowLetter?Msgid=524 45759698— Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 19:22:04 -0800 (PST) From: 'Hal Smalley" <hvsmalley@yahoo.com> Add to Address Book a Add Mobile Alert Subject: Re: Two Requests To: `iG "P. Falkenberg" <pet_rainbow@yahoo.com> Patricia, Under pending legislation ( to be discussed at a time not yet specified, a later date ) is Ordinance 2362-2008, the Rezone issue. It is not scheduled on the consent agenda at all. It may be addressed under Item C Unscheduled public comment and again L-1 Citizen comment. I isn't necessary to remove it from the agenda to discuss it. It can be addressed as I previously mentioned. To my knowledge, the re -zone issue isn't scheduled to return to Council until April. With it being discussed at the P & Z in its April meeting, it would come to Council after that meeting. I will make sure that I ask our Clerk of this procedure and the Mayor at our meeting. 0 "P. Fafkenberm- <pet rainbow at hoo.com> wrote: Bear Councilman Smalley: I would like to make the following requests: • Removal of the rezone application from the consent agenda so that a public hearing is possible. • Rezone vote be postponed until after the April 8th work session on the proposed revision of the Limited Commercial Zone. f I would appreciate a reply and comments. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Cherish the Day!!!! Patricia Falkenberg -93- 1 of 1 3/3/2009 9:37 AM Carol Freas From: Joe Moore poem@aitrogco.comj Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 11:17 AM To: dialaprayer@yahoo.com Cc: Carol Frees Subject: RE: Agenda Change Janine, I am not opposed to removing any item from the consent agenda to allow for public input. I am not in favor of postponement of the process any further, I am only one vote of seven. Joe Moore From: Janine Espy [mailto:dialaprayer@yahoo.comj Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 11:04 AM To: cpajoe@aitrogco.com Subject: Agenda Change Dear Councilman Moore, As we continue to strive toward a peaceable solution to the zoning issue of properties along the Kenai Spur Highway on the north side from McCollum Drive to the Wal Mart property, I respectfully request that: 1. the introduction of the cities application to rezone these properties from RR1 and Conservation to LC be removed from the March 18, 2009 consent agenda as it is a controversial subject 2. the public hearing or the Council's vote slated for April 1, 2009 be postponed due to the fact that the Planning and Zoning Commission are slated for Work Session on April 8, 2009, to revise the LC zone one week after the scheduled vote by the Council. I realize that the Council is concerned about postponement in light of the approaching building season and the desire of Todd Wortham to break ground for his dental office. Does he have a specific date or "ball park" idea of when that would be in regards to what could be accommodated in the Council's schedule? It doesn't make sense to vote to change zoning that is controversial, then one week later to begin to change the parameters of that controversial zoning. The MAPS neighbors have come up with an idea and would like to have the opportunity to bring it to the table. I would appreciate your thoughts. Sincerely, Janine Espy t -94- Carol Freas From: Patricia Porter (kenaimayorl0@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 11:41 AM To: dialaprayer@yahoo.com Cc: Rick Koch; Cary Graves; Carol Freas; mboyle@alaska.com; hvsmalley@yahoo.com, molloylaw@ak.net; rossrck@hotmail.com; barry_eidridge@yahoo.com; joemoore@altrogco.com Subject: RE: Agenda Request Janine, Thank you for your email. I do not have a problem with the proposed rezone being removed from the consent agenda. This will allow for two public hearing. I do not support a delay of the council vote on April 1. Pat Date: wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:50:59 -0800 From: dialaorayer@yahoo.com Subject: Agenda Request To: kenaimayorlOCa�msn.com Dear Mayor Porter, As we continue to strive toward a peaceable solution to the zoning issue of properties along the Kenai Spur Highway on the north side from McCollum Drive to the Wal Mart property, I respectfully request that: the introduction of the cities application to rezone these properties from RR1 and Conservation to LC be removed from the March 18, 2009 consent agenda as it is a controversial subject and the public hearing or the Council's vote slated for April 1, 2009 be postponed due to the fact that the Planning and Zoning Commission are slated for Work Session on April 8, 2009, to revise the !C zone one week after the scheduled vote by the Council. I realize that the Council is concerned about postponement in light of the approaching building season and the desire of Todd Wortham to break ground for his dental office. Does he have a specific date or "bail park" idea of when that would be in regards to what could be accommodated in the Council's schedule? It doesn't make sense to vote to change zoning that is controversial, then one week later to begin to change the parameters of that controversial zoning. The MAPS neighbors have come up with an idea and would like to have the opportunity to bring it to the table. I would appreciate your thoughts. Sincerely, Janine Espy 1 -95- 210 FIDALOO AVE., KEN A?, ALASKA 99611-7794 TELEPHONE 907-283-753 5 FAX: 907-283-3014 TO: Marilyn Kebschull, City Planner FROM: Cary R. Graves, City Attorney DATE: February 4, 2009 RE: Protest of Charles Winegarden You requested that I review the protest dated January 31, 2009 from Charles Winegarden and make a recommendation regarding it. My analysis follows. The protest requests that Commissioners Twait and Koester be disqualified from participating in the proposed rezone of properties north of the Kenai Spur Highway Condor from McCollum Drive west to No -Name Creek ("proposed rezone"). There are actually two different protests in the letter. One alleges Commissioner Twait has a conflict of interest and the second alleges pre - ,judgment bias. I will analyze each separately. 11, The protest alleges Commissioner Twait has a conflict of interest under KMC 1.85,060 As 1 understand it, the letter alleges that Commissioner Twait's daughter is the granddaughter of Glen McCollum, Jr. who owns property in the area of the proposed rezone. The City Planning Department checked the Kenai Peninsula Borough land records via the Kenaiview GIS system and did not find any property within the city limits owned by Glen McCollum, Jr. However, I will assurne, for purposes of argument, that Mr. McCollum does own property in the area. The theory is that Commissioner Twait has an indirect financial interest in the issue because his daughter, Miranda, may at some point in the future inherit all or part of the property.' KMC 1.85.060(d) provides that: No Council or commission member may vote on any question in which he or she has a substantial direct or indirect financial interest. Direct or indirect financial interests shall be disclosed to the presiding officer prior ' It appears that Miranda's mother, Cora Leigh McCollum, is the ex-wife of Commissioner Twait and the daughter of Gleo McCollum, Jr. a Page 2 of 3 to a vote on the question and the presiding officer shall determine whether the financial interest exists and whether the prohibition from voting is applicable. A decision by the presiding officer may be overridden by a unanimous vote of the members present, exclusive, of the member presenting the possible conflict. Whether a person has a substantial direct or indirect financial interest is analyzed under the criteria in KMC 1.85.060(d)(1). Those criteria are: Whether the direct or indirect financial interest is substantial shall be determined by the presiding officer on a case -by -case basis, with evaluation of these factors: (i) Whether the financial interest is a substantial part of the consideration; (ii) Whether the financial interest directly and substantially varies with the outcome of the official action; (iii) Whether the financial interest is immediate and known or conjectural and dependent on factors beyond the official action; (iv) Whether the financial or private interest is significant monetarily; (v) Other factors deemed appropriate by the presiding officer under the specifics of the disclosure and the nature of the action taken before the council or commission. Since the records do not show Glen McCollum, Jr. owns any property in the area, fiere does not appear to be any direct or indirect financial interest at issue, Moreover, the alleged indirect financial interest is not immediate and is both conjectural and dependent on factors beyond the official action. The complaint is based on a theory that Commissioner Twast's daughter may at some point in the future inherit all or part of property in the area alleged to be owned by her grandfather: The alleged indirect financial interest is purely conjectural, it is clear that if Cotmmissioner Twait owned property in the affected area, he would have a conflict of interest which would not allow him to participate.2 However, where the alleged conflict of interest is attenuated and speculative, the Alaska Supreme Court has held there is not a substantial financial interest.3 Even if Mr. McCollum owns property in the area. the allegation regarding possible inheritance by Commissioner Twait's daughter is too speculative and attenuated to be a substantial indirect financial interest in this case. Therefore, it is my opinion that Commissioner Twait does not have a conflict of interest under the Kenai Municipal Code. 2Griswold v. City of Homer, 925 P.2d21 1015, 1027 (Alaska 1996). Griswold v. City of Homer, 34 P.3d 1280, 1287 (Alaska 2001). -97- Page 3 of 3 The complaint also alleges that Commissioners Twait and Koester should be disqualified because they have exhibited a pre -judgment bias. 'The protest alleges bias on behalf of Commissioner Twait because he signed the first rezone application and has written a letter indicating support of the rezone idea. It also alleges Commissioner Koester has indicated bias in a letter to Council supportive of the rezone concept. The letter cites two cases in support of that argument. However, neither of the cases cited involves a zoning amendment. One involved an adjudication of a pipeline rate tariff by the Regulatory Commission of Alas& and the other involved an adjudication of an unfair trade Practices complaint before the Federal Trade Commission.5 Both cases involved quasi-judicial or adjudicatory proceedings, not legislative proceedings, In Alaska, like most states, a zoning amendment is a legislative function, not an adjudicatory or quasi-judicial .funetion.6 Because zoning is a legislative function, the prohibition against the appearance of pre -judgment bias does not apply.? If the prohibition against pre -judgment bias applied in legislative proceedings, a legislator who sponsored an ordinance or bill would not be allowed to vote on his/her own bill. Obviously, that is not the rule. Therefore, it is my opinion that neither Connnissioners Twait or Koester should be disqualified from participating on the proposed zoning amendment due to pre judgment bias. IV. KMC I.85.060(d) provides that the presiding officer should make the determination of whether a member of the body is prohibited from voting on an issue. The decision of the presiding officer may be overturned by a unanimous vote of the members, exclusive of those presenting the possible conflict. Because the complaint involves Commissioner Twait and he is the presiding officer, he should Pass tha gavel to Vice-Chair'Romain tic ,rule on the issue. Depending on the ruling by Vice -Chair Romain (and any override attempt), either Commissioner Twait would be allowed to participate as the presiding officer or he would be excused and the Vice -Chair would run that portion of the meeting$. V. I hope this memorandum answers the questions you had regarding these issues. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding these matters. `.Amerada Hess Pipeline Corp. v. Regularory Convnission gfAlaska, 176 P.3d 667 (Alaska 2008). Cinderella Career & Firdshing Sch. v. F.T.C., 425 P.2d 583 (D.C. Cit. 1970) 'Alaska Planning Commission Handbook, p, 31-32 (July 2003). [bid See also Horns),. Hornbaker, 658 P.2d 1219 (Wash. 1983) (Prohibition against pre -judgment bias does not apply to Iegislative decisions). a The ruling would also involve Commission Koester, but that part of the ruling would not involve who chairs that portion of the meeting. •00 CITY OF KENAI 210 FIDALGO AVE., KENAI, ALASKA 9961 [-7794 TELEPHONE,': 907.283 -753 5 PAX: 907-283-30M TO: Marilyn KebschulI, City Planner FROM: `'. '' Cary R. Craves, City Attorney DATE February 4, 2009 RE: The "Appearance of Fairness Doctrine" You requested that I provide a surrunary of the `:Appearance of Fairness Doctrine" (doctrine) and its applicability to zoning in Alaska. My analysis follows. The doctrine was judicially established in Washington State in 1969.1 It was later codified into the statutory law of Washington.2 It was intended to provide courtroom type procedural due process protections for quasi-judicial (adjud,icatory) land use decislons.3 In Washington, zoning amendments are considered quasi-judicial in nature.4 The doctrine prohibits such things as ex pcarte communications and pre -judgment bias in quasi-judicial land use proceedings. Planning Commission decisions can be either legislative or quasi-judicial.5 In Alaska, land use proceedings which are considered quasi-judicial are such things as conditional use permits, variances, plats and Board of Adjustment appeals.6 Unlike Washington, the Alaska Supreme Court has held that zoning decisions, including small scale amendments to the zoning map, are considered legislative rather than quasi-judicial proceedings.7 That is the rule in the majority of states.8 Smith v. Skagit Co., 453 P.2d 832 (Wash. 1969). ' RCW 42.36,010-110. s The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine in Washington State, Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington, p.l . (January 1995). " Fienvne v. City of Tacoma, 502 P.2d 327,331 (Wash. 1.972). Oregon and Idaho follow the same rule as Washington. See Neuberger v. CO, of Portland„ 607 P.2d 722 (Or. 1979) & Cooper v. Board ofCouno) Camm'rs, 614 P.2d 947 (Idaho 1980). s Alaska Planning Commission Handbook, p. 31 (July 2003), .Alaska Planning Convnission Handbook p. 32 (July 2003). ' Cabana v. Kenai Peninsula Boroughh, 21 P.3d 833, 836 (.Alaska 2001) (classification of borough land was legislative, not quasi-judicial or adjudicatary); Batough v. Fairbanks North Star Borough, 995 P.2d 245, 249 (Alaska 2000)(rezoning a 75 acre parcel was a legislative decision); Oreiwoldv- C;0) of Homer, 925 P.2d 1015, 1019 n. 3 (Alaska 1996)(rezoning 7.5 acre parcel was a legislative enactment), z 1-6 Land Use Law p6.26 (Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. 2008). •• The Rlaska Planning Commission Handbook states: In Alaska, a rezone is legislative. It affects all those with property in the area that is rezoned. and the legislative body has the discretion to approve or deny the rezoning. Although there may be statutory rules that govern legislative proceedings, there are no procedural due process rules that apply to legislative proceedings.9 Since a zoning amendment in Alaska is a legislative act, not a quasi-judicial one, the appearance of fairness doctrine and the prohibitions against ex parse cotmnunicationsl0 and appearance of pre -judgment bias do not apply.'1 1' Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this memorandum. e Alaska Planning Commis ion Handbook, p, 31 (July 2003). 10 Alaska Planning CDmnussion Handbook, p. 32 (July 2003). Harris v. Hornbaker, 658 P.2d 1219 (Wash. 1983). (Prohibition against prejudgment bias does not apply to legislative decisions) " However, the conflict of interest rules in Kiv1C 1.85.060 apply to both legislative and quasi judicial acts M To: Planning & Zoning Commission Date: January 27, 2009 t Applicant: Rick Koch, City Manager For Kenai City Council City of Kenai 283-7535 210 Fidalgo Avenue Kenai, AK 99611 Requested Action: Rezone Legal Description: See Attached Map & Spreadsheet Street Address: Multiple KPB Parcel No.: See Attached Map & Spreadsheet Existing Zoning: Rural Residential 1 (RR1) & Conservation (C) Current Land Use: Residential & Vacant Land Use Plan: Neighborhood Residential & Conservationl0pen Space ANAL PSIS General Information: This is an application to rezone several parcels north of the Kenai Spur Highway from McCollum Drive west to No -Name Creek. This includes 13 parcels and a portion of another parcel; approximately 21.71 acres. The majority of these properties are zoned Rural Residential 1. The portion of the City of Kenai's property, Kenai Peninsula Borough parcel number 04501029, is zoned Conservation. The City property will require a subdivision plat and is shown for the rezone application on the map and spreadsheet as an approximate area. The actual property will be identified when a plat is processed and this platting will insure that the area rezoned does not encroach on No -Name Creek. KMC 14.20.270 describes amendment procedures. Section 2 states, "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 rights - of -way) unless the amendment enlarges an adjacent district boundary." The -101- PZ09-06 Comments Page 2 area of this rezone meets the requirements for an amendment to the Official Zoning Map. Background Information: In September 2008, an application was submitted by Dr. Wortham to rezone his property, Kenai Peninsula Borough Parcel #04506025, The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the application on September 24`h. The Commission postponed action and held a second hearing on November 12"'. The Commission voted 2 to 4 against the rezone. That recommendation was forwarded to City Council. City Council held a public hearing on December 3, 2008. Council tabled action on the ordinance and requested administration bring back a more comprehensive plan for rezoning the area. At the direction of Council, administration reviewed the area and selected the parcels to be considered for rezone to the Limited Commercial zone. An application was prepared for the Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman's signature. On December 111h, a letter with information on the proposed rezone was sent to the owners of property included in the proposed rezone area. The application was scheduled for a public hearing at the Planning Commission for the January 14, 2009 meeting. Due to a question as to whether the Chairman has the authority to submit an application on behalf of the Commission as provided in KMC 14.20.270, Administration requested the Commission remove the item from the Commission agenda. The item was removed. At their meeting on January 21, 2009, City Council directed City Manager Koch to proceed with an application for the rezone on behalf of the Council. Evaluation of Application: During the creation of the 2003 Comprehensive Plan, development concerns along the Kenai Spur Highway corridor were discussed extensively. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the issue of neighborhood concern relating to commercial development near residential areas as conditional uses or through rezones, particularly along the Kenai Spur Highway. However, the Plan provides guidelines to address these concerns (City of Kenai Comprehensive Plan, Page 37). The City of Kenai's Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council recognized the issue of development along the Kenai Spur Highway and created the Limited Commercial zone to provide a transition area between commercial and residential districts and allow a mix of low volume businesses as well as residential use. The Limited Commercial Zone meets the recommendations for Commercial Land Use Development Policies CM1, CM3, and CM4 (City of Kenai -102- PZ09-06 Comments Page 3 Comprehensive Plan, Page 37). KMC 14.20,115 - Limited Commercial Zone (LC Zone) - "Intent: The LC Zone is established to provide transition areas between commercial and residential districts by allowing low to medium volume business, mixed residential and other compatible uses which complement and do not materially detract from the uses allowed with adjacent districts." The Limited Commercial Zone requires that developments meet the requirements in KMC 14.25, Landscaping/Site Plan Regulations. Included in those regulations is the requirement for a buffer separating commercial uses from adjacent residential properties (City of Kenai Comprehensive Plan, Commercial Land Use Development Policy CM4 - Page 37). There are 13 parcels zoned Rural Residential 1 and a portion of a parcel zoned Conservation included in this application. Six of these parcels are undeveloped. Four of the parcels located in the Rural Residential 1 zone are considered non- conforming. These are the Tree Top Estates Subdivision which house four- plexes. The non -conformity would continue under the proposed rezone to Limited Commercial. The remaining lots are in conformance for lot size and use and would continue as conforming under the proposed rezone to the Limited Commercial zone. In 2006, the City of Kenai initiated the first rezone of properties along the Kenai Spur Highway to the Limited Commercial zone. That rezone was the result of an appeal by a property owner who had applied to rezone a residential property to General Commercial zoning. On appeal, the Board of Adjustment remanded the case to the Planning and Zoning Commission and directed the Commission to review whether the area was more conducive to the Limited Commercial zone. in the decision the Board commented the increased traffic along the Kenai Spur Highway has limited residential development along the highway, "The Board is forced to recognize that restricting use of the property to solely residential purposes may simply result in vacant and run down homes along the highway." The Board commented, "The Limited Commercial Zone was specifically designed for this type of zoning problem, allowing limited commercial development while protecting adjoining residential neighborhoods." (In the Matter of the Appeal of the Denial of A Zoning Change for Jay T. Snow and William A. Snow - Case No. BA-05-3, October 7, 2006.) The rezone before the Commission is a similar situation and the issues identified in this appeal are consistent with development issues for these properties. Building Official: No building code issues. -103- PZ09-06 Comments Page 4 The City of Kenai has identified the area along the Kenai Spur Highway as hindered from future development due to traffic along the highway and the residential zoning limitation. There is limited land currently zoned commercial along the highway and the current vacant residential land does not allow for commercial development. The Comprehensive Plan noted that uses should not be allowed through the conditional use process that has been used to allow some development along the highway and recommended zoning suitable for all land uses and to prepare criteria and standards under which compatible mixed uses are allowed to ensure that the uses are compatible with surrounding uses. When the Comprehensive Plan was written, the City did not have a mixed -use zone. Since then, the Limited Commercial zone has been developed to allow mixed uses of residential and commercial, The zone has strict development criteria that limit the size of structures as well as landscaping with separation between uses. The proposed rezone from Rural Residential 1 and Conservation to Limited Commercial will provide for development along the Kenai Spur Highway while not restricting residential use. Based on the application and review of Kenai Municipal Code and Comprehensive Plan, the requested rezone meets the criteria for an amendment to the zoning map. Recommend approval. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. PZ09-06 2. Application 3. Drawings m CTY OF KENAI l: >> P AONNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PZ09-06 d e ei yo� REZONE PERMIT KENAI L SKA A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COM SSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE KENAI C 7Y COUNCIL OF THE REQUESTED REZONING SUBMITTED BY PARCEL WHEREAS, the Commission finds the 1. The subject property is 2. The present land use plan designatitai}`'is Neizhborhood Residential & Consen7ation/0�en Space I 3. The proposed zonin disc a`'t ,,'Lunited Commercial 4. An appropriate pub c lse ring,;as required was conducted Februan, 11 2009 5. That the following additiol4l facts have been found to exist: 6. Applicant must comply v"rth all Federal, State, and local regulations. NOW, THEREFORE BE dT RESOLVED, by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai that the petitiortvd REZONING of PROPERTIES SHO VvN ON THE ATTACHED MAP AND SPREADSHEET are hereby recommended to the Kenai City Council. PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASK4�PI BRUARY 11, 2009. i CIIAIRPI RSON. ATTEST: -105- PZ09-06 PARCEL#!Ap0RES5 ACRES LEGAL OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP LAND IMPROVEMENT ASSESSED TAXABLE jOWNTYPE T 6N R SEC 33 SEWARD 4iKN THAT PORTION OF THE W112SWI5W1la SE SEi/A ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH 13745 COMh9UMTY ANCHORAGE, AK 4$01005 9744 KENAI SPUR tRNY 5-51 LYING IJ OF KENAI SPUR ROAD TRUST AUTHORITY PARK LOOP STE 200 99508 $32,900 ,$0 $32,900 SDISTATE T6N R 11 W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN PORTIONS OF THE WI/2 S4114 SEV4 & EV2 I 4501007 9616 KENAI SPUR HWY 1.37 SW 114 SE1/4 LYING N OF KENAI SPUR HWY KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N BINKLEY ST SOLDOTNA, AK 99669 $16,600 80 $16.600L $0eDROVGH 45050H 305 C,INDERELLAST I 2.5DGOVT T 6N R 11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN -----T40 (EZ hWNAGEh1ENT LLC._ LIP — BOX 3293 KENAI, AK 99611 $33,000 $104,800 $137.800 $137,800'PRIVATE_ 4506004 309 CASTLE ST 1,49 T 6N R 11 W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN GOUT LOT 29 BISSET LOIS E ._ 1309 CASTLE ST KENAI, AK 99611 $26.000 $179,800 $205,800 - $185,800 PRIVATE j SEWARD MERIDIAN KN COVT LOT LYING GOVT LOT 28 LYING NORTH OF KENAI 4506005 - 9392 KENAI SPUR HWY 132 SPUR HWY - -- --_ BISSET MARG - . 13C9 CASTLE St KENAI, AK 9%11 L $24,300 $0 $24,300 PRIVATE t 6N R 15W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN ---- - --- -- _$24,300 - _ _ -- - 4506007 9328 KENAI SPUR HWY 0_9331SPUR GOUT LOT 27 LYING NORTH OF KENAI HWY LASHOT BILLY JACK PO BOX 473 KENAL AS 99611 I $20,100 so $20,100 $20,100 PRIVATE IT 6N R IIW SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KNI 5088 BEAVER LOOP I 4506013 9464 KENAI SPUR HWY) 0.50) 0830096 TREETOP ESTATES SUB L0T1 111111'.__.______-.._.._ IGONZALEZ ROBERT M RD#2 _... KENAI, AK99611 �$14,600 $182,200' $196.800 $196.800�PRIVATE IT _ f—_ 6N R 11 W SEC 33 SEWARD MERID4KN ANCHOR POINT, AK4506014 808 MAGIC AVE 0 40 083D096 TREETOP ESTATEG SUB LSTIN DENNIS PD BOX 209 99556 1 $13,700 $186,300 $200,000 $180,0W PRIVATE 4506015 810 MAGIC AVE ' 0.4010830096 T 6N R 1 tW SEC 33 D ERIDIANKN TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT 3 I RICKMAN STEVEN A 49630 RF.XS RD iSOLOOT IA. AK 99669 $13)00 $172,700 $1815,400 $186,400 PRIVATE 1 T 6N R 11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN 4506016 9444 KENAI SPUR HWY 0,44 0830096 TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT I ANDERSCN SCOTT E PO BOX 302 SOLDOTNA, AK 99669 $14.100 $1 B4,900 $199,000 $199.000 PRIVATE_ 'T 6N R t iNJ SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN FNAKtINUK PASS, 45W019 804 MAGIC AVE 04509TW23 PAPA JOE'S SUB LOT3 GERKE ERICN PO BOX 21D77 AK 99721 $14,400 $12,400 $26.800 $26,80 PRIVATE T 6N R i4YV SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN FALKENBERG CEGIL C & _�— _. ... 4506024 399 MCCOLLUM DR I'll 200005T REDFLO SUB LOT i -T 6N R 11W SEG 33 SEWAP,D MERIDIAN KN PATRICIA PO BOX 3293 KENAI, AS 99611 $21,900 $W4,000 $225.900 $0 PRIVATE 4506025 9520 KENAI SPUR HWY 2.97REPLAT 200211; PAPA JOE'S SUB CHUMLEY TRACT A WORTHAM FRANKLINT PO BOX 1284 KENAI,AK996ii $35300 $35,300 $36.30QjPRiVA1'E _$0 —.. ! 4501023i— 2.3/ POriAn o14501029 CHY OF i(ENAILGO AVENUE KENAI AK 99511 $0' $0, $0 $OjMUNiCIPAL IT.W Acreage 21.11 _ —_ -- — — - I - -- Total Assessed Value: T---------- $1,193,309 P'OREZONE' \� Ike city of // KENAI, ALA SA /Villa e witk a Fast City w fk a there // 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 btftd Telephone: 907-283-7535 l FAX: 907-283-3014 111111 1992 REZONING APPLICATION APPROVED BY COUt CiL DATE PETITIONER Rick Koch, City Manager ADDRESS City of Kenai, 210 Fidal o Avenue, Kenai, AK 9961.1 PHONE 907-283-8222 LEGAL DESCRIPTION See Attachments PRESENT ZONE Rural Residential I/Conservation PROPOSED ZONE Limited Commercial I Intended Use and/or Reason for Rezoning: To rezone properties along the Kenai Spur Highway corridor consistent with the Comprehensive Plan coals and to provide developrneri pu .n for those properties. 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 INITI.AL THE SPACE AFTER THE ITEM NUMBER TO INDICATE THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THESE CONDITIONS. l Amendments to the Kenai Zoning Code and Official Map may be initiated by: Kenai City 'Council; Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission; Submission of a petition by a majority of the property owners in the area to be rezoned; or, a petition bearing the signatures of fifty (50) registered Ke voters within the City of Kenai to amend the ordinance text; or, 04 j�/ submission of a petition as provided by the Home Rule Charter of the City { PTrl ed of Kenai. JAk 2 3 200E Rezoning Application Page 2 2. ;'Jm 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 enlarges an adjacent district boundary. 3. L" A Public Notification and Hearing is required before the issuance of this permit, A $100.00 (plus sales tax) non-refundable deposit/advertising and administrative services fee is required to cover these notification costs. Depending on the rezone location, an Affidavit of Posting may also be required. 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. i tdet&her`s Signature REZONING CHECKLIST: a. MAP )A b. SIGNATURES c. DEPOSIT/ADVERTISING FEE ($100 + sales tax) a. APPLICATION FORM OR LETTER e. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING -110- PZ09-06 PROPOSED REZONE PARCEL IT ADDRESS ACRES LEGAL T 6N R 11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN THAT PORTION OF THE W i/? SWIM SEtt4 OWNER ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH ADDRESS 3Zd5 COMMUNITY CII YSTAT E ZIP ANCHORAGE. AK LAND IMPROVEMENT �_$0 ASSESSED _.L_. TAXABLE OWNTYPE 4501W5 9744 KENAI SPUR HWY 5.51 LYING N OF KENAI SPUR ROAD TRUST AUTHORITY, ARK LOOP STE 200 '99508_ `�. $32,900 $32,9W_ $0 STATE _ T R 11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KNI 6N PORTIONS OF THE W V2 SELA SE114 & E V2' $0 BOROUGH 4501007 9616 KENAI SPUR HWY 1.37 SWi14 BETA LYING N OF KENAI SPUR HWY 7 R i t W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN KENAI PENINSULA 60ROUGH 144 N BIN_KLEY ST SOLDOTNA, AK 99669 SNLE 0 $0 $16,600 _ 4505011 305 CINDERELLA SF _ 2S_0_ 6N GOVT LOT 40 T 6N R 11 W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN' E2MANAGEMENT LLC 'PO BISSET LO15E BOX 3293 309 CASTLE ST KENAI AK 99611 1 KENAI, AK 99611 $33,000 $26000 $104,eW $1798W _$537_BW ff O5,e00i E137,800 $i8S,8W PRIVATE PRIVATE 4506004 309 CASTLE ST tA9 GOVT LOT 29 _ T 6N R i i W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN� LOT 28 LYING NORTH OF KENAI 4506005 9392 KENAI SPUR HWY IGOVT 1.32'SPUR HWY _. BISSET MARC 309 CASTLE ST KENAI, AK 99611 $24,300' $0 $24,300 i_ $24.300 PRIVATE _ _._. T 6N R 11 W SEC 33 SF,WARD MERIDIAN KN 1 I GOUT LOT 27 LYING NORTH OF KENAI LASHOT BILLY JACK PO BOX 4T3 KENAI, AK 99611 $20,100 PRIVATE 4506007 9328 KENAI SPUR HWY 0.93 SPUR HWY _ _$20.IW _$0 _ ,$20.100 4506013 - 9464 KENAI SPUR HWY - - T, T 6N R IIW SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN OB30096 TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT I - - �GONZALEZ ROBERT M --_ 5088 BEAVER LOOP RDN2 - j 1 (KENAI, AK 99611 �$14,6W $182.2W $196.8W $196,800 PRIVATE 4506014 4506015 808 MAGIC AVE 8W MAGIC AVE I 0,400830096 0 40 T6NR 11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT 2 T 6N R 114V SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN 0830096 TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT 3 DUSTIN DENNIS RICKMAN STEVEN A I PO BOX 209 49630 REXS RD ANCHOR POINT, AK l 99558 SOLDOTNA, AK 99669 $13J00 313.700 $186,3WI $A2,7W $200,000 $18f:.400 Ei6QW6 $/86,4W PRIVATE PRIVATE 4606016 9444 KENAI SPUR HWY 0.44 T 6N R 11W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KH 0830096 TREETOP ESTATES SUB LOT 4 ANDERSON SCOTT E PO BOX 30'2_ SOLDOTNA. AK 99669 ANAKTUVUK PASS $14.100 $i84.900 5199A00 _ $199'O PRIVATE ..__ .. ... 45W019 804 MAGIC AVE 0 46 T 6N R 1 iW SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN 0970023 PAPA JOE'S SUB LOT 3 GERKE ERIC N _ �RD F0.LKENBERG GECIL C 8 PATRICIA BOX 21077 PO BOX 3293 AN 99721 _ . KENAI, AK 99611 _ $14.4001 E21,900 $12A00 $204.W0 $2fi 800 $225,9W _$26,BW _ $0 PRIVATE PRIVATE 4506024 �399 MCCOLLUM DR 1.112W005T T 6N R 1 iW SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KN REDFLO SO LOT( T 6N R 51W SEC 33 SEWARD MERIDIAN KNI 4506025 4501029 9520 KENAI SPUR HM 2,97 1 2002113 PAPA JOE'S SUB GHUNTLEY REPEAT TRACT A Podion of 4501029 _ _ WORT HAM FRANKLIN T CITY OF KENAI PO BOX 1284 210 FIDALGO AVENUE KENAI, AK 99611 KENAI, AK 99611 $36,3W $0 $0 $0 $36,3W $0 $36 300 $0 PRIVATE MUNICIPAL Value: 11193300 Tota! Aunaga 21.71 Total Assnssod January 26, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission 210 Pidelgo Ave. Kenai, OAK 99611 Re: The issue cf the contemplated rezone of properties north of the Kenai Spur Highway Corridor from McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek Dear Council: My wife, Jo, and I moved from Kodiak to Soldotna in February, 1997 dace to Jo's health and opened racy law practice at 100 Trading Bay Drive, Kenai. We did not buy a hone until December, 1999 because we were looking for just the right combination of factors. We wanted to be close to the law office since I often have to meet with clients at odd hours on short notice, close to a commercial center for shopping but yet in a quiet neighborhood. In December, 1999, we found our house at 309 princess which met all of our requirements and we have lived there since that time. Our home Is 1 a/ miles to my office, approximately the same to the Dena'ina Health Clinic and a lesser distance to the area grocery stores and home supply stores. When the 2003 Comprehensive Man, hereinafter referred to as the "Plan" was adopted, we did not comment because the Plan requirements recognized the needs of the City of Kenai and insured that our neighborhood would remain essentially as it is now and has been since we moved here in 1999. We were in full support of the Plan. We do not believe that the contemplated rezone is in conformance with the Dian. It appears that the rezone Is nothing more than a pretense to legitimize spot zoning. When the rezone was proposed there had been no study done. There had been no planning. It was proposed because a developer wanted to build commercial buildings on a lot that he had purchased. In order to facilitate that developer and avoid an illegal spot zoning, this rezone Tawas proposed. The hasty Illegal application submitted by the Planning and Zoning chairman, which had to be withdrawn, supports that conclusion and gives the public the appearance that the rezoning is going to be done regardless. As stated above, the rezone does not comply with the Plan for the reasons set forth below. -114- Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2009 Page No. 2 Several goads of the Elan are listed but the first two of the goals of the Plan are: Create an attractive, vital, city center, with a mix of private and public facilities and activities to benefit residents and visitors. Protect and rejuvenate the livability of residential neighborhoods See page 2 of the Flan, These goals will be discussed in the order presented above. it was recognized in the Flan that: The city's dominant spatial pattern — linear growth along the Kenai Spur Highway spine — suits local ground conditions. But it fosters a weak, poorly defined city center. It also channels most focal and through traffic onto the Kenai Spur Highway, whose roadside is Kenai's front yard. The community has cited development of an identifiable, diverse, prosperous city center and a more attractive Kenai Spur Highway corridor as important planning goals. Bolding added. See page 25 of the Plan. The plan goes on to state: A common there ae at the public planning workshops was that. Kenai lacked a well-defined city center, w he old business district did not project a well defined city center. The old business district did not project a positive identity of a thriving Kenai. Instead, it was losing vitality and looking faded. Citizens generally agree that creating a strong, attractive, busy city center is a highly desirable planning goal. Kenai does have the potential to develop a more distinctive, attractive, successful city center. But it will take a joint public -private focus on the economics, appearance, and convenience of the city center in order to make it an attractive venue for residents and visitors. Some of the policies to foster that goal are set out below. A long-term strategy for development of Millennium square, a remarkable community asset, is a key element for the future emergence of a city center. -115 Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2009 Page No. 3 My laws office serves clients who reside throughout the Kenai Peninsula. The office was intentionally located in the city center so that clients who visit my office can accomplish other tasks In the city when making the trip. My practice benefits from this versatility offered the clients and the city benefits from the business that my clients bring to the city. l support the concept of a strong city center and l believe the 2003 Comprehensive Plan correct8y identified such need. Land Use Plan, Map 11 on page 23 of the Plan (attached) shows the concept of the strong city center clearly. The addition of Lowe's and Wall Mart fit into the concept and strengthen the city center. I supported the addition of those two businesses as they will enhance my clients ability to accomplish other tasks while in the city. An inspection of Map 11 will show that the location of the two businesses also complies with the Plan as it enhances a strong city center. Unfortunately, Lowes and WaiMart will increase the traffic corriing from the east past Princess Street which will effect the safety of my family attempting to egress Princess. This is especially true in the winter when the snow berms along the highway block the view of oncoming traffic from the east. The traffic from the north and west substantially stops at the city center, Lowes and WallMart and will not increase the traffic past Princess from those directions. The proposed rezone of the Kenai Spur Highway does not comply with the Plan in that it fosters a weak, poo dy designed city center which was specifically warned against in the Plan. It will draw professionals and other businesses away from the city center. It will increase traffic flow past Princess in both directions from clients and customers going to and from the rezone. Since WalMan is not finished, it is impossible to predict what the traffic pattern will be past Princess other than to say for sure that traffic will increase significantly and that the rezone will add to that traffic flow. In that respect alone, the rezone is premature as the addition of Lowe's and Wall Mart may stress the traffic flown on the Kenai Spur Highway. Increased commercial use in the rezone would hamper individuals entering the city center and would then adversely impact the city center. Further, the rezone does not meet the second goal of protecting and rejuvenating the residential neighborhoods. An examination of laps 10 and 11 shows the entire area of the rezone colored Orange which identifies the rezone area as Neighborhood Residential. There is absolutely no neighborhood Commercial shown in that area. neighborhood residential is defined as: The neighborhood Residential district consists of single- family and multifamily residential areas that are urban or -116- Planning and Zoning Cormnlssion January 1 9, 2009 Page No. 4 suburban in character. Typically, public water and sewer services are in place or planned for installation. This land use district may include both single-family and multi -family dwellings subject to reasonable density transitions and/or design compatibility. Formal public outdoor spaces (parks) are a critical feature in this district. Small home -based businesses may be accommodated within certain design guidelines. Neighborhood institutional uses such as churches, schools, and day care facilities may be intermixed if they comply with neighborhood design guidelines. See Plan, page 29. There is nothing in that description that would imply commercial activity on any scale. On the west side of the city center, there are areas shown as Neighborhood Commercial which is defined as: The Neighborhood Commercial district applies to areas along the arterial road system that are suitable for small scale neighborhood -serving retail service, and office uses. It appears that the Limited Commercial Zone, KMC f 4.20, t t 5, was developed to foster the Neighborhood Commercial areas along the Kenai Spur Highway on the west side of the city center. The LC zone is described as: (a) Intent: The LC Zone is estabilished to provide transition areas between commerclat and residential districts by allowing low to medium volume bossiness, mixed residential and other compatible uses which complement and do not materially detract from the uses allowed with adjacent districts. The principal permitted asses shown in the attached Land Use Table are: single, two and three family dwellings, churches, clinics, government buildings, day care centers, dormitories/boarding houses, essential services, green houses/ tree nurseries, professional offices, restaurants, gunsrnithing, printing, taxidermy, off-street parking and personal services. Personal services are defined in Mote 25 to the Land Use Table (attached) as art studios, barbers, beauticians, dressmakers, dry cleaners and self service laundries, fitness centers, photographic studios, tailors, tanning studios and massage therapists. There is no statutory definition of an "essential service" which is allowed. Since medicine and other health supplies are essential to some individuals, it could include a drug store. -117- Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2009 Rage No. 5 All of the foregoing will encourage businesses to locate away from the city center and degrade the buffer zone of the neighborhood. The users of the rezone will be transient users ®with no connection to the neighborhood, i was asked during nay testimony in front of the Cites Council if I considered churches and schools as commercial entities. I answered that I did not but did not get a chance to explain my answer. Church members are usually from the neighborhood but, event if not, the members are seeking good moral values and are self-disciplined, church activities are monitored and controlled and such activities most often take place within the building and are not conducted every day or night of the week. School activities are always well monitored and controlled. There is very little interaction between the schools and the neighborhood. Any "bad" interaction is usually addressed by school officials quickly. Whereas those individuals using commercial facilities are not monitored and are not corning to the area seeking a good moral end. The commercial entity wants satisfied customers. For example, It is not going to attempt to control a customer's actions outside the business. The goal of the Dian is to protect and rejuvenate the livability of residential neighborhoods. The rezone under application does not protect the livability of my neighborhood. As stated above, it subjects the neighborhood to transitory unknown visitors'. The impetus of the rezone was based upon an application to place 5 commercial buildings on a lot in the zone. The proposal was that the buildings would be professional buildings. As far as l am concerned, as a professional, I want to be in the city center. Dr. Carlson of the MedlCenter built in the city center possibly for the same reasons that I have broached. I have not seen any explanation addressing how this rezone is going to snake my neighborhood more livable or how it is going to rejuvenate the neighborhood. l would appreciate such explanation. When investment is high and the need to bring in revenue to support a mortgage, any renter that will not violate the zone limitations win be welcome by the developer. Even the developer can not say who will inhabit those buildings in the long term future. it can be said for sure that the character of the neighborhood will change. The neighborhood can no longer be titled "neighborhood Residential" and Map 11 will. not be an accurate representation of the area. It can be said for sure that traffic flow will be affected. As a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission, you must recognize that this rezone is merely an attempt to satisfy one developer and that the selection of land area was done in haste without even consideration of Maps 10 and 'I1 of the Plan. Recommending the rezone will be an arbitrary use of power of the Planning and Zoning 2 Most visitors in a residential neighborhood are invitees or people such as repairmen who are there for a purpose. SMOO Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2009 Page No. 6 Comrnision as it is merely an illegal spot rezoning. The Alaska Supreme Court in Griswold v. City of Homer, 925 P.2d 1015, 1020 (Alaska 1996) stated: Spot zoning "is the very antithesis of planned zoning." Courts have developed numerous variations of this definition. These variations have but minor differences and describe any zoning amendment which "reclassifies a small parcel in a manner inconsistent with existing zoning patterns, for the benefit of the owner and to the detriment of the community, or without any substantial public purpose." Anderson, senora, § 5.12, at 362. Professor Ziegler states: Faced with an allegation of spot zoning, courts determine first whether the rezoning is compatible with the comprehensive plan or, where no plan exists, with surrounding eases. Courts then examine the degree of public benefit gained and the characteristics of land, including parcel size and other factors indicating that any reclassification should have embraced a larger area containing the subject parcel rather than that parcel alone, No one particular characteristic associated with spot zoning, except a failure to comply with at least the spirit of a comprehensive plan, is necessarily fatal to the amendment. Spot zoning analysis depends primarily on the facts and circumstances of the particular case. Therefore the criteria are flexible and provide guidelines for judicial balancing of interests. 3 Edward H. Ziegler Jr., Rathkoph's The Law of Zoning and Planning § 28.01, at 28-3 (4th dd. 1995). In accord with the guidance offered by Professor Ziegler, in determining whether Ordinance 92-18 constitutes spot zoning, we will consider (1) the consistency of the amendment with the comprehensive plan; (2) the benefits and detriments of the amendment to the owners, adjacent landowners, and community; and (3) the size of the area "rezoned." In our case the rezone is not consistent with the Plan. There has been much testimony by owners, adjacent landowners and a few members of the community of the detriment that they believe they will experience. The effective area of the rezone is not SMS Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2009 Page No. 7 as large as proposes in that some of the area can not be developed and some is already developed. Other landowners who are more familiar with the total area have addressed the effective area of the rezone. I urge the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny the application. At the least, it is premature. No one knows hove WalMart will affect the community or the traffic flow on the Kenai spur Highway. At the worst, it is inconsistent with the flan and will unalterably change the character of my neighborhood. Regardless of what the developer represents neither he nor you can predict the type of business that will operate within the rezone in the future. The permitted uses of the i_c zone is extensive. l thank you for your time. Sincerely, Charles Winegarden, Es . 309 Princess Kenai, AID 99611 283-0774 -120- 14.20.115 Limited Commercial Zone (LC Zone). (a) intent: The LC Zone is established to provide transition areas between commercial and residential districts by allowing low to medium volume business, mixed residential and other compatible uses which complement and do not materially detract from the uses allowed with adjacent districts. (b) Principal Permitted Uses: As allowed in Land Use 'fable as long as the footprint of the building dares not exceed three thousand (3,000) square feet. (c) Conditional Uses: As allowed in Land Use Table. (d) Accessory Uses: As defined (see definitions section). (e) Home Occupations: Uses as allowed by this chapter. (f) Development Requirem mt: As described in this chapter. (g) Parking Requirements: As required by this chapter. (h) Outside storage is allowed for display purposes only unless the storage is in an area enclosed by a sight -obscuring fence. (i) Landscaping/Site plans: As required in KMC 1.4.25. (®rds. 2081-2005, 2148-2006) -123- L 4ar, Y V1 J Title 14 PLAWIING AND ZONING vhapter 14.22 LAND USE TP,BLG 14.22.010 Land use tab8e. KEY: P= Principal Permitted Use C Conditional Use S = Secondary Use N = Not Permitted LAND USE TABLE NUM: Reference footnotes on following pages for additional restrictions ZONING MTRICTS SYDENTIAL LAND USES C RR M RS RSI RS2 RU CC CC i In, IN E D R TTSH LC CLE7U One Family Dwelling Cla P P P P P P P21 St S2 S2 Cn P p p Si/C21 Two/Three Family Dwelling Cis P P P P P P P21 Sl C C n_22 P P -P S2/r21 Four Family Dwelling Cis P C3 P N N P P21 Si C C C22 N P C Si/C2i Five/Six Family Dwelling Cla C3 N P N N P P21 Sl C C N N P C Si/C21 Seven or More Family Dwelling C18 C3 N C3 N N P p21 S1 C C N N P C St/Czt Townhouses° CIS C C C C C C C C C C 222 C C C C Mobile Home Parks" N C C C. C C C C C C C N C N C C planned Unit Residential Development Cis C C C C C C C C C C N C C C C COAMEIBUAAL TAND USES C PR . I CC I CG JR, 1H LLD R 9fSH LC CKU I Automotive Sales N C C N N N C P P P P N N N N P Automotive Service Stations N C C N N N C P P P P N C N N P Banks N C C C N N C P P p C N C C C P Business/Consumer Services N C C C N N C P P p C N C C C P (3ide Service N C C C N N C P P P P N P P C P Howls/Motels N C C C N N C P P P C N C P C P Lodge N C C C N N C P P P C N P F C P Professional Offices N C C C N N P P P P p N C P P P Restaurants N C C C 'N N C P P P C 1Q C C p P Retail Business N26 C C C N N C P P P P y.2n. Sea C C P Wholesale Business N C C C N N C C P P P N Sea C C N Theaters/Commercial Recreation N C C C N N C P P C C N P C C P http://www.gcode.us/codes/kenai/view.phpAopie_142.AL 22-14_22_010&frames=on 1/24/2009 n rEK� t trt ✓ LAND USE 'TABLE KEY: P= Principal Permitted Use C = Conditional Use S = Secondary Use N = Not Permitted NOTE. Reference footnotes on following pages for additional restrictions ZONING DISTRICTS IND-USTRIAL LAB USES c RR RRa Rs Rss RS2 RE s G m¢ ED R r5 Lc ohau Airports and Related Uses pen C C C N N C P P P P N C N N C Automotive Repair N C C C N N C P P P P N N N N P Gas &fanufacmrerlS[orage N N C C N N N N N Cv Co N N N N N ManufermingTabricating/ Assembly N C C C N N C C P P P N C C N C Mini -Storage Facility N C C C N N C C p P P 1Q N N C C Storage Yard N C C C N N C C P P P N N N N C Warehouses N C C C N N C N P .P P N C N N N BLIC/ PUBLIC/ INSTITUTIONAL LAND USES C RR RRI R5 RS1 RS2 RE CC CG IL 1H EID R TSR LC CMU Charitable Institutions C C C C C C P p P P P P C P C P Churches* C plo pto plc P10 pro plo pao p16 C C P pw P P P Clinics C C C C C C C P P P C C C C P P Colleges° C C C C C C C P P C C P C C C P Elementary Schools* C C- C C C C C P P C C P C C C P Governmental Buildings C C C C C C C P P P C P C C P P High Schools° C C C C C C C P P C C P C C C Y Hospitals* C C C C C C C P P P C C C C C P Libraries° C C C C C C C12 P P P C P C P C n AR,e C i C C C C C C p- P l? C P C P C P Parkes and Recreation P C C C C C C P P P P P P P C P Assisted Living C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C MISCELLANEOUS LAND USES C RR RRI RS RSF RS2 RE CC CG IL 1H EID R M LC CMU Animal Boardingli C C C C C N N C C C C N C N C C Bed and Breakfasts C C C C C C C C C C C N C C C P Cabin Rentals C C C C N N N P P P C N P P C 7? Cemeteries C C C C N N N N C C C N C C N N Crnmatories/Funaral Homes N C N C N N C C C C C N C C C C Day Cue Cemess12 C C C C C C C P P P C C C C P P Dormitories/Boarding Houses C C C C C C P p21 S C P p23 C C P P Essential Services P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Fanning/General Agriculwre*.r P P N N N N N N N N P N P N N N Greenhouses/Tree Nurserieel3 C C C C C C C P I P P C N C C P P littp://www.gcode.us/codes/kenai/View.plip?topioL�1I,R4_22-14 22 010&frames=on 1/24/2009 C 6or,- v -, 1 LAND ITSL TABLE LE KEY: P= Principal Permitted Use C _ Conditional Use S = Secondary Use N = Not Permitted NOTE. Reference footnotes on following pages for additional restrictions ZONING DISTRICTS MISCELLANEOUS LAND USES C RR RRI RS l61 RS2 RU CC: CC— H, M F.IID R `%'SH LC CMU Qunsmithing, Printing, N C C C C C C P P P P N C P P P Taxidermy Assemblies" (Large: C C C C C C C P15 P15 pts Pry P15 C P N Pie Circuses, Hairs, Etc.) ,Fraternal Organizations/ N C C C C C C P P P C N C P C P Private ClubsiSocial Halls and Union Halls Nursing, Convalescent or N C C C C C C P P C C C C C C P Rest homes Parking, Off -Street P P P P P 1' P P P P P P P P P P Parking, Public LOIS12 C C C C I C C C C C C C C C C C C Personal Services C C C C C C C P P P P C C 'P P P Radio/TV Transmitters/Cell P P C C C C C P P P P P C C C P Sites-* Recreational Vehicle Parks C C C C N N C C C C C N C C N C Subsurface Extraction of C C C C C C C C C C C N C N N N Natural Resourcesib Surface Extraction of C C C C N N C N C C C N C N N N Natural Resources 17 * See 42 USCA See. 2000oc (Religious Land Use and hatintoonahzed Persons Act of 2000) See 42 Telecommunications Act of 1996, Sec, 704(a) nos See,however, the limitations imposed under KMC 3.10.070 Footnotes: i.. Allowed as a secondary use except on the ground floor of the part of the building fronting on collector streets and major highways. Commercial or industrial which falls under the landscaping/site, plans requirements of ICMC 14.25 shah include any secondary uses in the landscaping and site plans. 2. One (1) single-family residence per parcel, which is part of the main building. 3_ Allowed as a conditional use, subject to satisfying the following conditions: a. The usable area per dwelling unit shall be the same as that requiredfor dwelling units in the RS zone; b. The site square footage in area must be approved by the Commission; C. Yards around the site, off-street parking, and other development requirements shall be the same as for principal uses in the RR zone; d. Water and sewer facilities shall meet the requirements of all applicable health regulations; e. The proposed dwelling group will constitute a residential area of sustained desirability and stability; will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding property values; f. The buildings shall be used only for residential purposes and customary accessory uses, such as garages, storage spaces, and recreational and community activities; g. There shall be provided, as part of the proposed development, adequate recreation areas to serve the needs of the anticipated population; It. The development shall not produce a volume of traffic in excess of the capacity for which the access streets are designed; i. The property adjacent to the proposed dwelling group will not be adversely affected. 4. See "Townbouses" section. 5. See "Mobile Homes" section. http://www.gcode.us/codes/k-enai/view,php?topicI1210..4 22-14 22 010&frames=on 1/24/2009 11.L..V A VLCUAJ Ua3 tl[0.VAI. 6. Allowed as a conditional use, subject to "Mobile Homes" section and provided that anymobile home park meetstheminimum Federal Housing Authority requirements. 7. See "Planned Unit Residential Development" section. 8. Allowed as a conditional use, provided that the proposed location and the characteristics of the site will not destroy the residential character of the neighborhood. Allowed as a conditional use, provided that allapplicable safety and fire regulations are met. 10. Providedthat no part of any building is located nearer than. thirty (30) feet to any adjoining street or property line. 11. Allowed as a conditional use, provided that no part of any building is located nearer than thirty, (30) feet m any adjoining street or property line and provided further that the proposed location and characteristics of the use will not adversely affect the commercial development of the zone. 12, Allowed as a conditional use, provided that the following conditions are met: I The proposed location of the use and the size and characteristic of the site will maximize its benefit to the public; b. Exits and entrances and off-street parking for the use are located to prevent traffic hazards on public streets. 13. Allowed as a conditional use, provided that setbacks, buffer strips, and other provisions are adequate to assure that the use will not be a nuisance to surrounding properties. The Commission shall specify the conditions necessary to fulfill this requirement. 14. Allowed as a conditional use, provided that no indication of saiduse is evident from the exterior of the mortuary. t5. -Allowed, providedthat the following conditions are met 1. An uncleared buffer strip of at least thirty (30) feet shall be provided between said use and any adjoining property in a residential Ane. n. Exits and entrances and off-street parking for the use shall be located to prevent traffic hazards on the public streets. 16. See "Conditional Uses" section. 17, See "Conditional Use Permit for Surface Extraction of Natural Resources" section. 18, Conditional Use allowed only on privately held property. Not allowed on government lands. t9. Deleted by Ordinance 2144-2006. W0 The airport related uses allowed under this entry are aircraft approach zones per KMC 14.20.070(a), except that for properties :ontamcd inside the airport perimeter fence or having access to aircraft movement areas, tamps, taxiways or parking aprons, FAA imborized uses are allowed. 21. Developments for use shall be the same as those listed in the "Development Requirements Table" for the RU/TS;R zones. 22. Allowed as a conditional use in conjunction with a permitted use in me ED zone. For example, housing for teachers or students For a school in the zone. ?3. Allowed as an accessory use in conjunctionwith a permitted use in the Ell zone. For example, a. dormitory used to house students or a school or educational facility. 24. Retail businesses allowed as a secondary use in conjunction with the primary use (e.g., a gift shop or coffee shop within another xnsincas). ?5. Art studios, barbers, beauticians, dressmakers, dry cleaners and sell -service laundries, fitness centers, photographic studios, allots, tanning salons and massage therapists. K Food services are allowed on a tern or seasonal basis of not more than four (4) months (Amended during 7-7-99 supplement; Ord. 1862-2000; amended during 12-1-00 supplement; Ords. 1911-2001, 1938-2001, 1956-2002, 1962-2002, 1990-2003, 1994-2003, 2053-2004, 2081-2005, 2112-2005, 2113-2005, 2144-2006, 2152-2006, 2185-2006, 2195-2006, 2246-2007, 2272-2007) http://www.gcode.us/codes/kenai/view.php?topiclQ7L4_22-14_22_._01O&frames=on 1/24/2009 C V Pam 32009 January 31, 2009 Kenai City Council Planning and Zoning Commission Rick Koch, City Manager 210 Fidelgo Ave. Kenai, AK 99611 Re: The issue of the contemplated rezone of properties north of the Kenai Spur Highway Corridor from McCollum drive West to No -Name Creek Dear Council: I am lodging a protest conceming Jeff Twait and Karen Koester participating in any further voting on the above rezone. They should either recluse themselves or be disqualified for the following reasons: Jeff it Wallt The City of Kenai Municipal Code 1,85.060 Conflicts of Interest prohibited states: (d) No Council or commission member may vote on any question in which he or she has a substantial direct or indirect financial interest, Direct or indirect financial interests shall be disclosed to the presiding officar prior to a vote on the question and the presiding officer shall determine whether the financial interest exists and whether the Prohibition from voting is applicable. A decision by the presiding officer may be overridden by a unanimous vote of the members present, exclusive, of the member presenting the possible conflict. Mr. Twatt and Cora Leigh McCollum have a daughter Miranda Twah. Miranda I air Is the daughter of Glen McConu Jr.:.;t;c is an owner Of property in the proposed rezone area. Miranda will have an heir to that properly. Mr. Twait has an indirect financial interest by way of his daughter. Further, Mr. Twait illegally filed the rezone application and has provided a letter to the City Council supporting the rezone. The letter is attached. In AME. Ness Pipe Corp. v. REG. COPS., 176 P.3d 667 (Alaska 2008), the Alaska Supreme Court reviewed sm Kenai City Council Planning & Zoning Commission Rick Koch, City Manager January 31, 2009 the decision in Cinderella Career d, Finishing Sch. Y. F. T..C., 425 F.2d 583 (D.C. Cir. 1970) and approved the finding in that case. In Cinderella, Paul Rand Dixon, who was the chairman of the Commission spoke at the Government Relations Workshop of the National Newspaper Association In which he made several derogatory statements concerning deceptive advertising and charm schools which substantially implied that he had pre -judged the issue which was being brought before the Commission. The Cinderella court expressed its strong disapproval by stating: This does not give individual Commissioners license to prejudge cases or to make speeches which give the appearance that the case has been prejudged. Conduct such as Oils may have the effect of entrenching a Commissioner in a position which he has publicly stated, making it ditfiv ulk If not impossible, for him to reach a different conclusion in the event he deems It necessary to do so after consideration of the record. There is a marked difference between the Issuance of a Press release which states that the Commission has filed a complaint because It has "reason to believe' that there have been violations, and statements by a Commissioner after an appeal has been flied which give the appearance that he has already prejudged the case and that the ultimate determination of the merits will move in predestined grooves. While these two situations — Commission press releases and a Commiesioner°s pro -decision public statements — are similar in appearance, they are obviously of a different order of merit. Id. @ 590. The Alaska Supreme Court in AVE. Hess Pipe Corp. cited above added this comment: In the light of prior warnings to him in other cases, the court scarcely concealed its disgust for his ethical laxity. Cinderella most squarely stands for the proposition that intemperate public remarks by a decision maker create a constltudonaliy Impermissible appearance of outoorne-determinative prejudgment. 176 P.3d @ 674. In the case of the rezone, based upon Mir. Twaft's illegal filing to the application to rezone and his public remarks to the City Council, I and many others have no -129- Kenai City Council Planning & Zoning Commission Rick Koch, City Manager January 31, 2009 confidence that Mr. Twad will fairly and impartially consider the issue of the rezoning. He should recuse himself or, if he refuses to do so, Mn Twaik should not be allowed to participate in discussions or vote on the issue, Karen Koester Ms.Koester also provided a letter to the City Council in support of the rezone. The letter is attached. The above cited cases also apply to Ms. Koester, Her remarks in the letter certainly indicate that she will vote for the rezone regardless of what additional testimony will be presented at the hearing, Ms. Koester has certainly created an "appearance of outcome-datenninalve prejudgment'. She should recuse herself, or, if she refuses to do so, Ms. Koester should not be allowed to participate in discussions or vote on the issue. Sincerely, Q . Ck . G.J Charles Winegarden, Est' 309 Princess Kenai, AK 99611 283.5774 -130- Jaffrey M. Twait ISM Julie Anna Drive Kenai, AIL 99611 December 3. 2MB ,�+n I vented to write a brief letter in light of the rumblings I've heard over the past weak regarding the rezone of Tract A. Papa Joe's Subdivision Chumley Rapist from. RRl to I.C. As you are aware, I was out of town far bode of the meetings in which testimony was given regarding this. I have read the minutes from the first meeting in September and have silted through the Comprahansive Play and the Zoning Coda. Having spent a great deal of time with fellow commissioners and yourself in developing a Limited Commercial Zone it is my opinion that this is the bast zone for the above mentioned Property. I know that neighbors in the aroa are reluctant for change and it is our job as a Planning and Zoning Commission to weigh all the factors and allow responsible development and growth in our ' community as long as it is in barmony with the guidelines that we must use to make such decisions. ' I feed that Dr. Wortham has taken the proper steps and hired the proper profsssamals to assure the community that hia investment in this property will not only improve the aesthetics as we all drive by but also be an asset to the entire area. That being said, had I been available at the last meeting it would have been my vote to vote in favor of the ream. Plenas forward this on to the proper body for consideration if you feel it appropriate. Sincerely y 14vsit-_- j Planning and Zoning Chair aslved DEC I -131- .�,,.•. • a.., aY =a er � u ... irn .r.M' , Y a' x..♦ s:'...: . sr .v rYv a.a. doemOtprunde, Dr Wordism myIon term be xie i. Should tze re -zone fall, in my opinion, the Vpe of construction most cmducivt to ibis cleared rural rcsidentol lot is probably .II. which wift aut :.Y the neighbors would eventually depions Wom, BUT, DE Wordemi could g4 bu mousy out of neither the n6gWxm norl haw a say es to their design,buffer. tl Y 4 .:WS Y • • 1, Y ♦ 1 .Ya• 4.0 employees rcespective wages,and with flis ioes'am pmvitnity to arms md }....♦ ♦ apartments me i vbtfile {..AS• x fir any owner to a,.;#: without: the hemit ofitezone,'i T_Y to ateempt to recover theirinvcameat, mud VD� Worthom can't buM his office, there ss proposed, now took alhe loeaiou, cancer oA�ea a♦ u•cu. -132- NO ft-oftdWil "••:t vi Yr:•rr"1 1 ry �••.-.� 1• r.r.A �lf4 .in': i'••i �...�:nl♦ t•�ir�i+i r ail#x Y i i t^I _ • -• l.i In ♦ lu...[ IY 11 .•\ v •. .i �t ..•:( a •. v.V '•. t n ul•t. •: 4 t. s 4.. 1. •!ll- 1' •.!t :r:'-: Y • a. 1 • •...1 4...� • !• �.�:P. . .t tl.. •' �. 11 1 +: `: v. r 14.a YII yN WY �•` l u ..M1a vvl M1 i •t i .. Y i CF" ii i -133- Marflyn Kebsch u1ill From: Carol Freas Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 9:32 PM To: mboyle@alaska.com; barry_eldridge@yahoo.com; molloylavd@ak.net; cpajoe@altrogco.com; kenaimayorl0@msn.com; rossrck@hotmail.com; hvsmalley@yahoo.com Cc: Cary Graves; Rick Koch; Marilyn Kebschull Subject: Gloria Wik email comments FYI From; Gloria Wik [mailto:gwik@alaska.net] o�F eas/2009 10:58 AM To: CaFF� 2D©9 Cc: Colleen Ward Subject Rezone Hi Carol I would like to make it known that I am against the purposed rezoning between No Name Creek and McCollum Drive in Kenai. Although my residency here has been very short comparatively speaking I have lived here long enough to come to enjoy the quiet neighborhood and country living. I fear this neighborhood would change dramatically if RR1 was changed to Limited Commercial with the increase in traffic alone. As I understand it back in 1985 the neighborhood did help pay for water and sewer installation so they would be able to have a say as to how development occurred. What happened to that agreement? We have come together as neighbors to voice our concern and opposition to this and it seems to be falling on deaf ears. Gloria Wik 707 Magic <enai -134- Mar6@yn Kebsnhufl From: Carol Freas Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 9:34 PM To: mboyle@alaska.com; barry_eldridge@yahoo.com; molloylaw @ak.net; cpajoe@altrogoo.com; kenaimayor90@msn.com; rossrck@hotmail.com; hvsmalley@yahoo.com Cc: Cary Graves; Rick Koch; Marilyn Kebschull Subject: Bissett rezone comments FYI From: covops specops [mailto:specforces@mail.com] Seam: Mon 2(2(2009 9:15 AM To: Carol Freas Subjects To whom it may concern, I am very concerned about the way this council is treating this in a socialist manner. Rezoning this neighborhood would be a detrament to all residents in the area. My wife and I moved to AK almost 7 years ago and took six months to locate the perfect neighborhood to fit our needs. We picked this particular place because of its location and the zoning as we intended to live out our lives here. We bought the tract of land next door to us so our kids could build right next door. We were going to pick up more land in the area for the same purpose and for our children children. Over the past 6 years there has been increasingly more traffic in the area which has made it more difficult for my children to cross the highway and to play without fear of traffic hazaards. If this is rezoned and this proposed proffessional "mall' comes in, the street that was once safe behind our house would be too dangerous and the increase of trespassers on my personal drive would be unforgivable. As it is I have problems with people trying to take shortcuts through my drive which is dangerous for my family. Not to mention I am the one that pays for the upkeep of this drive. As it. is I have had the police out a few times. I would be calling the police constantly to report trespassers and demand some form of protection. I would also have to seek legal action for any damage committed by such encroachments. I am not ignorant that I would believe there would be no more traffic on Magic street nor through my drive. They would have to use it to get in and out of this proposed proffessional plant because the traffic on the .spur is too dan—rou€ to apt it a„ri out effectively. To put in another light would only increase the congestion and create more problems of another kind. My kids and I like to ride bikes in this area and injustice would be too great a risk. I have too much invested in this area not to be heard. I have made renovations to my house, spent thousands updating it and maintaining it. I planned to do many more improvements but have haulted my efforts because of this unjustifiable act of preferring money over the wellbeing of the people. There is no reason for this to be be a transitional zone because there is no transition, There is a distinct seperation between the industrial and this residential area created by nature alone. If you propose to do this you are creating many environmental and social issues that are not sound policy no matter what your agenda is. There must be sound, reasonings and a definitive purpose behind this rezone other than someone has spent money on some land. This cannot be done because someone thinks it would be a nice gesture. This is a demoralizing unethical act that would be unforgivable ifpersued any farther. Too rezone would be to exact more taxes on my family wich already have enough hardships as it is with this current economy and the socialist regime that is now in office on the national level, We have need of every dime we have left over to live on. Why sould you impose an unconstitutional act upon the people when this area already has an agreement with this city zoning commission restricting any such action? It makes me suspect motives and leadership abilities. Let alone your concern for the people. Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, FOR THE PEOPLE not for big money, the respecting of persons, or big government. I admonish you strongly to please fore -go these efforts to create -135- further hardships upon this residential area and its occupants. With great expectancy of your compassion, wisdom, and reconsideration on this matter. Thanks, Marc and Lois Bisset and family Be Yourself @ mail.com! Choose From 200+ Email Addresses Get a Free Account at www.mail.com! -136- A February 1, 2009 p ��pp9 N Dear Kenai Planning and Zoning Commissioners, I have lived at 403 McCollum Drive since November 4, 1988- It was our first home and we w Ye very excited to be moving in. We had house hunted all over Kenai and in Nikiski. We could have chosen a larger home in Woodland or other Kenai neighborhoods but fell in love with this home the first time we pulled in the driveway. The Rural atmosphere of the neighborhood, the church across the street, having an acre to ourselves, and living close to the schools and grocery stores were all part of the appeal that helped us make our decision. Just as we were preparing to close on the house, a report came in that the private water well was not adequate. The seller quickly brought in equipment to hook our home up to Kenai city water and sewer. We were glad for that but a little disheartened. The heavy equipment and the process of digging water and sewer lines drastically changed the look of our lot as they took out the trees on the front of our lot that had provided a lot of privacy. You could now see our house from the road_ We had an opportunity to back out of the deal but losing the trees was not a deal breaker for us. We knew we could replant trees and put in grass and create a beautiful yard with a little bit of work. That is exactly what we did; making planting trees a special family project. The trees were the same height as our two little boys and they took great pride in planting them and watching them grow. Those trees are as tall as the house now and the boys take their children out to show them the trees they planted when they themselves were small. The trees now provide a nice natural barrier and privacy for our home. We are glad to have them as we lost many of the older trees on our property from beetles. I have heard many reasons why the Papa Jo property should be rezoned to Limited Commercial with the primary reason I keep hearing being because all the trees were cut down. I agree the piece is an eye sore as it stands now but there are many ways to fix that problem. Rezoning for commercial entities is not the only solution. Just as rezoning the whole corridor now to LC is not the only solution and only prevents an arbitrary spot zoning condition, creating a strip zoning situation. Nine years ago our neighborhood formed a "Lighthouse of Prayer" gathering in my living room on a weekly basis to pray for our neighbors and our city. Sometimes some of us went on prayer walks praying through the neighborhood. Red McCollum was one of the members who came regularly and ,prayed with us for the neighborhood. He also would pray for his children. He said, "Someday I won't be here to continue praying and I ask that you continue to pray for them for me." He taught us how to pray for them and entrusted the neighborhood and his children to us. January 5, is a special anniversary for those of us in this Rural Residential neighborhood. Debbie Sonberg had gone to the house of Red McCollum on this day seven years ago because he was not answering his phone and she felt the need to check in on him. That is what neighbors do. She entered the home of our beloved friend and found that he had passed away sitting in a chair in his living room. She picked up the phone and dialed 911. From 2 houses over, we heard and saw an ambulance arrive at the residence. My husband, Roy, barely took the time to slip on his shoes as he went running over to see if he could assist. I hopped in the car and drove over as I was expecting to accompany the ambulance to the hospital. On arrival, the Kenai ambulance crew met us outside the living room saying they were sorry, but there was nothing they could do. Red was gone. I called Colleen Ward so that she could begin to contact Red's family members. She came and we all hugged and cried as neighbors, and the family was called. -137- On January 1, 2002, many of us had gathered at my home to celebrate the New Year together. It was the last time I saw this man and the memory of that day is very vivid in my mind as I recall how happy and content he was mostlyjust watching us and chuckling to himself, With his passing we resolved to never forget the man of whom part of the neighborhood was named after and to honor his request to pray for it and his children. On January 11, 2002, we alongside his family buried Red. We will not stand by now and just let his property where his daughter, our friend, now lives be rezoned to anything commercial. We are a neighborhood of people who are neighborly, Around 600 B.C.E., the prophet Jeremiah sent a letter from Jerusalem to the exiled community of people in Babylon. In the letter, Jeremiah relayed a message to the people: 'Build houses and settle down, plant gardens and eat what they produce.... Increase in number there; do not decrease. Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper." Today we are still called to care about the community in which we live. Get involved; get serious about where you live become a part of the community. Becoming a part of the community can mean three things. Caring about the peace of the community -- making sure that the community is a safe place for all to live; connecting with the people of the community -- working together with others in the community to serve the community; and committing the community, its people and its needs to prayer -- coming together to pray for its peace and prosperity. My husband and I graduated from KCHS 29 years ago and have enjoyed the 20 years we have lived here in this home, in Kenai raising five children. We were creating a legacy for our family, planting berries, raising flowers, cultivating an apple orchard. Our son even married "the little girl down the street'. They bought the home directly behind us so the kids could grow up walking a path through the woods to grandmas. We put in another path creating a "secret garden" for them. When they come, the first thing they ask, "Can we go to the secret garden grandma?" They believe this will never end, that there will always be a treasure chest of sweets waiting for them. I have devoted a length of this time to serving the community, helping neighbors to help other neighbors and teaching my children to do the same. Now, because of the fighting we have to do to maintain what we have, my husband and I have begun house hunting in Nlk':skl 1 told him when we moved her-- that 1 would never move again. We planned to die here. I cannot begin to describe my agony. I urge you to vote "no" on recommending this rezone on the grounds that it will 1. Drastically affect the surrounding neighborhood residents as well as the majority of the residents being rezoned, 2. Create a strip zoning situation, 3. Does not comply with the Kenai City Code that states "the purpose of the LC zone is to create a transition from commercial to residential, and 4. No one in this neighborhood asked for this rezone, it was the sole desire of four members of the City Council Please protect the current zoning our neighborhood enjoys as well as have trusted to be protected. Sincerely, Janine Espy 403 McCollum Drive From: Debbie Sonberg [debbie sonberg@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 8:11 AM To: Carol Freas; Marilyn Kebschull Cc: Colleen Ward; Debbie & Russell Sonberg Subject: Opposed to any rezone of RR1 & Conservation to Commercial Please include my statement in the packet that I am OPPOSED to any rezone of RRl or conservation as described on the petition. I fully support the neighborhood report that is (or soon will be) submitted for inclusion in the P&Z packet for the February I l meeting. I will let the petition and neighborhood report reflect my position in greater detail. This email is to simply, officially register my opposition to this and any similar rezone to the RR MAPS neighborhood. Debbie Sonberg 410 Cinderella Street Kenai, AK 99611 90I-283-5880 Kristine A. Schmidt 513 Ash Avenue Kenai, Alaska 99611 g�7e (907) 283-7102 s February 4, 2009 My husband and I moved to the Kenai-Soldotna area in the early 1980s, and we lived in both Kenai and Soldotna. In 1985, we chose to buy a home in Kenai, rather than Soldotna where we both worked at that time. We chose Kenai (and the daily commute to Soldotna for many years) because Kenai bad a compact city center, and was not a sprawlscape like Soldotna. �Ve also believed that Kenai government, at that time, was more protective of ale quality of life for Kenai residents, than in Soldotna. I am opposed to the proposed rezone, PZ09-06, for the following reasons. A. DOTES NOT CONFORM RM TO COMPREHENSIVE PLANT. I ,personally participated in the Kenai comprehensive plan community workshops in (I believe it was) spring of 2002. The most memorable feature of those meetings to me: the great majority of people attending the workshops felt very strongly that they did not Thant Spur highway business strip development, They wanted business development to be in and around a core City Center, with strong residential neighborhoods around the city center. This is reflected several times in the Comprehensive Plan (see below): (1) Page 25: "The City's' dominant spatial pattern -- linear growth along the Kenai Spur Highway...fosters a weak, poorly defined city center. It also channels most local and through traffic onto the Kenai Spur Highway, whose roadside is KENAI'S VISUAL FRONT YARD." (2) Page 25: "The community has cited development of an identifiable, diverse, prosperous city center and a more attractive Kenai Spur Highway corrider as IMPORTANT PLANNING GOALS." (3) Page 20: "-The Proposed Land Use Plan (Maps 10 and ll) are to be used with the development policies to guide growth. The Proposed Land Use Plan is a generalized vision of a desirable pattern of land uses toward which the City has chosen to evolve. The zoning map and regulations are meant to implement the proposed plan." NOTE: Map 10, Proposed Land Use Plan, shows the highway strip along the proposed rezone to be NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL. (4) Page 26: "A common theme at the public planning workshops was that Kenai lacked a well-defined city center... Citizens generally agree that creating a strong, attractive, busy city center is a highly desirable planning goal." (5) Pages 30-34: Create a city center, discourage "highway -oriented, low -density, free- standing commercial buildings or land uses." r1 (6) Page 36: "Some residents complain about commercial 'strip development' along the Kenai Spur Highway." "On analysis, these concerns seemed aimed mainly at the appearance -- lack of landscaping, unattractive signage -- and poor access of some businesses and, to a lesser extent, the dispersed character of development." (7) Page 3T "Another issue of neighborhood concern is commercial development near residential areas as conditional uses or THROUGH REZONES, particularly along the Kenai Spur Highway. One of the goals of zoning is to achieve stable, livable residential neighborhoods by SFP AR ATMC, them frnm inrmm�atihla neec" This rezone proposal does NOT conform to the Kenai Comprehensive Plan (CP): 1. Comprehensive Plan - Map 10. CP Map 10 is the "Proposed Land Use Plan" for the City of Kenai., This map shows the "desirable pattern of land use" for the City. See CP 26. The proposed rezone area is currently zoned rural residential, consistent with Map 10. This proposed rezone to limited connnercial is right in the middle of one of these large "neighborhood residential" areas. Commercial development is not "desirable" for this area, according to Map 10. Map 10 was amended, this last May 2008, but the proposed land use plan for the proposed rezone area remained the same — neighborhood residential. 2. Allows and Encourages Commercial :Strap IPevelolament. This proposal opens up a large residential zone to highway business strip development, with no protection for "Kenai s visual front yard." See CP 25. The landscaping ordinance is cited by City staff, but that ordinance is extremely weak, and the City does not enforce it. See the strip mall next to Safeway as an example. It had a required landscaping plan, but the City allowed the developer to remove every single bit of vegetation, and replace it with a building and asphalt -- and no enforcement of the landscaping plan. In this strip mall development we see the future of this proposed rezone, 3. weakens 0b: Center. This proposal allows business development far away from the city center, which weakens the city center. This proposal encourages "highway oriented, low -density, free-standing commercial buildings" -- which the CP says should be discouraged. 4, Allows and Encourages Incompatible Commercial Development. This proposal would allow incompatible commercial development in the middle of a large residential zone, through rezoning. Nearby residences are not protected from potentially incompatible commercial development, because commercial development is specifically allowed n7 the Limited Commercial Zone., regardless of whether it is incompatible with nearby residential areas 0-.not, andthe adlaeent residential property owners have no recourse, This rezone :s exact],`,-' the type of rezone that the CP 37 says should not happen. B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - MAJOR REyfi'lPJTE WITHOUT PUBLIC INPUT. This proposal is a major rewrite of the Comprehensive Plan, with no community involvement allowed -- unlike with the Plan itself. This proposal has been singled out for the fast track, with no work sessions, just to accommodate the developer of one lot -- Tract A, Papa Joe's Subdivision Replat (Tract A). This Commission turned down a rezone application for that lot recently. C. PROPOSED REZONE - NO PUBLIC BENEFIT, The proposed rezone of this area -- both the pending rezone of Tract A, and this new rezone proposal -- has no benefit for the general public, but is exclusively for the benefit of the private owner of Tract A. I have not heard one single reason expressed for this rezone, that establishes a public benefit. I have only heard people voice their personal opinions that the lot as developed is ugly, and would be better off being developed according to the Tract A developer's -2- -141- proposed plan for a professional services "mall." However, these opinions don't express any PUBLIC benefit, just a private one, for the benefit of the developer. There are also many good arguments the opposite; for example: (1) rezoning to "fix" the ugly existing development sets a bad policy, that rewards bad actors; (2) Tract A could also be developed for attractive single or multiple family housing, or for many other purposes already allowed in the existing zones. No affected property owner applied for a rezone of this proposed area. This proposal is not related to any plan or design in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed lots are not mixed use -- the supposed rationale for rezoning the Thompson Park highway frontage from general commercial to litited commercial. There is no reason for this proposal EXCEPT to benefit the one Tract A developer. This new multi -lot proposal, which includes Tract A, appears to be a ploy to "cure" the spot zoning of Tract A through duplicating the prior proposed rezone of that parcel, and just adding a few more parcels to get around the spot zoning problem. Call this what you will -- it's still spot zoning. M REZONE PROCESS - ARBITFdAIRY, UNFg AIR, NOT COMPLIANT. Here are other reasons the two rezoning proposals for this area are arbitrary and unfair. F. No Rezone Standards. The Kenai Zoning Code contains virtually no substantive standards or criteria for a rezone --just a one acre lot minimum. A person who opposes the rezone has no way of knowing what facts to present or arguments to make against the rezone, because the final decision can be based on any reason, or no reason -- it can be completely arbitrary. Regardless of whether the Kenai Zoning Code contains standards, the Alaska Supreme Court developed a test in Griswold v. City of Homer for whether zoning amendments are constitutional. The rezone must: (1) be consistent with the comprehensive plan; (2) provide a benefit to the public, rather than primarily a benefit to a private owner; and (3) not be a small parcel (or small multi -parcel area) singled out for a use classification totally different from that of the surrounding area. This proposed rezone fails all three tests. At a minimurn, the desires of the people within the rezone or adjacent to the property to be rezoned should be given the same consideration or more than the applicant. There is only one lot owner (LaShot) in the proposed rezone that is on the record as consenting to the rezone -- the others in the proposed rezone, or those adjacent to it, either oppose the rezone on the record, or non -object, or have not responded on the public record (not counting the Ci'ty's lot; see below). It's wrong and bad public policy to force a rezone down the throats of the affected property owners; in the proposed zone and adjacent to it. 2. No Fair Hearing. The Planning and Zoning Commission hearing process itself can be unfair. There is no time for interested persons to submit comments into the Commission packet before the hearing. The general public has no idea what will be on the P&Z Commission agenda until AFTER the agenda and/or packet have been published, when it is too late to get a statement into the packet -- unless a person has inside information, or has personally received a notice of the rezone because of residing within 300 feet of the proposed rezoned area. For example, the Feb. 11, 2009 P&Z Commission meeting agenda was just published in today's (Feb. 4) morning newpaper, and the packet deadline is today at noon; leaving no time for the general public (not "in the know") to submit a comment for the packet. -3- -142- Commissioners and Planning staff make statements after the public hearing is closed that cannot be addressed by people opposed to the rezoning. Often, the applicant has an unlimited time to speak and answer questions, but the people opposed to the rezone are not given the same opportunities: I saw this happen with the prior Tract A rezone proposal. Planning staff advocate for the rezone, and the Commissioners give their testimony more weigh" than anyone else's (more on this below), People testifying are interrupted (losing their time), or thew testimony is stopped before their time is up. Favored testifiers (including the applicsant) are allowed to go past the time Limit, while unfavored testifiers are held strictly to the time limits. The City Manager has submitted a chart (dated 1 /9/09) which contains hearsay and misinformation. For example, the chart states that Eric Gerke supported the rezone, while Eric Gerke submitted a statement in the record opposing the rezone. The chart states that the Borough supports the rezone, while the Borough letter in the record states only non -objection, with conditions. The chart claims that the City "supports" the rezone, but the City Council (which decides these policy matters under the City Charter) has not taken a position on this rezone yet. The Commission should not accept any claim of a property owner's support (or opposition) on this chart, where the property owner has not submitted a written statement for the public record. 4. Unfair Advocaev, I am very concerned about the level of advocacy and lobbying by Planning staff on some rezone applications, such as the Tract A proposal, and this proposal. This advocacy biases the whole process from the beginning, because the Commission and the City Council give more weight to the staff report and testimony, which is evident from co nments I have heard from Commissioners at Commission meetings, and the City Council members at Council meeting. In addition, City staff has an unlimited time to advocate for the rezone, including after the public hearing, while the public is limited to 3 minutes each, and cannot address comments made by staff after the public hearing -- another unfair process. S. Appearance of Bias. I am also concerned that two P&Z commissioners who testified (by letter and in person, or both) in favor of the Tract A rezone before the City Council on 121,3108, might be voting on P4-09-06. These commissionser sshould recuse themselves from voting tonight, or be barred from voting, for conflict of interest -- because the Tract A rezone is included in PZ09-06. A public official cannot be both an advocate for one side, and a decision maker. It is obvious that these two commissioners have pre -judged this issue. Even though this type of conflict of interest does not appear to be covered by the City code, it is one well recognized in Alaska law (called "appearance of bias"). 6. Eaflure to Follow Zoning Code. As of yesterday, February 3, 2009, the property in the proposed rezonee had not been posted for the 10 day period, as required by KMC 14.20,280(d). According to KMC 14.20.280(d), "Failure to pznpeely post notices shall be grounds for deferral or denial of the application." Therefore, this rezone applicant should be denied or deferred. Also, one can't legally post the property within the proposed rezone without the consent of the property owner -- without consent, posting is trespassing. The very fact that the Zoning Code requires posting on the property within the proposed rezone means that rezoning cannot occur without the consent of all property owners within the proposed rezone. Im -143- Thank you for your consideration of these comments. � /Y Im From: Carol Freas Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 1:17 PM To: Marilyn Kebschull Subject: FW: Opposed to any rezone of RR1 & Conservation to Commercial Don't think you got this one. Corey From: Debbie & Russell Sonberg [mailto:sonberg@alaska.netJ Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 8:23 AM To: Carol Freas Cc: xcel@alaska.com Srubjectt Re: Opposed to any rezone of RR1 & Conservation to Commercial TO CITY OF KENAI I am OPPOSED to any rezone of RR1 or conservation as described on the petition. I fully support the neighborhood report that is (or soon will be) submitted for inclusion in the P&Z packet for the February 11 meeting. I will let the petition and neighborhood report reflect my position in greater detail. This email is to simply, officially register my opposition to this and any similar rezone to the RRI MAPS neighborhood. Russell Sonberg 410 Cinderella Street Kenai, AK 99611 907-283-5880 February 4 2009 -145- % : w Qtit CME1, sM *G w k« c » a!! «=y, 11 �y ... y , -- z-�� . -� ,:,>ur»i ybm »z� aP* mtz«z><«¥ OF NUMEROUS M PS REST 2 a -146- The City manager stated in a letter to the Council dated September 11, 2008, "if it's not broke why fix it" The Kenai Spur 14ighway corridor east of Kenai's commercial district beginning at Walker Lane on the south side of the highway and beginning at No -Name creek on the north side of the highway is not broke and is not in need o_ f fixing. On the contrary, it is working exceptionally well. It is this significant hub of residential and educational life intentionally segregated from commercial activity that contributes to the character and distinction of Kenai. This highway corridor just east of the commercial center is characterized by residential and educational life — children go to school, play sports, conduct concerts and plays; families run and walk their pets, ride bikes and roller blade on the walkways; the young and old play tennis and walk the track; club and school teams practice and play hockey games; children and adults alike come from the local area and around the state to orbit through the galaxies at the phenomenal and integral Challenger Center. This hub is a recognizable attribute that helps define the quality of life that attracts families and citizens to Kenai and distinguishes Kenai from Soldoma, Wasilla and the Muldoon and Spenard communities of Anchorage. This residential and educational hubs without commercial sprawl is an intended and recognizable attribute that has successfully developed Kenai as an idyllic place to live and raise a family. This hub of residential and educational life is not what is wrong with Kenai, it is what is right with Kenai. It is not broke so don't tKv_ to fix it. In this report the residents of the McCollum/Magic, Aliak, Princess and Spur (MAPS) area will address the proposed strip rezone in the following :Wanner: ®dispel widely propagated, but incorrect paradigms; *provide compelling legal roadblocks; * demonstrate clear conflicts with the Kenai. Comprehensive Plan; * outline violation of the Kenai Municipal Code; and ®discuss improprieties and probable illegalities surrounding the proposed rezone process. .�;%�,�t.•Y ':va'_ .'�. �:. �",%� �P -?�'� aka �_�` '."°� �; �$ ,. �� r �etY �l "d... : l�a:.. c ,1�= -`sari overwhelming majority of L j ty urc properly owners located in the adjoining parcels and Wnzm3 the propo3cd rezone area itself strongly ap use approval of the application being prepared by City Manager Rick Koch for the Kenai City Council to strip rezone a portion of the MAPS area from Rural Residential i (RR1) and Conservation to Limited Commercial (LC). We urge the elected and appointed officials of the City of Kenai to hear the voice of the people and to open-mindedly consider the following presentation. Before we can provide an analysis of this proposed rezone in light of the Kenai Comprehensive Plan, the Kenai Municipal Code, and the applicable legal precedent related to the rezone application, we must first clarify prime paradigms being widely propagated by city officials. To do justice to this process we must recognize these paradigms for what they are perceptions of reality. Perceptions of reality and reality can be, and often are, two completely different and contradictory things. False paradigms, when left uncorrected, result in prejudice. Decisions based on false paradigms are arbitrary. The decision regarding this rezone must he based on the actual realities, not on false paradigms or perceptions of pertinent reality. -147- False Paradlgua #1: What else are you going to do with this property? No one would want to love along the highway. The reality is that people want to and do live along the highway. In the specific area targeted for rezone the Sherry James family (Parcel 4505011) has rented her duplex fronting the Kenai Spur highway for the past 16 years. As a renter she could easily up and move if she so chose. She does not choose to do so. She likes living along the Kenai Spur Highway. Her neighbor, Glen Smith (Parcel 4505011) also has the option to rent elsewhere, but he too, chooses to live along the Kenai Spur Highway. Homeowners Perris, Falkenberg (Parcel 4506024) and Marcus and Lois Bisset (Parcel 4506004) also choose to live on the highway in the proposed rezoned area. The Bissets have plans to build a house with their son on a second parcel (Parcel 4506005) they purchased along the highway so he too can Pave in this area with his family. The tenants in the Scott Anderson (Parcel 4506016) and the Robert Gonzalez (Parcel 4506013) apartments could just as easily rent elsewhere, but they choose to Pave along the highway. It may be the preference of the city officials to not live along the highway. This preference should in no way be projected on the populace as a whole. See Exhibit P. False Paradigm 2: No houses have been built along this corridor of the highway for a lying time. it is a deteriorating area. The reality is that of the eight road frontage, privately owned properties being considered in this rezone, five have already been developed with residential housing. The Bissets home was built in the early 2000s. They purchased it shortly thereafter. They have since purchased the lot beside them and plan to build another house on this lot. In spite of the neighbor's offer to purchase the properties for residential uses, the Franklin T. & Kristie Worthanr lot, formerly owned by Hugh Chumley, was unavailable for purchase for residential use at any semblance of market value pricing for over a decade. MAPS owners have also made the Worthams aware of their desire to purchase lots from them. for residential uses. The only other remaining vacant lot is now owned by former city employee, Jack Lashot. From the inception of a .new community through its development, the properties along the road systems feeding that new community are quite naturally the first place homes are built. The most obvious reason includes convenient access to the rest of the community. Therefore, the Kenai Spur Highway corridor being targeted for rezone is one of the older and more maturely developed residential neighborhoods in the community. The slowing of new growth along this corridor is ..n indicator of maturity and avaiiabiln T, not undesiraNi;t}'. One has only to drive through the adjoining and surrounding neighborhood to recognize that this is not a deteriorating area. Several new homes have been built in recent years and in many cases these homes have been built as second homes by current residents of the neighborhood. It would not be a stretch to assume that people would be eager to vacate a deteriorating neighborhood. Instead of vacating, multiple owners have built second homes in this same neighborhood. Also demonstrated in this development is the care of the neighbors to preserve the "intent" of the zone and "the residential atmosphere" of an open, un-crowded, low density neighborhood. Residents are often choosing to place their single family dwellings on properties that could actually accommodate multiple dwellings. False Paradigm 93: It is an eye sore and therefore we must develop it commercially to make it more appealing. Prior to this property being clear cut this paradigm was non-existent. The reality may actually be that it is an eye sore to some, however there are many viable options to change that reality that do not include rezoning. The most obvious is re -forestation. A thorough listing of other viable and compliant alternatives is provided in Exhibit A on both page 4 and Attachnnent C. M False Paradigm *4: There is no commercial property available In Kenai so additional property needs to be rezoned for commercial use. In reality, one NMAPS owner discovered on a quick drive around Kenai, five undeveloped commercial properties for sale and observed numerous unoccupied developed properties, some of which he knows has been vacant for years. In further research, focusing only on undeveloped commercial properties, he learned the following: "A quick search on www.alaskarealestate.com reveals 14 undeveloped commercial properties in the Kenai area, nine of which are in Kenai or on the Spur 1-Iighway.(Listing #.07-824; Listing 9:07-16226; Listing 9:08.4053; Listing #:08-6677; Listing 4:07-12816; Listing #F:08-108 t9; Listing #:08-14452; Listing 4:04.3 i 0558; Listing 9:08-14359) Most striking is that "three (3) parcels of land are located near the Kenai Airport right in the heart of a rapidly growing retail area of the city. Neighboring development includes: Home Repot, Carrs Safeway, 3-Dears, and the Stanley Chrysler." (Listing: 08-14359) These lots are strategically located in the fastest growing commercial area in Kenai." "The City of Kenai is also considering rezoning nearly 1,080 acres of airport reserve lands surrounding the airport from conservation to light industrial use at this same time, a significant amount of land for future commercial development." (PiIIL HERMANEK: Peninsula Clarion, February 22, 2008) Another resident, with little effort located the multiple parcels represented in Exhibit B. Some of these parcels are raw land, others contain vacant buildings. Of the approximate 1500 linear feet of private property that is under threat of being rezoned only two are undeveloped lots that have not already been or have plans to be developed residentially. The assertion that these two lots are somehow going to mitigate a nonexistent shortage of commercial property is an unabashed distortion of reality. Perhaps this is not about availability, but about pricing. Or perhaps this is not about availability, but about directionality and the underlying, but unstated false paradigm, that in order for Kenai to progress it must develop easterly. False Paradigm #5: A required landscape ➢ offer will provide the separation needed to protect the residential neighbors from the commercial developments. If this were true, and the codified buffer provided a protective level of separation, Shen it would also be true that such a buffer could provide the same protective separation between the highway and the highway frontage residential development. City officials claim the frontage properties, although zoned RRI, are not suitable for residential development. They also claim the codified landscape requirements sufficiently buffer the non - compatible commercial development from the residential development. If the City had successfully codified landscape requirements that provided such an effective buffer it would be more sensible to apply the landscape requirement to RRI highway frontage then it would be to destabilize the entire neighborhood through rezone. A simple landscape buffer code could then mitigate the concern, albeit false, that no one wants to live along the highway. Unfortunately, the reality is that the landscape buffer prescribed in the landscape code (KNC 14.25.040) does not provide protective separation. It does not contain any required line of sight protection or separation. It does not contain any buffer requirements to minimize noise. It can be as ineffective as a ten foot wide perimeter of grass or gravel. Commercial enterprises that locate along a highway generally face the front of their buildings towards the highway for exposure. This leaves the far less attractive backside of the buildings, and often their respective dumpsters, facing the neighborhood with essentially no requirement of effective buffering. The City Planner may recommend a fence with trees as a buffer, but if this property is rezoned, that recommendation has no enforcement power. The City does not have the authority to impose this expense on an owner when it is not a zoning requirement. Line of sight and noise minimizing buffers are not a zoning requirement for the LC zone. smell ell False Paradigm 96. Everyone would much rather see Limited Commercial development than. sift triplexes. The reality is that IMAPS is a residential neighborhood consisting of a blend of family owned and occupied residences and rentals. The homeowners have co -existed with both landlords and tenants for numerous years. Many owners value the contribution of the tenants to the neighborhood. The MAPS neighborhood is bordered. on one side by two schools that house approximately 1000 kids, a kid -oriented hockey rink and the Challenger Center. The MAPS area is about family and about residential community and living. Many of the MAPS residents would, without hesitation, choose the six triplexes over the commercial development. The discriminatory references regarding this type of development (six triplexes) demonstrates a misplaced bias on the part of the city officials. The attempt of PZ07-06 to remedy the practice of making decisions "with conflict being resolved in favor of business" is apparently at risk. See Exhibit C (Ordinance PZ07-06) This paradigm is further exasperated by officials' assumption that `the type of construction most conducive to this cleared rural residential lot is probably multiple apartments ... up to d triplexes could be built on this lot ... Lowe's and W almart are here and with them, a need far more apartments to accommodate employee's receptive wages..." (Commissioner Koester, 1213/08, Council Meeting, Exhibit ®) The insinuation that the maximum number of triplexes allowed is the likely alternative to a rezone, or that the triplexes built would need to be low- ered quality confirms preconceived false paradigms. In step with existing development, it would be reasonable to assume that an owner may choose to put less than the maximum allotted number of structures on this property as has been done throughout the entire neighborhood. In addition, Exhibit E illustrates potential higher -end, quality triplex developments that would both enhance and be compatible with the existing zone and neighborhood. False Paradigm 97: if the neighbors woaald just worst with the city this could all be worked out. An owner asked the city officials at the 1/5/09, public meeting for clarification on process, "I'f the neighbors and original applicant worked together to prepare a Conditional Use Permit that met all parties needs and all parties agreed on, would the city work with us?" The City Planner responded by, "It is not something that I do." The reality is that the neighbors and the original applicant did meet and discuss alternatives on various iC s I 'lie course o he proceedings} h w Cie of= l o "cis".nn rS.. .. fit. .::.te neighbors diSCrr✓erei;. iscaL tile. -y aiCiaLS were peruy at1Ci erroneously counseling the applicant by: a) telling him a Conditional Use Pennit (CUP) is too restrictive when the reality is that a CUP can be written as liberally as the applicant would have required, b) asserting that the CUP would be tenuous and awkward to maintain and transfer if ever it became necessary to sell the properties, and c) leading hire to believe rezoning his property would be a relatively quick, non -controversial and easy process. The evidence seems to suggest that City officials are exploiting the original application, for an illegal spot zone, to drive their own agenda. In so doing, the original applicant, whether willing or unwillingly, is caught in the cross fire. Furthermore, the City's actions make it much. less Iikely there will ever be a collaborative solution between the neighbors and the original applicant and greatly escalate the risk of an extended and costly process. False Paradigm : "Highest and hest case" of this deteriorating highway corridor is commercial development. The reality is that the "highest and best use" is not a codified standard for planning and zoning and can be a dangerous target when applied in the sensitive arena of public land management. This nomenclature is typically used by appraisers, assessors and developers and relies heavily on potential monetary values. The complexity -)f determining the "highest and best use" intensifies in the political arena. of planning and zoning and requires n -150- officials to focus on an expanded array of criteria which encompasses suitability of zoning, compatibility with surrounding uses, conformity with the prevailing comprehensive plan, greater public safety and welfare and legal. precedents, among others. False Parad'o m #9: The MAPS residents do not have a clear understanding of what the LC zone provides. The reality is that the MAPS residents clearly understand that the LC zone provides twenty three additional "Principal Permitted Uses" consisting of: professional offices, restaurants, clinics, governmental buildings, day care centers, dormitories, boarding houses, greenhouses, tree nurseries, gunsinithing, printing, taxidermy, art studios, barbers, beauticians, dressmakers, dry cleaners, self-service laundries, fitness centers, photographic studios, tailors, tarming salons and massage therapists. Furthermore, LC permits a decrease in lot size from IZ I to LC for various uses ranging from 62.5% for all "Principal Permitted Uses" and a. decrease to 55.81% for a "Conditional Use Permit' creating greater density of development. The LC minimum lot width, setbacks and maximum coverage and height are the same as RRI and the building footprint is not to exceed three thousand square feet unless variance is sought and granted. Landscaping requirements do exist, but offer no guarantee of line of sight or substantive noise buffering quality. Once the property is rezoned any of the twenty-three "Principal Permitted Uses" is permitted, and may be developed to the most minimum density requirements. Finally the residents of MAPS clearly understand that according to Kenai. Municipal Code the "LC zone is established to provide transifnon areas between commercial and residential districts." The reality is that the MAPS residents clearly understand that if the proposed rezone is approved the following scenario could compliantly oemr. Surrounded by residential and educational development the Wortham- Chumley 2.97 acre parcel of land alone could become the location of approximately nine enterprises that could include, among other things: A restaurant, and A gunsinither, and A barber or beautician, And A tanning salon, and A self-service laundry, and Amassage therapistand A dry cleaners, and All additional traffic created by such. False Paradigm #f 0: A professional dental office is a good fit for this neighborhood so it should be rezoned LC. The reality is that if a professional dental office was a good fit for this neighborhood it should be conditionally permitted because the above stated scenario is not a good fit for this neighborhood. The application for the proposed rezone is not about a dentist office, it is not about a professional building, and it is not about five professional buildings — all scenarios discussed by the original applicant. The application before the City officials to rezone this critically sensitive area of the Kenai Spur Highway is an application for restaurants, gunsmithing, fitness centers, Laundromats, tanning salons and any other of the additional twenty-three principally permitted uses. Once the rezone is approved Commissioners and Councilors have no authority whereby they can pick and choose. A rezone blows the door wide open to any one of these uses and a compliant "buffer" could be as minimal as a strip of grass ten feet wide along the perimeter. The full spectrum of these uses must be factored into responsible decision making. -151- In our current scenario where City officials are bath the applicant for rezone and the governing body that will. determine if the rezone is approved, the bar must be extremely high in terms of carrying the burden of proof to justify what is obviously an acutely challenged, very controversial and high impact decision. Nonetheless, the City has failed to grovide adeapuate ustification for their positions and recommendations presented in staff reports as found throughout the record and provided in public meetings. Due to City unposed deadlines, at the time of this writing, the City Administration has provided two documents available to the public. First, in defense of their recommendation to approve the proposed spot rezone, there is a staff report to Planning and Zoning dated 9/10/08. Second, in defense of their recommendation to approve the subsequent proposed strip rezone, we have the staff report to Planning and Zoning dated 12/22/08. Additionally Planning and Zoning Chair, Jeff Twait and Commissioner Karen Koester provided personal statements to the Kenai City Council on. 12/3/08, which are now part of the public record. The officials entrusted with the City's welfare are encouraged by the MAPS residents to open mindedly and comprehensively evaluate all pertinent facts. A thorough and objective analysis of the pertinent guiding policies, regulations, and legal precedents will provide ample and compelling cause to reject the proposed rezone. The undeniable history of the MAPS area is a reality that neither the Council nor citizenry of Kenai has the prerogative to ignore. The 1985 assessment and rezone did occur. The 1,998 Churnley Conditional Use Permit application said subsequent reiteration of the record did occur. It was crystal clear in 1985, it was indisputably clear in 1998, and, today, it is still a fact of record that the City of Kenai did and said something that induced an expectation of the owners of the MAPS properties. The owners of these properties and new buyers reasonably relied on this expectation to invest in upgrades and additions to their homes and, in multiple instances, build new homes. The City's inconsistent and unconscionable rezone will cause detriment to the MAPS owners. The City of Kenai will be estopped from granting a rezone from the RRI to the LC zone. In general, estoppel protects a party who would suffer detriment if each following tests is riot: A second party has done or said something to induce an expectation in the first party a The first party relied (reasonably) on the expectation... ® ... and would suffer detriment if that expectation were not met. (Wikipedia) First test. 66A second war& 'leas dame or said something to induce an expectation" A review of the history of this neighborhood and its interaction with both the Kenai City Council and Planning Commission will show a highly collaborative effort of the majority of property owners cooperating or working with the City to preserve and maintain the low density residential character of the neighborhood. In 1985, the citizens of the MAPS neighborhood petitioned the City offering to pay 20% assessments for sewer and water improvements and to have a say in future development of the neighborhood contingent upon the city rezoning the defined area from RR to RR1. Furthermore, the City's record of the event revealed that the understanding of the resident's was clear that they would "have a say in how the neighborhood is developed in the future" with particular upfront understanding that the intent of the residents was to avoid a "patch work type if development, almost a Spenard-like type of development..." (Board of Adjustment Packet, BA-56) G -152- Significant to the history is die fact that due to the prosperity of the state the City, prior to this period, had provided the same service without assessing adjacent landowners." (See Exhibit F) The owners ultimately paid 25% assessment for the installation of sewer and water and the City rezoned the area from RR to RRI . During the 1998 Chumley Conditional Use Permit application process this agreement was revisited and the records regarding the "1985 Deal" were again reviewed,. ExhlbOt G provides a page form the 1985 petition, served as the catalyst to the assessments and rezone, and states, "This petition shall be valid only upon the prior filing with the appropriate administrative official for the City or Kenai of a valid petition, containing sufficient signatures, for the rezoning of substantially the area described above, from RR to RRL" Exhibit H provides a letter from former City Finance Director, Charles A. Drown, which states "—as as with the first petition we received on February 5, 1985, it is contingent upon the validity of a rezoning petition:" and later states, "The petition appears to be valid, pending the validity of the rezoning petition." It is a matter of record that the owners offered, with condition, to pay and did ultimately pay the assessments and that the City did subsequently rezone the identified properties. These exhibits inextricably link the payment of the assessment with the rezone to RIU. Not only did the City do or say something that built the expectation of the land owners, but the City records prove the City's actions were and. are "based on full knowledge of the facts" of the "1985 Deal." This presentation of the facts and the records of the City are sufficient evidence. If there is dispute of these issues affidavits can be taken from the people involved in the 1.985 Deal. It is irrelevant whether the current Council members agree or disagree with the actions of their predecessors. Idistory can not be re -written. The record is clear. The City induced an expectation. Second test; "Thee ffirst warty reiied freasonably) on the expectation—" It was reasonable for the owners to rely on the exanectag2aa created in the 1985 Deal. The owners negotiated a deal Mien they made an offer to pay assessments, have their properties rezoned and a have a say in the future development of the MAPS properties. The City accepted the owners' money and rezoned the MAPS properties as requested to the more restrictive RRI zone. . T'. e reaS072abilln7t1?JW* trot the expeetarlcjn v_ntttat y ereatP_.d, nsa ! �b 5, g,R/ac again rrviterated. in yg;a 19,98 Chumley Conditional Use Permit application process. "It is clear that the city understood the connection between the assessment and the rezone (from RR to RRI) as indicated in a letter from former Finance Directory, Charlie Drown. (Board of Adjustment Packet, BA-6b, page 4) Inherent in due process is the right of the residents to be heard. Burden of proof for exceptional uses rests with the applicant and has not been met. Exceptional uses should be evaluated against rigorous and restrictive standards. The neighbors have supported their chosen direction for the city with well documented, rational "proof' that is not even their obligation to provide_ There is no logical reason for allowing the "1985 Deal" issue to escalate beyond this level at potential expense and liability to all taxpayers of this city." (Appeal of PZ98-12 Commission. Decision, #8) The reliance on the expectation of RRI zoning has been repeatedly demonstrated through the immense level of investment owners have made in upgrades and additions to their current homes, building new homes, and in multiple incidences, the same owner building a second house in the MAPS area. Examples include: 7 -153- L The Becks remodeled the floors, kitchen and bathroom inside their house and installed a porch and fencing. 2. The Bissets bought and have conducted two remodels to their home on a lot they have now been "notified" is a newly proposed rezone property. 3. The Bissets bought a second lot to build a house for and with their son on a parcel that they have now been "notified" is newly proposed rezone property. 4. The 17ixes purchased two larger parcels and built their dream homes adjoining the newly proposed strip rezone properties. 5. The Daniels purchased one of the large parcels from the Dix and built their three bedroom, two and one half bathroom, house with three car garage adjoining the proposed rezone properties. 6. The Espy's son married the Sonberg's daughter and purchased a home in the neighborhood based on the multigenerational expectation regarding the MAPS area. They have made weatberization and professional painting improvements over the last three years, 7. Steve Gille built two new homes and sold them as single fancily dwellings a block away from the newly proposed rezone properties. S. The McCollums added an entry way to the home they owned for approximately the last fifty years on a lot they have now been "notified" is a newly proposed rezone property. 9. The Piatts built an addition doubling the size of their house and, subdivided out a lot which they sold to a daughter who wanted to locate in the neighborhood. 10. The Schrags purchased the vacant lot next to them and approximately one block from the proposed rezone parcels. 11. The Sonbergs added a two story addition to the home they currently occupy. 12. The Sonbergs are also building a second house right next to their current home less than a block away from the newly proposed rezone properties. 13. The Wards built a two-story addition to their current home which is located less than a block away from the proposed rezone. 14. The Wilshusens (Piatt's daughter) are currently building a new two story, two bedrooms, three and one half bathroom house with two car garage, from the lot they purchased from Piatt's in 2007 and on a lot adjoining the proposed rezone. 15. The Wiks built an oversized two car, detached garage less than a block from the proposed rezone. 16. The Winegardens built a greenhouse, two storage sheds, added a chain link fence along the front and back, paved their wiriveway, installed underz.ouard area lighting and Dower outlets and landscaped, 17. The Wrights currently live in a house on McCollum Drive they have owned since 1983, and are building a second and planned ultimate dream home adjacent to the newly proposed rezone properties. 18. Others invested tens of thousands of dollars in upgrades and additions within a block or two of the newly proposed strip rezone properties. Third test: ".— and would suffer detriment if that expectation were not met." The past, current and long term expectation of the overwhelming majority of MAPS residents is to dwell in a low density, residential community. The MAPS residents have relied on this expectation and made substantial. investments and significant life decisions based on this expectation. The approval of the proposed rezone will inescapably cause unconscionable detriment. The detriment will take many forms including, but not limited to: ® a variety of sources of financial hardship, increased traffic negatively impacting road conditions and potentially resulting in new assessments to owners to further upgrade roads to address this negative impact, Q SUM • causing further danger to exceptionally vulnerable pedestrian (students) and road traffic (new, first time drivers), ® landlords' loss of current and long term tenants, • Line of sight degradation imposed by commercial activity, ® destabilization of the residential character of the neighborhood spiraling into decreased quality of life, • open invitation and subsequent introduction of undesired human traffic frequenting any variety of "personal use" businesses permitted in the LC zone (e.g.: fast food restaurants, laundromats, hair salons, gunsmith, coffee stands, massage therapist, fitness centers, etc.), • intrusion of a non -compatible commercial wedge imposed between fully compatible uses of educational and recreational with residential uses, e unknowable and unpredictable development environment regarding home investment, property improvements and neighborhood enhancement projects; and • extreme anxiety and other health issues directly caused by all the other previously listed detriments. The financial hardship, albeit inevitable, is further exasperated by its unpredictable nature. If the commercial developments that might ultimately spring up are tastefully developed and quality establishments, those living next to or near the property will likely experience increased assessed value creating an increased property- tax burden. If the commercial developments that might ultimately spring up are poorly developed and low-grade establishments, the property values may substantially decrease. In both scenarios the obvious sale -ability of the property is likely to decrease. For those whose properties are rezoned against their will, the detriment is undeniably unconscionable. The increased assessments and subsequent tar, burden will make it difficult, if not impossible, for some residents to be able to afford to stay in their homes. It likely will cause a loss of both long and short term residential tenants, loss of desirability to replacement tenants and prevent some owners of rental properties from even. being able to break even. Therefore, the necessary elements of estoppel are present. In addition to the necessary elements, there are other considerations relevant to this legal doctrine. Additional consideration relating to egtopgel and uunsi-estotattmle Additional considerations also show that the City would be estopped or quasi-estopped preventing the City from continuing to force this rezone on the neighborhood. Three Alaska cases in particular provide a strong basis for these considerations. They include Dressel v. Weeks, Jamison v. Consolladrdlead DR., Inc. and the Municipality of Anchorage v. Schneider. We learn that quasi -estoppel "precludes a party from taking positions inconsistent with one he or she has previously taken where circumstances render assertion of second position unconscionable." Jamison v. Consolidated Util., Inc., 576,P.2d 97, 102 (Alaska 1978) "In essence, the doctrine protects the integrity of the judicial process by preventing litigants from "blowing both hot and cold" where the assertion of inconsistent positions would be unconscionable." (Alaska Lava Review: Michael. D, Moberly and Laura L. Farley, Blowing I-Iot and Cold On The Frozen Tundra:..." I) The "unconscionable" standard is generally defined as grossly unfair, unjust, inequitable, oppressive, or unduly harsh. (Alaska Law Review: Michael D. Moberly and Laura L. Farley, Blowing Hot and Cold On The Frozen Tundra:..." I) The act of rezoning the RRI properties along this small stretch of the Kenai. Spur Highway corridor unquestionably meets this standard. Increased tax burdens and/or decreased market values. degradation of quality of life and the potential taking of property as a result of this rezone is oppressive and unduly harsh. The City has plenty of just and fair options available to them. The City of Kenai has over 9 -155- 110,000 feet of Kenai Spur Highway frontage. Of that total, only approximately 3000 linear feet of the Kenai Spur Highway frontage is RRI. Of the 3000 linear feet of R21, approximately 1.500 feet are owned by the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District and the Alaska Mental Health Land Trust. Of the remaining 1500 feet of privately owned RRI frontage, only two lots have not been developed or have plans to be developed residentially. That leaves only two undeveloped privately owned lots along the Kenai Spur Highway in any RR 1 zone that is not currently developed. The detriment caused by this proposed rezone to the many other owners in the area who oppose the rezone and have approximately a collective $4.1 million in assessed value to benefit a couple of speculative owners who have approximately a collective $56,400 in assessed value is grossly unfair, unjust, inequitable. According to the .Kenai Zoning Code (14,20.080 & 14.20.150) and Development Requirements "fables (14.24,010), RRI and LC zones are in conflictwith each other and are necessarily inconsistent, * RR] provides low density residential development while LC allows lot sizes to decrease to 62.5% for the same permitted purposes and 55.81 % for a conditional use. According to statements made by the City manager at the 1!5/08, informational meeting, the original applicant has already indicated he will seek variances to increase the sizes of his buildings from the maximum allowed in the LC zone. Placing larger commercial buildings on smaller lots is inconsistent R ith loin density residential development. ® RRI creates stable and attractive residenti.aI environment andprohibits violation of the residential character of the environment while LC permits twenty-three additional commercial uses both violating and destabilizing the residential environment. * RR1 prohibits heavy traffic. The Code claims LC: allows "low to medium" traffic as defined by the code, but in reality a fitness center in the winter, a tree nursery or greenhouse in the summer months, a coffee stand and fast food restaurant year around are all examples of businesses that comparatively can generate high volumes of traffic. * RRI separates residential structures and preserves the rural, open quality of the environment while LC has twenty-three more additional, commercial, permitted uses than the RRI that can be more densely populated and thwarts the open quality of the environment. The "Alaska Supreme Court also has concluded that the (estoppel) doctrine may alg.& in administrative and other quasi judicial (Alaska Law Review: Michael D. Moberly and Laura L. Farlev; Blowing ldot and Cold On The Frozen Tundra:..." 111) Municipality ofAnchorage v. Schneider demonstrates this reality. The City of Kenai is not exempt from the application of this legal doctrine. Ssnoffiaa A!M ®f' ;l:st®nruei The estoppel of the proposed rezone can be summarized using the pertinent issues identified in ".lamison v. Consolidated Utilities, Inc. " I. An advantage had been gained or a disadvantage produced -- the MAPS residence will be greatly disadvantaged by the rezone to LC. 2. The magnitude of the inconsistency -- in light of the 1985 Deal and the reiteration of the resident's understanding and continued desire to remain RRI in 1998, a rezone to LC is inconsistent with RRI and a rezone to LC is inconsistent with allowing the owners to "have a say in how the neighborhood is developed in the future," 3. Whether the changed circumstances tended to justify the inconsistency — destabilizing one of only two RR.1 neighborhoods in the entire City of Kenai is unjustifiable, as is defying the good faith agreement with the citizenry conveyed through the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. 10 -156- 4. Whether the inconsistency was relied ¢peat -- the expectation created was reasonably relied upon and. substantial investments and significant life decisions were made based upon that reliance. 5. Whether the fwst assertion was made with fall tmowledge of the facts —the records of the City, the 1998 Appeal of PZ98-12 (see Exhibit 8), the document submitted by NEAPS at the 12/3/08, Council meeting and this document demonstrate both parties have full knowledge of the facts. In light of a fair an honest evaluation of the 1995 Deal, it would be an egregious betrayal of trust for the officials of the City to approve this rezone. The very real and present likelihood of "inverse condemnation" should this rezone be approved must be considered. Obviously the MAPS resident are not the ones that will make this determination, but serveral indicators give cause for pause. Basically stated from a layperson's perspective inverse condemnation is a legal tenn that describes a situation in wluch a government body "takes" private proeprty, but fails to pay the just compensation required by the Constitution. A taking can be physical or reglatory by nature. Some types of government action are categorically treated as takings. Agins v. City of Tiburon (1980) provides an example wherein the Court declared that regulation, such as the zoning ordinance challenged in that case, "effects a taking if the ordinance does not substantially advance legitimate state interests ... or denies an owner economically viable use of his land" in which case just compensation must be given. Due to the "ripeness" standard clarified in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank ofJohnson City (1985), which requires that "the government entity charged with implementing the regulations has reached a final decision regarding the application of the regulations to the property at issue" (p. 186), it is premature to make this judgment. The MAPS residents do submit to the public record their concern regarding inverse condemnation and believe that approval of the rezone will deprive landowners of "all economically beneficial use of the landowner's property or defeated the landowner's reasonable investment - backed expectations" (Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, 2001, p. 618). URAWLSIONAMIUM Regulatory taking is an additional legal aspect of the proposed rezone. The fifth amendment of the United States Constitution states, among other things, that "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." By destabilizing the livability of the MAPS residential neighborhood the City may be creating a scenario wherein residents may no longer find it suitable to remain in their homes. By going too far the City deprives the landowner of the value of his land "When government regulation of private property "goes too far" and deprives the landowner of the value of his land through enactment of a statute, promulgation of a regulation, refusal to issue a permit, or declaration of land as a wetland, as endangered species habitat or as unsuitable for mining, such a taking also may be compensable. This is known as a REGULATORY RY TAKING or INVERSE CONDEMNATION." Source: http://wxxrny.regulatoTytaking.com/pages/1/index.htm 11 -157- The significance of the Kenai Comprehensive Plan (PLAN) was fully addressed in the "Response Regarding Application to Rezone O dinance No. 2362-2008." The principles presented therein still apply. We have submitted to public record. the complete document and again ask the City officials to review Exhibit A for an in-depth analysis of this rezone in light of the PLAN. Furthermore, Exhibit d is a letter dated 1/26/09, and submitted to the City by MAPS resident and attorney Chuck Winegarden wherein he addresses the inconsistency of the proposed rezone to the PLAN. In summary the Alaska Statutes requires that the City: "...adopt a comprehensive plan AS 29.40.030(b). A comprehensive plan, is a "compilation of policy statements, goals, standards and maps for guiding the physical, social and economic development of the city" (AS 29.40.030(a). It serves as a long-range policy guide for development of a city as a whole. City land use regulations are to be "in accordance" with the comprehensive plan AS29.40.040(a). Requiring zoning decisions to be in accord with the comprehensive plan "helps to `guard against prejudice, arbitrary decision -making, and improper motives' by providing substantive standards against which to measure individual zoning decisions." (Quoting South Anchorage Concerned Coalition., Inc. v. Coffey, 862 P 2d 168, 174 (Alaska 1993) Price v. Dabl (3115196), 912 P 2d 541 (touchngo.com/sp/htirillsp-4326.ht,-n) Furthermore, the Alaska Planning Commission Handbook requires City policy to be guided by the PLAN. The MAPS owners maintain and the facts set forth herein show that this rezone is indirect violation of the PLAN. In the staff report dated 1.2/22/08, staff correctly asserted in their "Evaluation of Application" that: "During the creation of the 2003 Comprehensive Plan, development concerns along the Kenai Spur Highway corridor evere discussed extensively. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the issue of the neighborhood concern relating to commercial development near r csidciitial areas as conditional uses or through rezones, parocularly along the Kenai Spur highway. F%owever, the Plan provides guidelines to address these concerns (Page 37)" At this point in the staff evaluation, other than to simply state with no further explanation, that the LC "meets the recommendations of... MI, C1143 and CIvi4," staff, in essence, disregards the PLAN and launches into their defense of the "Limited Commercial Zone." It is imperative that an objective evaluation of the PLAN be factored into the examination and decision making process. The following points summarize the relevant issues of the PLAN. Number One Goal of the PLAN The number one goal of the PLAN is to "create an attractive, (Page 2) which the PLAN declares currently has "ample inventory of privately owned vacant land" (Page 25) and "the gross supply of privately owned, developable, appropriately lately warred sites appears more than adequate for future development needs." (Page 14) "Kenai cannot afford an abandoned business area." (Page 36) Approval of this rezone "fosters a weak, poorly designed city center." (Page XX) The PLAN is incontestably clear on this point. The City has failed to substantiate or provide any level of proof regarding the need to abandon the city center and propagate easterly development away from the city center. The unfounded claim by City officials that "there is 12 sm no commercial property available in the city center" is simply not true as is illustrated in Exhibit D. The PLAN very plainly communicates that something is broke with Kenai, and it is the struggling city center. The PLAN clearly promotes addressing this problem as the number one goal of the City. Although the IMAPS area is not broke and is not in need of fixing, the city reinter is broke and needs ffnxin . Approving this rezone would be a breech in the policy outlined in the PLAN. Approving this rezone would also be an arbitrary action that: will serve only to exacerbate the City center deterioration. Finally, approving this rezone alters the private sector dynamic of supply and demand through capricious governmental intervention and unwarranted discrimination that provides no economic benefit to the citizenry merely to benefit one, possibly two, landowners. Number Two Goal of the PLAN The number two goal of the PLANT is to "protect and rejuvenate the livability of residential neighborhoods." (Page 2) Of particular concern to the citizens is the "strip development" along the Kenai Spur Highway including both the appearance and the dispersity of character. (Pages 36, 37) it is not a stretch to conclude "dispersity" would be mixing commercial *Atli residential. It is unconscionable that in an evaluation of the application as it relates to this very strip rezone, city officials would fail to convey in full the most pointedly relative statement in the entire PLAN: "Another issue of neighborhood concern is caaaaaapmereW development near Fesiden icad areas as conditional use permits or through rezones, g ar dcul ardy along the Kenai Su FF:Lh wots, One of the off zoning as to achieve stable, livable residential neighborhoods sWp aratdng them frame ineoLnpaatdble eases. This is best achieved by zoning sufficient suitably located land for all expeeted noses, then adhering to the zoning plan." (Page 37) [emphasis added] The PLAN has already established supply of "sufficient suitably located land for all expected uses" and directs the City specifically in this scenario to adhere to the existing zone. `fhe City has failed to provide any justification for doing otherwise. Furthermore, they have failed to demonstrate how LC can mitigate the issues of incompatibility and destabilization. The PLAN states "The community has cited development of an identifiable, diverse prosperous ci eenter rind a more attractive Kenai Spur Flighway corridor as important goals." The City's interpretation implies that tlus is a mandate for "diverse" commercial development &long the "Kenai Spur Highway." This guidance from the City is an obvious misinterpretation of the PLAN and an unmistakable disregard for the policy it has established. Furthermore, the City should "promote an orderly overall pattern of land that... maintains the quality of Rlialkg development." (Page 15) q '._ g- ... ,it. 12 .f�:,l -_a+4 ,' e.�:. "� C. .�,.. �. ,. r'%�' C. r�-k..b.n! 1. x .. ,�•_a : t� � ,_f'?.. .e. -:' a _ The Land Use P➢an Map I The PLAN contains Maps 10 and 11 - "Land Use Plan," City of Kenai, 2008. See Exhibit A, page 5, paragraph 1, for a detailed discussionof the MAi'S. At the 1/5(09, information meeting, the City Planner told attendees that the Land Use PIan maps were not realty planning maps at all, but rather maps that reflect what currently exists. The City Planner admittedly does not view the PLA.N's "Land Use Phan" maps as a plan to guide growth. Consequently, the Planner is capriciously recommending a rezone that is in direct nonconformity 13 SF�'11 wiith the "Land Use Ilan" maps. The maps that reflect what currently exists are in the PLAN — the are called "Existing Land Use" (Map 4) and "Existing Zoning" (Map 6). fit reality, the "Land Use Plan" maps are authentic planning grans intended to gLaideegrowth and decision Braking relative to that growth: ® To other citizens who participated in the comprehensive planning process, ® To the general. citizenry of Kenai who recognize that a "plan" by any other name is still a "plan," ® According to Alaska Statutes 29.40.030(a) which states, "The comprehensive plan is a composition of policy statements, goals, standards, and maps for ian ng the physical, social and economic development.. , ", and o According to the City PLANT itself in which it states, "The Proposed Land Use Plan (Maps 1.0 and 11) are to used adth the development policies to guide growth. The Proposed Land Use Plan is a generalized vision of a desirable pattern of land uses toward which the City has chosen to evolve. The zoning map and regulations are means to implement the proposed plan." (Page 26) Commercial Lznd Use Development Policies of the PLAN Contrary to the staff report, the proposed strip rezone does not meet the recommendations of the Commercial Land Use Development Policies (CM.) found in the PLAN (Page 37). The staff report doesn't provide even so much as a pretense of trying to meet the most minimal burden of proof. The report succinctly and without foundation states, "The L C zone meets the recommendations for Commercial Land Use Development Policies CMI, CM3, and CM4 (City of Kenai Comprehensive Plan, Page 37)." The error of the IgIlXsis is that it essentially focuses on Hnnw the newly deveHaaxsed P C z®®e eaagneaHies with the PLAN. Frank, it is totally irrelevant whether or not the LC zone, itself, meets the Commercial Land Use Development Policies outlined in policy. The analysis must focans on whether or not the proposed rezone meets the criteria outlined in the PLAN. A cursory review of CMI demonstrates its complete irrelevancy to the proposed rezone. The policy states, "Promote adaptive reuse of vacant commercial buildings h3 the city center and along the Kenai Spur highway." This policy addresses vacant commercial buildings, of which there are none in the proposed rezone area. Staring the "i,imued Commercial One meets tile recommendation for ... CMj" may or may not be true, but it 1: definitely arbitrary to claim the proposed rezone meets the CMI policy. Similarly, LM3 states, "Update existing guidelines for commercial development." The LC zone may be an attempt to respond to this policy, but a comprehensive analysis of the PLAN renders this policy inannlgcal to the proposed rezone area which is currently, and according to the PLAN must remain, residentially developed. LM4 provides a list of factors that must be considered "In designating (zaning) areas for commercial uses" including "The use has adequate access to a collector or arterial level street" and "Potential conflicts with adjacent non-commercial uses have been minimized through site design, landscaping or other appropriate measures." To date the City Administration, Commission and City Council have altogether failed to address "tine access factor" and, other than a deficient mention of landscape buffers, the "potential conflicts with adjacent non-commercial apses," The City has negligently shed their rightful burden of proof as it relates to this proposed rezone in light of CM4 and instead has made the woefully inadequate statement that "the LC zone meets this recommendation." 14 -160- Predictable Setting For Future Investment Promoted Ily the PLAN The City manager asserted at the 1/5109, information meeting that "zoning is a very dynamic animal. Not only do zones change but zoning requirements change." He further stated, "The whole code book with the exception of the charter is, pretty much fair game. ,and are always open for discussion and change." The PLAN states that "the city's Iand use plan and zoning code and 'map ihould promote orderly overall pattern of land that ... creates a stable, predictable setting for future investment.' (Page 15) Albeit true that city govenumentdoes have the authority to make zoning changes, those changes must adhere to many standards and intense sdruting including conformance with the PLAT. the Kenai Municipal Code and legal Drecedent. The MAPS residents who invested in their properties did so because these elements all existed and gave surety of a predictable and stable future for residential development. The recommendation by the City Planner to approve the rezone is arbitrary. Approval of a proposed rezone by the Commission or Council would be also arbitrary. The City officials have failed to meet even a minimal standard of proof and have misrepresented the proposed rezones as being in conformance with the PLAN when it is clearly nonconforming, In conclusion, to legitimately adopt the proposed rezone would require a substantive rewrite of the PLAN. Adoption of the rezone would, in essence, be a rewriting of the PLAN which would bypass the required public process. Neither the Commission, the Council nor the Administration have the statutory authority to conduct a rewrite without broader citizen hearing and input. The elected and appointed officials of the City are, by law, entrusted with the responsibility of implementing the PLAN regardless of their personal persuasions and opinions. In light of a fain an honest evaluation of the PLAN and the 1985 Deal it would be an egregious betrayal of trust for the officials of the City to approve this rezone. ANALYSIS CITY OF KENAI MUNICIPAL CODE (CODE) The Kenai Municipal Code (CODE) provides land management regulation .for the City of Kenai. It is a binding doeunient that legislates how applications are to be evaluated, such as the one initially presented by Dr. Todd and ? risrt:e Wortham, secondly attempted to be presented by Jeff "I wait, Chairman, City of Dena: Planing and Zoning Commission, and thirdly is to be presented by the Kenai City Council. The relevance of the CODE was initially addressed in the "Response Regarding.Application to Rezone Ordinance No. 2362-2008." The principles presented therein still apply. Please review Exhibit A, pages I - 4 for an in-depth analysis of this rezone in light of the CODE. LIMITED COMMERCIAL ZONE: Transition Area Between In relation to the code the staff report dated 12/22/08, claims, "The City of Kenai's Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council recognized the issue of development along the Kenai Spur Highway and created the LC zone to provide a transition area between commercial and residential districts and allow a mix of low volume businesses as well as residential use." A critical distinction exists between this summary and the actual code. On various occasions the City Planner has verbally attempted to explain that "transition" does not really mean transition from residential to commercial or transition in the conventional sense of the word. The Planner claimed at the 1,15/09, 15 -161- informational meeting, "it infers that transition already exists, but that was not the intent." She suggests if attendees at this meeting had. participated in the development of the original language they would know "it was to provide an area of limited commercial and residential use" or "the mixed use in the intent of the zone." Clearly the wording of the code does not support this interpretation. The code actually reads, "The LC zone is established to provide transition areas between commercial and residential districts bl, allowing low to medium volume businesses, mixed residential and other compatible uses which complement and do not: materially detract .from the uses allowed with adjacent district." The word "by" is in the code to convey "the means by which" the mixed zone will be allowed and the transition will occur.. The word "and" implies the potentially unrelated existence of mixed zones "and" transitions from commercial to resndentiat. l;urthezmore, the CODE is crystal clear in stating the "transition area" is to be "between" commercial and residential. The point being made in the accurate language of the CODE is that in order to comply with the CODE this proposed strip rezone must provide transitioning from residential to commercial. it does not. Rather it imposes commercial within residential while butting up to Rural. Residential on one end, Conservation on the other and Rural Residential I and Education on the sides. By changing this single ward the City Planner has inaccurately represented the CODE and presented arbitrary reasoning for making her recommendation. Buffer The 12/22/08, staff report states, "Included in those regulations is a requirement for a buffer separating commercial uses from adjacent residential properties." Closer scrutiny of the code reveals that the minimum requirements of the Landscaping plan -Performance criteria (KMC 14.25.040) r°euuire no actual "line of sight99 scDarations or "naise buffering" senarations. Virtually it provides no substantive separation. The allowed ten feet wide perimeter of gravel, grass or flowers does not serve as a sufficient border, yet alone an effective separation intended to buffer low density residential from incompatible commercial establishments. The capability of the City to enforce what minimal landscaping standards do exist, are untested and offer no convincing assurance of effective initial or ongoing separation. nAial LC: Rezone model Although the intent of the City Planner and Manager seem to be to apply the initial eastern Kenai LC rezone rationale to all the lots along the highway as conveyed in the staff report of 9/10/08, such application would be misdirected. The first rezone to a LC zone was fundamentally dissimilar than what is being proposed in the current rezone. The first rezone along the Kenai Spur Highway started with over 50 acres that was originally mixed zones of General Commercial and Rural Residential. Several lots were involved and there was a lengthy public process with a great deal of public notice. Conversely in the proposed rezone of the MAPS property only some owners within 300 feet were provided notice of the initially proposed rezone and, then only for the Commission meeting, not the Council meeting. As the controversy of the proposed rezone became more evident a lengthy public process did ensue, however adeguate notification did not occur and aspen dialog remained thwarted and consisted of three minute limitations of public hearing testima ny and a 1/5/09, information meeting proposed for the purpose of the Administration to "sell" the LC zone to the h/lAPS attendees as suggested by Councilor Joe Moore in an email sent 12/17/O8. See Ex Molt K. 16 -162- This proposed rezone stands furthermore in stark contrast to the initial LC rezone in both its size and constitution_ In the staff evaluation of the Twait's application it is rioted that "There are 13 parcels zoned Rural Residential i and a potion of a parcel zoned Conservation. included on the application. Six of these parcels are undeveloped." A more thorough breakdown is quite telling and should be factored into decision making. Of the proposed rezone parcels: (See Exhibit is - Color Coded Map) & 3 vacant parcels are publicly owned - (red), 0 1 currently zoned RR1 can only be developed for "public educational site purposes only, o I currently zoned Conservation is an un-subdivided partial of a much larger city owned parcel and is configured as a narrow rectangle and in such a way that development is highly questionable due to setback requirements, and o I currently zoned RR,I is owned by the Alaska Mental health Trust Authority who have not requested or offered their support for this rezone; a S parcels are develararusaeana (yellow) © I vacant parcel is privately owned with owner intendhnz to build a singDe-farmfly residence- (gold) and. o 2 vacant parcels are privately owned - o 1 owned by ®riganal AB2!jEjM Dr. Todd & Kristie Wortham (blue) o I owned by former eity emaeloyee Jack Lashot quitclaimed, to Lashot during his employ with the City (grey). Tbis proposed rezone encompasses approximately 21.7 acres according to the 12/22/08, staff report and fronts a neighborhood that is about four blocks long and one to three blocks deep at the widest point. Destabilization of the neighborhood is inevitable if the proposed rezone is approved. The rezone area is on}y approximately 3000 linear feet Hong, whereas the City has an estimated 110,000 feet of Kenai Spur. Highway frontage. Of the 3000 linear feet of Kenai Spur highway frontage, approximately 1500 feet is owned publicly. Of the remaining 1500 feet of privately owned RRl frontage, only two lots have not already been or have plans to be developed. residentially. The .initial LC rezone rationale does not fit the currently proposed rezone and is conversely different in many -rays. First, the initial rezone area and the current proposed MAPS rezone areas are, dissimilar in size, configuration and original zone constitution. Second, the initial rezone response was not as overwhelming opposed by owners in and around the rezone propel -des. See Exhibit& am, N & 0. Cf the eight privately owned parcels, five parcels have owners who staunchly oppose the rezone, and only one owner has requested a rezone, but not the currently proposed rezone. Third, whereas the first rezone contained a mix of commercial and residential properties, the MAPS rezone proposes to rezone thirteen RRI parcels, the most restrictive residential zoning available, and one city -owned Conservation parcel, to the far less restrictive LC zone. Whatever successes the initial LC rezone may or may not have experienced, the model does not fit nor will the successes transfer to the dissimilar MAPS area. LC; zone inaR proprinte foe Pareels Responsible rezoning would consist of ensuring zone changes consistently reflected land usage or usage potential. It is nonsensical to convert a Kenai Peninsula Borough parcel that can only be used for educational purposes to a LC zone when the City has a truly applicable Education zone. If this property is to be rezoned at all, it should only be appropriately rezoned to Education. The Council's attempt to rezone this parcel to LC further demonstrates capricious and arbitrary decision making. The City owned parcefl being presented for rezone in the City Council's application is currently zoned Conservation. The portion designated for rezone is actually a partial of a much larger and unsubdivided 17 - -163- Conservation parcel. The City's pattern of rezoning Conservation, and in particular this parcel, is troublesome for many reasons. The first reason being the very grounds for which the Conservation Zone exists. It is "intended to apply to areas which should he preserved primarily as open areas and as watersheds and wildlife reserves" KMC 14.20.07, Relative to watersheds, the City's mitigation with Wal-Mart has already resulted in a net loss of watershed. Sensitive watershed, including an Alaska Department of Fish & Game identified salmon stream (see Exhibit Q), is found on the City Conservation parcel. Eaviromnemally it would be wholly inappropriate to subdivide the parcel with No blame Creek and rezone a portion wherein development would obstruct the openness surrounding No Name Creek. It is appropriately zoned Conservation. ® The second reason also stems from the provision of the code wherein it states that the Conservation Zone is "intended to apply to areas which should be ureserved nrimarfiv as 22gg arras." No -Name Creek provides a natural barrier on the north side of the Kenai. Spur Highway whereby residents intuitively understand that the residential and education hub ends and the commercial activity begins. 'Natural barriers provide rational and justifiable parameters for city planning and zoning. Although the Code has no provision for a "green belt," many residents of Kenai value the green belt that currently exists east of No -Name creek on the north side of the highway and east of Walker Lane on the south side of the highway. They provide appealing open areas between the residential and educational hub and the commercial zone and contribute greatly to the attractiveness and. uniqueness of Kenai. ® 'Third, the City's proposal to subdivide off a relatively small, oblong portion of the Kenai Spur Highway frontage land is illogical. Because the parcel has not yet been subdivided and the property dimensions, right away, easements and applicable set backs are therefore unknown, it is premature to determine, but guesticornable if this narrow portion of land can even be developed for commercial purposes. If the City intended to sell the parcel Tor private use, RRI would be the logical, consistent and most compatible zone. If the land actually is undevelopable, the appropriate and responsible zoning designation is without question Conservation. One might also argue that even it the land could be developed, the appropriate and responsible zoning designation is still Conservation. Due to the usage questien, the environmental connsrdoration and the "open area" intent, the proposal to rezone and then subdivide out the designated portion is arbitrary and appears to be nothing more than a pretext to provide the original requested spot zone. The current and forward -thinking Conservation zone is an effective strength of Kenai's land management strategy safeguarding critical parcels for generations to come. r �1 SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL CODE INFRACTIONS: The proposed rezone to LC will substantially destabilize the neighborhood, in the following manner: 1. Converts loin density to high density by decreasing required lots sizes from 20,000 square feet to 12, 500 square feet. 2. Encompasses approximately half of the TRAPS neighborhood depth essentially changing the very fabric of its character and endangering the residential element that rightfully exists. 3. Introduces incompatible uses of commercial within a residential and education hub. 4. Erodes safety and road quality by introducing increased traffic (see Traffic section below). 5. Expands permitted uses by twenty-three additional and undesirable allotments. 18 -164- 6. It is undeniably apparent that a conflict exists between the proposed rezone and chapter 14 of the CODE which addresses "Planning and Zoning." The CODE describes how such conflict should be resolved - "Whenever there is a conflict between this chapter and other ordinances pertaining to the regulation of property within the City, the most restrictive n°eanlation shall app ." KPC 14 20.020. It would be in direct violation of the CODE to apply the less restrictive LC rezone to the most restrictive RRI zone. The elected and appointed officials of the City are, by law, entrusted with the responsibility of implementing the CODE regardless of their personal persuasions and. opinions. In light of a fain` an honest evaluation of the CODE, the PLAN and the 1985 Leal it would be an egregious betrayal of trust for the officials of the City to approve this rezone. .y? fir l.. ...�rs.s... The legal challenges that trouble this rezone are not limited to Estoppel, Inverse Condemnation and Regulatory Taking. At the close of the 12/10/08, Planning and Zoning Commission work session, a MAPS resident heard a Commissioner ask the City Planner why the rezone issue had come back to the Commission. The Planner responded that they "want to prevent this from being a spot zone." Improper motive and arbitrarily proposing a non -compliant strip rezone as a subterfuge for an illegal spot rezone does not exonerate the City from the illegality of their action. Essentially the City has taken a bad idea, the Chum] ey-Wortbarn spot zone, and made it worse by proposing a non -compliant strip rezone as pretext 'or the original spot zone. Moreover, standards developed and contained in legal precedent from the Alaska Supreme Court's 1996 Griswold v. City of Homer (GRISWOLD) case apply to the most recent application for the proposed rezone sponsored by the City Council. The relevance of GRISWOLD was initially addressed in the "Response Regarding Application to Rezone Ordinance No. 2362-2008." The principles presented therein still apply. Please review Exhibit A, pages 9 - 1, I for an in-depth analysis of this rezone in light of the spot zoning legal precedent. As stated in this exhibit it is appropriate to again reiterate that the citizen taxpayers of the City of Kenai have elected the Council to protect the best interest of our community. The legal implications of the newest application are substantial and important variables to factor into both the Commission's and Council's consideration. The nature of the rezone, combined with the C.ouncii's history of repeatedly attempting code contrary and plan prohibited usages along the arterial strip of the Kenai Spur Highway and in multiple neighborhoods, (see Exhibit R) truly constitute a "public interest" scenario. In summary, the lessons learned from Griswold v. City of Homer teach us the following about the rezone. I . The action the Council takes regarding this proposed rezone is legislative. 2. Spot zoning is per se illegal. Should a favorable rezone decision be deemed spot zoning by the Superior or Supreme Courts of Alaska, the Council would have taken illegal action. 3. The Supreme Court invalidates zoning decisions which are result of prejudice, arbitrary decision making, or improper motives. 4. The court considers consistency of amendment with comprehensive plan, benefit and detriments to owners, adjacent landowners, and community and size of area rezoned. 5. Consistency with the comprehensive plan is one indication that: zoning action has a rational basis and is not an arbitrary exercise of city's zoning power. 6. Filling in vacant places, and increasing tax base and employment of community are not automatically legitimate zoning goals for the purposes of deciding whether particular zoning actions constitutes improper spot zoning. 19 -165- 7. Small -parcel zoning designed merely to benefit one owner constitutes unwarranted discrimination and arbitrary decision -making, unless the ordinance amendment is designed to achieve statutory objectives. &. An affected parcel cannot be too large per se to preclude funding of spot zoning, nor can it be so small that it mandates finding of spot zoning. 9. Similarly, a legislative body's zoning decision violates substantive due process if it has no reasonable relationship to a legititriate government purpose. If the City believes it has a legitimate purpose for this rezone it has failed to convey it to the public. 1.0. The party challenging city ordinance bears burden of proving its invalidity. The applicant of the proposed rezone, most recently the City Council is the party responsible to bear the burden of proof. By approving this rezone the City essentially revolves their right to prevent any, and all of the newly proposed twenty-three permitted commercial establishments. The entire strip zone runs parallel and encompasses both pedestrian and road traffic from two major schools with combined student bodies close to 1000 students. Since the City is the applicant in this action, the burden of proof rests with the City. 'Traffic considerations are addressed five times in the Alaska Planning Commission Handbook and are essential criteria to sound planning decisions. The City must prepare for the scenario in which a single or all of the additional twenty-three permitted uses being proposed actually develop along this strip. The City would be negligent to approve such a change without first collaborating with the Department of Transportation to detenrime appropriate ingress and egress options and to further study traffic patterns, impact and risks. The traffic implications of this proposed rezone evoke legitimate concerns regarding first and foremost the safety of the children who routinely enter and exit the Kenai middle and high schools located across the highway from the proposed rezone. The City awareness of the already existing traffic problems for the Kenai Spur Highway was made evident at the 12/15/06, Kenai City Council work session with state legislators. The minutes from this session state: "The Kenai Spur Highway between Soldotna and Kenai has become an increasingly more dangerous roadway. The conflict between through traffic traveling at higher rates of speed, and traffic attempting to exit the road J"av"sie$6 local k,}zEsire.s3 c an:i regitlen4'iae se3bd_vi�e�3i e5 ha5 created an Ei?sau�: COni.&iFi::. At present there is not a project on the Statewide 'Transportation Improvement Plan. The City of Kenai requests legislative assistance in having ADOT/PP' provide some preliminary engineering data produced showing costs for having the Kenai Spur Highway upgraded to a three -lane configuration, with overhead street lighting in appropriate areas. The City of Kenai will work with the City of Soldoma, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough to submit a project nomination to AD®T/PF." The MAPS residents addressed traffic concerns in their response to the 1998 Chumley Conditional Use Permit proceedings. Exhibit S contains the excerpt regarding "Traffic Patterns" wherein the residents recorded traffic volumes at peak times during the day school day. Studies conducted by the Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) at the Tinker — Kenai Spur Highway intersection in October of 1996 can also be found in Exhibit S. MAPS residents recently conducted another survey and the results are demonstrated below. 'These counts are not intended to imply an "apple to apple" comparison. These counts do, however, provide conclusive evidence that traffic volumes in this particularly sensitive hub of Kenai are increasing. Obviously it doesn't take a traffic study to anticipate that the addition of Lowes and 20 m the incoming Wal-Mart alone will 'increase traffic volume in the proposed rezone area. The City is obligated to address the implications of LC traffic changes prior to determining the fate of the rezone. 1996 — DOT ^ 1998 — MAPS 2009 — MAPS Time o4 ®aye Tinker &, Kenai Spur KCHS Entrance + Suits Sinker & Kenai Spier Vehicle Total = Vehicle Total Vehicle Total 7:00 — 7:15 a.m. 112 165 + 74 = 244 877 7:15 — 7:30 a.m. 142 (7:07 a.m. star time) 7:30 — 7:45 a.m. 127 7:45 — 8:00 a.m. 143 886 194 Children in the MAPS area on Princess have to walk over a third of a mile from. Princess to McCollum in order to cross the five -lane highway at a traffic light, then almost that far back to get to the high school. From Cinderella, students have to walk a quarter of a mile to a traffic fight to cross the highway, In the winter the bike paths often are not cleared after a snow fall. Testimony provided by .Panne Espy at the 4/15/98 Board of Adjustment Hearing additionally addressed the issue of children safety and is included in Exhibit a. Scott Thomas of the ADOT spoke to a Kenai resident on approximately 1 /29/09, and indicated that ADOT does not plan to approve more Kenai Spur highway access for any development, commercial or otherwise, along this highway corridor. Therefore, all new ingress and egress for any and all commercial enterprises that may locate in the area, with. the exception of one already approved highway access, will be through the MAPS streets of Princess, Cinderella, McCollum and Magic. The commercial traffic will add considerable stress to the neighborhood road infrastructure, decrease safety and turn the quiet, lour -density MAPS neighborhood where our children walk to and from school, ride their bikes, and walk their dogs into a commercial access passageway. The intersections of Princess, Cinderella and McCollum with the Kenai Spur Highway will undoubtedly experience increased traffic volume. All in all the safety, stability and very nature of the MAPS area will irreparably be changed. Many MAPS residents are convinced that, in its haste to push this strip rezone through the public process, several improprieties or other procedural missteps have occurred. These possible improprieties include, among other things, conflicts of interest and violations of the Open Meetings Act. Should. the Commissioners consider approving the pending application in spite of the many objection raised by the MAPS residents, we strongly urge that, before taking such action, you look into these improprieties. If, instead, the proposed rezone continues to proceed apace, and reaches the Council for a final vote, the MAPS residents will, regrettably, have no choice but to present to the Council, before any such vote, information and evidence documenting these likely improprieties. Tlie interested residents of Kenai encourage the Commissioners to recognize this proposed rezone for it is -- a noncompliant violation of the PLAN and CODE, an illegal act and a very, very bad idea. Furthermore, the Planning and Zoning Commission is encouraged to kill the proposal at the Commission level, for once and f6r all. 21 -167- Bank you for your consideration of the facts, issues, and positions presented herein. The residents of MAPS have trusted and invested in the regulatory (CODE) and policy (PLAIN) direction they collaboratively developed with the City of Kenai, as well as sound legal precedent established in this state. We strongly urge you to honor and uphold the public trust placed in you and reject the proposed rezone. 22 dT�.11 B COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES P- 0 - 6 E TRIPLEX PLANS SPECIAL 1985 ASSESSMENT PETITION r_O. ;85 1ARLES A. BROWN I APPEAL OF PZ98-12 COMMISSION DECISION f H''v R_ E RD p i d LETTER, .. ! N (! MOORE EMAIL, 12117108 ... i i:• _ A COLORED PROPOSED REZONE M SALMON STREAM, ADF&G PENINSULA ",i '._A CLARION R'{71;`+" n ... ! LI SUMMARIES TRAFFIC RMA IO N i p w D ... .. LETTER, Q LETTERS OPPOSING PROPOSED REZONE OPPOSITION PETITION -ORDINANCE 2362- 1 23 -169- Kenai Cott' CounclR -170- CITY OF KENAI MUNICIPAL n I IPt,._, CODE D .: (KMC) . The Kenai Municipal Code (KMC) provides land management regulation for the City of Kenai. It is a binding document that legislates how applications, such as the one presented by Franklin T. & Kristie L. Wortham (the applicant) are to be evaluated. used on the KMC we take objection to the "Analysis" and "Recommendations" presented in the September 10, 2008, Staff Report, the erroneous "whereas" statements made as fact in the Ordinance No. 2362-2008 and the Planning Administrators Memo to the City Manager dated November 1.4, 2008, due to the following reasons. 1. These staff -generated documents failed to consider all ngylicnble codes in drawing their conclusion. Thereport focused fully on the Limited Commercial. Zone language of the code to justify the recommendation and did not include undeniably pertinent and non -supportive language from the Rural Residential Zone language of the code which is the existing, prevailing zone for this parcel. 2. The Limited Commercial Zone (LC; Zane) language of the code does not, in fact, provide the support for this application that is acclaimed in both the staff report and the ordinance. a. KMC 14.20.115 LC Zone states "Intent: The LC Zone is established to provide transition areas between commercial and residential districts by allowing low to medium volume business, mixed residential and other compatible uses which. complement and do not materially detract form the uses allowed with adjacent districts." The parcel in question is bordered on three sides by Rural Residential 1 (RR1) developed properties and on one side by Education Zone. "There are no nearby commercial properties to which it is transitioning. Therefore, it is capricious and misleading to claim it as a "transition" area. b. The staff report states that "The proposed development will improve the property providing for limited commercial development. The landscaping requirements will lei -sure commercial use is separated from the adjacent residential properties." Staff hereby suggests that K. MC 14.25 "Lnrndscapiana/Site Plan Regulations" in some manner solves the incompatibility of spot zoning a commercial parcel in the middle of an education and residential parcels by offering a buffer of trees or shrubs. Verbal testimony implied this would be an additional level of protection afforded the neighbors should the parcel be rezoned. i. First, this statement is meaningless. Any degree of development technically "imRrovesS9 a property, including single- and multifamily homes and churches. However, if one was to interpret improvement qualitatively, this statement is inherently bias in that it claims the property will "improve" by placing an incompatible and non -harmonious commercial structure or structures smack-dab in the center of a residential and educational zone. ii. Second, according to the KMC many types of development with the exception of single family, duplexes and churches would be required to submit for approval a lanpdscape/site plan, anyway. (KMC 14.25,020; 1.4.20.020; 14,20.320) The implication, that by rezoning this property, the neighborhood would enjoy an extra level of controlled development otherwise unrealized is inaccurate for many of the potential uses other than LC Zone. -171- iii. Third, the 1andscsRing code does not "insure" or "ensure" separation of commercial from. adjacent residential properties. It only requires a plan that has very minimal requirements in which "buffer" is not defined. The buffer therefore could conceivably be very narrow. 'There are no visual requirements of the buffer that would keep neighbors from actually seeing the development. Typically, the types of "buffers" allowed by the City are just grass or roells sty with a tree or two along the street. They are actually more like setback areas than a real buffer purposefully designed to impair line of site as trees or bushes, c. Unfortunatoly even if the incompatibility of commercial properties could be hidden by trees and foliage, there is still a huge 'issue of increased non -neighborhood traffic such an enterprise would generate. i. The conceptual plan of the applicant conveys two additional avenues of ingress and egress to Cinderella Street. The increase of commercial traffic on Cinderella Street would be uanaitatively increased and a ualitatively unknown. ii. The code itself acknowledges that traffic generated by clinics, such as the one being proposed in the application for a dental practice, requires 62.5% rr kt �� spaces than a similar sized professional building would require. It seems logical to deduce based on this requirement that clinics generate a much higher volume of traffic than professional offices - both of which are substantially higher than routine residential traffic. iii. This increased traffic flow and congestion is a particularly troublesome detail in light of the proximity of this parcel to two major schools with combined student body populations of 916 students. These issues are not new to this Council relative to the foot traffic generated by these schools. The timeline provided by the Council does not allow the neighborhood to fully develop its defense and conduct a traffic study as was done in the.1998 Appeal, but a review of the MAPs 1998 Appeal PZ98-12 document demonstrates the vulnerability of this pedestrian and traffic hub. Please see Attachment - A. These pedestrians are particularly vulnerable due to their young age and the hazardous five -lane street crossing corridors in which there are not enough crossings, they are not within reasonable proximity of the students, the ti.x.ing allowed yr crossing is inadequate and the intense wacer«ratiou of both pedestrian and vehicle traffic occurs at special events and at two peak times a day — the start and close of each school day. Although it may not be obvious to the Council, the exit to the high school is directly across from this parcel and the entrance a few seconds' drive away. Due to the youthful nature of drivers at the high school, a higher number of inexperienced drivers use this entrance and exit more than any other single driveway system in the City of Kenai and do so at a time when pedestrian traffic is at its highest. Undoubtedly the best interest of the entire community was being considered when this parcel was zoned the most restrictive available zone — RRI. The safety risk a commercial spot zone would afford is absolutely unconscionable. One more accident would be one too many. d. The first rezone to a LC Zone was fundamentally dissimilar than what is being proposed in the current rezone application. The first rezone along the Kenai. Spur Highway started with over 50 acres that was originally mixed zones of General Commercial and Rural Residential. Several lots were involved and there was a lengthy public process with lots of public notice. Although the intent of the City planner and Manager seem to be to apply this former rezone rationale to all the lots along the highway as conveyed in the staff report of 9/10/08, only people within 300 feet were provided notice of this rezone application and, then only for the Commission meeting, not the Council meeting. -172- Conversely this application it to rezone a single parcel from the most restrictive residential zoning to the far less restrictive LC zorie. 3. Furthermore, the Rural esidential tom} language of the code does not provide the support for this application that is acclaimed in both the staff report and the ordinance. Rural Residential 1 (RRI) is the current and applicable zone that applies to this property and the regulation .found in this section of the code should be factored into any decision regarding this application. a. The unique hMory of this neighborhood is a matter of record, Its interaction with both the Kenai City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission demonstrates a highly collaborative effort of the majority of property owners to preserve and maintain the low density residential character of this neighborhood. See Attachment - 8 The RRI designation came at a cost to the residence good faith agreement with the City of Kenai made their intentions ileac- from the heghtain "For the price of the assessment we avant to have a say in hoar it is developed in the future. At the present time its .Rlt in character has 2 potentials. If we do not rezone it then. I see a patchwork type of development, almost a Spenard-like type of development with people who want nice residential lots being slowly squeezed out or chased away.- I understand the City Comprehensive Plan calls for such an area [low density residential] in the City. One with larger lots so that people can actually live close in to town without having to live on smaller lots. (Board of Adjustment Packet, BA-56, Rick Baldwin) "The 1985 Deal" as it has come to be called and our approximate $300,000 utilities assessment investment (nor factored into real or current dollar- values) was an agreement of good faith whereby the city agreed to consider the input of the current land owners when making decisions of impact and the owners agreed to pay to the city what was then a substantial assessment for improvements as well as making individual improvements and upgrades to their own properties. b. Tiae iX.R Zone is intended "to provide for low density residential development in outlying and rural areas in a form which creates a stable and attractive residential environment" Spot zoning commercial parcels in the middle of residential neighborhoods does not stabilize the residential environment of the area and in fact would create an "endangered neighborhood," c. The RR Zone is "to prohibit uses which. would: a) violate the residential character of the environment; b) generate heavy traffic in predominately residential areas." Principal presented uses for this parcel according to the KM.0 Land Use Tables are: 1) One Family Dwelling; 2)Two1 Three Family Dwelling; 3)Churches; 4)Bssential Services; and 5) Off Street Parking. The common characteristics of these principal permitted uses include: principal activities occurring at each of these uses is non-commercial, the vehicular and pedestrian traffic is often known or knowable to the principal occupants, generated traffic in and out of permitted use areas is generally low density with the exception of Churches at strategic non -imposing times of the week and day, and the character of the neighborhood is enhanced by the familiarity factor as neighbors watch out for and help each other out. Commercial enterprises, such as professional offices, do not share any of these common characteristics. Their principal activity is commercial, the vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and out of the businesses will be primarily unknown to the principal occupants, generated traffic in and out will likely be of a far higher density, and the character of the neighborhood will be eroded as an -173- unfamiliar public files in and out of the area. Professional offices are not similar to those principal. uses permitted in RRI zone. Therefore, a LC rezone would both violate the residential character of the environment and generate heavy traffic in predominately residential areas. d. The argument neighborhood residents have repeatedly heard from both staff and Council members that "nothing else can be done" with this particular parcel is absolutely false and further indicates a preconceived bias on the part of these officials. Not surprisingly this is a bias that has been propagated by the former owner in his endeavor to convert a residential investment into a commercial. windfall ,profit. Here is a list of highly viabRe alternative uses: i. SingIe-family dwellings. The Kenai Comprehensive PIan (KCP) explains the city's homebuyers prefer larger residential lots. (KCP Page 34) To claim that no one would want to live along the Kenai Spur Highway is ludicrous. One only has to drive from Princess to Swires to see this is not true. Furthermore, proximity to the schools makes this a very desirable location for families with children. A achment _ C roughly illustrates a potential site plan and layouts for single family development. The original plat of the former owner was at one time platted for seven RRI lots. ii. duplexes and/or triplexes. We are a neighborhood that values both our .rental properties and our renters. The home owners and renters have successfully co -existed in this neighborhood far several decades. This property is bordered by townhouses on one side, duplexes on another, a single family on the one side with a triplex one block away. iii. A church. We currently have two churches in our neighborhood and would welcome another. iv. Essential Services v. Sell a portion or all the land to the neighbors. The neighbors don't need this additional land. The collective investment of the first 42 owners to sign the petition alone is already assessed at over 4.1. million dollars. However, residents are willing to make an investment to maintain the integrity of the residential character. vi. If the city is intent. on providing the applicant's dental office a place to operate, they could do a land swap to one of their commercially zoned parcels. The debated property could then be sold at RRI market values, converted to a city park or perhaps explore assisted living home options. e. To fairly evaluate the requested rezone the entire code must be reviewed,. In considering the entire code, the guideline provided in KMC 1420.020 [e] states "Whenever there is a conflict between this chapter and other ordinances pertaining to the regulation of property within the City, the most restrictive regulation shall apply." In adherence to the code the. ®nays@ restrietive re,�an9 at%®as ffinrst lv� a]Rnlied to die assessment of this rezone application leading to its rejection. This parcel is zoned the more restricted RRI, and as outlined in the KMC and the Kenai Comprehensive Plan should remain. such. 4 -174- T- Just as the KMC provides for the regulatory basis of land management, the Kenai Comprehensive Plan (KCP) provides for the policy basis of land management. Although not law per se, "Kenai's land use plan and related development policies are a decision -making tool that provides a "blueprint" for growth and change in the community. —The comprehensive plan does provide the public policy basis for defining the zoning districts and related development standards that guide what happens on the land." (KCP, Page 26) The Alaska Statute (AS 29.40.030) and the Alaska Planning Commission Handbook further mandate and support this function of comprehensive plans. The handbook states "Planning can protect property and property values by separating a potentially harmful or disagrgeable land use frorn surrounding residential and commercial uses and by helping to protect stable neighborhoods." (handbook, page 7) Eased on the KCP we take objection to the staff -prepared documents referenced above and included in the Council's packet. 1. The Proposed Land Use Plan and subsequent Maps 10 and 11 complement the written policy and are to be used with the development policies to guide growth. The Maps were updated in June of 2008. As the maps iIlustrate Kenai has a well defined, long-term plan for future growth. The terms used for the Land Use Map are different than the terms for the actual zones. Map 1.0 shows the areas where "Neighborhood Residential" and "Neighborhood Commercial" are planned. See Attachment 0. The section of the arterial road system being reviewed for rezone is not planned "Neighborhood Commercial," nor should it be. The Maps illustrate that the applicant's ,parcel clearly is planned for "Ngighb€srhood Residential" and n2 far "Neighborhood (Commercial." while in fact other areas of the arterial road system are planned for "Neighborhood Commercial." The broad purpose of the land a$se elan is to ensure an adequate supply of land that is: ® suitable for development; in appropriate ownership status; appropriately zoned; with needed utilities and services; for future private a .d public uses; and o at desirable locations." (Page 9) a. According to the KCP "the gross sulmt of privately owned developable, appropriately zoned sites appears ffiore ghan asiecasuafie for future development needs ...Comparison of estimated demand for residential, commercial, and industrial land uses to the existing zoning status of vacant land suggests that Kenai has an adequate supply of appropriately zoned parcels for future demands." (KCP Page 14 including Table 5) b. The plan establishes a standard of suitabiii@v for development. Rezoning a residential parcel to commercial when it is surrounded on three sides by residential development and on the fourth side by education in an arterial corridor that is designated the most restrictive zone defies the definition of suitability. Expanding the scope of review to the entire highway frontage from the Walmart to Swires Road, on both sides of the highway, is some form of residential zone, except for one small commercial lot (not near this proposal) and the two educational parcels (KCHS. KMS). The proposed rezone is a commercial spot zone, plunked down into the middle of a large residential zoning district. -175- c. The appropriateness of the ocwnershira status is demonstrated by the number of owners who have purchased more than one parcel in this area. At least three current owners and one former have 'built and/or lived in two separate dwellings within this neighborhood. Private horneoswners and lamdlords appear to be the predominant ownership group. d. The plan establishes apRropriatc zoning as a standard. According to the KC:P "the gross supply of privately owned developable, appropriately zoned sites appears more than adequate for future development needs. (ILCP Page IQ) It further states that "One of the goals of zoning is to achieve stable, livabflc resideatiaal neighborhoods, by separating there from incompatible uses." (Page 37) Rezoning this lot will cut into our neighborhood by 50% of the land mass from north to south. It will cut us in half east to west. That is a huge dent -- significant enough to have destabilizing impact on the continuing life of the entire RRI zone, hence, the "endangered neighborhood." e. The plan establishes desirable locations as a standard for development. It is entirely desirable for residential development to be located in the vicinity of other residences and schools. It is entirely desirable for a dental clinic to be located in the city center near other health care providers. It is not desirable to open up a residential community to those tootential oases this LC rezone would daermit including restaurants, art studios, barbers and beauticians, dry cleaners, fitness centers, photographic studios, tanning salons, massage therapists, professional offices, to name a few. iiiiiiiiiii III: Jill �. 3. Section IV of the KCP defines the "Framework for the Future" of Kenai. The first planning topic revolves around the city center and millennium square. (Page 26) "Citizens generally agree that creating a strong, attractive, busy city center is a highly desirable planning goal." a. The city leadership serves as guardian of our community's best interest and caretaker of the greater public purpose and good. Policy decisions that influence market variables are a form of market intervention and government control. It is commonly understood that supply and demand are the variables that dictate market direction. To increase the `asuratalv49 of commercial properties in the marketplace that already has an adequate supply of land to accommodate new commercial development is unwarranted government intervention. Obviously, increasing the supply impacts the supply and demand relationship. In this instance approving a rezone will intervene with the marketplace to pull businesses away from the city center and result in "sprawl." Sprawl is not good for a vital city center. Such a move would be in direct opposition to the KCP. By not approving this rezone the city avoids tampering with these market variables and the natural course of supply and demand will concentrate commercial enterprises in the city center. We already see this occurring with our health care services accomplishing the goals of the plan. -176- at t':.,...... Ali c' � ar (KC ' i. ge 25) b. Another impact of this rezone would be that one land owner would benefit at a cost to all other property owners who have previously invested to build this community. No greater public interest would be served by granting this rezone. The granting of the rezone would further influence the supply and demand by providing a single property owner advantages that are not available to other existing owners. The KCP states, "This [to permit uses that otherwise might not fit within the intent of the underlying zoning] approach may address the immediate need of individual applicants. However, over time, it can compromise the basic purpose of zoning and public confidence in zoning." (Page 15) c. The goal as described in the KCP is to revitalize city center by promoting residential and. commercial development in this area, not by promoting commercial development in residential area outside of the city center. To rezone this parcel undermines both the goals of revitalizing the city center and the goals of protecting the harmony and character of residential environments in RRI, and promotes commercial sprawl. 4. Another planning topic addressed in. the "Framework for the Future" of Kenai focuses on Residential Neighborhood Development Policies (R). (Page 35) a. The KCP states the city is to "Promote the siting and design of land uses that are in harmony and scale with surrounding uses." Specifically to " n ores exastinna soda reatuirennents and address zoning violations." (Page 35) Again, the point is being made that the Council should not change the code in order to place commercial development in a residential area, but rather that you enforce the existine code. b. The KCP further states that the city is to "Encourage a variety of neighborhoods within the city that offer a choice of urban, suburban, and semi -rural lifestyles." Specifically to "F,stablish standards in the railer use negnaatiesn vole .or Vacl®llS ll®LiS2ng types and ua¢Z&HSaEuF uue&d3nt5a'.S. �Pwge 35) FaGin the zoning snap it appears that there are only two RR1 neighborhoods in Kenai. A rezone would essentially change the character of this residential neighborhood from the most restrictive zone to a more liberal zone and thereby endanger one of the only two RRI neighborhoods, thus diminishing the variety the city is committed to encourage. c. Rezoning this parcel would contradict the Residential Neighborhood Development Policies outlined in the KCP and would result in the following detriments to the cony mun tv. i. If a single spot zone is approved, residential districts will never again be stable and safe from the impact of adjacent commercial or industrial uses. ii. The City would essentially be changing the policy direction of the KCP without adequate public notice and disregarding the 2003 KCP rewrite, annual reviews and the 2008 Maps 10 and I I. updates. iii. Finally, establishing this dangerous precedent would create an unstoppable domino effect. -177- 5. The "Framework for the Future" of Kenai also addresses Commercial, Land Use Development Policies (CM). (Page 36) a. The KCP states, "Some residents complain about commercial "strip development" alone the Kenai Snur law . On analysis, these concerns seem aimed mainly at the appearance .... And to a lesser extent, the dispersed character of development." (Page 36, 37) First, to address the issue of appearance, the staff recommends approving the application and implies that dressing up LC Zones through landscaping and building placement is the method that makes spot zoning acceptable. As a side bar, it should be noted that the applicant's conceptual plan, which consists of five buildings, each exceed the maximum footprint allowed for Limited Commercial zoning. b. The other issue of concern expressed in the KCP (Pages 37) is the "dispersed character of develo anent" along the Kenai Spur Highway. This rezone plainly proliferates the problem instead of controlling and/or reducing the problem. c. The plan suggests, in the very next sentence that "These deficiencies [appearance and dispersed character along the highway] can largely be addressed through development and design standards that reflect the communim consensus, and by provision of adequate, suitably located commercial sites." (Page 37) We proactively demonstrated community consensus in 1985. We overwhelmingly demonstrated community consensus in 1998. Again, on the ten year anniversary of the Appeal of PZ98-1.2, we still have community consensus. As of December 3, 2008, at 3 p.m., 42 of the 43 residents surveyed oppose this ordinance to rezone. To ignore this histort seed clarn� of sonsensuns in combination with the fact that there is adequate and suitably zoned land for the desired usage available through the year 2020, (Page 14) would be a capricious break from the KCP community consensus policy standard. d. The most conclusive paragraph in the plan that pertains to the consideration of this rezone states; "Another issue of neighborhood concern is commercial development near residential areas as conditional uses or through rezones, particularly along the Kenai Spur 1-lighway. One of the goals of zoning is to achieve stable, livable, residential neighborhoods by separating them from incompatible uses. This is best achieved by auuing suMcient s°uitnM located u� d t r st expected s, tie afterrng to tCne zoning Plamm ° (Page 37) This fundamental KCP policy is crucially and glaringly pertinent as it describes exactly the scenario being considered. The unreasonable choice of the staff to arbitrarily ignore this policy in their eagerness to lobby in favor of the rezone on the applicant's behalf demonstrates total disregard for a fair and unprejudiced due process. Furthermore, staff has assumed the burden of proof that is rightfully assigned to the applicant which places the neighbors in the undesirable position of bearing a burden of defense in an unreasonable time frame. The staff documents have not provided the Commissioners and Council members a comprehensive and objective, unbiased rendering of the issue at hand. IM The 1996 Supreme Court of Alaska case of Griswold v. City of Homer establish legal precedent for "spot zoning" and subsequently contain valuable criteria that Council members must consider to apply legally sound decision snaking. The citizen taxpayers of the City of Kenai have elected the Council to protect the best interest of our community. The legal implications of the application and the subsequent litigation that would result from a favorable vote, are substantive and judicious variables to factor into the Councils' consideration. The nature of the case, combined with the Councils' history of repeatedly attempting code contrary and plan prohibited usages along the arterial strip of the Kenai Spur Highway in multiple neighborhoods, truly constitute a "public interest" scenario in which it is highly likely that legal fees will be charged to the City at the expense of all taxpayers and to the detriment of other valuable potential uses, The lessons learned .from Griswold v. City of Homer teach us that a "SPOT" by any other name is still a "spot" and the following factors must be weighed with the utmost intention. 1. First, we would like to remind and ensure that the Council understands that the action they take retarding this application is legislative, and the legal consequences of their decision constitutes a very real and potentially present danger to the citizens of Kenai. (Cabena v Kenai Peninsula Borough [4,'27101 ] "Because small-scale rezonings are treated as legislative decisions under Alaska law...") 2. The second lesson extracted from the Griswold v. City of Homer case is that "Not all small -parcel zoning is illegal, but -Dog , nang is per se illegal; "spot zone" is zoning decision which affects small parcel of land and which is found to be arbitrary exercise of legislative power." (Page 5, Section [7]) Although the neighbors of this area are not lawyers, from a layperson's perspective an analysis of the criteria outlined in Griswold v. City of Homer makes it quite evident that approval of this application would comprise a classic spot zone scenario. It further stands to reason that should this decision be deemed spot zoning by the superior court of Alaska, the Council would have made an illegal decision. 3. The third lesson extracted from the Griswold v. City of Homer case is that the "Supreme Court invalidates zoning decisions which are result of x e^n di^�_ b^tra _y decis on m3kin , or improper motives." (Page 4, Section [5]) The staff documentation surrounding this application clearly expresses a foundational prejudice and displays an arbitrary decision making process when measured by the City of Kenai regulatory document, the KMC and by the City of Kenai policy document, the KCP. Although motives are more difficult to prove in a court of law, there appears to be reasonable evidence that the staff of Kenai has assumed both the burden of proof for the applicant, and a lobbying role in favor of the application' for unknown reasons that appear to have a foundation in the misled notion of staff and Council alike that "there is nothing else that can be done with this property." The neighbors have successfully countered this fallacy elsewhere in this document. 4. The fourth lesson extracted from the Griswold v. City of Homer case is that "In determining whether amendment to zoning ordinance constitutes spot zoning, court considers consistency of amendment with aoml2rebensive plan, benefit and detriments to owners, adjacent landowners, and community and size of area rezoned" (Page 5, Section [K]) This document provides, at the very least, a minimum gauge of reasonable doubt regarding consistency with all four of these criteria. 5. The fifth lesson extracted from the Griswold v. City of Homer case is that "Consistency with comprehensive plan is one indication that zoning action challenges as "spot zoning" has rational basis -179- and is not arbitrary exercise of city's zoning power." (page 6, Section [101) The KCP is a critical tool to be fully utilized in the process of making this decision. In so doing this Council must conclude that sound policy dictates the rezone be rejected. 6. The sixth lesson extracted from the Griswold v. City of Homer case is that "Filling in vacant Maces, and increasing tax base and employment of community are not automatically legitimate zoning ®gals for the purposes of deciding whether particular zoning actions constitutes improper spot zoning." (Page 7, Section [l1]) The notion that "there is nothing else that can be done with this property" and that this parcel is now a "dust bowl" are irrelevant criteria on which to base Council's decision. It may be wise to take beed to this legal precedent that vacant land is a perfectly legitimate and sound alternative to illegal "spot zoning." . The seventh lesson extracted from the Griswold v. City of Homer case is that "Small -parcel zoning designed merely to benefit one owner constitutes unwarranted discrimination and arbitrary decision -making, unless ordinance amendment is designed to achieve statutory objectives of city's own zoning scheme, even if purpose of change is to bring nonconforming use into confonnarice or allow it to expand." (Page 7, Section 12) The specialized consideration given to this particular owner (the applicant) through a favorable vote, and the outcome it would incite, are contrary to both the regulation of the I{1VC and the policy direction of the KCP to revitalize Kenai's city center, preserve and stabilize IZenai's residential sectors and promote conanercial development in. suitably zoned areas in adherence to the KCP. Arbitrarily rendering a favorable vote for this one particular applicant would be discriminatory and therefore illegal. 8. With intent to provide full disclosure to the Council the 2khth lesson extracted from the Griswold v. City of homer case is that "Affected parcel cannot be too large per se to preclude finding of spot zoning, nor can. it be so small that it mandates finding of spot zoning." (.Page 8, Section [14]) The applicant's parcel is less than three acres. However, before one considers this a ray of light favoring the rezone, it is critical the Council review the discussion relative to this point. "N'Ve believe that the relationship between the size of reclassification and a finding of spot zoning is properly seen as symptomatic rather than casual and thus that the size of the area rezoned should not be considered more significant than other factors in determining whether spot zoning has occurred. A parcel cannot be too large per se to preclude a finding of spot zoning, nor can it be so small that it mandates a finding of spot zoning. Although Anderson notes that reclassiffacataonns of parcels sander three acres are nearly always found invalid, while reclassifications of parcels over thirteen acres are nearly always found valid. Id., as Zieler notes, the relative size of the parcel is invariably considered by courts ..." (Page 20, 3. Size of "rezoned" area [13] [141) he d"Md of tire, ft6at De ptooette without Ofue ptmebb ®f lam", ao 9. The ninth lesson extracted from the Griswold v. City of Homer case is that "Similarly, a legislative body's zoning decision. violates substantive due Rrocess if it has no reasonable relationship to a legitimate government purpose" (Page 15, Section [5] [61) Although the burden of demonstrating violated substantive due process is a heavy one, a decision to approve this rezone would seem quite arbitrary and capricious. It would require discounting the Planning Commission's advisory opposition vote, it would be 10 in transparent contradiction to the regulatory mandates of the KMC and thee policy direction of the KCP and the one-sided documentation of the staff documents would be a factor. 'Therefore, if the rezone would be approved there exists convincing argument regarding substantive due process. Frustrating procedural due process experiences the residents have had regarding this application include the denial for postponement to allow more time to prepare a response, the denial of city officials to allow inclusion of documentation from the neighbors in the Council meeting packet on a holiday week when conventional deadlines to submit documentation were skewed, the placement of this highly controversial issue on the consent agenda for its first reading. Additionally, it is the understanding of the neighbors that an reasonable time frame and suitable format for a fair hearing or an opportunity to be heard and defend against the proposed action will not occur during the December 3, 2008, Kenai City Council meeting. See page 33 of the Alaska Planning Commission Handbook for due process guidelines. 10. Although many more lessons can be extracted from this precedent -establishing case, the final lesson we bring to the attention of this Council is that the "Par tar eha Ueaging eiflv ordinance bears burden of proving its invaslidity." (Page 11, Section [241) No property owner has a "right" to rezone; in fact, the opposite is true — the property owner has the burden of proving that the rezone meets the appropriate criteria. It is our finding that not only did the applicant not bear the burden of proof, the applicant appears to have been misinformed by city officials as to what could be anticipated in his pursuit of this rezone and the city assumed the burden of proof as demonstrated in the "Analysis" and "Recommendations" presented in the September 1,0, 2008, Staff Report, the erroneously interpreted "whereas" statements made as fact in the Ordinance No. 2362-2009 and the memo dated November 19, 2008, from the Planning Administrator to the City Manager. 11 SM CLOSING REMARKS Details have and are being discussed throughout this process as justification for this particular spot zone that are truly irrelevant to the decision and legitimately must be discounted from the decision making process. Please "it is role of elected representatives rather than courts to decide whether particular- statute or ordinance is wise." (Griswold Page 2, Section [2]) Based on the lessons learned from Griswold v. City of Homer, we admonish the Council to wisely reject the application and avoid an insidious precedent that would fundamentally undermine the regulatory and policy directives of the City. Zoning is a matter of public trust. It is intended to "create a stable, predictable setting for future investment" (KCP, Page 15). The Kenai Comprehensive Plan should provide reliable information about the City of Kenai and its development plans and policies that potential buyers will factor into their decisions regarding their land purchases. It can provide the assurance current owners factor into their decisions regarding property improvements. The residents of this neighborhood have trusted and invested in the regulatory and policy direction they collaboratively developed with the City of Kenai. Spot zoning this parcel would be an egregious breech of the public trust that each member of the Council is elected to uphold. 12 IM 171 r" > Ir r-.� v P ') I .a.. (Source: Appeal of PZ 8-12 -® Commission Decision) 7.1 Valid Planning Issue During the February 4, 1998, Board of Adjustment Hearing the applicant's representative stated,...... we fee[ a traffic problem, if it exists, is a traffic problem and not a property development problem and we think we would like to respectfully suggest that traffic problems be addressed with traffic control items." (Board of Adjustment Hearing, Churnley/Chunley Appeal, February 4, 1998, Page 6) _ The residents of the neighboring lots respectfully disagree. The Planning Commissioner's Handbook (June 1993, State of Alaska) validates traffic as a sound planning and zoning concern in the following statement: The effects on traffic congestion are also mentioned some in the conditional use section of a zoning ordinance. .A permit granted or denied under this standard has a better chance of surviving judicial review if it is based on a credible traffic study which quantifies the effects of the proposed use. (68) 7.2 Traffic Study and Pertinent Statistical Date Residents of the neighborhood conducted counts of three main areas: (1) children in the neighborhood and at local schools (2) number of cars entering & exiting the Kenai Central High School from the Spur Highway, and (3) a count of clientele entering & exiting other professional offices to represent a possible traffic sampling for the proposed professional offices traffic. These counts were conducted by neighborhood residents around such priorities as family, school, jobs, and neighborhood issues in an all too short allowable time frame. Although they may not be an official traffic study, they do show that there is a traffic impact on the neighborhood and surrounding area that, must be considered. 7.2. 1 The number of children potentially affected by traffic concerns who live on the north side of the Spur Highway and who must cross a five lane highway to get to their respective schools is currently at 70 and will climb to 71 in approximately three months. The ages of these children range and the number is relative to change. See attachment # 7 for recorded tally of survey. _ The number of children enrolled in the area school are: 475 at Kenai Central High School, 455 at Kenai ,middle School and 409 at lviountakn View Elementary. These statistics establish the fact that many children wiU feel the impact of the council's decision concerning this CUP now and for years to come. 7.2.2 The number of cars entering & exiting the Kenai Central High School from the Spur Highway were tallied at three different counts. Number of vehicles going in to the high school: * first count 1:55 p.m. to 2:50 p.m. 66 * second countl 2:45 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. 83 *third count 7:07 a.m. to 7:45 a,M 165 (as many as 47 in a 15 minute period) (as many as 10 in a one minute period) * fourth count7:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. 191 Number of vehicles exiting the high school (offset exit from Cinderella St.): * first count 7:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. 90 *'second count12:45 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. 78 * third count 7:07 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 79 (as many as 18 in a 9 minute period) (as many as 12 in a one minute period) " fourth count7:00 a.m, to 10:30 a.m. 50 -183- increases in traffic flows at peals hours due to the Kenai Middle School traffic flow have not been included in these counts. 7.2-3 Professional Offices clientele traffic (information obtained by phone calls to the businesses): (1) A Dental Clinic (2) A Medical walk-in Facility (3) A Medical Specialist (4) Tanning Salon (5) A Hair Salon (6) A Chiropractic Clinic (7) An Insurance Agent 7.3 Conclusions 25+ vehicles per day plus 5-6 employees 20 on allow day plus 3-4 employees 60 on a heavy day plus added employees 40 on office days (non -surgical days) 30 on off-season days plus 2 employees 90 on in -season days 30 to 50 in the winter plus 4-5 employees (doubled in the summer) 50 per day plus 4 employees 50 per day plus 3 to 4 employees 7.3.1 Traffic Related Safety Issues Exists. The Churnieys' application is for two professional office buildings, The number of stories or businesses in each is still undisclosed or unknown, Assuming that each building held only one professional office, based on the above clientele counts for two professional offices, in and out traffic, the clientele numbers above would have to be quadrupled to account for the traffic. Each of the two offices would have in and out traffic for each client served. it is entirely feasibte that each building, even if single story, could house two or more professional offices. Each building could be two stories high (or higher), and double the traffic possibilities. Considering the traffic from the high school, added to the traffic from a minimum of two professional offices, congestion could become unmanageable around the high school exit and Cinderella Street without further traffic assistance (suck: as a traffic light at an already unaligned intersection -- just planning the traffic light might be a nightmare). Due to the general nature of the drivers at the high school, a higher number of inexperienced drivers use its entrance and exit than any other single driveway system in the City of Kenai. Not one map presented by the Chumleys has shown the location of the high school exit in relation to their proposed site plan. 7.3.2 One Accident is One Too Many. Unfortunately the peak traffic congestion times are also the tithes children are walking to and from school. It is obvious from the data collected that safety risks, particularly to our children, will escalate if this CUP is approved, This is of utmost concern to the neighbors and rightfully should carry tremendous weight in making the decision to approve or decline the CUR d;. ENO REIDNE The history of this neighborhood and its interaction vaith both the Kenai City Council and Commission demonstrates a highly collaborative effort of the majority of property owners to preserve and maintain the low density residential character of this neighborhood. 81 Historical Data In 1985 the citizens of this neighborhood petitioned the City offering to pay 200/6 assessments for sewer and water improvements contingent upon the city rezoning the definer: area from RR to RR7. We ultimately paid 25% assessment. City of Kenai Assessment Roll records show total amounts paid were $328,181 or $287,869 excluding government properties. Many residents paid 'these assessments over a ten year period at a 70% interest rate. The residents of this neighborhood confidently invested in the Clty of Kenai. We agreed to pay and we did 8.2 Linkage of the 1985 Assessments Levied on Residents and the RRi Rezone In return for the approximate $300,000 investment made, the residents received a rezone to RR-1 and at very least reinforced our right to "have a say in how the neighborhood is developed in the future" with particular upfront understanding that our intent was to avoid a "patch work type of development, almost a Spenard-like type of development..." (Board of Adjustment Packet, BA-56) To breach this good faith agreement is a detriment to the overall community. it erodes confidence in the city leadership's ability to plan and zone in a responsible, progressive and consistent fashion. It deteriorates the motive for future investment in our city and ultimately deters future growth and economic vitality. These points are further supported in the Planning Commissioners Handbook The determination as to the legally binding implication (i.e. assessment reimbursements) should not have to be established in a court of law. It is clear that the city understood the connection between the assessment and the rezone as indicated in a letter from former Finance Director, Charlie Brown. (Board of Adjustment Packet, BA-Cb, page 4) inherent in due process is the right of the residents to he hea,:d. Burden of proof far exceptional uses rests with the applicant and has not been met. Exceptional uses should be evaluated against rigorous and restrictive standards. The neighbors have supported their chosen direction for the city with well documented, rational "proof' that is not even their obligation to provide. There is no logical reason for alloirAng the "19BS Deal". issue to escalate beyond this level at potential expense and liability to all taxpayers of this city. How ever the legal implications are interpreted by individual council members, what occurred in i 985 must be given due consideration in malting the decision to accept or reject Chumleys CUP. NEW.TAIIIIIII m A - �b \, -,: 1� r J h -'✓ '' U - �t % 1t � •r � ?` � (� tom._ `� ...,.� T � % J Im Mom 601'T LOT 20 } i 60V'T LOT 21 { MAGIC AVE b6' R/W IDB_ZO" q0Y 1 a OleI 88, ZG 60V'T 1 0T 21 BEoo of ' Ab 1 e F p gpca N I 1.x 6 IAT3 3bobb R C-1 'J Ip .l r/9" Y.W YN1 PCCOKNEA � 5/e' BEBaR PECtlKflFO a 5/e' pEBMJKASiM CAP Ar m5 4XntY F ( p N...'A ( KNLa-. I EISN'T�M S i� I LOT g" j ar h..}r IDJ SITq.ei oo n a owe zo-s Iw.ap � O I' X. n "p LOOTi ss 8„ QaT3 ors R' w Tot o v gA;rs I.-�, Ew � 0 I ? gm by, 4 'a'I -' i �.- i ,m y- aR i i / ax �M�P��Oxa1 /tea p 1 �Y' i iUFs � ry q KA. 4T, 1-71- 1 A ey llf .faJ-1.� -ice NOTES /ai E 1e p.r o enl afro W hall ae ana or vi3lrin n /Y b M1 e menl MiM roulU ntv,t.m a'llh the abiG! of a mih!y a r lea , KA f a0i f w �� aa.em..a..m..l. No q< A. to Stota moin!dned ri9Dte-of-aor b.,n,Rt.d uNaan o11-d by SWIt of Al-ko 011,1 11 of T.Onapar:olion WASTEWATER DISPOSAL: P ec r .a Ea, a:.pel �.t eel 1,1, .... ..tan " bl lh. N. al-t.. B permitted .rlha, pmhonJl< portion of Ilay Ibt. ➢ep.11-1 of En.:.vnn..Yo Can ... -11.v el�ii6g9 .vtbaaka qnd 1-i.,-M -.1 by K.- Nv,nlaiPd Cade. kl. nvnrrr maP ' a CERTIFICATE OF 011INEK3HIF AND DEDICATION W. hereby certify that ae qm Co, oboe,, of the and pmpvty .M.. ma ae-O-d h.,.- ana K., .. hasp, ao., No. Wm of .ubdviaion ana by - free ca eenx a.alml. all rlgi ta-of-vay to pamk uae ana wept m .q.,men!a 1. m. uea ,open. wa fort.,, g.'Nfl mm lin U.ed of T-t q(r.cr q IN, y0omty ease not eoNom ,..j,i.N- awx, code this aubd.tai0n a, r.q6,. alplu!ar, qM °pprara of ban.6.tar, iW R. ChurtJ.y % Joe E, Chwnley Po Box 753 - 5!arting. AK 98673 NOTAKY'9 ACKNOWLCD5CMENT a Sob x,lb.4 bob aver. before me thia_s/----- do, a1 1957. Fgr�#ry�'z CS1smSD }i �Ae.�C.httYn.lae} l by NotvY Public to, AN � "N()FMp� . uY Cgmmiaafa. E,W.a 9r_ PLAT APPKOVAL TN. plat vm ...... a by lbe Kengi Peninsula Burqugb P1mn1.0 Cammiedo. of the mating of NaBsud4,1447 KENAI PENDISLkA RORONDN ayi Aut _ aetl Offidd PAPA JOC'5 9UDPlVl51ON A aubd.iafgn of Gov't Lol. 31 6 32 Sec 35. TON, Allw, SN. tvcgma nilOo ma NE 1;{ SE 1/a See. 33 . lb. city of K-c WNITYORD KU.y EYING PO BOY 042 - S➢LDOiNA, AK B..bs (G09) ?00-8082 NOTES- 1} {+ P 1¢ 4: 1 1 I Srrb 1 t n QiY of K ning 9 2) nPShYL47ERS1L45P1 IT fo 1 e m rl t tP AI k0 D _ t of 1kI t flan �ootico f�l y�� Vy p j� �}�{ E se @OVrj S LS t CS J 3) No p:-u xc¢za m Sm!¢ me9lab�ee DEW, pm'+licl?n1m, ep"-d JY Ih[ Siv;e a! IvzkO ➢Ill en, a h^.n[91T c 4) Fom ID G of IM1e bvBding 11DIII adp,,t 1. rights-of-.,0, iz vtza — rillllly +°II be COna1vC1<R - plvil3il.. Nv (tt°.mvmm T;e, `v—II pagiC ATe92j.hd.1 vNp(y t. Pc cosonl _ S6958'30 E 190 ).Q' N 5} lhl5 h e pcper %et NO IIIill SllRt^l" XAS PEF(FTIRM'D All data t END W Al I 3Y 33' �� -' 10 I--T--------- Vtdrty E",, uMesz nIT.1 ahc n°ied waz °M1!vSved SWAins:on, Pbt ; B]-SS Y.RO. 1 51 p`0. z VU p En:W I 1 o � i I o I i I p % 4if .......... r... [-...... S84'SBID'E 9901' f 1 ' G ND= (� 3-i/1� AWm fop Nanvmmt OI Rec°itl 9,/ Stale o: Alvzkp. 19a9 B V., Reev. ¢( Reccy . 1.-,, t 1 Iv nl(Uul:t E i d tFI. p. I A4P' a br 9 c J a/v> �y zo' lirnttt a s Eo.+rrmt a dnt +c-pr. d bT m9 <n m.zz+n i!ft2/D1 [ T Reemd CetT1 - POpe J°es S.rtdl.:zicn PI°t f 9J-23 KID 9 C�7 1 p Tract A �. 2270 At r �1 �I & n, , I h pag 6� gti9 \ 9- md`" SURD YOR 5 CERTFICATE t , bt 1 e [v yMqI, u <t 1. I 1m,i, IN._nl i repro f y a. PY Y ek m F flcmMry of prvcl.ce of Ivn1 SvrveAr2 m lM1etS101[ a( Aleske GT; Cf KEIEAI i THIS kenor 3`' N US n rut 3 3.5 T `oY 5D r NCINItY 2 ,� e MAP e° -r It" CERTIFICATE of OWNERSHIP and DEDICATION wE HExcay '", THAT T ARE IF, ovrNEx,+ Oc THE REu PROPErzm SH➢Ne wD PFOOAPED NEHE. AND OUT BE HERESY ACDPT 11S PLAN DF S_'BDntC!h: AND BY OUP MM CONSENT ➢EDIUTE ALL RiGBTE-OF- WAY AND PUBLIC AREAS TO PUBLIC USE AND GRANT ALL EASEMENTS TD 1,H(E� USE SUD"(`�ynry P O No, 753 !O.irr9. Alaske 99619 NOTARY'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT SUBSCRIBES AND SBORN BEFORE ME THIS _ayd_ DAY OE oaC n EHr zxfz}FOPL- 0. ChLRrcicy e..a E-tnA.. G C t .� sr_Teo2`Hu3eu MyN.,sImR,P.-SIT'�P�' t.NOTwNY POB ILC MY fifAIGIS51Cttl E%PIRESI�-� PLAT APPROVAL DFS PLAT WAS a^O"IE+ BY iNC KENA1 PSOBSUA, B➢fOUGN PLANNIND CPUMf59GN AT THE MEFITMC OF HENA, FENINtUTA BPO LM_+CN 5645fi'OfE 532➢62' V gye p Oi\fl l£pf q2q eff RECORDED AIS (q�tP Jf f0.I fR REO O:SF. NNJJJJJJ ts-nsx UTEOs*so e �?� N55MRS RVEYS 'r0.1f'2�2. .9yS 5O5 l AI A DA S ffit, V.ENAI_ ALA$fi 99311 Papa Joe's Subd. Chumiey Repiat A fepl0l of LIN 1. 2, 4-7 Pape J g S,,bd, Plol R 97-23 tacated rilhd+ 1Ce NEI/4 SE1/1 S"fion 31, TIN, R11W. 5M. Gty of K¢nvl, % vi Rec°ta�nq DIS1�c1. Kenai Peolnzule BmmgN, 0.lvzkeen 605 E.11- 0'1- Ke°al A 4° 99fiit 836 SGIC Pry¢ A qID f::• * zRya • �Y t f sm NJ I 1. The rari�aaat said for the land is irrelevant. Whether applicant paid 10 percent of or 10 times more than market value is not only irrelevant, it ,pales by comparison when you look at the collective financial investment made by the many neighbors who have lived in this neighborhood for the last several years to a few decades. Add to that the relational and quality of life investment these individuals have made. Multiple owners own or have owned more than one parcel and/or lived on more than one lot. Two owners are currently constructing new homes on second lots in this same neighborhood. When we moved, we didn't go far. We have even seen our children grow to adulthood in this neighborhood, some have " married each other and some second generation residence, as adults, are choosing to locate in this very same neighborhood. The relevancy of pricing becomes an issue when land management decisions arbitrarily made negatively impacts property values, particularly in cases where due process has been thwarted. Relative to this concept of "takings" the constitution is clear, "No person shall ...be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law...." (Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution), 1 The tree -Jess, "dust bowl" phenomenon perpetuated by the former owner. The trees area aeon -issue m making this decision. practically speaking the cleared trees would allow the new owner(s) to tastefully landscape their lot without the added step of removing unwanted and/or unsightly trees. The picture in the meeting packet is based on an old satellite photo and inaccurately shows forestation that does not exist. Currently this parcel has only a sparse scattering of trees along its perimeter. 3. What the applicant knew or did not know prior to the purchase of this property is no one's responsibility other than the applicant's and is irrelevant to the decision of rezoning, -Nor does the city have responsibility to remedy any misunderstanding to which the applicant adheres by voting in favor of or "through this vote." The IBuyer Beware" principal applies to us all. 4. The applicant's concern for the future of his family should something happen to him is an irrelevant criteria. With all due respect the applicant is rightfully concerned for his ffamily's future, The applicant is not suggesting his family's benefit be given precedence over the neighbors in this area. It would be highly inappropriate for the best interest of the applicant's family to take precedent over the future well being of an entire well established, well populated neighborhood. S. The former owner's intent to utilize this property for purposes other residential is irrelevant to this decision. The fact that the former owner basically held this property hostage for about a decade requiring a commercial price for a residential parcel should not impact, nor does it provide justification to convert this parcel to commercial. The former owner had every right to get whatever price he could get, and the current owner had every right to pay whatever he paid. Neither fact has any bearing on the decision this Council must make. This parcel was, is and should remain RRI I. -193- rr¢rperty'berarz-ncrruu vonuner tear -. ___....__.__. _. Photos: r CD -N 1 Property Detail Report - CoM merual - - City: Kenai Photos: Area: 305 - Kenal - - Gitk: Kenai Zip Code: 99611 - - Area: 305 - Kenai Address: 105 Trading Ba i - Zip Code: 9%11 fHLS Number: 08-14191 � i Address: 255 S Willow M4S Number: 08-4911 Uso -nke i't ry .,_ .. }'r �`y(p P'f , t roperty Detail Report - Commercial Was: �•r*..' 'Al ,r 1 Property Detail Report - Commercial Phatos. y i 4- City: Kenai Area: 305 - Kenai Zip Code: 99611 Address: 11823 Kenai Spu MILS Number: 04-313187 us. - ate i aMm .,,fir. - _.. v t i n� .'•.4i i:. a3S + Q �1 Ij Property Detail Report - Commerch,f Photo.: City: Kenai Area: - 305 - KeN Zip Code: 99611 Address: 135 N Wdk -r"RS Number: 08-12544 MJ f.Wa C" r tk Property Doia1 Report -Commercial city: Kenai Photos: City; Kenai Area; 305 - Kenai - Area: 305 - Kenai Zip Cade: 99611 Zip Code: 99611 Address: 12624 Kenai SpL — - - Address- 405 Overland h9LS Number: 08-15874 Use 11-e i-i m the nn � in x m an `PUr io PtLS Number: 07-11479 use r(*e 0) pm 03 _ . C: +JNfN+�revmmimsi¢4.'4iPFa�mmena - . Cr 9 � S Property Detail Report -Commercial Photos: i � itjwj z5 Detail Report - Commercial City: Kenai Area: 309 - Kenai City. Kenai Zip Cade: 99611 Area: 305 - Kenai Address: Kenai Spy - Zip Zip Code: 99611 MLS Number: 06-10474 Address: 135 N WiOow St _ ._. MLS Number: 00-12514 Ilge OLe (I-) [4i on s'C T rn f ^. Kgy a t she n - £„, 5g nfii,n t•b(.n. °:-b, f ,fxeisu'� tH �} "�::�q _ xProperty Detail Reportr commercialDetail Report - Ff .`7 L �j City: Kenai Area: 305 - Ka iai ZIP Code: 99611 Address: 10419 Kenai Spur Hwy MLS Number: oe-14192 Use dv, (+1 ns, !ht" zna 3,; zee_ca la :':r:'g. Sy�ut ktadV City: Kenai At": 305 - Kenai Zip Code: 99611 .Address: 1022.4 Kenai Spt MLS Number: 089589 I *'hp {-1-b. ot. dw-•a^rz #a _. 5-. az w�. >L; Kenai SpLa. Nanj W17 x r 11 > .: s e3 z9 'kv v`¢' fkz Tawrc Kermi Genera@InFormeiiorz i1 fat S9• fie 51401 _ Zoning: UNft Building Ion conveniently located crone to Kenai $ Soitlotna. Zoned for Single Family; Mufti & an comerciai. e Look. for real estate slqns. K-Beach road pass Bridge Access road, Turn Lett on Eider past beaver por d.' Cerkral Jr '.lai. Commercial Ase>xe: t`uavW 1'W.dir.MAd RrmN_ _ t 804.895 Rivers iew Or ° - * Closest Town: Kenat General Information L.o£ S4 Fla 109336 _ Aerea®e:2S7 Zoning: LC Panoramic view of Kenai River, Cook islet It mountain range. Rare 8 unique Historic Old Town original Townsde Wuf f front, Cook krlel parcel, Location would be prime for residential, commercial, professional office space. Includes sewrai structures, value Is placed in land. From Kauai Spur Highway gong north, turn left on Main Street, follow to Riverview Drive on left, loss al end of street. • rRTUI 14031 f(eni Spur Rudy Closest Town: Kenal ff9: 602' are: 1.57 Great lot on Kenai Spur Hwy. just across from Redoubt. City sewer & water. Land is cleared. General commercial. Kenai Spur Hwy, headed north, property is across highway from Sperrards at corner of Redoubt and Kenai Spur. View Business in Kenai in Growing... Corrnercial lot centrally located in Kenai just off Spur highway. Zoned General Commercial... MuBipie uses allowed for developmerf_ City wader sand sewer available and easy access. Only $33,680. Move FasU Right on Mon. Corner of B rch and First Avenue Coded L Land Features: Southern Exposure, Stub Out - Water, Stub Out - Sewer Level ._ R C i ..... _ _ UUU Airport Way Closest T¢mrn: K.uw • •- _ General tnformativn Lot SR• - t 0759 -Ft a@creege: 2.47 Zoning: CG .� ,.-.,_._ ..... _ These three (3) parcels of land are located new the KEMM Airport right in the heart of a rapidly growing retail area of the cily. Neighboring development Includes. Home Llefid, Safeway grocery store, 3-13ears, and the Kenai Chrysler Center. crnrenny under coo iiuction(5 a new Lowe's HW (abutting the subject property to the north) and e WM-Mart planned to the east across Marathon Rd l From Kenai Spur Highway turn MVV on Airport Way (towards the Airport) and property is on the right beyond Kenai Chrysler Center. HFgh School: Not Coded Jr nigh: Not Coded Elementary: Not Coded _ land Type; Commercial - Walertrvm: PJo Waterfront Access: paved, Mali rained c � x� �� f, 4995i Eider iDr I Z91u,� ;p,r - �M ��:, Closes8 Town: Kenai t Genoral information Lot 5€i. Fl.:: 47045 _ Zoning: I,"< Building lot conveniently located close to Kenai a Soidatna. Zoned for Single Family, Muni 8 commercial 1 r K-Beach road pass Bridge Access road, Turn Left on Elder past beaver pond. Look for real estate sign Nigh School: Kenai Central Jr Utah: Kenai Elernenrimu : SewsM View Land Tppe; Residential, ConrrrierciM Land Factures: Covenants, Highway Frontage, Mufii-Family OX Topography; Level b�. Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION „ RESOLUTION NO, PZ07-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNCIL THAT KMC 14.20.125(a) BE AMENDED BY B)URF t1 THE REQUIREMENT THAT c OWW' TS BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS USES IN THE CENTRAL MIXED USE ZONE WILL BE' RF,SOL��T7IN`�'A'-�Zi6I2�:(JE�r�St� �». WHEREAS, KMC 14,20,1.25 established the Central Mixed Use Zone (CMU zone); and, WHEREAS, KMC 14.20,125(a) provides that conflicts between residential and business use in. the CMU zone shall be resolved in favor of business; and, WHEREAS, conflicts between residential and business uses in the CMU zone should be resolved according to the best interest of the city according to the principals set forth in the Kenai Zoning Code rather than automatically in favor of business; and WI-IEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Kenai to amended K2v1C 14.20125(a) by removing the requirement than conflicts between residential and business uses will be resolved in favor of business. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMIS SiON OF THE CITY OF KENAI RECOMMENDS THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMEND KMC 14.20.125(a) as follows; (a) Intent: The CMU Zone is established to provide a centrally located area in the City for general retail shopping, personal and professional services, entertainment establishments, restaurants and related businesses. The district is also intended to accommodate a mixture of residential and commercial uses [WITH CONFLICT BEING RESOLVED IN FAVOR OF BUSINESSES). The CMU Zone shall be designed to encourage pedestrian movement throughout the area, ,Building and other structures within the district should be compatible with one another and the surrounding area. PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 11 thth day of July 2047. 151 Aw�4 OuNbveukber. IZ MtheTmct & Papa Joes Subdivision cw= befmn the City of Kauai Planning ,& Zoning Com sim of IK�fik-h I am amelp ex d=- Mis & for a second When this issue Arst came up,,I vArftd t& her both aides of -the argument bef*re ocjj&eg to any cOnclusim Initially, the Aa=it neighbors teshj5ring were not mall y opposed to Dr. Wortham's office proposal, but to the m-zone, however by November, thaose same individuals oAmsed the building pbnmd n=m After much thought I had plawn.-od to v(Ae tor the rn- onebut is the , end, wWaWayed me to VOTO against it at the last Miatims was when a neighbor stated that they di&'t care 16 sii pleura, Without mu %= builton tim lot I voted aPi='ft t aaecMomft say "fgne , if gzaf s *bat yots, rMlly -vm f", but at- o b mause i Irnew it would 9r, befole- the council fora Baal deL-minatior.t, so it was a Way for me to weenie out in thp, -5EIE offtir oppas4om 11W MS not dw correrzt VMY tzar me to ca� a troft. Thatb said, rstand t�.-,4scmt s4hhor s tullag rs.concern and ptvte=wwss Tegarding possible imphowever, i- must sap I doftt agree a$dSh daeiratualysas. Dr, '%X6rdnmIsPr0PeTtYis CUr=tIY,Mtreeless, hi -Way froLaP eye- sm mid he has no plans to buildhis he= th-M.Even if he item-Wt the owner, I don't believe this lot is conducive to m3f owner building a =idwce Thne. 7"here mt a few residential homes that, from the Spur but I'm lint amom of any u%f homac V, anstgucti6u, along IEW s coniden Options for Dr Wortham don't include leaving- it as n.is, as,he obviously wanm to r=oup big investment A ounditional usepermit siMpty doesn't prmideDn Wortham any long term assurances aud-Puls him icana%im-Ud end unreasonableposition as it mla:L-s to his invegunen, & plans for this lot Dr. Worthm's to Limited C.Orfa=oial would.allowthe erty to'hwVC some Control andieveisftereguding nis plans: Aspropawd, his plan is vTable, redistic, lo-,k impact and it talces into consideration, a "residculialr- look to his proposed baild-ings- should the rezxfail, in my opinion, theme of Most conducive to this cleared rural residential iot is probably multiple apartmews vkioh wilizat anhwme the chy and I flaink- the nexghbor� would evennially deplore ftm BUr, Dg. WGrftm could get lei _Money out of the- proped-y, Under -the- -Rzural Residenfi-I Mme,vpto 6,Ln p1m.4."'Could be kaft vu&let and neither the neighbors nor the Pity would have a say as to their design, laqd=ape or buffer. Lowo's and Tvajmwt = here aml,r th then], a need for more apaltneigs to aceemmodate employee's 'nespeoth'a wpges, and With this kes close proximity to StGres arw schools, That WMI4 eranyane else to attempt toxecover their Una vesument, and if Dr. Wartham Can't build his office there As proposed, 1%on he or 9aueone else must look at the Io on,enpmol diti caii con on, zonhIg & the current economic =--=Stan= to dictat-, what said pnovide finnexal mwvery. plan and code, This high-iksy corridoz is noted in the eompmh la Ig VA s en,sive p nejo� thdism si Ioa of low impact transitions between residential nad eomrrserad, nis proposed plan and M7=C request appears to be a good e=mple of why the city added L.-auted Counnoreial as a ramns of treasrumung prmperdes and axes pllffe-. what a Limited Commotmal one should look like. -200- . W*r l l Plan iS'W ;.vOWe laic,.. litaas,= Haply taa bad l is OWn single office .buffding. ale i rai is I?etFi ag xc uea c 'alrtrart f%a :ss:an ecoraraaraic reality the,--- days ' x Gael a necession —and that .eks zoncePtualepausion. plans for additional prolcasionsl offices for years to come, 11MOW and, I do appnediate that you wzizb re sy..S_-Cammy conxlmzd the Valicik and aesthetics of fare proposed plan as well .as irnpw rs of traffic, Balsa, lighling, clientele,, hours of, operation —any conceMliblenega e.mxpo&to the €reighborhoad.that.fi mold think of, but I can't reAffly find any. The adjacent neighbors smr vAlling to deed oar overseer;, knovA4 & in my opinion, aestheficiffly ple asing pkma for tvhat—v er outer eo 6aoa. ssenssAaiaiiiieszalkmdunder Rm7IR= t zoring. WbIch 'l doet 'i :is a gazubleft,etty should take, The council is charged with compliance to the, code, and act; tD review the -v4dity and ice. otproposals, but also to h etne eaties best im=5t to On der es a whole. It is my opinion that the current proposed plan r e ets the crater k to -4,7o e and that it aural ulti rattily improve titre 1 •athe c€ty for all residems andvisito s al e;t#ra drirao , town'To shop & enjo plat �rlae 04F of T.Mai hasto Q fe". While I wtadW:like to suppad-.adj ett, residelm, I feel Zile council inust consider passage of this re-neno west as odor € ptions are simply not. desirable for IDr Ws xthanv, fear the City of Kenai .said .ir,rny humble opinion,the ,Idiactnt rmioftrs. -201- Here are your Saved Favorites Houde Mar, NoffnberLA071-2,2,, 7clislay, _Q9 ie Le—f P—M—favorites Bedrooms: 6 Levels: I . .. ...... . . Mareby—this desangw tv o—I Bathrooms: 5 Width' 82'0 Car Stalls: I Depth. 62'0 Square Feet: 2818 %J Viewdetalis Desilgner Notes: GREENRIDGE 3 Hoods Mars NiprinbGrz L4W7-5.2 Bedrooms: 6 Levels: I Delete from —fa V P,fIfd; More bthgdgLs—igner Bathrooms: 3,3 Width: 70T Car Stalls: I Depth: 65'0 Square Feet: 2802 view diusAls; Designer Notest DANYELLE- Triplex Maoist Plan Nunbcn Ii Delete from favorites Bedrooms; 6 Levels: I More -1py this_desi ner 211k T Bathrooms: 6 Width: 6S is o; Car Stalls: I Depth: 69'0 Square feet: 3030 Wew details Designer Notes: GREENPJDGE 5- Triplex Vinusin Plan mum.bissri Ir"'OT-Q.2 Bedrooms: 6 Levels: 2 Delete fromfavorite, More jj�es , sec Zz xBathrooms: 3.3 Width. 74'10 Car Stalls: I Depth; 40'0 Square Feet: 3S28 view details Desligner Notes� TRIPOLY- Triplex House Man Nuqniissam DIM7,104, Tr9pter, f Bedrooms; 3 Levels: 2 all More bh�tlms designer Bathrooms: 2.5 Width: 67' 8 Car Stalls: 0 Depth: 47- 0 Square Feet; 4145 Vom, details Designer Notes: "HAMDEN" This is a tri-plex with 3SR/3bath, Unit "A" Measurements Unit morg! >::L Nauss Plain Nuonijoarr HDIS69n Irripicot Bedrooms: 2 Levels: I Bathrooms: 2 Width: 122' 2" http://www.am.azingplans.coii-Lfeatalog.php?action=807 -202- P-10 qe AoD:LLaY.P—rLt—S S More —by_this designer — 1/2/2009 . " 4 ;";.etc .t�,"•' Car Stalls: 1 Depth: 55' 10" Square Feet: 4194 view details Designer Notes; Each Unit: ' 396 sq/ft Tri-plex A Traditional Neighborhood Design triplex more » NoWpSQ PrTv 0 Pi 7U ntlyM WM"O"' aU, Tel(•P{:2U.. Bedrooms: 2 Levels: 1 Bathrooms: 2 Width: 123' 2" Car Stalls: 1 Depth: 53' 10" Delete from favatres lire by this deslgner Square Feet: n40 vim details Designer Notes: Each Unit: 1180 sgjft Tri-Plex Traditional Neighborhood design in multi -family more >> E-0OMO Man JC1WiTi,Dikovt IDMV7,20 ., Vilefsac Bedrooms:4 Levels:2 QA_IO rCM=aY0 5 —More bythis g1gsaner ', Bathrooms: i In 1 � � Width: 72' - 0" Car Stalls: 0 Depth: 50` - 0" t 3 r Square Feet: 4397 viev., detatls {1i 1 Designer Notes: . �.t Apt #i 1st level: Foyer with coat closet, kitchen with island! lunch counter, moo e >> BOOKMBRK ids 7 d2miaIlan Resources J� g,op Ter D"Dc uiw l$ sj6rd`s a VwIndtir P Shades. o Qis�c yLnt'Jyood Blin o Chea ux yyyoC Bhijg Home _ ulidinq Gorums o Discount Verticai Blinds o Discount Mini Blinds o Discroun hula ades o Discount „w dP Shadts 89m a o Discount Bamboo_Shadgss o HlorizonWl Window Shadings Resources DirectM o Bamboo Sliding Panels a pleated Shades House Plars Glosss;Y View our Home moans Defin ons Tlbeimicpilign Home Bulkdlng &House Plans Llnk Program � S unt 1'-`'p'= )fla d 800, p:01,06 'rr FisnC'ZI ot't .:".4 i t. i. ,e4t .aSw* •p, Yatiuwtyl`. r 1 t ml .r ".,^In n6 bi vnr, I( Ohl'..n ji fa, `.L[ rt'Y ,',rfC vi (I r.xsi v ell •': LV4`('. {Mr r Cr,; ,CrE ITI I V � I 1 r r.,j . v4 F Uorl of Itl f -Y bQm(, Ir f L floor IA By serudilling I td "tI 1 (, J th l 'Y 1 S i' iU 5 pm ar piths ul t t' ru . { igrm for n nce,, hot on rue lhU m!1 rt< You n i, < i out toe cl i t � rn U tu, our "hmu,c "hi , .. clukhe c vccd, n oc f 7n" < utc " ,i. t UICUPndor, v ronile desi,ris. "'Vs , i- lec on or c,l. i,e new l our a ik>ol h ,cr, '<,unu 6t dLt ict. f� c ll vo r, -� LhF to rs r 1% rv' iu, : t I L hi <.t � i r Lu ic,..I].,:n ' 'L: bZII -i n( ; an:l c. rck ,L ti'C' rol Dt -��. n° tort, G c ce:lf 111C� I:"3r1 nL, GUUH"I CCU _u . atop://vA"V amazingplans.com/caiatog.php?action-80 1/2/2009 -L03- . ,. Te�eaFawc 967-2Ea-?'189, May 31, 1984 Mr. Charles A. Brown Finaiice Director 210 Fidalgo Kenai, Alaska 99611 Re. Your letter of May 24, 1984 Assessment Districts for Princess and Magic Streets Dear Mr Browne This matter has gotten completely blown out of proportion. The people that live over in the area of Princess and Magic Streets were under the impression that they were going to have considerable street improvements without putting underground water and sewer in first. In other words getting the cart before the horse. They went to the City Council with their request that the City put in sewer and water before doing anything else. During the course of the meeting one of the City Councilmen inquired if the people in the area would be willing to pick up :part of the cost i.e. 20 or 25%. Pursuant to that request and inquiry, the parties of the original petition were recontacted, four were out of town and one refused to pay anything and the others agreed to pay a portion of the costs of the installation, Now I find the whole thing has gotten completely out of context to the extent that it is ridiculous. I am going into the second paragraph on the second page, "in general, the City has requested that: the petitioners waive the 25% limitation on assessments" that is not true, Councilman Wise inquired whether these people would be willing to pick of 25% of the cost of water and sewer. They agreed, they waived nothing. Based upon your letter of May 24, Councilman Wises' inquiry was an exercise in futility and a jousting at windmills for my clients to answer the question. It apparently is not possible to -'do this. I am going to advise my clients that they should seek to get these improvements put in at no cost to them on the basis of the fact that the City has and in the past and regularly put in streets, sidewalks, gutters, sewer, water, and storm sewers without any assessments whatsoever to the adjacent landowners and for them not to do so would be a discriminatory act on behalf of the.City. If they decide they want to pursue that matter it -204- v)Ap'92� we, the undersigned property owners, desire the Cienai ..c establish an assessment district in the area described in Exhibit 1 which is attached to this petitionm Requested improvements includes 1) Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply Systems 2) Assessments for the improvements shall be limited to twenty percent M%) of the actual costs of the imprpvemer.ts. 3,) 2•hia p,z,,i t'on sha11 be v;a1 C\P:I._,> upon t h a prir,r ii1 `_nc with the appropriate adrnin'ss:reeiae official for the C tj of Ken.a-1, of a cMlid put:itiars., conta.4ni.ny sufficicnt signat.ares, for the rezoning of substantially the area described above, £gain RR to RR 1 . ?rope ty Property Legal Description $orough baner's Owner's Of P= rty Name ,F,i,�c{naJ;Fe (Print) s r 5 _�';'*•'�r'�c^ref 7%��r r�'rr'i%✓SSG 9_/(!.a>« 4Z_�- 1.4��4 JzL 31/ ic'S,G�O-o15 &Urtc �AG55 R1Lr.l o,t&)d/�--- 2 iVk /.P -1-2 aSe S e}YU 1 f i' iS err 5'i,',bi/ell 1 4 . f: 4 _ U Cos»...✓ I,�±L' l-�'%,/(,wTiU --- 1._n-- r n U�': C.: n : I�7 tlti - /IP 9f r<: ni `"IQ �aF: _>rY iy .,,. i�✓ �//!.,�T -��/ Ga?.� u� �%i✓ec= IG^•�'��1;C'uG ( '1 f`.."� /w .�,v t .�`/1�.r:j/-e%^�'✓"i/-�''�� .1w i..'� v t~c 'i '•{ i� 'f'Sx'1 e Y " t "r L-fi- � k-o- '" u OF K E N A I 219 HDALGO KEWAI. ALASKA 99611 -- TELEPHO14E 283. 7535 WO TO: Kenai City Council PROM: .Charles A. Brown, Finance Director DATE: March 25, 1985 SUBJECT: Assessment District - A1iak/mccollum On March 19, 1985, tha City received a revised petition for a water and sewer assessment district in the A1i.ak/McCollum area. The petition asked for the assessments to be limited to 20% of actual costs. in addition, as with the. HIL petition we received on February 5. 1985, it is coltinFent The scone of the water and sewer improvements requested by the petition. Ls smaller than that planned by the City. The benefitted lots, as requested by the petition, number 72. Therefore, 36 valid signatures are :squired. 1 believe that we have at least 39 valid signatures. `7;,hg ... ;.;,-- .---..-.- s Wa -0;A ncp va.7..i_di.ry of the rezoning You can review the map that is enclosed marked "Planned by City" and see the difference from that "R.equesced by Petition." The lots that are benefited by the water and sewer improvements, as planned by the the City, au;n'oer 89, They are Listed in detail on the two enclosed printouts. One printout shows legal descriptions, names, and addresses of benefitted property owners. The other printout serves as a preliminary assessment roll .A review of the preliminary assessment roll shows that the City expects total costs of the water and sewer 'improvement to be about $1,352,000 (excluding design). The City expects to assess 50% of that cost, or about 3676/000. Note that this is not what was requested by the petitioners; they requested an assessment of 20% of cost. All property owners will be given instructions on how to protest. M Fw Commission Decision AA A i I` f': N R C ¢� o 31 a ii'. R O a P F —207— t — Ida I COMMISSION MEETING DE MRRCH 25a 1990 in the March 5, 1998 issue of the Peninsula Clarion, reporter Dave Lucas explains how Kenai Mayor John Williams describes the role and relationship of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Kenai City Council. "The planning and zoning commission is second in its authority only to the council, added Williams. Commissioners have to register with the Alaska Public Offices Commission, file conflict -of -interest statements and meet numerous other bureaucratic requirements, despite being appointed, rather than elected. Williams said they put a great deal of time and effort into their duties and it isn't the place of the council to second-guess their decision." Mayor Williams is directly quoted as saying, "The city council puts a great deal of credence in what the commission does." We are pleased our Commission and Council work so well together. However, regarding the Hugh and Joe Chumley's Condtional Use Permit (CUP) we strongly urge the Council to carefully review, as we have, what occurred at the commission level regarding this permit and exercise independent thinking on this matter. City Attorney Graves reminds council members they ...... may consider the recommendation of City officials but may not substitiute that judgement for theirs." (Board of Adjustment Packet BA-1, p. 2) 1. COMMISSION HANDBOOK REGARDING CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES The commissioner's handbook clearly states, "The commission should not act on controversial, complicated, or difficult issues with more than one member absent." (Planning Commission Handbook, State of Alaska, June 1993, p.58) Two commissioners were absent from the March 25, meeting. Yet, inspite of both verbal and written requests from the public, and a motion from Commissioner Werner-Quade, the commission voted against delaying the vote. Unless the commissioners do not view this CUP as controversial, the vote that ccurred on March 25, should not have occured at that time. 1.2 DECISION COMMISSION MADE WAS BASED ON ERRONEOUS The commission's decision to allow the CUP was based on erroneous information as demonstrated in both the meeting record and the Finding of Facts. First a close look at the meeting record and supporting documentation reveals misleading and incorrect information presented by Mr. Hugh Chumley. 1.2.1 Map Chumley presented a map in which he claimed 53 families dwelled, 15 who were opposed to his CUP, 38 who were non -opposed. Chumley took the liberty to represent anyone who did not testify or sign a petition in opposition as being "non -opposed" Chumley also represented families as non -opposed where families did not dwell, and have not dwelled for months. Furthermore, he deleted an entire segment of the neighborhood from his map that has been actively involved with the development and shaping of this neighborhood for years. We have expanded the map and conducted a door to door survey to determine who is "opposed", who for reasons of their own choose to be represented as "no voice" and who is favorable to the Chumpley CUP. An additional category was created for those we were not able to contact. We have classified them as "unknown." See Attachment #1. This Map is based on actual family dwellings with the exception of the Tree Top Townhouses. We have represented the land lords preference due to the simple logistics of contacting each family and the imposed time constraints of the Board of Adjustments. Attachment # 2 is a map of land owner and demonstrates those land owners opposed to the CUP and the parcel the possess. 1.2.2 Majority/Minority Statistics Chumley states his CUP "is opposed by a MINORITY of the family households within the neighborhood." in reality a majority of the neighborhood has in the past and currently opposes the granting of this CUP for commercial professional offices. According to our door to door survey 43 families oppose the CUP, 3 have no voice (including 2 churches), 7 are unknown and .I ,(Chumley) is in favor. The erroneous information presented at the commission meeting claimed that only 15 (not the actual 43) households out of 53 total were opposed. Chumley's number of 53 includes 16 fourplex households, six of which were vacant at the time of the commission meeting. Futhermore it excludes important areas "within the subject area." Our total number of 54 includes two churches and, due to logistical constraints, only provides 4 counts for the fourplexes compared to Chumleys 16 count. For further accurate representation of the MAPS area please see attachment 1. 1.2.3 Position of Surrounding Schools Chumley states that his CUP "is no longer opposed by KCHS and the school PTA groups, based on 'Professional Offices' category. Attachment 3 contains letters from the Kenai Middle School PT'SA and Site Based Councils and the Kenai Central High School PTSA stating their concerns and opposition to the approval of Chumleys CUP. Petition signatures including the Kenai Middles School principal, Paul Sorenson and public testimony also reflect related opposition. The schools still have legitimate concerns that must be factored into the decision regarding Chumleys CUP. 1.2.4 Claims Compliance with Land Use Table Chumley claims his CUP complies with the Land Use Table requirements, This topic will be discussed in detail throughout this presentation and document. 1.2.5 Buy Out Offer From Neighbors Chumley relays the offer of residents to purchase his land for what he had in it. He claims, "I didn't think that was too bad ah ... ideal under one condition, that those opposed would sell us their property for what they had it in. But they didn't want to do that and I don't blame them." Unfortunately important details were omitted from this explanation and the end result in another case of comparing, figuratively speaking, apples and oranges. The offer to Chumley was for raw land. The residents making the offer had improved lands with homes, landscaping and in some cases paved driveways and walkways, therefore equity values could not be rightfully compared with raw land. Chumley's land purchase occurred within the last few years. Those offering to buy Chumley's land had purchased their properties ranging from approximately twenty to forty years prior Therefore "actual dollars" would need to be converted into "real dollars" accounting for inflation and the difference in purchasing power of a dollar from 1959 to 1995 to 1998 to provide a fair comparison. 1.2.6 Surrounding Property Value impact Chumely claims, "it's been proven or been stated by professionals that there is no devalue of property upon the current development plan." First of all the "professionals proved nothing, they simply shared an opinion. Second, the commission and the council should consider the increase in a realtor's commission if they sell developed commercial property in an exclusively residential neighborhood verses selling residential property. Was there potential benefit to the "professionals" for sharing their opinions? Third, because no one (including Chumley) knows what kind of businesses are going into these "professional offices" it seems more than a bit premature to be making claims of property value impact. Fourth, the most straightforward test of impact on surrounding property is to consider the implications for the landlord with properties closest to the land in question. Will the tenents of these duplexes continue to reside in the homes they have been in for 15 years and 3 years if a business moves into their front yard? What impact does that have on the landlord if he can not find tenants who want to live beside a commercial business? -209- 1.3 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The very premises the commission decision was founded on as outlined in the "Findings" document are at best questionable and at worst insidious. Furthermore, the commission seems to have taken on themselves the "burden of proof' that rightfully rests with the applicant (Board of Adjustment Packet, BA-1, page 2) by developing favorable arguements on issue the, applicant did not address or themselves develop. 1.3.1 Desirability of Property for Residential Use Findings state, "the property is no longer desirable as residential property' and "the only practical use would be for multi -family use". In an attempt to justify this conjecture the Findings explain that no new single family dwellings have been built bordering the Kenai Spur Highway in eleven years. This explanation is invalid as justification for declaring such properties undesirable for residential use for the following reasons. 1.3. 1 . 1 From the inception of a new community through its development the properties along the road systems are quite naturally the first place homes are built. The most obivous reason includes convenient access to the rest of the community. Therefore the Kenai Spur Highway corridor being referred to in the Findings is one of the older and more maturely developed residential neighborhoods in the community. The lack of new growth at this stage is an indicator of maturity, not undesirability. 1.3.1 . 2 The absence of new construction serves to further support the "intent" of the zoning and the desires of the residents to "perserve the residential atmosphere" of an open and uncrowded, low density neighborhood. It is very typical in this neighborhood for property owners to place their single family dwelling on a property that could actually accommodate 2 to 4 residents. 1 .3. 1 .3 In a recent survey conducted of home owners who live along the highway 12 out of14 stated they considered their homes to be suitable for residential usage. The first gentlemen who felt his home no longer was suitable explained the widening of the highway brought the road far too close to his front door. This is a variable Chumley can control, The other women who didn't feel it was suitable residential also did not believe commercial development should be allowed. As this survey was conducted, a number of the esidents stated their objections to commercial development. As one home owner stated, "I could put in a twelve-plex if I wanted to, but i wouldn't do that to my neighbors." 1 .3. 1 .4 Based on this reasoning, to be consistent, the City of Kenai would need to proclaim all maturely developed neighborhoods to be undesirable for residential development. Such logic is a formula for planning and zoning disaster. I .3. 1 .5 Another indicator of suitability is the single family dwelling in close proximity to the highway that recently sold that had only been on the market a matter of a few months. 1.3. 1 . 6 The Findings state, `Because of close proximity to the highway, the proeprty is no longer desirable as residential property ..... The only practical residential use would be for multi -family use (duplexes and triplexes are allowed in the RR-1 zone)." The opponents of this CUP would like to know what justification and proof is given for this judgement of desirability. Furthermore, how and why is land suitable for multi -family dwelling if it is not suitable for single family dwelling. 1.3.2 "The 1985 Deal" Findings state, "the proponents of this arguement would have us believe the city could never rezone the property, grant a conditional use permit, or a variance in the (NAPS area. Thus, under that arguement, fifty years from now if all the property owners requested a zoning change or a conditional use permit be granted, it could not be done," 1 .3. 2- 1 This dire oversight on the part of the commissioners who voted in favor of this permit is somewhat confusing in light of the sign variance (PZ98-097) passed earlier during the very same Planning and Zoning Meeting in which some of the same neighbors spoke in support. 1 .3.2.2 Such extreme deduction infers a preconceived bias that taints the objective course of due process. The proponents of the 1985 good faith agreement with the City of Kenai made their intentions clear from the beginining. "For the price of the assessment we want to have a say in how it is eveloped in the future. At the present time its RR in character has 2 potentials, If we do not rezone it then i -210- I -:S see a patchwork type of development, almost a Spenard-like type of development with people who want nice residential lots being slowly squeezed out or chased. away .....I understand that the City Comprehensive Plan calls for such an area in the City. One with larger lots so that people can actually live close in to town without having to live on smaller lots." (Board of Adustment Packet, BA-56, Rick Baldwin) "The 1985 Deal' as it has come to be called and our approximate $300,000 investment, should at very least ensure an untainted due process. 1.3.3 Less Restrictive Standard of Exceptional Land Use Applied Findings state, "We adopt a definintion of similar as "having characteristics in common" rather than more restrictive as in "strictly comparable" because the latter definition would make the new land use table and KMC14.20.150 irreconciable. 1.3.3.1 The Kenai Comprehensive Plan establishes, as policy, the requirement that commission and council members "Follow consistent, enforceable policies in administering the Zoning Code, pursuant to Title 29, Alaska Statutes. The City should:.... (d) Review the Conditional Use Section of the code (14.20-150) to ensure that rigorous standards are applied for approval of exceptional uses..." (P. 69) 1.3.3.2 The latter would not render KMC14.20.1 50 irreconciable. It would simply require planning and zoning decisions to be be made from a full spectrum of considerations and "take zoning actions which are "in accordance with" or in conformance to the adopted comprehensive plan (AS29.40.040 (a))." (KCP P. 69) 1 .3.3.3 Findings state, "Does a professional office have characteristics in common with a triplex in terms of its effect on the neighborhood? We find it does. We do so because the proposal is for a professional office with a buffer of 30 feet behind and on the sides of the property. That combined with the limited traffic a professional office requires means the neighborhood impact is no greater than the two three- plexes with access on Cinderella which could be built without a conditional use permit." A very relaxed interpretation has been offered by the signing commissioners based on a 30 foot buffer zone and a parallel between residential and professional office traffic. Objective thinking might lead one to ask some obvious questions. Why is a 30 foot buffer zone acceptable to insulate residents from businesses when an approximately 100 foot tree buffer zone (currently available to applicant according to maps submitted with CUP application) is not acceptable to buffer residential development from the Spur Highway? On what bases is the traffic flow comparison founded? How many triplexes require a 14 space parking lot and is this any indication of expected traffic flows? Section 7 of this document futher discusses Traffic Patterns and provides some factual basis of comparison. Section 7 does not support this Findings Claim. 1.3.4 incorrect "Facts" in trio Findings The Findings states the assessement rate was 20% when it actually was 25%. 1.3.5 Omission of Facts Points of pertinent interest to these proceedings were left out of the Findings record in a manner that provides a biased representation of the facts. 1 .3. 5. 1 The Findings state, "Ten people spoke at the public hearing, including one of the applicants Hugh Chumley and eight residents of the MAPS area." The record should also reflect the stand- in liaison from the city council requested, was granted and did step down and addressed the committee speaking in unquestionable favor of the CUP application. 1 .3. S. 2 The Findings state, one must recognize that the land use table in effect now is different than that in effect during the last application by the Chumleys for the property." Chumleys last application was submitted on December 12. The new Land Use Table was introduced on December 17 and adopted on January 7. Chumleys application was addressed at the commission level on January 15, and again at the council level on February 4. The new Land Use Table was effective February 7. The Findings statement leads the reader to assume the Land Use Table rules have changed since the previous application was addressed. In reality the commission and the council both were aware that the CUP was being evaluated in light of the new Land Use Table. -211- G 1.4 COMMiSSIONERS VOTE 1.4.1 We understand that Mike Christian will address the council this evening and he is opposed to the CUP. 1.4.2 Karen Mahurin regretted not being able to attend the commission meeting due to a family medical emergency. She is opposed to the granting of this CUP for reasons outlined in her letter seen in attachment 4. 1.5 OBJECTIVITY OF COUNCIL MEMBER The process outlined in the Planning Commission Handbook (1993) for "Due Process" requires certain behaviors and actions from the elected and appointed officials of any Alaskan city. "The commission has a responsibility to assure that its decisions are fair, impartial and objective, unbiased by even the appearance of having been privately influenced .... ".... the hearing must be conducted as to be free from bias and prejudice; it must not only be open-minded and fair, but must have the appearance of being so....." Smith v. Skagit County (1969)..... "Members of commissions with the role of conducting fair and impartial fact-finding hearings must, as far as practicable, be open-minded, objective, impartial and free of entangling influences and capable of hearing the weak voices as well as the strong," Buell v. City of Bellingham (1972). (p.45) q �� x♦� �o . o e »3 v $.,, ;i.,,� The Kenai Comprehensive Plan (KCP) is designed to do more than fill a legal requirment. It is designed to represent our community's vision for the future and serve as a guide for decision -making and a blueprint for growth. It potentially can serve as the standard by which the legal system measures actions and decisions of the city leaders. The following extracts outline the. reasons why the Chumley CUP must be denied. 2.1 City of Neighborhoods -- the KCP recognizes and supports the uniqueness of neighborhoods. Kenai is characterized by dispersed pockets of development separated by drainage ravines, bogs, and the Kenai River floodplain. (P. 17) These separate developable areas have tended to create a city of identifiable neighborhoods, each with a somewhat different character. When asked, Kenai residents say they five in such neighborhoods as Woodland, Beaver Loop or Valhalla [err -MAPS] -- not just "Kenai". (P. 17) italic own 2.2 Separate Lower Density Housing from High Density and Commercial Uses -- the KCP acknowledges the need for separation. Small highway commercial uses may be found in close proximity to single family houses, duplexes, and an occasional apartment building. While such diversity is well established and accepted in the original townsite, it may be obiected to in some other neighborhoods where residents which to maintain larger groupings of lower density housing separate from higher density and commercial uses. (P. 19) (emphasis added) The City should strive to maintain physically separate neighborhoods in Kenai, and strengthen the "identity" of each neighborhood by encouraging development of public and private facilities... (P.22) Strengthen residential neighborhoods by better control over the development of different densities of housing in neighborhoods. (P. 22) 2.3 Restrict Commercial Uses to Commercial Zones -- the zone of Papa Joe's subdivision is RR1, not commercial. Support development of neighborhood -serving commercial uses ..._ in commercial zones. (P. 22) 2.4 Restrict Commercial Uses Which Do Not Serve the Neighbors -- their is no need to permit this conditional use. Discourage highway commercial uses in residential neighborhoods which have no direct service relationship to the needs of residents or the neighborhood. (P,22) Neighborhoods along the Spur Highway such as Wildwood, East Kenai, and Thompson Park/ Valhalla have small commercial districts, each with a variety of automobile services, liquor stores or small businesses, which do not necessarily serve the needs of the immediate neighborhood. The zoning for these commercial areas is General Commercial, the same zone as the dowtown area, but the residential neighborhood setting is quite different than downtown. Land use regulations should better reflect the differences between downtown commercial uses serving the region and smaller commercial sites in neighborhoods along the Spur Highway. (P.24) (emphasis added) -213- 2.5 Availability of General Commercial Land is Generous -- there is no need to make an ;ception and provide a CUP. There is a generous amount of land in the central business district to accommodate new commercial development, most of which is zoned General Commercial. (P.24) 2.6 Consistent Procedures Regardless of Changing Membership -- The rezone/assessment. of 1985 at very least established this neighborhood's desire to be afforded due process and be treated fairly and without bias on all future decisions impacting our neighborhood regardless of the personal agenda of individual and changing council and commission members. The City Council stands as a Board of Adjustments on appeals from decisions by the Planning and Zoning Commission. An appeal from a decision of the Council to the Superior Court shall be heard solely on the record established by the hearing officer, Council or other body (AS 29.40.969(b)). This means that Planning and Zoning Commissions and Councils must take pains to follow consistent procedures to insure fair and unbiased decision, regardless of changing memberships. (P. 69) (emphasis added) 2.7 Zoning Map and Code Required to Conform to KCP -- The KCP provides a more valid criteria of decision making than a controversial Land Use Table footnote. The Planning and Zoning Commission is responsible for amending the Zoning Code and official map. This will be required to make the zoning map and code conform to the adopted comprehensive p I an. (emphasis added) Normally the code should not be updated on a piecemeal basis, because provisions of various zoning districts tend to be adapted to others [setting trends], significantly weakening important distinctions. A clear, well -written code is important not only for administrative simplicity, but also to stand any appeals or legal challenges... (P. 69) 2.8 Rigorous, Simplified Conformance Standards -- The KCP requires rigorous standards tc be applied to exceptional use applications. it does not design interpretation and decision making to weaken and lessen the significance of residential uniqueness of neighborhoods for the sake of applying a more flexible application of land uses, particularly commercial. Follow consistent, enforceable policies in administering the Zoning Code, pursuant to Title 29, Alaska Statutes, The City should: (a) Maintain careful records ... in support of judicial review of appeals. (b) Take zoning actions which are "in accordance with" or in conformance to the adopted comprehensive plan (emphasis added) (AS 29.40.040(a))... (d) Review the Conditional Use Section of the code (14.20-150) to ensure that rigorous standards are applied for approval of exceptional uses... (e) Simplify residential zoning district classifications by amending the Zoning Code and enact new zones. (P. 69,70) (emphasis added) Contrary to the KCP, the new Land Use Table weakens rather than strengthens neighborhoods by making provision for less restrictive, more flexible development in our neighborhood. -214- In reviewing an application for a conditional use the City of Kenai Zoning Code, also called the Kenai Municipal Code (KMC) needs to be reviewed. 3.1 Conditions of Conditional Use Permits 14.20.1 SO Conditional Uses: (a) Intent: There are some uses which may be compatible (emphasis added) with principal uses in some zones if certain conditions are met. The Commission shall permit this type of use if the conditions and requirements listed in this chapter are met. Before a conditional use permit may be granted, the procedures specified in this chapter must be followed. (Ord. 1504-92) (b) Conditional Used in All Zones: ( 1 ) Uses not specifically permitted in the zone concerned may be permitted provided that the following conditions are met: [i] Such uses must be similar to principal uses permitted in the zone; [ii] Such uses must be in harmony with the intent of the zone. In order to grant the permit the council must find that the applied for uses are similar to the principal uses permitted in the zone and that the applied for uses are in harmony with the intent of the zone. "if an applicant seeks the allowance by the zoning board of a variance or exception, he has the burden of proving facts entitling him to it; i.e., he has the burden of setting before the zoning board the evidence necessary for exercise of its seasoned discretion." (Board of Adjustment Packet BA-1) The applicant fails to delineate any similarities between the principal uses permitted in the zone and their applied usage. Furthermore the applicant fails to prove the applied for uses are in harmony with the intent of the zone. Principal permitted uses are: i)One family dwelling; 2)Two/three family dwelling; 3)Churches; 4)Essential Services; 5)Farming/Gardening/General Agricultural; and 6)Off Street Parking. The common characteristics of these principle permitted uses include: principal activities occurring at each of these uses is non- commercial, the vehicular and pedestrian traffic is often known or knowable to the principal occupants, generated traffic in and oa,t of permitted use areas is generally low density' with the exception of Churches at strategic non -imposing times of the week and day, and the character of the neighborhood is enhanced by the familiarity factor as neighbors watch out for and help each other out. Commercial enterprises, such as professional offices, do not share any of these common characteristics. Their principal activity is most often commercial, the vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and out of the business will be primarily unknown to the principal occupants, generated traffic in and out will likely be high density (See section 7 Traffic Patterns), and the character of the neighborhood will be eroded as an unfamiliar public files in and out of the neighborhood. Thus professional offices are not similar to those principal uses permitted in this zone. Professional offices are not in harmony with the intent of the zone. The statutory intent of the RR-1 zone is contained in KMC 14.20.080, The intent stated in KMC 14,20.080 for the RR zones is to provide for low density residential development in a way that creates a stable and attractive residential environment and to preserve the rural and open quality of the environment. The RR zones are also designed to prohibit uses that would violate the residential character of the environment. It is.also clear that the intent of the residents who petitioned the City for an RR-1 zone in 1985 was to preserve the residential character of the neighborhood. (Board of Adjustment- Case No. BA-98-1, Decision, p.5) MAPS comprises 75% of all RR1 in the City of Kenai and Maps comprises 100% of RRl along the Spur Highway. For these reasons; the development is not consistent with the intent of RR-1. -215- 3.2 Most Restrictive Regulation Shall Apply When Conflict -- the KMC requires the "most estrictive" regulation in conformance with the KCP rigorous standard for exceptional uses. 14.20.020 (f) Whenever there is a conflict between this chapter and other ordinances pertaining to the regulation of property within the City, the most restrictive regulation shall apply. (Orris. 925, 990). (The Commission seems to be taldng the most liberal, rather than the most restrictive interpretation of regulations.) -216- A basic premise the supportive commissioners stated in advocating this application is the unsuitability or undesirability of this property for residential development. Section 1.3.1 of this document states 6 reasons why this premise is invalid. This section offers more explanations. 4.1 Manipulation of Suitability/Desirability 'Factor Desirability and suitable of land use can often be manipulated by the configuration and directional bias of the plat layout. If a parcel of land along a five lane highway is layed out so the two lots bordering the highway have frontages exposed to the highway (i.e. no tree buffer zone), the facilities located on the lots face the five lane highway, and access is confined to entrance and exit to and from the five lane highway, then the residential suitability is ast diminished. See attachment #5 On the other hand if the parcel of land is layed out so the two lots bordering the highway have maximurn'allowable tree buffer with optional fence between the home and the highway, the homes are set back as far away from the highway as practical for lot size, the homes face the opposite direction of the highway and the homes have accesschanneled through residential side streets, then residential suitability is maximized. See attachment #6. 4. Z Burdens or Hardship "The Board should not consider .... burdens or hardships arising not from zoning laws, but from plat or deed restrictions, since these are not relevant to proper grounds for relief from zoning restrictions. (Board of Adjustment, April 15, 1998 Packet, BA-1) The applicant has a variety of configurations and layouts available to them which provide suitable and desirable residential land. usage. As presented, the applicants layout provides self-induced restrictions that may produce unnecessary burdens or hardships for which the city can not assume responsibility. -217- The citizen taxpayers of the City of Kenai have elected the City Council to protect the best interest of our community. As the council responds to this appeal it is imperative that the legal implications of this appeal decision be considered. The 1996 Supreme Court of Alaska case of Griswold v. City of Homer and West's Pacific Digest contain valuable criteria that council members are encouraged to apply to legally sound decision making. 5.1 Conditional Land Use Permit as Viewed by the Law In reviewing a zoning and planning issue the legal system focuses on the actual purpose for which the land will be used, not on the semantics of the exception. 'The City (Homer) states that "this is not a case of 'spot zoning' at all, because the area in question remained BCD (commercial business district). However, treatise discussions of spot zoning appear to make no distinction between cases where a zoning district has been reclassified and those where a new use without district reclassification is at issue. [Griswold v. City of Homer 925 P.2d 1015) The exception being allowed is the issue, not what the exception is being called. Certain Commission and Council members have emphasized the distinction between a "rezone" and a "conditional use". The court system will focus on the "new use" regardless of semantical reclassification or lack thereof. 5.2 Spot Zoning Defined It is our position that if the City Council grants the CUP the Council will be illegally spot zoning and the Council's approval will be struck down in a court of law. In Griswold v. City of Homer, 925 P.2d 101 5, 1020 (Alaska 1996), the Alaska Supreme Court held that it would invalidate zoning decisions which are the result of prejudice, arbitrary decision making, or improper motives, and that zoning decisions which have no reasonable relationship to legitimate government purpose will be struck down as violative of substantive due process. The Court in that case held that spot zoning is per se illegal. The Court described the spot zoning situation as one in which a property owner seeks to establish a use prohibited by existing regulations. The Court discussed spot zoning as: "the process of singling out a small parcel of land for a use classification totally different from that of the surrounding area, for the benefit of the owner of such property and to the detriment of the other owners", and "the very antithesis of planned zoning." The court settled on the following definition of spot zoning for Alaska: "any zoning amendment which reclassifies a small parcel in a manner inconsistent with existing zoning patterns, for the benefit of the owner and to the detriment of the community, or without any substantial public purpose." 5.3 Jurisdiction Criteria In the Griswold case, the Court states that it would look at the following factor in deciding whether the action of the City of Homer was arbitrary spot zoning: (1) the consistency of the amendment with the comprehensive plan; (2) the benefits and the detriments of the amendment to the owners, adjacent landowners, and community; and (3) the size of the area rezoned. Other cases include an additional factor: character of the adjacent land. -218- 5.4 Comprehensive Plan in Griswold, the Court stated that consistency with the comprehensive plan is one indication that the zoning action in question had a rational basis and was not arbitrary. In this case, the current zoning is residential, and the applicant is seeking a CUP for a currently prohibited, noncomforming commercial use; therefore, it is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. This discussion if expanded in Section 2 of this document. 5.5 Effect of Small -Parcel Zoning on Owner and Community In Griswold, the Court stated that the most important factor in determining whether a small parcel zoning amendment such as this one would be upheld was whether the amendment provided a benefit to the public rather than primarily a benefit to the private owner. The Court considered public interests such as preservation of the neighborhood character, traffic safety and aesthetics to be legitimate and substantial concerns: and stated that proposals to change land uses that would negatively impact these interests were "tangible harms." Clearly in this case the only person that would benefit from granting the CUP is the private property owner. An overwhelming majority of neighboring residents are against this application. Further discussion of this point are in the following section of this document. 5.6 Size of Rezoned Area In Griswold, the Alaska Supreme Court stated that the size of a parcel proposed to be spot zoned is relative; that is, just because a parcel is a certain size does not mean that the zoning amendment will be either spot zoning or not per se. Nor can reclassification of surrounding parcels into a similar use as the proposed amendment be used to avoid a charge of spot zoning. This parcel is a small parcel rezoning in that the property is only 3-4 acres. It cannot be argued that this parcel is too large to qualify as spot zoning. 5., Character of .Adjacent Property Other courts have also examined the character of the adjacent property in making a determination whether a zoning amendment is illegal spot zoning. The more a proposed new use differs from the character and uses of the adjacent property, the more likely it is to be illegal spot zoning merely to the benefit of the owner. In this case, the surrounding character of the adjacent property is primarily residential. The property under consideration can be developed as residential property, such as single family; duplexes or triplexes. Thus, the City has no justification for approving the amendment on this ground. Sections 2 and 3 of this document further establishes the character of adjacent properties. The Alaska Supreme Court set out the rules that the City must follow in making its determination, as discussed above. Under those rules, the City must uphold the appeal and deny the CUP, for the reasons discussed above. 5.8 Burden of Proof Finally, the City Council is required to follow the rules of due process in cases such as these. No property owner has a "right" to a conditional use permit; in fact, the opposite is true -- the property owner has the burden of proving that the CUP meets the criteria set out above: consistent with the comprehensive land use -219- plan, benefits the community and not just the private owner, is not 'small parcel" zoning , and is consistent -ith the character of the adjacent parcels. The Planning and Zoning Commission acted improperly in )proving this permit, because the applicant did not meet his burden of proof in the Commission hearing; yet the Commission still granted the CUP. The Commission seemed to be placing the burden on the community -- it appears from the Commission's decision that the Commission will always grant an application for a CUP unless Kenai residents provide overwhelming evidence under some impossibly high standard known only to the Commission. This is not the correct analysis. The applicant simply cannot and has not met his burden of proof and the permit must be denied, -220- a l a d g fi 4' 6.1 Free Market anap Government Control In the decision passed down by the council regarding Chumleys' previous application the decision document states, "The free market, not the Board of Adjustment, will decide which commercial properties will be used and which will remain vacant." (P.6) In reality the Board of Adjustment and consequently the council and commission are not absolved of responsibility in this area. The market economy has been highly successful in most industrial countries, especially the United States. Even here, however, a perfect market economy does not exist because of the influence of three factors: large corporations, labor unions, and the government..... Government policies continue to shape the U.S. economy .... Government intervention can be regarded in two ways, actual government ownership of means of production and government influence in economic decision making, Ownership is easy to quantify statistically, but since influence is a matter of policy and custom, it is difficult to measure precisely. (International Business by John D. Daniels and Lee H. Radebaugh, Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 6th ed., (D1992, pages 53,54) 6.2 Commercial Vacancies are Community Good Issues The city leadership se ves as guardian of our communities best interest and caretaker of the greater public purpose and good. Policy decisions that influence market variables is a form of intervention and government control. It is commonly understood that supply and demand are the variables that dictate market direction. To advocate the increase in "supply" of commercial properties to a marketplace that has "a generous amount of land in the central business district to accommodate new commercial development" is intervention. Increasing the supply impacts the supply and demand relationship. The impact is that one land owner benefits at the cost of decreased demand to all other current commercial property owners. Furthermore the granting of the Chumley permit would further influence supply and demand by providing a single property owner an advantage that is not available to existing owners - purchasing at residential prices and selling at commercial prices. Without the exception (Chumley CUP) or the exceptions (commercialized Spur Highway corridor) of conditional uses, the free market, would in fact, force development back to the centralized commercial zone. It is a mere fact of supply and demand. Such movement is for the good of the city because it allows the natural course of economic checks and balances to infuse life back into a sluggish commercial sector. Intervention on the otherhand, contributes to rendering a sluggish sector into a slum and creating a liability for the City of Kenai, The city leadership is not exonerated when they tamper with free market variables through policy influences. 6.3 Precedent Setting Action With Long Term Community Good Ramifications The proposed conditional use issue transcends the applicant, the surrounding residents, and the commission and council. It impacts the good of the community, This is a precedent setting decision that will serve as a measure of accountability for years to come. What basis will future councils have for saying "no" to other CUP applicants if they say "yes" to the Chumley's. The proposed conditional use wilt be harmful to the community, not beneficial. The public has made it crystal clear to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to the City Council that they are against this application and against opening up the Kenai Spur Highway outside the City center to strip development as proposed by the applicant Their reasons correlate with those the Alaska Supreme Court deemed legitimate and substantial in Griswold v. City of Homer (92S P. 2D 1012,1020 (Alaska 1996)). The proposed development will destroy -221- the primarily residential character of the neighborhood, and permanently alter the lot itself -- once a commercial building is built, the lot will not be used for residential purposes again. There will be increased -affic caused by the businesses in the building, with increased noise, fumes and traffic hazards causing harm co the adjacent landowner's residential lots. The proposed development will interfere with the flow of traffic on the highway. The proposed development will contribute to unsightly strip development along the Kenai Spur Highway. -222- 7 TRRFFIC PIRITTERNS 7.1 Valid Planning Issue During the February 4, 1998, Board of Adjustment Hearing the applicant's representative stated, "... we feel a traffic problem, if it exists, is a traffic problem and not a property development problem and we think we would like to respectfully suggest that traffic problems be addressed with traffic control items." (Board of Adjustment Hearing, Chumley/Chumley Appeal, February 4, 1998, Page 6) The residents of the neighboring lots respectfully disagree. The Planning Commissioner's Handbook (June 1993, State of Alaska) validates traffic as a sound planning and zoning concern in the following statement: The effects on traffic congestion are also mentioned some in the conditional use section of a zoning ordinance. A permit granted or denied under this standard has a better chance of surviving judicial review if it is based on a credible traffic study which quantifies the effects of the proposed use. (68) 7.2 Traffic Study and Pertinent Statistical Data Residents of the neighborhood conducted counts of three main areas: (1) children in the neighborhood and at local schools (2) number of cars entering & exiting the Kenai Central High School from the Spur Highway, and (3) a count of clientele entering & exiting other professional offices to represent a possible traffic sampling for the proposed professional offices traffic. These counts were conducted by neighborhood residents around such priorities as family, school, jobs, and neighborhood issues in an all too short allowable time frame. Although they may not be an official traffic study, they do show that there is a traffic impact on the neighborhood and surrounding area that must be considered. 7.2.1 The number of children potentially affected by traffic concerns who live on the north side of the Spur Highway and who must cross a five lane highway to get to their respective schools is currently at 70 and will climb to 71 in approximately three months. The ages of these children range and the number is relative to change. See attachment # 7 for recorded tally of survey. The number of children enrolled in the area school are: 475 at Kenai Central High School, 455 at Kenai Middle School and 409 at Mountain View Elementary. These statistics establish the fact that many children will feel the impact of the council's decision concerning this CUP now and for years to come. 7.2.2 The number of cars entering & exiting the Kenai Central High School from the Spur Highway were tallied at three different counts. Plumber of vehicles going in to the high school: * first count 1:55 P.M. to 2:50 p.m. 66 * second countl 2:45 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. 83 * third count 7:07 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 165 (as many as 47 in a 15 minute period) (as many as 10 in a one minute period) * fourth count7:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. 191 !lumber of vehicles exiting the high school (offset exit from Cinderella St.): * first count 7:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. 90 • second count12:45, p.m. to 3:00 p.m. 78 * third count 7:07 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 79 (as many as 18 in a 9 minute period) (as many as 12 in a one minute period) * fourth count7:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. 50 -223- increases in traffic flows at peak hours due to the Kenai Middle School traffic flow have not been included in these counts. 7.2.3 Professional Offices clientele traffic (information obtained by phone calls to the businesses): (1) A Dental Clinic (2) A Medical Walk-in Facility (3) A Medical Specialist (4) Tanning Salon (5) A Hair Salon (6) A Chiropractic Clinic (7) An Insurance Agent 7.3 Conclusions 25+ vehicles per day plus 5-6 employees 20 on a slow day plus 3-4 employees 60 on a heavy day plus added employees 40 on office days (non -surgical days) 30 on off-season days plus 2 employees 90 on in -season days 30 to 50 in the winter plus 4-5 employees (doubled in the summer) 50 per day plus 4 employees 50 per day plus 3 to 4 employees 7.3.1 Traffic Related Safety issues Exists. The Chumleys' application is for two professional office buildings. The number of stories or businesses in each is still undisclosed or unknown. Assuming that each building held only one professional office, based on the above clientele counts for two professional offices, in and out traffic, the clientele numbers above would have to be quadrupled to account for the traffic. Each of the two offices would have in and out traffic for each client served. It is entirely feasible that each building, even if single story, could house two or more professional offices. Each building could be two stories high (or higher), and double the traffic possibilities, considering the traffic from the high school, added to the traffic from a minimum of two professional offices, congestion could become unmanageable around the high school exit and Cinderella Street without further traffic assistance (such as a traffic light at an already unaligned intersection -- just planning the traffic light might be a nightmare). Due to the general nature of the drivers at the high school, a higher number of inexperienced drivers use its entrance and exit than any other single driveway system in the City of Kenai. Not one map presented by the Chumleys has shown the location of the high schuol exit in relation to their proposed site plan. 7.3.2 One Accident is One Too Many. Unfortunately the peak traffic congestion times are also the times children are walking to and from school. It is obvious from the data collected that safety risks, particularly to our children, will escalate if this CUP is approved. This is of utmost concern to the neighbors and rightfully should carry tremendous weight in making the decision to approve or decline the CUP. 224- , 1905 OSSESS E T ONO REZONE The history of this neighborhood and its interaction with both the Kenai City Council and Commission demonstrates a highly collaborative effort of the majority of property owners to preserve and maintain the low density residential character of this neighborhood. 8.1 Historical Data in 1985 the citizens of this neighborhood petitioned the City offering to pay 20% assessments for sewer and water improvements contingent upon the city rezoning the defined area from RR to RR1. We ultimately paid 25% assessment. City of Kenai Assessment Roll records show total amounts paid were $328,181 or $287,869 excluding government properties. Many residents paid these assessments over a ten year period at a 10% interest rate. The residents of this neighborhood confidently invested in the City of Kenai. We agreed to pay and we did! 8.2 Linkage of the 1985 Assessments levied on Residents and the RR1 Rezone In return for the approximate $300,000 investment made, the residents received a rezone to RR-1 and at very least reinforced our right to "have a say in how the neighborhood is developed in the future" with particular upfront understanding that our intent was to avoid a "patch work type of development, almost a Spenard-like type of development..." (Board of Adjustment Packet, BA-56) To breach this good faith agreement is a detriment to the overall community. It erodes confidence in the city leadership's ability to plan and zone in a responsible, progressive and consistent fashion. It deteriorates the motive for future investment in our city and ultimately deters future growth and economic vitality. These points are further supported in the Planning Commissioners Handbook. The determination as to the legally binding implication (i.e. assessment reimbursements) should not have to be established in a court of law, it is clear that the city understood the connection between the assessment and the rezone as indicated in a letter from former Finance Director, Charlie Brown. (Board of Adjustment Packet, BA-6b, page 4) Inherent in due process is the right of the residents to be heard. Burden of proof for exceptional uses rests with the applicant and has not been met. Exceptional uses should be evaluated against rigorous and restrictive standards. The neighbors have supported their chosen direction for the city with well documented, rational "proof' that is not even their obligation to provide. There is no iogicai reason for allowing the "1985 Deal" issue to escalate beyond this level at potential expense and liability to all taxpayers of this city. How ever the legal implications are interpreted by individual council members, what occurred in 1985 must be given due consideration in making the decision to accept or reject Chumieys CUP. -225- 9 CLOSING EMR KS ,ee attachment #8 for the lists of community members that are opposed to the City of Kenai granting this CUP. Due to the collaborative nature of signature collection there may be duplicate signatures. We request permission to offer written rebuttal to applicants closing comments to be forwarded to council members to be used in decision making. We request that the permanent record of this Board of Adjustment include past commission and council proceedings related to Chumley's applications for rezoning and conditional use permits, as well as the records of the 1985 rezoning proceedings. We also request that the permanent record reflect the number of all present who have not testified and who are - opposed and willing to indicate so by a raised hand. In closing, deny the Chumiey CUP. IM LEGEN D oppo5es (43) -227- �\ mLEs Ann% « 1�e c 92 7. w I (2) 3-A-4 (4) 401 .}, 1=4 163SE \9 1 oosa oasc rIn t � WTON DR. By' -228- A 1.7 50' ACCESS ESWT.I' 7U. 706 1700 16 1 15 11 F 14 a TR. A ti "s OJ 4 2� 01 E03 2 a 6a7 6a9 Ell ¢ 7a3 MAGIC AVE. J-;l 711 ALIAK DiZ. (EAST _�LfAK 50' ACCESS 'c D.R. j - ACCESS ESM'i, Scz sao�J! si PI P� 0 ao' 13 G� 10 a 2 P ORT. G0V°T.y _ LOT 9 C) , u Li I s � 20 o 21 p 22 23 ED 20 em. eos eo7 ela 9m 9a3 pas 9IfT 909 913 U u sac 606 609 0 6Aa 2 7" 708 - y n ; _-_ evz._ m %!s MAD TTER L 2 5 � a Ea .TR. A B o A J La E'S TR. � ^J E CHANTED 38 a N N W W W N n 39 400 ! 9 F❑ EST y M a u V 4 3' ACCE-S ESM' Bla � � 402 904 9" W 27 26 29 NN 0% 33' ACCESS I N " W A I : /y � (._�� _ la' O 'V W j} 1202 2 4; t212 1206 f4 w 1 _�< �' `% llU3 1105 11p4 i111 1 12411 12a3 a 1107 K$ANA 1207 I213 4x' �b F1p2 7106 1�1p 1114 -- �Rp 9 qq '\ w 1233p2 g 1204 1208 1 rJ z 9 322 324 i , A ® b b � � S �)5 DM FU03 lOW ` 1009 loll Fp13 103 ilp7 '"'� ll09 Slk3 rR (KN REi 99-36 \� 201 12p3 " 120 Im m I 1 2 1004 '-i-0367 (y 10o9 I01A 2 1012 Cp"1 i m"n I lOOi 009 loll 1 1a 3 106} llec U04 11i �_�� II12 PUkjT. 137 IZG4 T E-� zau z a 1 2 4 II S 1 \ 5 7 o � G , PROPERTY / l I r [ s _� ifs �) iJ'? i (9OR FA LrSA t I �I Hui low 3.1 M U JAPONSIG DR. 662 gCg 404 506 SOS 0 M 0 a f+ ,u 0k5) Y 6 leo Q so m yak. 03 iU 6m � �m �u ��nai •'� 501 512 /`ANDLELI u -r°rAcHMr LEG Em op 9 os es -232- F Ncn WU) F W W H FJX AVE. r 4 I N M p�. L,VV NO .. (f) cc • `O°. O� -_ Off° - b� - O CE ooL hoti Na `700 ALIAK OR, a ti N ALIAK h - a N Rey aJIF� O OP o - CA'y0 e t Ory O IANA LN. ay adoV (� "i ru>o`ytl H. , i Q' 0 cn w,1-97,7 —234— F 0 WO As the executive board of the Kenai Middle School PTA, we would like to assure you that we continue in our opposition to the conditional use permit for mots 6 & 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision, Kendi Spur Highway. we believe that even under a professional office designation the effects on the traffic as well as to the atmosphere of the neighborhood wilt be negative ones for the school community, In addition, we are distressed as citizens of the city to be involved in this continued attempt to change the zone in this area against the wishes of the overwhelming majority of those residing in that neighborhood. We respectfully request that you reverse ruling of the Planning and Zoning Commission and deny the conditional use permit. Sincerely, Marjorie Campbell, PTA President .Dames Montgomery, PTA Vice-president Tisha Schwesniey, PTA Secretary Kelly Hicks, PTA Treasurer jiGlJl✓� COPY i�' MEti7,NC, 2>✓�c2.p -235- MMI Rpr 06 98 01:O1p Rdams' 2837630 p.l KC.H.S. PTSA Kenai Central High School 9538 Kenai Spur Hwy. Kenai, AK 99611 City Council City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo, Suite 200 Kenai, Alaska R9611-7794 April 6, 1998 Regarding: Appeal of approval of application for Conditional Use perm t for professional office building for the Property described as Lots 6&7, Papa Joe's Subdivision, 9520 and/or 9488 .Kenai Spur Highway. Members of the City Council, Ladies and Gentlemen, The Kenai I-ligh School PTSA is concerned that development of this particular area with businesses would fiuiher complicate an already complicated traffic pattern The area in question lies in a particularly bad Iocation to be adding further egresses onto Kenai Spur. It is already complicated because Cinderella is slightly staggered from the K.C.H.S. exit. We are concerned that this added congestion would be an accident waiting to happen. Please look carefully at the traffic pattern in this location before voting on this -appeal, Use are ,grateful to the Chumley's for the way that they have tried to appease all of our concerns. We do, however, want to urge caution when. adding to the traffic pattern in the lidgh school's local. Respectfully subm tted, 0a)-\� 41 Deborah Adams K,C-H S. PTSA President. -236- Apr-,15-98 12:46P Oanaina Haalth Clini 907 283 2289 P.02 April 15, 1998 City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Kenai, AK 99611 RE: Papa Joe's Subdivision Lots 6 & 7 Dear Mayor Williams and City Council members; 1 am writing to represent the Site Base Committee and the staff of Kenai .Middle School. YVe are again before you to speak- about the issue of the above mentioned piece of property, As a group of parents and educators our first and foremost priority is the well being of the children. We feel that any commercial endeavor in the area of the schools has the potential to cause problems. 'There Will be an increase in traffic into this area. Also, there may be the further temptation that once a commercial facility is present, that in the future there would be a chance for further development along the Spur. I would like to ask the Kenai City Council to consider the wishes of those who live in this area as well as those Atha are runcerned about commercial Sr this area to reverse rate decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission. n.this Thank you very much for your consideration in this matter of concern. Barry L. Campbell, PA-C President, £KMS Site Base Committee -237- ��C —238— -_ • =tsib �. a&A�! FROM Karen J. Mahurin P, Q. Box 1073 Kenai, Alaska 99611 April 13, 1998 Mayor John Williams and Members of Kenai City Council Re: Chumiey Board of Adjusters Hearing Dear John and Council Members: As i am not able to attend the council meeting tonight, please accept my letter as the testimony I would have presented at the public hearing on this matter. Due to a family medical crisis in Montana, i was unable to be back in Kenai when this conditional use permit came back before Planning & zoning on March 25. Had I been in attendance I would have once again voted "no". Conditional uses, in my opinion, mean that a property owner wants to do something different with his property than is allowed under the zoning ordinance. Public testimony is what helps me as a commissioner decide how I will vote. Public testimony on this issue has been overwhelming against the permit, time and time again. I realize that many council member support a central Spur Highway commercial corridor - as you know, I do not, especially in this area. Residents of this particular area have worked for years to protect the integrity of their neighbor by rezoning and fighting to keep the zoning as is and I urge all of you to recognize that. Yes, Kenai is made up of business and residential - that is what community is. And, yes, we need business to make jobs and thus have a community, However, a community is also people And, the people in this area say NO to this permit. 1 am also very concerned about additional traffic in this school zone - no matter what is said, offices bring traffic and traffic pose hazards to students going to and from school. Please, please listen to the public testimony and also I remind you that Mr. Chumley was well aware of the zoning of this property when it purchased it. For once and for all let's end this controversy and deny the conditional use permit. Thank you for your time in reading my letter. CC: Colleen Ward Sincerely, Karen Mahurin -239- Ckumlej S+e ? an m i C� 4 sip ,r` 'lotlog . kN 014 AW 1 \ t� ( f A `FA ku [-N7 -ro ARIL CA 779N AOTTACH M E N T t� 4 -242cof - W, Im count Statement to be Presented to be 7f Kenai City Council // Board of Adjustment This is a survey being concering EM-J.-Conditiona➢ Land Use Permitt (Professional Offices) -Lots 6 and 7, Papa's does Subdivison, 9520 &/or 9488 Kenai, Alaska, We, are tring to see hoax many families, with school age children, live in the snrroundding area from Linwood Lane to Princess. That will be affected by Joe Hugh Chasm➢ey Building Permit. Address Children 5 z -245- Statement to be Presented to be Kenai City Council Board of Adjustment This is a survey being concering P2.4$22._Conditiooal Land Use Permitt (Professional Offices) -Lots 6 and ?, Papa's Joes Subdivison, 9520 Wor 9488 Kenai, Alaska. We, are tying to see how many families, with school age children, live in the surroaundding area from Linwood Lane to Princess. That will be affected by Joe Hugh Chumley Building Permit. Address J, — Chi➢dren 0 I C) f -246- 01 0 Statement to be Presented to be Kenai City Council Board of Adjustment This is a survey being concering - e Conditional Land Use Permitt (Professional Offices) -Lots 6 and 7, Papa's ,Goes Subdivison, 9520 &/or 9488 Kenai, Alaska. We, are tring to see how many families, with school age children, live in the surroundding area from Linwood Lane to Princess. That will be affected by Joe Hugh Chumley Building Permits Address Children C o 3o f-c /i --,� l �l�) �,�� (�0 ',7l,7 Y Ln� 15 - -247- bb k' Statement to be Presented to be Kenai City Council Board of Adjustment This is a survey being concering - ,. Conditional Fused Use Permitt (Professional ®ffxces)-Lots 6 and 7, Papa's .does Subdivison, 9520 &/or 9488 Kenai, Alaska. Wc% are tring to see how mRny families, with school age children, live in the surroundding area from Linwood Lane to Princess. That will be affected by Joe Elugh Chu coley Building Permit. Address Childress �.�r,7 Is L r U-� 4ve /� L 1�5 -248- $testament to be Presented to be )Kenai City Council Board of Adjustment This is a surrey being concering 9 - Conditional band Use Permitt (Professional Offices) -Lots 6 and 7, Papa's Joes Subdiwisou, 3520 Wos 94$8 Kenai, Alaska. We, are tying to see how many families, with school age children, live in the surroundding area from Linwood lane to Princess. That will be affected by Joe Hugh Chum€ey Building Permits Address Children c C� ( 4 1 /[/� V -249- Statement to be Presented to be Kenai City Council Board off, Adjustment This is a survey being concering a - 2- Conditional Land Use Permitt (Professional Offices) -Lots 6 and i, Papa's ,does Subdivison, 9520 &/or 9488 Kenai, Alaska. We, are trimg to see how many families, with school age children, live in the surrounddimg area from Linwood Lane to Princess. That will be affected by ,doe Hugh Chumnley Building PermiL Address Children 0 12C> 3/0i�; e�ss 56S -1 r,' /) L�T / -7)�-I A 0 P-S -250- I 251- Statement to be Presented to the Kenai City Council Board of Rdjustment We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to PZ98-12 - Conditional Land Use Permit (Professional Offices) - Lots 6 and 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision, 9520 Vor 9488 Kenaa Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska, an application suuiauvMed by Hugh Chuarnley and Joe Chu coley, P.O. Box 753, Sterling, Alaska. i natu//ure� / Name / � L Address Phone/Number �C1(',7�'�.lt I>./i'/n,-,� �� Ei Diu. �•GLl2c lam' Tl� �'`�Ll�y�i � (�3.'7.'f�`�f-� -252- n r Tv� nSStatement to be Presented to the Kenai City Council A" 61 J) Board of Rdjustment We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to.. PZ98-12 - Conditional Land Use Permit PI ♦ V_ .sional Offices) s 6 and - Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska, an application submitted by Hugh Chumiey and Joe .iey, P.O. Box 753, Steriffig, Alaska. Signature Name Address Phone Number C �l �i �'��C'��t �.) (� h(1/`.i_-1 ��" �r� �=, ��1 lY �0 ,7 / ��;1Y1 l.n: ✓,, c �C y 3 /,,l�L,fY A.�a� ,.k/ � )fir✓�. J h�ti''/1`'/ --'J ~,-% J� 'Z `/ -253- Statement to be Presented t® the Kenai City Council Board of ndjustment We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to PZ98-12 - Conditional Land Use Permit (Professional Offices) - Lots 6 and 7, :...R Highway, ay'n Alaska, a, n application submitted by Hugh Chumley and Joe P.O. Box 5^.. i i r rr Alaska. ,Signature Name Add�ess�Phone dumber 0 -254- =�l nna�yy wy �I C?%�i SCt1 LLi q5 J Statement to be presented to the Kenai Citg Council Board of iifdjustment e, the € ndersigned, ARE OPPOSED to PZ98-12 e Conditional Land Use Permit (professional Offices) - Lots 6 and 7, papa Joe's Subdivision, 9520 Wor 9488 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Aiaska, an appiioation submitted by Hugh Chumley and toe Chumley, P.O. Sox 753, Sterling, Alaska. Signature Name ,address phone Number p ..:r'- t� '(1"i�.l ��' �,1 _ c i�.y I1ttl,h;}�✓:�< K:Y 1 _.1 J�iiCl 0"U fir'\ 3-7� s 3 255 Statement to be Presented to the Kenai City Council Board of Fidj stment We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to PZ98-12 - Conditional band use Permit (Professional Offices) - Lots 6 and 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision, 9526 Wcr 9468 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska, an application submitted by Hugh Chum@ey and Joe Chump ey, P.O, Box 753, Sterling, Alaska. gnature Name address Phone Number A L•� /I 101;�� /�'Aihr_,.i 6't0—" V{ LLtK�/GC04/ �vk -256- statement to be presented to the Kenai Mg Council. Board of Rd ustment February 4, 1IJ98 A/VO /i%ARCN szsri99r We, the undersigned, are opposed to the approval of Joe and Hugh Churniey's Conditional Land Use Permit application. We support the preservation of the low density, residential character of our neighborhood as prescribed by our assigned zoning - Rural Residential 1. vd� fl^ aL�� 1/✓at�, '709 n�E)c t4va. lC£v�tl WaI4-0sae X�yt P 30'7 e CQCve c - C �4 e ' c C' li 2 vt l c'v �7 l o 0.3 �-1 A-. k _.:- __ /00Or-- -257- 3a cr (o (a l Z-- r QrtS- S 40 Statement to be presented to the Kenaa CIt9 Council Board of Rdjustment Eebruarg 4, 1998 We, the undersigned, are opposed to the approval Churnley's Conditional Land Use Permit application. preservation of the loan denslty, residential character o as prescribed by our assigned zoning - Rural Residential f of Joe and lough We support the our neighborhood 1. ESP 4,03 Dr. 3 f �a 1�rell a Zn �D2k'� nA PC,r,ICrSOrt 30%� C � `S rr z_ A2 I / '..c �C_,<;U.,,�, \ �L'l'�..i,�. rtJ�✓E71 Q,., YS cam. VI.- -)'Z Z Z Z, �J f'R.irtc2 SS l'! %r;n Ge"s' 410 �'rio{n re L (c 54 L4jv S1—, rsrri fn, ,. �x r3 12 -258- Statement to be Presented to the Kenai City Council Bard of fidjustment e, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to P798-12 - Cond€tionai Land Use Permit (Professional Offices) - Lots 8 and 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision, 9529 Vor 9488 Kenai Spew Highway, Kenai, Alaska, an application submitted by Hugh Chumisy and Joe Ciaumley, P.O. Sox 753, Sterling, Alaska. Signature Kbc me Address Phone Number ��`l�o�i (Ai. ��.C� �)� ;ll `°C�;>)1G?e-�4 � �.4 ,F'.+• �,: `I"t. i S I 5 f'1"t i e'l "'� 7 ' p ;3' C, J i f62/ : k A , —259- a 5 �7� During the March 25, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting the following property owners were represented as not opposing the Hugh and Joe Chumiey Conditional Land Use Permit Application. However, these property owners were never contacted about the permit application by the Chumleys. As indicated by their signatures they wish to go on record with the City of Kenai Council and Planning and Zoning Commission as opposing the Chumley Conditional Lard Use Permit. April 1, 1998 IM Statement to be presented to the , Kenai MY Council Board of RdjusE ent We, the undersigned, are opposed to the approval oil Joe and Hugh Chumley's Conditional Land Use I Permit application. We support the preservation of the low density, residential character of our ne ighborhood as prescribed by our assigned zoning - Rural Residential 1 IF,4/4 C r � s 8'I 3 (-A`A �' eI-eN G5 �� 5-0 g c e� Z�1/ �>/�der� //� . f, �\+,\ne�A L. VAo�).re r �G�S �'is 412,c ✓5�, 6,03 M �.�` C- -261- Statement to be Presented to the Kenai CitU Council Board of Rdjustment We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to PZ98-12 - Conditional Land Use Permit (Professional Offices) - Lots 6 and 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision, 9520 Wor 9488 Kenai. Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska, an application submitted by Hugd Joe Chumlev, P.O. BoxSterling, Alaska. S4g,nature Name Address Phone Number 7� 6, k fM 7LTID-� A i C;-L-) V2- L e 7 7�z 61, A4,rlp Se �-262- Statement to be Presented to the Kenai City Council �/ Board of Rdiustment We, the undersigned, ARE -,,OPPOSED to. PZ98-12 - Conditional land Use Permit (Professional Offices) - Lots S and T, Peps Joe's Subdivision, 9529 &tor 9489 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska, an application submitted by Hugh Chumley and Joe Chumley, P.O. Sox 753, St'Prling, Alaska. Signature Name Address Prone hsurxhpw NV��tL n r n7 W OaJ4 6, (Y k2 i/ fA.i - 6,Gr a0 1 -� If 3 _ c, --t I�. 4 j fln7s /5"� ,4, t � K 1 ;i � nc/ry v r .A-V —c -263- Statement to be Presented to the Kenai Eity Council Board Of Rdiustment We, the undersigned, ARE QPPOSPg to PZ98-a2 - Conditional Land Use Permit (Professional offices) - Lots a and i, Paps Joe's Subdivision, 9524 &✓or 9488 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska, an appiicition submitted by Hugh Chumley and ,toe Chumley, P.O. Box 753, Sterling, Alaska. Signature } Name Address `` Phone' Number laj��l j ��IC(,l ��5 i)l)A,45>9,oeG GG y� i/X�-7 - �}. -.�. •vJ � �' 1 ram" Vi �..�: 1...� \ L.� _ �, IS 71 �z // i -264- statement to be Presented t® the Al4 Kenai CRg Council ,n _ j Board of Rdjustment L We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to Pw, a Conditionat Use Permit ,,Professional .I Offices) Lots F and 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision,9520 Wor 9488 Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska, ppiic on ""R J Ili.; a and Joe . Chumley, P.O. Box 753, Steriing, Signature Name Address Phone Number r:.l,n !i C 67 J � r Statement to be presented to the Kenai City Council Bard of Rdjustment We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to PZ99-12 - Conditional Land Use Permit (Professional Offices) -lots 6 and 7, Papa Joe°s Subdivision, 9520 Wor 9488 Kenai Spur Highway, penal, Alaska, an application submitted by Hugh Chumleyt and Joe Cd um� ey, P.O. Box 753, Sterling, Alaska. gnature Haase Address Phone Number 12Ar2Lfy Ca, Lis �Itlo C,411,lve�y kj �?8"3 3OW10 V tall p.n..�z C �T 1`tl vJ�c cCOI'✓ /i o 9 7/J ioiG`�i.ii��f �� °n %+ � � a S CtJ� i ✓i C v�,crfl/le'C r i�ivcgl % `3�i%GGu s��ZCC °�ham� "�p`7's�r�o JzkP r� mraLsrha t toq Lj «� -266- Statement to he Presented to the Kenai City Council Bard of Rdjustment We, the undersigned, OPPOSED to PCondftlona� Land Use Permit (Professional offices) r; naand 7, Papa IM. Subdivision, li u Wor 9488 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska, an application submitted by Hugh Chumley and Joe t itP.O. Box 753, Sterling, S�gnaturg tame Address Phone Number -267- Statement to be PreseRt8d to the Kenai City Council Board of Rdiustment -268- 'j - t January 26. 2009 planning and Zoning Commu smon 210 FidelgoAve, Kenal, AK 99611 IR e-! The issue of the ,,*nternpicted rezone or properties north of the Kemal Spurs Highvray Govidor from McCollum, Drive 'Wev, to M-04,&ame Creak tear Council: PAy wife, Jo, and t moved from, Kodiak, to Soidotna in February, 1997 due to jo's health and opened my law practics at 100 Trading Say Drive, Kenai. We did not buy a home until December, 1999 becuse vft-, were looking for just the right combination m' factors. We wanted to be close to the law office since I oAan have to meet with ofionts at odd hours an short notice, close to a commercial center for shopping but yet in a quiet neighborhood. In December, 1999, se found our house at 300, Prlr=-sC-,fiAqioh met all of our requiremerAs and we have lived there since that time. Our home is I !Aa miles to my office, approArnsteiV the same, to the Dena'ina Health, Clinic, and a lesser distance to lbe area grocery stores and horn, supply stores. Wher, the 2W03 Comprehensive Plan, hereinafter referred to as tie "Plan' was adopted, m did not cornmant because the Nan requirements recognized Ifis needs of she City of Kenai and insured that our neighborhood could. remain essentially as *,it is now and has been since vve moved here in 1999. We were in full support orflI6 Finn. We do not' believe thattile contem ' vlated rezone is in conformance vitth the Plsn if appears that the rezone is nothing more t]lian a pretense to legitimize spot zoning. When the rezone was proposed there had been no study done, There had beer, no planning. It was proposed because a developer wanted to build oornmarciai buildings on a lot that he had purchased. In order to facilitate that developer and avoid an illegal spot zonjrQ, hit rezone was proposed. The hasty fliscgil aopfica.tlor, submitted by the pjaajjjMjg zgjd ZU-aing chairman, which had to be—wittI.Arawn, supports that conclusion and gWar the public the appearance that the rezoning is going to be dwie, regardless. As stated apove, the rezone does not comply vvfth the Nan for the reasons set forth beiow. IM Planning and ZanirQ Commission January 19, 2009 Page No. 2 Several goals a, the Plan are listed. but the firet NVO of the goa;s ae'dia Plat" are - Deets an attractive, vital, city center, with a mart of private, and public facilities and acthdtierr to benefit residents and visitors. Protect and reiuvenare the flrabiUi4,, of residential nc ighborhoods See page 2 of th* Plan. These goal., wff be dMusssu. [n ft, Order presented above. i'l-tires recognized in the Plan that.: k he city's dominant spatial pattern - linear gronj4h along tile Kenai Spur Highway, spine --auks local ground condItlom.. But it, fasters a tweak, Poorly deflanwi ct"Ir cavcisr'. it also channels most local and through traffic into the tKsnai Spur Highway, whose roadside is Kenal's front yard. The community has cired development aFan identifiable, diverse, prosperous city center and a more attractive Kenai Spur Highway corridor as impoitantplanning goals. Balding added. See page 25 of the Piai t. ""he Plan goes art to state A cornmon tharne at the public planning workshops was that Kenai lacked a %,all -defined city center. The aid busiress district did not project P well defined city center. Tito old business district did not project a positive identity of a thriRmig 11%ersL instead, It was losing crltallty and looking faded. Citizens generally agree that creating a situ ng' attractive, busycity center is. a highly desirable planning - goal. Kenai does have the potential to develop a. more distinctive, attrac-Uve, successful city center,. But i'-will take a joint public -private focus on the economics, appearance, and convenience of, the city center in order to make VK an attractive venue far residents and visitors. Some of the, policies to foster 'rat goal are set out below. A long-term strategy for development of Millennium Square, a remarkable communii1k asset, is a key element for the future emerdence of a city oamei% -2! 0- Planning and Zoning Commission January 19, 2000, Page No, 3 The office was intentionally located in the city center so ifiiat clients who visit my office can accomplish otartasks in the oily when maVing the trip. My practice berish,"ts from this versatility offered the clients and the city benefits. from Vie business that my clients bring to the city, i support the concept of P strong city center ant I believe -,Is 2003 Comprohenshie Plan correathy identified such need. Land Use Plan, Map 11 or page 26 of the Plan. (attachedshows the ronrepi of the strong city center clearly. The addition of Lowe's and Wall Mart fit into the coricept and strengthen tie city center. i supported the addition of those two businesses as, they will enhance my clients sbiNty to accomplish othertasVs while in the dill. Ar, inspection of Map 11 will show that ffie location of ; the two busitiesses also romplies with the Plan as it enhances a strong city center, Uriforhjnara6y, Bowes and Wahifurl vvfil increase the tral"fic coming fiorn the east past Princess Street which 1iWO effa&i the safety of my fainfly attempting to agress Princess. This is especially true in the winter when the snmA, berms along the highway blw* the view of oncorning, traffic from the east. The traffic from the, north and West -substantially stops at the city center, Lowec and We! Nlarl and vldl not increase the traffic past Princess, from those directions, The proposed rezone of the Kenat Spuri-lighway does re, comply JVrCh 'the Plan in that it fosters a weak, pciorly &Mgned dty cantev %Mnich was specifically warned against in the Plan. it will draw professionals and other busonesses away from the city center. R will increase traffic flow past P�fncess in to directions front clients and custorners going to and frorri the rezone. Since WaHarl is not finished, it is impossible to predict what the traffic pattern will be past Princess other than to say for sure that traffic wifiRincrease significantly and that the rezone will add to that traffic flow. Iry that , aspect "o alone, the rezone is a re mature as the addition of Lowe's and Wall Mart May stress the traffic flow on the kenai Spur Highway. Increased commercial use in the rezone would hamper individuals entering the city cariter and. would then adversely inipact the city center. Fi;,;'hPr, the rezono ..I. molat the se and goal n-f pr7rxacting and rejuvenating the residential neighborhoods. An eXaminatiai of ; Maps 10 and I I Shows the entire- area of the rezone colored Orange which identifies the rezone area as Neighborhood Rasidentlai. Ir here is absolutely no Neighborhood Commercial shown in that area. Neighborhood residential is defined as: The Neighborhood Residential district consists of single- famHy and mulfifiernily residential areas that are urban or -271- PfannirG and Toning Commission Januarys 19, 2009 Pigs No 4 suburban in character. "r •ypicaHy, public water and sewer services are in plare or planned for installation. This land use district may include both single-family and multi -family dwellings subject to reasonable density transitions and/or design compatibility. Forinsi public outdoor spaces (parks) are a critical feature in this district. Small home -based businesses may be accornmodated within carlaisn design guidelines. Neighborhood institutional rases such as churches, schools, and day care :acli ies may be lntarrnixed if they comply with neighborhood design guidelines. See Man, frame 29. There 'ss noNng in t&war desc:r'sption that, would irnsplyr cornmercial activifif on any scale. Or the west side of the city c-errier, there ar areas shown as Neighborhood ^ornr om.t [ which is defined as: The Neighborhood Commercial district applies to areas along the arterial road systern that are suitable for small scale rrsighborhood-seaving retail service, and rifts users. it appears gmt he Linnited Commercial Zone, KIMCY 14.20.11 d, was developed to Foster the Kleighborhood Gorarnercial areas along the Kvnai SpurHighway on the west side of the city center. The LC; zone is described as: (a) Intern: The LC Zone 8s eatabHshad to provide transition areas lietwaa P carnmerciaaf and , ssidential dlstrlctt by agiawing low W ny adiurn vok ans b ssaeaess, mixed residentiat and other compatible uses which iumplernam. and do not materially detract from the uses allowed with adjacent districts. The pnccipal permitted uses shown in the allached l acnd Use T able are: single, two and three family dwellings, churches, clinics, government buildings, day cart; centers, dora;€toriestboarding houses, essential services, green houses/ tree nurseries, professional ^,f.'cE4: estaurants, -unsm thing, printing, taxidermy, off-street parking, and personal services. Personal services are defined in Note 25 to the Land Use Table (attachedf as art studios, barbers, beauticians, dressmakers, dry cleaners and self service laundries, fitness centers, photographic studios, tailors, canning studios and massage therapists. There is no statutory definition of an "essential service' which is allowed. Since medicine and other health supplies are essential to same individuals, K could include a drug store. Planning and Zoning Comnnission January 19, 2009 Page No. 5 All of the foregoing vAl encourage businesses to locate a Aiay from the city center and degrade the buffer zone of the neighborhood. The risers of the rezone with be transient users with no connection to the neighborhood. I %as asked during my testimony in front of the City Council if 1 considered churches and schools as commarcia€ entities. I answered that I did not but did not get a chance to explain my answer. Church members are usually from the neighborhood but, even if not, tt:e members are seeking good moral values and are self-dlscipi ned, church activities are - monitored and controlled and such activities most often take place within the building and are not conducted every day or night of the week. School activities are always well monitored and controlled. There is very little interaction between the schools and the neighborhood. Any "bad" interaction is usually addressed by school officials quickly. Whareas those individuats using commercial facilities are next monitored and are not coming to the area seeking a good raoral end. The aomnaemiaf entity daunts satisfied yutomers. For example, Ot is riot going to sttesnpt to control a custosm er's actions outside the business. The goal of'the Flan is to protect and r ejuvcnate- the livability of residential neighborticods. The rezone under application does not protect the livability of my neighborhood. As stated above, it subjects the neighborhood to transitory unknown visitors'. The impetus of the rezone was based upon an app@ication to place 5 con nercial buildings on a jot in the zone, The proposal was that the buildings vvoutd: be professional buildings. As far as I an^ concerned, as a professional, I want to be in the city center. Dr, Carlson of, the AhediC..anter built: in the city, center possibly for the same reasons that t have broached. I have nest seen any explanation addressing how this rezone is going to make my neighborhood more 1hrabte or how, it is going to rejuvenate the neighborhood. I would appreciate such explanation. When investment is high and the need to being in revenue to support a mortgage, any renter that, wilt not violate the zone limitations wilt be welcome by the developer, Even the developer can nat say who will inhabit those buildings in the long tern future. It can be said for sure that the character of the neighborhood wilt change. The neighborhood can eshtential" and N,9arp 11 will riot be an accurate representation of this area. it can be said for sure that trattic'r4rn.r will be affected. As a member or the, Planning and Zoning Commission, you must recognize that ails rezone is merely an attempt to set isfy one developer and the,, the selection of land area was done In haste without even consideration of Mops 14 and t 1 of the Plan. Recommending the rezone will be, an arbitrary use of power of the Planning and ?onfng Most,rioora in a residential neighborhood are invitaes or ipeopc such as rspsinnen Who are there for a purpose. -273- Planning and Zoning Commission isinuary 19, 2009 Page No. 6 Commision as ;t is merely an illegal spot rozming. The Alasks. Suprenne Court in Gfismfo0v, OltyofHomer, 925 R2d 1016, 1020(Alaska 9996) stated: Spot zoning "is the very antithesis of planned zoning." Courts have developed numerous variations of this definition. These variations have but minor drierences and describe any zoning anvend.me-ntwhich "redeasifies a smail parcel in a manner inconsistent with existing zoning patterns, for the benefit of the owner and to the datrinieret o, the cornrnuril�kr, or without any substantial rmbk purpose." Anderson, stepra, § & 12- at 362. Professor Dogier states: Faced vvith an allegation of spot zoning, cowls determine firsOmhather the rezoning is compatibia vvith the comprehensive plan or, vOners no plain exista, vOth surrounding uses- Courts then emnnine the degree of pubiil- Iranefit gained and the characteristics of land, includino pmei size and other 'actors indicating that any reclassification should have embraced a larger area containing the subject parcel rather than that parcel alone. No she padicuar characterisho associated v4l'i spot zoning, except F failure to complyM61 at least the spirit of a coraprehensNle pian, is necessarily fatal to the amendment, Spot zoning anafiysis depends primA61V on the faam and cirounnstances of Ime particular case. Therefore fthecObesria, are flexible andprovide guideRnes forjud'cial balandrig, of interests. 3 Edifivard H, Megler Jr,, Ratilcophs The Low oF.Tonlng end Planning §4 2MI, at 2&-3 (41h ad. 1995) In accord with the guidance offered by Professor Ziegler, in de-ernnining 0, iether Ordinance 92-18 constitutes spot zoning, we wilf consWer (1) the comistancy, of, tts amendment, vulth gia comprehansive pier; (2) the baneffis and debriments of the amend merri to the awnegs, adjaveld and and QUj, the size 0itus area, "rozened in our case the rezone is not consistent vviffi the Men. There has been much testimony by owners„ adjacent landowners and a few members of the community of the detriment that they believe they aria experience. The effective area of 'the rezone is not -274- Planning and Zoning t,omd?? siaro January 19, 200g, Page No. 7 as large as proposes in that some of the area can not be developed and some is already developed. Other landowners who are more familiar with the total area have addressed the effective area of the rezone. E urge the Planning and Zoning Corarniss€on to deny the application. At the feast, it is premature. No one know how Waltuaart will ahect the community or the traffic Glow or, the Kenai Spur Highway. At the worst, it is inconsistent with the Plan and will una6terably change the character of my neighborhood. Regardless of what the developer represents neither he nor you can peed€& UNe type of business that will operate within the rezone ire the future. The Permitted cases of the LC zone !.% eAens6ve. t Shank you €rir Your time:. &ncerefy, Char§es Winegarden, Esq. 309 Princess f4wal, .AK 99614 263-577a. -2 / 5- iv w 14.20.115 Dmited iani'mercial Zone (L,C Cone) (a) Intent: The LC'�'a¢e is established to provide hansitioR areas berv✓eea commercial and residential dis'uicts by allowing low to medium volume business, mixed residmdal and other compatible uses whicb complement quid do not matetialty detract from the uses allowed with adjacent districts. (b) Prineipat Perraitted Use,,: As allowedinn Lad Use Table as long as the footprint of tPie building does not exceed three thousand Q 1000) square feet. (e) C.onditimval Uses: R—, allowed in Land Use Table. (d) Acee ssory Uses: As defined (serf definitions section). (e) Home Occupations: Uses as aF€ovved by this chapter, (2) Development [r egaiMment: As described in this chapter. (t;) Parking Requirements: ks required b'y this chapter- (h) Ou&sid: stmage is allowed for disp3 ay purpese•,, ortiy unless the stomae is in an area enelosed by a sight-obsemi_ g fence. (i) Landscspinesite plans: As rein tired in KMIC 1 4.25, k0rds. 26E 1.21,105; 2.1 Ca&-200f,) Im i_C ' L Title. 14, PLANNSNC, AN6 ZON'NG ChaptSr 142z LAND? OSE.Th6LE 14.22MOD F.,ond rm taWsi,: LAND USE TABLE KEY1 P= Prmdpnl l'a-mi11✓1 1)5� C=CmnditlaoaLiZSe $>+Saom�Um'y lice N =Not Yemiluul WC'1'L': 12eieronw tonmore: oa f0au4ng Peges 3¢ eddidnvcl ,,,muiom �— R;_SEDrKTFJ.L LAN➢? ums I C RR _ 28S Z.d➢1WIItd� 6Ps I ws; 1 ws'CP RSZ cls M I CG Lc Cfd ana Pamill'Dmogirtg Twollbme Pmnil➢ Pwaliind 5wellin8 Cw Cf" -P P 1' P P -V P P P P N P P 1V P. P 0 Yb P2± Sf Sf g2 C L�+ yrz C C Cn 2 P P 1, �. P N P P IaItC'-f P C y,tCxl� FmnilY Cff: PD SI �C22 'm' $I,Zl iivclSlu PnmilY'Avnlling Scivnm Mvm Pwnily C1S C'M CA 0 PI r N P C,� N N IV P( 1' EpRf y81 of of C C C., C N' P W P C � C g)Ol TiC21 Dwelting .11-- 1 Inunhovs�s^ Mobil. Bomw Pndsa Plmnnud Luny Radl tint cle N Clfi� C C C _C C C T I �. C C C, 1 C r C C C, C' c C C C C Q C C C G C N N C N C c C( C C 1]ecelopmumrz CfALNI NO EFAL i �__ _�—� U Y�ANN u3Gf.1 AUWmetm Suta f C_i A ¢t2 C C.RF C. Ne N Rs, p la»z 14 r EiW C Cl: P C'C. Y aL P FEe , P h; N a vsct T N ¢.4: + le cph'4; t P AIR ONC $crnlcv Staeions Sul. N tJ C: C C C U C N �,. N N N,C C P P P P P I P N N C N C! C' N C P P �BueinosslConamm: kamis(Mnteis Lodge v�—N'—� N N N G( ( C C C C C C {I{--I,_,.f_ C C I N Ni N N lu C C j C P P I, P P P P P i' C C C N N N I C C C~ P P P C P C- C' P P P P ProfeasionalUrces Rmmesvnm i RAO flvsiwss t4"va(esnlo 6usifmss 0 N CC C C --C I C 6 C C C N N_C_i�_ II N I N N I N N If 1 C C P P C P P P P j P P P P P N gn4�5:^�—C--) N C —C—I_ q24 t: 1(^ C f C 4 P i P 01 TBniterJCosnmmalnlc e G 1J� N P P C Q Nf p7'--C----II�p http://w vw.gcode.usicode /lenai/view.plip?-,opic=14-I4_,12.14_22_02 O&E�mcs=on 1/24/2009 -279- LAND USE T�M,E' M,y P- Pr i.E"[ Pennimd Use NO Siefccvor, fooumtcs on Collvwire pa3tts £b: C"= CundiM'm Gn xddioon.N resnicnovs 3=Rccvndcry Gsv to = Nor Pcrrnlnad ZO NZNG YLISTivTCTS INDUSTRIAL 6hN8P OS6S C iNtC J1��ditt �-R(G -r— � [t>p1 1232 RtC] i CC CG iL —__ �Yf{ .._ � r%D __.._.i R 'P5@ Yd' i CMHJ� ' Avpotls vad 2elefcd U.,P>.e C I C: r I .. N N C P f P I � P � N I ., I N N N C c Avw.mm Repuir Gss M rt ISvommslSvot Qv W N c 1V C C C C �_ P N �C_ N NI IJ P N ' N P Cfl P C.v N :1 N N N N N N P N Nnm cr v F/fnbricusm I AssemLly N _. C C .�� C Iv PI C C p P P MinrSwmae Yvedip Se,;eugo N C C c N N C C I^ P P Pt N N N N N C N C_- C lYnrehav5es �� n_� (, G' C I N NN C N P P P N C N N N Chnridble IvsamNous c C RR RIM C Rr C H+j Rs7� a¢I C C� [� ec P cc P u, P es P ; rsu P R C vz P LC C eaaei i' Chumhe* C �c� � v to C C� P P p p Clinics � c Piv c � Pw C P;lu C ptv Pm Pro .^, C C t;to P � c c �pID C C P � P �(:ntlegaF° Scfwols° C C C C C � C C P P � C t�P� _... Cc T C l: elwnws>ary Gwemnienmi 6uildings 13Ish Selmols" C C~ C� L C C_ C C C C� C C C C1--F----' P C C T C C 7 c C P P Aosplisls'��_ C c C� C C I C c -�--��` �Yih+sr"as+ —�r C t, C C C� c Cm P Musccros C C— C C C C C. P P P C c P C _P IPscYs and liar�Gor. P C c' C P P C P j ax�r�li.M.9 c. G MISCELLANEOUS— LAND VsKis Po�invl soxm{ngP'S j �C c up, C fmi C Rs C PSI C RS2 RU iV j N' CX' c CG C 4d- E1" ccN, i �n, €. c 1 TSF.i L-C c CYPFi� c Bad uNi Ureskft to Celac ftenl Is C C C �- c C I C C j U N C C N k C P G P C P O �C N N C P C P f C P P G'emsl�'s i it. ctn5lbfl [I PS ' M C I_C (' C \ C C _�I N N Nz N 1' C _j N •r —� C C C C C N C _ C C NI ('. Dsp Cve Cmnenl''� C C C C ;- C C. i P C -! C C_ C P P Da;mimriWBoordlugc houses i_ c C C C C N 021 5 C P rrzs L C P P L'es.W SeYvwe,i FnrmigNGe;w-1 A3ricuM1ure"°"' Grcrer;haysearr_e P P j P Y C P C c _ p C: c N C c _i ---P--y{{r?�� c C C C N �� P A T P N P P N P P P C P N N F P P� C P tv C F j—N P V N P ', Nurearics13 = L I htc�://�vvary..geode.aslcodes/iceiuilSrivw.p p?topic=i4-34 22-14_2.2 01O&f=es=on 1/24/1-009 m Yam"'. P=p,mm..d?erpretted Uuc NO'IL', ttefete»w nour.ttes an falluaing pages for C = Condldanal Uwe, ed innual vdinetions S = Secondary Use Iq = Not Pennlht ZONING DIST€ RCTS Po2LCr,Y.,S.Ah'EEtYJa "I'l)pas RSI RS2 Rid cc m m Fe G'u' 2 3 R LC Colo Crnuipl.e'l'stviug, N C G C C C C I' P p N P p P Tvddermy. _ 4 ��-1 star c c r C c ,. � hIS drier It pie Pi C P a 14 � ASx@Flu �i.xrgc, P � a P u Clrcrres, Fairs, Etc.) fmsemnl orgartrinicaps' h C C C C (` P P P C N C P C P_ Proeme Cue9c11.10is and Urwa Had, Nursing, Cenvnleccon., ti C C C C C C P P C C C C C t C 9 Rest He. -yf Peskin&.065ttecC P_ P , P^� t P- _�� -�� 1`—�P p P;vd:ing, public fors t? C C ii O C C C C C C C C C C C C J_ -�� C i C C C� C C I p�P P P C P P P Pcrsnnni Svvutt- 1 �_� Rndt./Tvi'nmmhrorVeoll P P� C C C C �C P P Y C C C p Sitcsn0 j RecremiciW Vehicle Paehs C C' C C ha N C G�C C C I N C N C She sum cce cce xtracdan or c II C� C C C C C 1 C C C I C N C N N N Nanot! Reeoaruslr' Santee BetenIst of C CN N ; C C N N C' =1 C C C C ' N N � Neturol Rasanrruxlt L ��— Sea rlUSCASha. snor.(Rshg,cm L,nd [use mud insm twelixed 1''waona Aarof2uilo) Sec 41 rclecommanicnuee, Act ar 1996. SM 704(a) Sec, however, the liotihenam imposed antler 1,MC i.10.0R0 i'o anotee, i. Allowed as a secondary use exceptoc the ground floor ol'uxper, ofduebuilding fronting on wliecfer strcen and major Ivghwnys. Commercial or industrial which fells under ote landscaping/site phms requiremwts of KvC 14, 25 shall include any secondary usas in the lendseaping and site picas. 2. C'lno(1)single-family residence per laurel, which is part of the main building. i. Allowed as a cond itioaW use, sabjact to satisfying site Yellowing condidans: `a. The usable, area per dwelling unit shall be the snore as dot required Car dwelling rauLs in die RS spot; I0. The site sqcare nxinige in as va% he approved by flue Caamslsshm; o. Yards sound the sfta of a eor peeking, and ethee development rern»rartems shall be the sane as for pivtcinal uses in the RR zone; d. Water and sewer faelllbes shall mCar the requir ar a rL of all allp11callk health 10911ledon'; �e Th proposed dwelling3 o ut wit consulates a ondet nd ac. '•f tagua had baron ii1h and ouwhi fs, will ire m ra many VALID Sine __.rcter fate slur,. art pot -, y ,lnes, ` t„r„ � t• - s „u cud d ,..L r.,, a � a, a_;cct surrounding 1 Y The buildings shall his inch only for residential part owe and c;utoinary aceeasory user .such as gangs stor ve sates and rccrennorml and carasavaray ncnvrttcs; 1 g. There snail F.e provided, as part of the propehxd devclapmait, adequ de recren(ien arees to carve the needs of the anticipated population; h. The devclopovea shall not produce avohune of traffic to excess of U:e capacity forwhlch the scores auee4S are decagonal L The or adjacent in the Proposed dwelling group ",it not be adeersely affected, 4. See'Tow•nhonses' section. 5. Sao mobile Homo" section. ht¢p://wwruv.gouda.esloodees/ke;dei,lview.hhp?mpic=14-I4 22-14 22 010&5...»res=on 1/24/2009 i 16. Allowed ao acondldenal use, srajeot to `blowle Horrors" auction and provided thatidy mobilehorne perk tntrots. the rrinimu:n kodtd l fious tig Authority requirements, 17. See "Reared Unit Rasidentel Deeo!opmeo'acslon. 18, Allowed no conditional sae, nrovin"i door doc pcopoaed lccation add the eharacPwiens of thr,de will oot destroy tm residential ! ohamctr of the neighborhood A Allowed as a conditions! use, provided that all nppGeablc safety and fire regulations are meL 10. Pmlided that as part of any bdidling isRcaied nearer than thirty fit)) feet to any adjoining sn'eei or property➢m. 11, Allowed as a conditional toe, provided that no part of any building is Iocaurd nearer Lhant1day(30) feet to any adjoining street or property line and provided further, that the proposed ]*cation and dhuracferistics or the use will not adversely affect as vommcrcial development of the zone. 12 Allowed as a conditions" use, provided that the fotiowbig ra diiions are met ht Tile nmposed location of rho use and the size and characteristic of the site uvili masimize its bcsefn'to rho poNic; to Saint and endrarres and oft street j.aking for, the use a,e land' add oo provnv; nuffic hezendt on public. streets, 13. Allowed as a sendldonal oat, pmvided duct scsbacks, buffer strips, and other provisions are adequate to nature thattho no w41 not be a nvisanae to surrounding propeviesThe Commisstan shall speolty the aanditions mussary in ftdt 1L this nedmo meet. 14. Allowed as a eondi(ianal use, provided Li at no indication of said use, is evident from he exterlor of site morduq•. t5. Allowed, provided that hoe foiiowing conditions are met: a.. A. wicandedbuffor strip of at Ides, dtirn,,(3Q)feet shall be provided between said use and any adjoining property in a residential zone. Is Ft its and con ances and ofn street parking fbr the om ri sll be Inroad to pre, ,cot tal'Ao hazards on oho oub;ic streets. i5. See "Co ss iPaoaai Uses" section. i7. Sec "ConditSaysl Use permit her Surface Ex-ireoYina or Nesser l lo- oar s" struts. 19. Conditional, Use a6owed arty on prlviaely held property; Not aliowad on govemment lands. 19. Deleted by Ordtnance 2144-2006. 20, 'Tbe airport mitaed ones udowod under this onry ore nlrchaft nppmaoh zones per KMC 14.20.070(a),..."or that par pmuerttes contained inside the airport perimeter £mite or having anew to sir sre, m*vemencareas. ramps, tesill tes ar patlang aprons, PAA authmitu d uses era allowed. 21. Developments for use shall he ion same as these listed in the "Development rtequimmonts Iable`'Po, she RC1fFSid Zones. 22. Allowed ns a conditional ass in moijuneiion with a detrined use in are FD zom. For ptanpie, housing for reaeheos or seudoum for a sriun! in the zone. 23. Allowed as an toseeasory use in emjonotion'eah o permitted use 1n the BD zone. I-'*, eaarnple. a dormitory used re, lwuse, stadent5 for a saNeol oe educational Facility. 24, Retail businesses allowed as s scot ab y Me in cogiunclion with the priors; use ieg, a. gift shop or cofiks than ui-RrI anaher nations). `25. Art sudios barbers,beauticians,dressmakers, dry cieaners ardselseendoelaundries,Cause, criers, photographie s'aidioa, i tailors, touring main, and mzssage rfierapists. (.tom -Food services are slowed on a temporary 01 seasonal basis of not more died four;4) monms per yeah____ ,Ancnded during 7-1-99 a¢pplement; Ord. 1862-2000; amaided during 12.1-00 sopp?cnnent Ord&. 1911.2001, 1933-2001,1956.2002,1962-2002,1990-2003,1994-2003,2053-2004, 2051-20051 2112-2005, 2113-2005. 2144-20067 2i52-2006, 23 5-2006. 2195-20067 2246-2007, 2272-2007) httpJ/wmv.gcode:us/codes/keix,i/vi-w.php'?topic=14-14,. 22.14.22.010&'frasnes=on 1/24/2009 T�il_IG V, l� From, Joe Moore [maiito:joem@altrogco.com] Sent, Wednesday, December 17, 2008 8:36 AM To,'Patricia Porter°; bany_eldridge@yahoo.com; hvs�naliey@yahoo.com; cpajoe@altrogco.com; absoluteprincessl0l@yahoo.com; mboyle@alaska.corn; rossrck@hotmail.com; molloylaw@ak.net; 'Carol Frees' Cc, 'Marilyn Kebschull'; 'Nancy Carver'; Rick Koch Subject RE: Rezone -- Rural Residential 1 to Limited Commercial I liked the information as well. I would like to see the administration hold an informative work session, for the public, prior to the P and Z meeting on the 140' Subject would be the "Limited commercial zone" what is it? We have same materials that were drawn up by an airport planner several years ago when we created the zone. Those materials should be available at the work session. I believe the work session will allow a more informal dialogue between the administration, the public and council. The work session would avoid any specific rezoning issues and could be limited to an hour. My hope is to diffuse some of the misconceptions and maybe "sell' the zone to more of the public. The administration and public worked very hard on this zone when it was created. We probably gave it the wrong name. Maybe "limited development' would have been better. I feel this outreach to the public will be well received and perhaps the public hearing on the 14" of January will be more productive. Thanks Joe -283- PROPOSED REZONE , §& \ \ \ Caro9 Freas From: Kevin and Robin Dix [kevinandrebin@acsalaska.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 9:05 PM To: Carol Freas Cc: kevinandrobin@acsalaska.net Subject: PZ09-01, Letter in opposition Kevin Dix PO Sox 1719 306 Princess St. Kenai, AK 99611 January 19, 2009 Kenai City Council RE: PZ09-01 — An application to rezone properties North of the Kenai Spur Highway corridor from McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek from Rural Residential 1 (RRI) and Conservation (c) to Limited Commercial (LC) Dear Kenai City Council Members, I am writing this letter in opposition to PZ09-01 Six years ago my family and I began searching for property to build our new home. We wanted to remain in Kenai, but wanted more space and privacy. We looked at many properties before finding what we wanted. ". hen We found our property on Princess St, it was not listed. We contacted the owners and negotiat_ed.a deal over the next couple months. We also bought an adjacent 2.5 acre parcel because we were worried someone might subdivide it. We did this even though the additional cost delayed construction of our new home. We eventually sold this parcel to a family who built a single family residence on it. My point in telling you this is so you understand the effort we put into finding just the right location for our new home. The location and surroundings were primary considerations for us. We went to significant trouble and expense to secure just the right site. We built our home on land which is separated from the highway by a parcel zoned RRI. A parcel zoned with the intent to "create a stable and attractive residential environment", and "Preserve the rural, open quality of the environment', and which prohibits uses that would "Violate the residential character of the environment', or "Generate heavy traffic in. predominantly residential areas". We had a certain expectation of what might eventually be built on that residential property. PZ09-01 would rezone this parcel to Limited Commercial. A. zone whose intent is to "provide transition between commercial and residential districts". This does not provide the same protection to the existing residential environment as RRI. This re -zoning would have substantial adverse impact to the desirability of my property. OWN PZ09-01 might increase the value of some property on the highway, but at the expense of others. If PZ09-01 is to be considered further, I believe the City is obligated to consider the impact on nearby properties. If this rezoning can not be done without adversely impacting the neighbors who have built their homes under the protection of the existing zoning, then it should not be done. Thank you for considering my view. Sincerely, Kevin Dix z CaHearn Ward From: Jessica Piatt Dessipiett@hotmail.comj Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 10:04 PM To: xcel@alaske.com Subject: Wilshusen Letter To Whom It May Concern: I have lived down Hutto Street for 22 years out of my 24 years of life. I love this area I grew up on. My husband and I wanted to have a home in this neighborhood where our family could grow and we would have a large yard for our two sons near their grandparents and town. We had ownec a previous home in Kenai that was near commercial land and the high way. When I got pregnant with our first son we had thought of what we really wanted for our family so we sold our home and decided to build down Hutto Street. We love being so close to town in this central location but the feeling of seclusion. We are against the proposed rezoning. Our property backs to the proposed rezoning and makes us very worried about what will happen in the future if this is approved. We feel as if this is the last subdivision in Kenai with the feeling of seclusion and the small town warm neighborhood feeling. I love that there is possibly of growth to our neighborhood but small and homier then most. I would like to see Kenai grow to a point but not to the determent of this neighborhood or any other neighborhood. The schools are walking distance from our home and with our two sons going to be attending these schools In the future it saddens us that if this rezoning is approved there is a a unknown to our future here. We love Kenai, but are opposed of these proposed changes. We had also purchased our land here down Hutto Street and are building on it due to the fact that it was residential and that there would be no large changes such as this. 'thank you for you time. Jessica Wilshusen Windows LlveTm: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. See how it works. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10,16/1928 - Release Date: 2/2/2009 7:51 AM 2/2/2009 -287- To the City Council. Fin opposed to tlae rezone of properties norm of the Kenai Spur Fighway con-idor frorn McCollum Drive 'West to No -Name Creels from Rural Residential I (RRI,1, to Linaited Commercial. This purposed rezone is destructive toffiz continuity of the present neighborhood slid represents a'dueat to the nature of this part of the corninunify. I also perceive it as a p*.nritive measure from the City of Kenai -odth its tinning following so closely to the neighborhoods opposition to the , ezoning of Papa Joe's Subdivision in December. The proposed rezone does not comply with the Kenai Comprehensive Plan. Alaska, statute and legal precedent establish the Kenai Comprehensive Plan as the o7� 19cv directive to be used in decision making. The Kenai Comprehensive Plan was developed by a broad based committee of citizens and the City of Kenai and ratified by the City Council and is periodically updated. Additionally, tJre proposed rezone does not adhere to the Kenai Zoning Code ,Alaska statute establishes the Kenai Zoning Code as the regmal4M directive to be used in decision making. The proposed rezone parcels are as follows: ci 3 vacant parcels publicly owned, I of which can only be developed for education, o 8 parcels privately owned with existing residential development o I vacant parcel privately owned with owner intending to build a single-family residence 0 2 vacant parcels privately owned Spot zones per se are illegal. A strip zone does no*,, cure a spot zone. The neighborhood opposed that original proposed rezone, among other things, for the illegality of"spot zoning". The reality of the current proposed rezone is that it essentially benefits two parcels, Dr. Wortham's and one other lot to the detriment of the surrounding parcels. It is self evident tIIW the expansion from Dr. Wortham's property in this second rezone is to cover up the initialhy intended spot zoning. Commercial traffic will likely be heavier through a residential neighborhood. The proposed rezone does not make any 8£iowances for the commerC.a£traffic and the surviving residential area. A neighbor has contacted the State of Alaska D.O.T. and they are resistant to additional driveways onto the Spur Highway. That means all additional traffic will be funneled onto Magic, Princess, McCollum and Cinderella drives. This issue is not about "Landscaping", or if the "corridor is not conducive to residential" in the opinion of the City, it's about our homes and families. The truth is people live there so it is conducive. It's also about public trust, and zoning is public trust. A rezone will violate 'that trust. In "The 1985 Deal" the neighbors agreed to pay assessments to help pay for sewer and water installation in exchange for a rezone to the most restrictive RRI and the chance to have a say on how the neighborhood developed in the future. The City would be breaking their part of the deal by rezoning. The City is stretching its credibility with rezoning' people's private homes along with bits of other properties to create what appears on a map as a unified block of property. There is no Justification to rezone as there is numerous commercial lots in Kenai, including several that are truly "deteriorating". `doting against this rezone will not impede the economic growth of Kenai. Surrounding property owners do riot want this rezone. No occupants have rt�quested this rezone or support it. The purpose of a Limited Commercial Zone as stated in the Kenai Code is to "provide a trans ion between Commercial and Residential". The proposed rezone butts tip to ConservaWS'' on one end and -Rai Residential on the other. No transition occurs. To the contrary there {s a buffer between the neighborhood with. a church on one end and another church and natural barrier on. the other end. When we as a neighborhood came to the City Council about a cell phone tpvver, we were a neighborhood worth, preserving. What has changed? H , him.. Drive. Coeeeen Ward From: Gloria Wik [gwik@aiaska. net] Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 10:58 Aft 7o: cfreas@ci.kenai.ak.us Cc: Colleen Ward Subject: Rezone Hi Carol i would like to make it known that I am against the purposed rezoning between No Name Creek and McCollum Drive in Kenai, Although my residency here has been very short comparatively speaking i have lived here long enough to come to enjoy the quiet neighborhood and country living. I fear this neighborhood would change dramatically if RR1 was changed to Limited Commercial with the increase in traffic alone. As I understand it back in 1985 the neighborhood did help pay for water and sewer installation so they would be able to have a say as to how development occurred. What happened to that agreement? We have come together as neighbors to voice our concern and opposition to this and it seems to be falling on deaf ears. Gloria Wk 707 Magic Kenai No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://,ArNw.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10,16/1928 - Release Date: 212/2009 7:51 AM 2/2/2004 -290- February 1, 2009 Dear Kenai Planning and Zoning Commissioners, I have lived at 403 McCollum Drive since November 4, 1988. It was our first home and we were very excited to be moving in. We had house hunted all over Kenai and in Nikiski. We could have chosen a larger home in Woodland or other Kenai neighborhoods but fell in love with this home the first time we pulled in the driveway. The Rural atmosphere of the neighborhood, the church across the street, having an acre to ourselves, and living close to the schools and grocery stores were all part of the appeal that helped us make our decision. Just as we were preparing to close on the house, a report came in that the private water well was not adequate. The seller quickly brought in equipment to hook our home up to Kenai city water and sewer. We were glad for that but a little disheartened. The heavy equipment and the process of digging water and sewer lines drastically changed the look of our lot as they took out the trees on the front of our lot that had provided a lot of privacy. You could now see our house from the road. We had an opportunity to back out of the deal but losing the trees was not a deal breaker for us. We knew we could replant trees and put in grass and create a beautiful yard with a little bit of work. That is exactly what we did; making planting trees a special family project. The trees were the same height as our two little boys and they took great pride in planting them and watching them grow. Those trees are as tall as the house now and the boys take their children out to show them the trees they planted when they themselves were small. The trees now provide a nice natural barrier and privacy for our home. We are glad to have them as we lost many of the older trees on our property from beetles. I have heard many reasons why the Papa Jo property should be rezoned to Limited Commercial with the primary reason I keep hearing being because all the trees were cut down. I agree the piece is an eye sore as it stands now but there are many ways to fix that problem. Rezoning for commercial entities is not the only solution. Just as rezoning the whole corridor now to LC is not the only solution and only prevents an arbitrary spot zoning condition, creating a strip zoning situation, Nine years ago our neighborhood formed a "Lighthouse of Prayer" gathering in my living room on a weekly basis to pray for our neighbors —end Our city. Sometimes some of us went an prayer walks praying through the neighborhood. Red McCollum was one of the members who came regularly and prayed with us for the neighborhood. He also would pray for his children. He said, "Someday I won't be here to continue praying and I ask that you continue to pray for them for me," He taught us how to pray for them and entrusted the neighborhood and his children to us. January 5, is a special anniversary for those of us in this Rural Residential neighborhood. Debbie Sonberg had gone to the house of Red McCollum on this day seven years ago because he was not answering his phone and she felt the need to check in on him. That is what neighbors do. She entered the home of our beloved friend and found that he had passed away sitting in a chair in his living room. She picked up the phone and dialed 911. From 2 houses over, we heard and saw an ambulance arrive at the residence. My husband, Roy, barely took the time to slip on his shoes as he went running over to see if he could assist. I hopped in the car and drove over as I was expecting to accompany the ambulance to the hospital. On arrival, the Kenai ambulance crew met us outside the living room saying they were sorry, but there was nothing they could do. Red was gone. I called Colleen Ward so that she could begin to contact Red's family members, She came and we all hugged and cried as neighbors, and the family was called. -291- On January 1,'2002, many of us had gathered at my home to celebrate the New Year together It was the last Vne t,saw this man and the memory of that day is very vivid in my mind as I recall how happy and content he was nPs4)ust watching us and chuckling to himself. With his passing we resolved to never forget the man of whom part pf the neighborhood was named after and to honor his request to pray for it and his children. On January 11, 2TDb'2; ingside his family buried Red. We will not stand by now and just let his property where his daughter, our frieh't,NbW lives be rezoned to anything commercial. We are a neighborhood of people who are neighborly. rkfcwnd 600 B: .,E., the prophet Jeremiah sent a letter from Jerusalem to the exiled community of people in Babylon. In the lett6,t, Jeremiah relayed a message to the people, 'Build houses and settle down, plant gardens and eat what thus Ooduce.... Increase in number there; do not decrease. Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper " Today we are still called to care about the community in which we live. Get involved, get serious about where you live become a part of the community, Becoming a part of the community can mean three things. Caring about the pE , a of the community --making sure that the community is a safe place for all to live; connecting with the people of the community — working together with others in the community to serve the community; and ,committing the community, its people and its needs to prayer -- coming together to pray for its peace and - prosperity. My husband and I graduated from KCHS 29 years ago and have enjoyed the 20 years we have lived 5 e ,linis home, in Kenai raising five children. We were creating a legacy for our family, planting berries, raising flowers, cultivating an apple orchard. Our son even married "the little girl down the street'. They bought the home directly behind us so the kids could grow up walking a path through the woods to grandmas. We put in another path creating a "secret garden' for them. When they come, the first thing they ask, "Can we go to the secret garden grandma?" They believe this will never end, that there will always be a treasure chest of sweets waiting for them. t: have devoted a:length of this time to serving the community, helping neighbors to help other neighbors and teaching my children to do the same. Now, because of the fighting we have to do to maintain what we have, my husband and 1 have begun house hunting in N.ikiski. 1 told him .when we moved h,-ro that I would never move again. We planned to die here. 1 cannot begin to describe my agony. I urge you to vote "no" on recommending this rezone on the grounds that it will 1. Drastically affect the surrounding neighborhood residents as well as the majority of the residents being rezoned, 2. Create a strip zoning situation, 3. Does not comply with the Kenai City Code that states "the purpose of the LC ziste is to create a transition from commercial to residential, and 4. No one in this neighborhood asked for this rezone; it was the sole desire of four members of the,City Council. Please protect the current zoning our neighborhood enjoys as well as have trusted to be protected. Sin& -rely, Janine Espy { 403 McCollum Drive U ) OWN N ----Original. Message ----- From: covops specops [mailto:specforces@mail,com] Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 9:38 AM To: Colleen Ward Subject Re: Letters for the Packet To whom it may concern, I ain very concerned about the way this council is treating this in a socialist manner. Rezoning this neighborhood would be a detramem to all residents in the area. My wife and I moved to AK almost 7 years ago and took six months to locate the perfect neighborhood to fit our needs. We picked this particular place because of its location and the zoning as we intended to live out our lives here. We bought the tract of land next door to us so our kids could build right next door. We were going to pick up more land in the area for the same purpose and for our children children. Over the past 6 years there has been increasingly more traffic in the area which has made it more difficult for my children to cross the highway and to play without fear of traffic hazzards. If this is rezoned and this proposed proffessional "mall" comes in, the street that was once safe behind our house would be too dangerous and the increase of trespassers on my personal drive would be unforgivable. As it is I have problems with people trying to take shortcuts through my drive which is dangerous for my family. Not to mention I am the one that pays for the upkeep of this drive. As it is I have had the police out a few times. I would be calling the police constantly to report trespassers and demand some form of protection. 1 would also have to seek legal action for any damage committed by such encroachments. I am not ignorant that I would believe there would be no more traffic on -Magic street nor through my drive. They would have to use it to get in and out of this proposed proffessi,onal plant because the traffic on the spur is too dangerous to get in and out effectively. To put in another light would only increase the congestion and create more problems of another kind. My kids and, I like to ride bikes in this area and 'injustice would be too great a risk. I have too much invested in this area not to be heard. I have made renovations to my house, spent thousands updating it and maintaining it. I planned to do many more improvements but have haulted my efforts because of this unjustifiable act of preferring money over the wellbeing of the people. There is no reason for this to be be a transitional zone because there is no transition. There is a distinct seperation between the industrial and this residential area created by nature alone. If you propose to do this you are creating many environmental and social issues that are not sound policy no matter what your agenda is. There must be sound reasonings and a definitive purpose behind this rezone other than someone has spent money on some land, This cannot be done be.:.Xdsc someone `chinks It would be a nice gesture. This is a. demoralizing unethical act that Would be unforgivable if persued any farther. Too rezone would be to exact more taxes on my family wich already have enough hardships as it is with this current economy and the socialist regime that is now in office on the national level. We have need of every dime we have left over to live on, Why would you impose an unconstitutional act upon the people when this area already has an agreement with this city zoning commission restricting any such action? It makes me suspect motives and leadership abilities.. Let alone your concern for the people. Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, FOR THE PEOPLE not for big money, the respecting of person, or big government. I admonish you strongly to please fore -go these efforts to create further hardships upon this residential area and its occupants. With great expectancy of your compassion, wisdom, and reconsideration on. this matter. Thantcs, Mare and Lois Bisset and family -293- Coften Ward From: Ken Seavey [kenseavey@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, Januanj 12, 2009 8:02 PM To: cfreas@ci.kenai.ak.us Cc: xcel@aiaska.com Subject: Rezone of the Kenai Spur Highway strip (Cinderella Street & Kenai Spur Hwy) To whom it may concern: As a property owner in the Cinderella Street area, I aen writing this e-mail to express my opposition towards the rezoning of the Kenai Spar Highway strip (Kenai Spur Hwy & Cinderella St). Thank you, Ken Seavey 704 Aliak Drive Kenai, AK 99611 kenseavey@yaho©.cam No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http:/Iwww.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270A M/1888 - Release Date: 1/12/2009 7:04 AM 2i4i2009 -294- From: Debbie & Russell Sonberg isonberg@alaska.netj Seat: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 8:23 AM To: cfreas@ci.kenai.ak.us Cc: xcel@alaska.com Subject: Re: Opposed to any rezone of RR1 & Conservation to Commercial TO CI 8Y OF KENA I I am OPPOSED to any rezone of RR l or conset- ation as described on the petition. I fully support the neighborhood report that is (or soon xiIl be) submitted for inclusion in the P&Z packet for the February I I meeting. I will let the petition and neighborhood report reflect my position in greater detail. This email is to simply, officially register my opposition to this and any similar rezone to the RRI IVIAPS neighborhood. Russell Sonberg 41€1 Cinderella Street Kenai, AY, 99611 907-283-5880 February 4 2009 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg,com Version: 8.0233 / Virus Database: 270,10,17/1934 - Release Date: 02/04/09 08:24:00 2/4/2009 -295- Colisen Ward From: Debbie Sonberg [dabble_ sonberg@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 8:11 AM To: cfreas@cLkenai.ak.us; mkebschull@ci.kenai.ak.us Cc: Colleen Ward; Debbie & Russell Sonberg Subject: Opposed to any rezone of RR1 & Conservation to Commercial Please include my statement in the packet that l am OPPOSED to any rezone of 121Z1 or conservation as described on the petition. 1 fully support the neighborhood report that is (or soon will be) submitted for inclusion in the P&L packet for the February I l meeting. i will let the petition and neighborhood report reflect nay position in greater detail. This email is to simply, officially register ray opposition to this and any similar rezone to the RR i MAPS neighborhood. Debbie Sonberg 410 Cinderella Street Kenai, AK 99611. 907-283-5880 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - wvuw.avg.com Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.10.17/1934 - Release Date: 02/04109 08:24:00 2i4/2009 -296- PETITION TO STOP A ZONING CHANGE TO OUR COMMUNITY f We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to the City of Kenai Ordinance 2362-2008 — AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY REZONING TRACT A, PAPA JOE'S SUBDIVISION, CHUMLEY REPLAT FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL I (RRI) TO LIMITED COMMERCIAL Printed Name sim—sture Phvsical Address Phone4 Date sigLie Lwiv �-J 11 ell XV L? --q�a oy -"rlll --iA krt u n '7' 1"A t'�%W, C A C' \A,Q C' 0 'Pt� 4 I -'Truy'4 �j 7C�-70 IZIV6� � t � 11�4 Im We, the undersigned, ARE OPPOSED to the City of Kenai Ordinance 08 ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDIT.�l COMMERCIALTHE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY REZONING TRACT A, PAPA JOE9S SUBDIVISION, CHUMLEY REPLAT FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL I (.RRI) TO LIMITED Printed Name Signature Physical .Addrecc Phone lime %i"ed } (# T "`' / / / �i/r '�t %MC^'r ✓f J� y; y f '° L L��f GL u / / 3' 7 7X % %,. '-2 :..�/✓i d /; .L�:�'i f ; G.�G'L J� .�^ 26 3 23xL /2��—c�� eb2 s b 3 Ma r L �_ 3 5 L/OS 5 l2-Z Zzo(S ab�`S6L1 12- dU�" "o F int o / 7aa t'l\ C.-j�vr' J�3 u,�R a a a� Val-- W aLr� 708 RA SSS�U- S.OAJ6 e2& 9�i i L/l/D V,1 )eketf s-r 2L 3 S9vO t -Z.;v,E ,�� / ir.-� ri >�•�,�:�21�-"�?�7k.�'� c c J -- �' " tJK q j ( �' �S( ` oo-31) ,'rya -298- Pt F .Wf-ti PETITION TO STOP A ZONrNG CHANGE TO OUR COMMUNITY Printed Name Sig2ature Pbysical Address qo Phone ## pate aimed "� 0 Z233T-6no' 1 0 undersigned,We, the ARE OPPOSED o the City of Kenai Ordinance 1 i' ZONINGORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENTDI THE OFFICIAL REZONING .,# TRACT • PAPA c Ia O I. SUBDIVISION, CHUMLEY REPLAT FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL 1 (RRI) TO LIMITED COMMERCIAL & '\ Gz• Lam(( • 016•2 ' JJ • Signature � Pbvs®ea! Address Phone # bate signed 4-. rn.0 n.. �- PETITION OPPOSING A ZONIN CHAN6E WIT ®iT� ��IIYItTNII� We, the undersigned, are OPPOSED to rezoning from Rural Residential t and Conservation to Limited Commercial the properties north of the Kenai Spur highway included in the frontage strip extending from McCollum Drive to the city -owed conservation parcel west of Princess Street and any additional subsequent resolutions or ordinances that would result in the rezone of properties herein identified, in whole or in part, from Rural Residential I and Conservation to Limited Commercial Zone, Number Aft Printed Name Sienatecre of Children 'hysica➢Address Phone # Date signed Under 19 yrs. MA /t,,i 4�, . ) n� 5 C"rc} �✓ i 1 � � N i �vrr� bV t7 171 b d El 33' om A 7 1 - KpP XP i k4 i_ (�U� fl t � t lUL- VVI k '.3s-cr J -OS 1 3! D We, the undersigned, are OPPOSED to rezoning from Rural Residential 1 and Conservation to limited Commercial the properties north of the Kenai Spur Highway included in the frontage strip extending from McCollum Drive to the city -owed conservation psircel West of Princess Street and any additional subsequent resolutions or ordinances that would result in the rezone of properties herein identified, in whole or in part, from Rural Residential 1 and Conservation to limited Commercial Zone, Number arS Printed Fame of Childress Signature Physical �nddress th—oR # Date sinned Under 19 yrs. �s:t, ✓� !1 ii0r'"�G: (t; . �'L 1 �C,j Jl L �8 J f dY J f 0C� (� 4� 7. C7f r S ,� �eu - 7L j t71 �� c �s - 5 Z�C �I' —1 a to' J (�4s —f1No w o�� w EiV �I 3.. 50007 r (� ^4�/'LV-I G✓� G U? '_%5"Y�' ' .K--I/—L ^"l.c. r i. �3 Al { r' �(� ✓'✓ a( �:f .✓ r,(t9� �( 4VC -735 V5 d LE 911T�10N OPPOSING A ZONIIC ."HANGiG N� i HII� ®III COMMTl�dd I }Y We, the undersigned, are OPPOSED to rezoning from Rural Residential I and Conservation to Limited Commercial the properties north of the Kenai Spur Highway included in the frontage strip extending from McCollum Drive to the city -oared conservation parcel west of princess Street and any additional subsequent resolutions or ordinances that would result in the rezone of properties herein identified, in Whole or in part, from Rural Residential I and Conservation to Limited Commercial Zone. Number of Children R2aPs( I'r$n$ed Name Signature I'hysical Address Phone # Date signed tinder 19 yrs. 'CAjQte A CAy1Ci{ �al� 4y 3qI Rc.&0 � '314--Z 4w^ 31 you`) 0 . ), r- X(3. `1:7 -1i dal--/ c) LAO\ mLC-OU , CT� ?, S"3 4`"1W_1 Teo%k 2009 C' f� -1�' ✓e 2 3-333E, A) 0 6 U00cJ 5 5 i£_ 2rs- 3- 3 7 3 z -- V33 -(a5'sC) _Q. fl We, the undersigned, are OPPOSED to rezoning from Rural Residential 1 and Conservation to Limited Commercial the properties north of the Kenai Spur t ighway included in the frontage strip extending from McCollum Drive to the city -owed conservation parcel west of Princess Street and any additional subsequent resolutions or ordinances that would result in the rezone of properties herein identified, in whole or in part, from Rural Residential f and Conservation to Limited Commercial Zone. Number of Children MAPS Printed NameSi nature Physical Address Phone # Date s�ned Under 19 yrs. [ I PI1(j 3D3C�iI1�fGt Z� (5y Z "Z d ❑ 6i'"��.�/�� '�/( �`, ��//�ll�' h f 4�' �\ ��%A �/�//LA f A � V1.:.., v "`�> � �) lV �� U®� �r/�'.n �y �\ � { � . t "1. � 5 � u � ? � ' � {�� J�t'� ,�./l e _ c� ® D/ got , LS 0,q I ✓LT �L�'> -Sb 2 .7 `2` 7 Y 2 Z. - J L G ray, ®®®; El WAHM II JAW KE MM'Sw We, the undersigned, are OPPOSED to rezoning from Rural Residential 1 and Conservation to limited Commercial the properties north of the Kenai Spur Highway included in the frontage strip extending from McCollum Drive to the city -owed conservation parcel west of Princess Street and any additional subsequent resolutions or ordinances that would result in the rezone of properties herein identified, in whole or in part, from Rural Residential 1 and Conservation to limited Commercial Zone. mAps Printed Name Signature / J hys➢ca➢Address ^1 '(�v1ic (IAO/l%i ///Y,(A,, 'T(A L..if 7/),f �")i.+— e x Number of Children Phone # Date signed Under 19yrs. 93 -yob 0,2-02 -7-)q We, the undersigned, are OPPOSED to rezoning from Rural Residential I and Conservation to Limited Commercial the properties north of the Kenai Spur Highway included in the frontage strip extending from McCollum Drive to the city -owed conservation parcel West of Princess Street and any additional subsequent resolutions or ordinances that would result in the rezone of properties herein identified, in whole or in part, from Rural Residential I and Conservation to Limited Commercial Zane. Number of Children MAPS Lrinted Name �T Sl tore Physical Address Phone# Date kned UndeE19 rs. �I F] I a N AND CTTV OF KENAI COUNCIL MEMBERS Sl_JBJE I't RE -ZONING PROPOSAL L FOR SECTION OF KR<NAl SPUR E-RWY, DATED. D. 1. E.BRUAR Y 2, 200 E It has come to my attention! via the nevw,spaper, that there is a petition to re -zone some of the l<,ettai Spur Hwy, properties sornewahere around candle€ig,ht drive or srr. E live on the Kenai `spur Higlxwwtaay at gd R0, and arty slpouse and i haw-c owned the properly as our principal residence since 1996. Imly residence is about a milt: or less fronn the proposed re -zoning. The reason ewe bought this house was nlotivaated by, the fact that it was on the highways and in close proa.itinlry to the elementary, middle, and high school. 'nacre was very hale commercial or retail and mostly nice residences and lots of'che rches and residential prolierty on tine highway and was zoned as residential. ` c ecs o , our Lesideneee ¢are the €uidianrr Il'he idea of any Lather thin resideeetisai will sadd more on/off trafffic stress around the schools, e@n3nae@€esY nkaai aH8 the other residences. Over the last few years there have been, numerous severe and iife ending crashes or this section of the highway asses€ as a matter of faact there was one killing accident right next door to me. Last week the; e were several and one aainside-€lo✓ n, vehicle right in front of then high school. Check with the police department and. you %vil, certairiy find tom; of accidentsalong this strip. wT€ c eeseiBw' 6ilfc @ivisa ¢see tRne 4ea�isoa aw with its access and quick snow removal, but putting other than residences An a re-zarning only would not he wise. We feel there is plenty of r°ooars €'err other than e`eside ntiui zoning in other Kenai areas and are strongly against this movement to firer --zone. We der ouch" want to see any more driveways to the highway used by other than for residential purposes and mutely do not Wastt HIN Section Of the higitwvay to look like the and development sniess aas we see on this highway north of Kenai. Sincerely, Raymond Zag vrtki 8480 Kenai Spas€° Highway Kenai, AK 99611 (907) 253-'-437 ifra<-ci net cc. Mrs. Debbie Sonberg M A MI v°�. March 2, 2006 - Kenai loses court appeal management decision on rec center costs city in fees "The city had appealed Kenai Superior Court Judge Harold Brown's ruling that the city should pay "reasonable attorney's fees" to the public interest group known as Friends of the Recreation Center Inc., which claimed Kenai violated its own municipal code by giving a management contract to Boys and Girls Clubs. The contract was awarded in 2003 without being put out for bid, as required by Kenai statute." An Anchorage attorney, John Havelock, said, `The court went out of its way to affirm Judge Brown's ruling that the city had misinterpreted its own ordinance," h tla:/twvtw.genrnsulae-tarion.comistories1030206/news 0302nctn001.shtmi April 19, 2007 - Reader: Are we no longer welcome In Cold 'own? Kathryn Tomrdle wrote about concerns if her neighborhood was rezoned to Commercial Mixed Use since many of the residents had lived there more than 30 years. "What this means is that there can be no alterations to homes, apartments or property unless a variance is granted from planning and zoning." httpa/v�rwvrr�eninsulac€arior7,corn/siorles104l907/€ette 2007041900 shtmil October 17, 2007-3unk Rec Center, buffers on docket "After a dozen residents from the Sprucewood Glen Subdivision protested the removal of trees in a strip of city -owned land along Walker lane at the last city council meeting, city administration is proposing two options for establishing the strip as a buffer between the residential neighborhood and commercial development to the west" Homer Electric Association wanted a 20 foot easement to bring power to the Aspen building. "A plat in the 1970s had noted the land as a buffer strip, but a subsequent plat in the 1980s did not include the annotation." The final decision, "After some discussion, the city council agreed to give HEA a 20- foot wide utility easement behind the hotel now, in exchange for a 60-foot easement coursing through the middle of the strip." bj vuv v .9seY irisoata Ber€ynaes it tsto>€rs/'irJi7071r ews 4272.shtm€ February 22, 2008 -Airport Reserve to be rezoned? Kenai City Council considers /fight industrial development "The first stone was tossed into the rezone pond Wednesday night as the Kenai City Council took up a recommendation to change all airport reserve lands surrounding the airport from conservation to light industrial use. The suggestion to rezone nearly 1,080 acres away from the relatively pristine classification to one allowing for some development came to the council by way of a motion of the city's Airport Commission." hi'cr�aj/ v&,ww.ueninse6ladarion corn/stories/02-?-208/news 3890.shtml September 18, 2008-'dine spent voicing opinions was wasted Glenn Fore, along with about a dozen residents, spoke at a Kenai Planning and Zoning meeting. They were against a permit allowing a business to operate in their residential neighborhood. Mr. Fore expressed that all of the residents who spoke were against the permit, yet the Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission approved it. "One of the comments from the commission was `dot e "significantly i_m ared.' To t^..e rceiriantc of ner , ergn:C4lOed, any impair m8nt IB ",id0 (,bhborhood w,id gn�,ftG?nt " is on.com/c-t.oi-les/G9!808/iet 284225797.shtmI December 7, 2008 -Students Recruited for Kenai rezone protest Public commented on the proposed rezone for the Papa Joe's Subdivision Kenai Ordinance 2362-2008. "A longtime resident, Patricia Falkenberg, said she petitioned the neighborhood and received 43 signatures out of 44 people opposing the rezone." Residents and high school students read from a 12 page document about the opposition for the rezone. The paper cited a 1996 Homer court case ruling against spot zoning. hti,i3://vuwvv.peiiinsulaclarion.com/stories/120-/06/riew 364800011.shtm6 January4, 2009 - Rezoning on Kenai docket: Meetings slated to discuss Limited Commercial label "Kenai officials have scheduled two public meetings in hopes of quelling controversy surrounding the potential rezoning of rural residential property along the Kenai Spur Highway across from the high school... The lot, which fronts on the highway, has residential properties on the other three sides. More than a dozen residents protested the proposed rezone during the Dec. 3 Kenai City Council meeting saying they want their neighborhood to remain residential... The Limited Commercial zone was created in April 2005 to provide transition areas between commercial and residential districts in Kenai by allowing smaller businesses, mixed residential and other compatible uses that complement and do not detract from adjacent districts." httQ://wwinr.penir+,sulactarion.com/stories/0104091newr 26059881.6.sin'.m! -310- Monday, February 7, 2000 - Kenai Gun Shop Gets Turned Doyen A gun shop was proposed in a residential neighborhood was voted down by Planning and Zoning, Neighbors and other Kenai residents opposed the permit. btt /tly .0207QOnec, Gdz.ht of June 13, 2000 - Proposed Business Upsets Neighbors "The possibility of a construction business next door to a rural residential neighborhood has got some people in the area up in arms. A conditional -use permit request will come before the Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission on Wednesday night that, if approved, will allow the project to go forward." A neighbor was upset over the time frame given in order for him to prepare a statement for the commission. He did not want planning and zoning to delay and wanted them to vote no. ht r, {Ln�cnr_ w.nerymsE3kac€arise_corn/s or'ses10&ii13t)t Levi 06130DQQQ3.vhtro i Friday, October 26, 2001 - Kenai planning session Worthy of residents` time An opportunity for residents to give opinions during the work session regarding updating the comprehensive plan was posted in the Kenai Peninsula Clarion. C;�-tp_'irjvvvv.frier%nsuVaclariort,(,otri stories/14 2601/0� e 102601edl orlaLs€ b—n! Friday, December 7, 2001- Kenai Plan Coaling Together "After an Oct. 27 public meeting, where attendees were turned into participants, scores of ideas were distilled into five pages of recommendations by the consulting firm Kevin Waring Associates of Anchorage." Goals listed were: 1. Create an attractive, vital, cultural center in downtown, with a mix of private and public facilities and activities to benefit residents and visitors. 2. Protect and enhance the livability of residential neighborhoods. 3. Meet the needs of Kenai's growing senior population. 4. Limit residential and commercial sprawl. S. Provide appropriate city facilities and levels of service. 6. Protect the city's natural areas and scenic views. 7. Develop a local system of traits and public access. S. Ensure that Kenai is a safe place to live. 9. Improve educational services for all age groups. 10. Expand or provide public facilities fiat increase the a ality of life for Kenai's citizens and visitors, irt�+a:'ivrrvtinnr.4,en€r;su€aeiaric�r.com�s�or�s��P!(3l(nerd 12Ci�100oS.shtrr.4 July 10, 2002 — Council ClKs New `school Zone' "Many schools in Kenai, like Sears and Mountain View Elementary schools, Kenai Central High School and Kenai Middle School, are in areas that are zoned residential, so the schools have to conform to the rules of that zone. The problem is that schools aren't designed as homes and aren't used the same way homes are. In fact, they function more like commercial buildings than homes, said Marilyn Kebschull, city planner for Kenai." The article stated in the past, the schools had to request a conditional use permit to do things such as landscaping and signage. ht4)_. l fwwp.nert nsulaciariori.com stories/071002 net,; 0710020005.shtmt July 22, 2002 - Council Hears Zoning Plight "The council held a Board of Adjustments hearing in council chambers regarding a piece of property in the Anglers Acres Subdivision. The lot is zoned rural -residential and has an existing conditional -use permit to allow a fishing guide business with no more than three guides to operate off the property. The owner of the lot, Gary Foster, applied to the Planning and Zoning Commission to modify the permit to allow him to build up to five rental cabins on the property." The amendment was approved and a neighbors were unhappy, so the decision was appealed by a neighbor. httoi,,arm,.pe•iinsulactarion.c.onl,/storics/072202/new 0722020001.shtmi -311- July 24, 2003 - Kenai officials miss point about rec Center decision Carol Brenckle wrote, "Instead of trying to work with the friends and the Parks and Recreation Commission to open the rec center, the Kenai city manager and members of the city council continue to work "behind closed doors" independently of public opinion. The mayor denied a request by the Parks and Recreation Commission to schedule an emergency meeting to discuss reopening the rec center under a plan submitted by former city employees to operate the rec center pending a final resolution of this case." hfdaalvan:vtiP.penlnsulaclarion.tom/storiesl0i2403/(et 0724038et00100i.s�n'�i September 21, 2003 -Kenai Woman Caught on Fence In September 2002, Nancy Henricksen of Groomingdales appealed Planning and Zoning's decision about a permit to operate her business from her home to the city council which acted as a board of adjustment. The board decided to award her the permit, on the condition she put up a sight -obscuring fence in her backyard. Henricksen explained her financial situation in not being able to afford a new fence. She finally put tarps over her fence to make it sight - obscuring. hitp; vv nnn .peninsulaciaejon.cQ n/stoctes 09216 neua �92103new004C30i shtanl January 6, 2005 - RV park planners a no show Washington based developers wanted to put an RV park near VIP Estates. After being turned down, they filled out an appeal but did not receive a notice in the mail until after the hearing had passed. "Karen Koester, a VIP Estates resident, testified in strong aversion to an RV park. She said her neighborhood is important to Kenai, and that transient visitors would not be good for the area. She called upon the board to preserve and protect the neighborhood from the appealed request." Mom.' i1r w.rsTnil sulaclaiio ,ca nistorieslT106�Q�s 0�.06new0o-20 10t i May 10, 200S - Green grass or green cash? Kenai to decide whether to allow development ofLawton Acres "The Kenai City Council on Wednesday agreed to allow the city's planning and zoning commission to address the issue of rezoning the strip of city -owned land, known as Lawton Acres. The land sits between the Kenai Spur Highway to the north and Lawton Drive to the south. It currently is zoned for conservation purposes, meaning it must be left untouched." h _.iJwnw. en'srisu(acla;Eon.ccm/stork-�S'_ti05(revvs 0S10nev,003001.5html March 4, 2005 -Kenai OKs New Zone The Limited Commercial Zone was created for areas where residential and commercial use_= are close together. "The idea of creating the Zone carve about last year, when small business owners Nate and Gina Kiel came before the council asking that a strip of land known as Lawton Acres be opened to business development. The land is at the eastern edge of the city's business district along the Kenai Spur Highway. Currently, the land serves as a strip of undeveloped land between the highway and a residential neighborhood." Nate Keil was in support of a new zone. "Another Lawton resident, Roy Wells, however, cautioned the city to move slowly when it comes to zoning areas that could impact residential areas." li :/ www.,ienlnsulactai-lon.com/stories/030405/news 0304neav,002.shtmi June 7, 2005 - Kenai faces growth spurt City will decide whether to open land to building Lawton Acees was considered for a Limited Commercial Zone. The area was considered changing from Conservation to Limited Commercial, htt, e/ vvvru.peninsu6ac6arion.eon storesf06C i05fesews 0607new00200I.s61 mi June 12, 2005 Staying in bounds... what offiers say "The decision by the Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission not to rezone Lawton Acres for limited business development makes sense." A reason being, "Recent efforts by the Kenai Economic Development Strategy (KEDS) group have highlighted the need to develop a more defined town center. Opening up more land along the Kenai Spur Highway would only thwart these efforts, further adding to Kenai's reputation as a sprawling, disconnected city." ht : Jwyau c-n' �sulaela `an tom/stonr c s/061J05looryd 0612o e0r� 0300I.shtmi -312- 7.1 Valid Planning Issue During the February 4, 1998,, Board of Adjustment Hearing the applicant's representative stated, ".- we feel a traffic problem, if it exists, is a traffic problem and note property development problem and we think we would like to respectfully suggest that traffic problems be addressed with traffic control items." (Board of Adjustment Hearing, Chumley/Chumley Appeal, February 4, 1998, Page 6) The residents of the neighboring lots respectfully disagree. The Planning Commissioner's Handbook (June 1 993, State of Alaska) validates traffic as a sound planning and zoning concern in the following statement: The effects on traffic congestion are also mentioned some in the conditional use section of a zoning ordinance. A permit granted or denied under this standard has a better chance of surviving judicial review if it is based on a credible traffic study which quantifies the effects of the proposed use. (68) 7.2 Traffic Study and Pertinent Statistical data Residents of the neighborhood conducted counts of.three main areas: (1) children in the neighborhood and at local schools (2) number of cars entering & exiting the Kenai Central High School from the Spur Highway, and (3) a count of clientele entering & exiting other professional offices to represent a possible traffic sampling for the proposed professional offices traffic. These counts were conducted by neighborhood residents around such priorities as family, school, jobs, and neighborhood issues in an all too short allowable time frame. Although they may not be an official traffic study, they do show that there is a traffic impact on the neighborhood and surrounding area that must be considered 7.2. 1 The number of children potentially affected by traffic concerns who live on the north side of the Spur Highway and who must cross a five lane highway to get to their respective schools is currently at 70 and will climb to 71 in approximately three months. The ages of these children range and the number is relative to change. See attachment # 7 for recorded tally of survey. The number of children enrolled in the area school are: 475 at Kenai Central High School, 455 at Kenai Middle School and 409 at Mountain Vie Elementary. These statistics establish the fact that many children will feel the impact of the council's decision concerning this CUP now and for years to come. 7.2.2 The number of cars entering & exiting the Highway were tallied at three different counts. Number of vehicles going in to the high school: * first count 1 :55 p.m. to 2:50 P.M. 66 * second count 2:45 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. 83 * third count 7:07 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 165 * fourth count7:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Number of vehicles exiting the high school (offset first count 7:00 a.m, to 10:30 a.m. second countl2:45 p.m. to 3:00 P.M. * third count 7:07 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. * fourth count7:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. 191 Kenai Central High School from the Spur (as many as 47 in a 15 minute period) (as many as 10 in a one minute period) exit from Cinderella St.): 90 78 79 (as many as 18 in a 9 minute period) (as many as 12 in a one minute period) 50 -313- f✓✓ Increases in traffic flows at peak hours due to the Kenai Middle School traffic flow have not been included in these counts. 7.2.3 Professional Offices clientele traffic (information obtained by phone calls to the businesses): (1) A Dental Clinic (2) A Medical walk-in Facility (3) A Medical Specialist (4) Tanning Salon (5) A Hair Salon (6) A Chiropractic Clinic (7) An insurance Agent 7.3 Conclusions 25+ vehicles per day plus 5-6 employees 20 on a slow day plus 3-4 employees 60 on a heavy day plus added employees 40 on office days (non -surgical days) 30 on off-season days plus 2 employees 90 on in -season days 30 to 50 in the winter plus 4-5 employees (doubled in the summer) 50 per day plus 4 employees 50 per day plus 3 to 4 employees 7.3.1 Traffic Related Safety Issues Exists. The Chumleys' application is for two professional office buildings. The number of stories or businesses in each is still undisclosed or unknown. Assuming that each building held only one professional office, based on the above clientele counts for two professional offices, in and out traffic, the clientele numbers above would have to be quadrupled to account for the traffic. Each of the two offices would have in and out traffic for each client served. It is entirely feasible that each building, even if single story, could house two or more professional offices. Each building could be two stories high (or higher), and double the traffic possibilities. Considering the traffic from the high school, added to the traffic from a minimum of two professional offices, congestion could become unmanageable around the high school exit and Cinderella Street without further traffic assistance (such as a traffic light at an already unaligned intersection -- just planning the traffic light might be a nightmare). Due to the general nature of the drivers at the high school, a higher number of inexperienced drivers use its entrance and exit than any other single driveway system in the City of Kenai. Not one map presented by the Chumley= has shown the !aCa?inn ni the ^inh schoni exit in relation to their proposed site plan. 7.3.2 One Accident is One Too Many. Unfortunately the peak traffic congestion times are also the times children are walking to and from school. It is obvious from the data collected that safety risks, particularly to our children, will escalate if this CUP is approved. This is of utmost concern to the neighbors and rightfully should carry tremendous weight in making the decision to approve or decline the CUP. USKA DEPARTMENT OF TRAIISPORTATIOii Site Code : 33333333 PAGE: I N-S Street: Tinker FILE: tinkerap U-W street: Kenai Spun GCF 0,,98 24 Weather : ------------------------ cold ------------------------------------------- Movements by: Primary ...------------------------- ------------------------------- DATE: 10/24196 Time ,.,, From South .... ,.., From Went .... ..,. From North .... ,. From Easc .... Vehicle peds Win -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- peels RT THRU iT peds, RT TBRU LT peels RT THRU LT peels RT THU LT Total Total 0:00 AM v' U 0 0 Z 2i 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 38 0 62 0 6:15 0 1 0 1 0 1 23 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 39 0 69 0 5;30 0 2 0 0 0 4 2d 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 48 1 82 0 U:45 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 1 p 0 0 0 74 I 161 0 NR TOTAL 0 3 0 2 G 8 92 i C ? 0 0 0 0 199 2 314 0 :0 AM 0 1 0 1 0 3 24 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 i2 105 0 7:15 1 0 4 0 10 30 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 50 it 12 i 30 0 14 4 i0 0 17 31 2 0 0 2 J ? ?7 0 142 0 45 0 S 0 2 0 5 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 86 2 127 0 ER TOTAL 30 4 1, 0 35 '139 3 0 0 2 20 13 206 31 686 1 3,00 AN U1 0 3 46 2 0 0 0 0 13 65 0 143 0 8:15 4 0 0 0 0 1d 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 94 4 194 0 .;30 0 4 u I3 § 'i3 0 i tl 0 0 0 09 234 0 8:45 D 4 0 16 0 7 101 0 0 2 0 i 6 0 112 6 249 0 R TOTAL 0 1 46 0 l5 314 4 0 4 0 0 i9 380 i9 820 0 9:00 AN 0 6 0 6 0 6 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 U9 2 i90 0 9:'15 0 0 0 i0 0 3 58 1 1) 2 0 0 0 50 128 0 9:30 0 4 0 3 0 9 63 0 0 P 0 1 0 0 66 2 14M 0 9:45 0 0 0 i 0 1 13 3 0 i 0 0 0 0 UO 0 139 0 SR TOTAL 0 10 0 20 0 i9 295 4 0 3 0 2 0 2 243 i 605 0 0:00 Aii 0 5 i) 1 0 1 69 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 I 151 0 i0:i8 0 U 0 1 0 0 10 0 0 i 0 0 0 ? b9 143 0 'i{ 11 TOTAL t � v .1 ! J03 i 626, 2 :00 AM 0 5 0 2 0 9 05 24 0 7 183 .0 0 1 2 0 2 0 3 89 3 0 0 D 0 0 5 56 3 163 a:JO 0 2 0 7 0 G '107 ., 0 2 0 0 0 2 94 4 227 0 106 1�) 0 0 0 0 0 1i8 0 239 0 R-TOTAL 1 I 0 i3 0 15 369 31 0 9 0 0 0 7 33M 19 812 2:U0 PM 0 0 7 d 3 12 0 0 0 1i 0 0 i 93 { i83 0 2:15 0 3 0 i 0 5 123 G 0 3 1 U 0 0 84 3 223 0 2 : 3 0 0 3 0 7 0 3 72 2 J i u 0 0 0 iO3 i93 0 ;2:45 0 i 0 15 0 8 1€6 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 101 1 245 0 3R TOTAL 0 3 0 30 0 i9 383 4 0 5 1 0 0 1 381 ii 844 0 1:00 PM 0 1 1 i0 0 4 130 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 93 2 244 0 15 0 3 0 Z 0 7 ii9 0 1 0 0 0 0 99 3 236 0 !:30 0 7 0 4 0 5 144 5 0 1 0 2 0 1 104 2 275 0 1:45 0 i 0 3 0 6 126 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 89 3 230 0 ER TOTAL 0 12 1 19 0 22 ui9 10 0 3 0 2 0 2 385 10 985 0 -315- 3 -. � BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING APPEAL OF LEIGHJBUZZELL APRIL 15, 1998 PAGE 45' Espy; To the best of knowledge, yes. And I don't know that this is a closing statement, but I am here to try to make this personal to you people because this is very personal to me. I am a wife, a mother, a community member, a neighbor in this area, and someone. who's active.in Kenai. and I have; a.big,concern for Kenai: I graduated front Kenai Central High School and so-1 feel I can try to make this personal to you people so that's what I'm going to attempt to do. I don't know whether you want to consider this as a closing comment or not. My husband and I purchased our horse on McCollum Drive because we fell in love with it the first that we pulled into the driveway tucked into this quiet little neighborhood. We moved in with our two small sons on November fifth, 1988, the same day George Bush was elected as president of the United States. We soon began attending church right there-iia'this neighborhood: In 1991, we felt really good about bringing our two new adopted daughters, age eight and nine, from Portland, Oregon to Kenai, Alaska to complete our family. We had so much to offer them. Two parents to love them. Two brothers to torment them and a cosy little log cabin on McCollum Drive in the beautiful city of Kenai. There was Laura Sue and Kaleen next door and Becky just around the corner. Our children grew. One by one they have mowed from school to school here. First Patrick onto Kenai Middle School. Then Stacy. III never forget the terror I had when I learned about the trouble she had coming from school one day from that school. I thought everything was p&rfeet: I foolishly thought she could safely cross the Spur Highway from the Middle School'ty^ hen1 aevme. at was so short va`.a distance, We Were so blessed that day that she didn't get hurt, She began to cross the Spur and got half way when she slipped and felt. Shy had enough time to pick herself up and run back to the side she started from before the car going 55 miles per hour descended on her. That's when I knew we had to do something about the safety of all our children on this highway. I drove my kids back and forth until the expansion project brought the stop light. At the P&Z meeting on March 25'h,it. was stated that the speed limit on this section of the highway was lowered from.55 miles per hour to 45 miles per hour for the purpose of accommodating more traffic. I remember it differently. I believe the speed limit was lowered to 45 miles per hour when.it was determined that many children cross this section of highway to travel to and from school. It was for the safety of the children. I deduct this from a conversation I had on the telephone with Mr. Horn before the highway expansion project began, who was and still is the head of the State's DOT -316- BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING? APPEAL OF LEIGH/BUZZELL APRIL 15, 1998 PAGE 46 and I apologize, I don't have the date for that conversation that he and I had. And I remember trying to lower itr.td�35 milevpaer-hottn-4fstill tninkithat it should be 35 miles per hour here in this area. I fought long and hard for safety measures to be made for our children who have to cross this section of the.highway every day while attending school. The Borough does not pay for busing for our neighborhood, Kenai Diddle School and Kenai Central High School students. The city council agree that there was a safety issue and that some sort .of plan needed to be made to accommodate the children. Finally the state gave in and agreed to put an. the _stop,hght with pedestrian..crossing._..... Please remember this issue when you make your decision. Please remember why you supported that effort. Please don't make the decision to add more traffic for my children to contend with. We moved here to offer our children what we have now and we hope to be able to offer my grandchildren the same thing. I never dreamed I would have to be dealing, with the possibility that our neighborhood would or could be issued this kind of permit. Please don't take our residential neighborhood away from US. Neighbors are important to me. Two gentlemen stand to.gain financially from this Numerous people stand to lose.. I would welcome these two men into our neighborhood if they wanted to live there with us. The only danger that l pose to them is. that I make some pretty cookies that I like to share with our neighbors. Outside of being a wi_fL. a _mom and a reiaMh-- he<e, I dev;;te the ^eSt ^f helping Kenai be a better place for everyone to five. I help neighbors to help neighbors. I'm asking you to think of my ,family and all of my neighbors tonight when you make your ;decision that will affect.us very, very personally. Thank you. WUHams: Thank you very much. All right. I thank we've taken probably all of the testimony that's pertinent to the hearing this evening.. I wa ast to thank both sides. You've both been very eloquent in your presentations. There are some lingering questions; I'm sure, that members of the council may have and most definitely myself. Well be doing a lot of thinking and examination of the, materials that we have and will be working very closely with the administration in developing our decision. As you know, when we develop the decision from the past record, we will vote one way or the other, there'll be room for each person to personally identify their feeling on the particular issue. Ah, we do have 30 clays in which to complete the appeal process. During that time, excuse me, again all of the material will be examined very closely and we will be able to present what the council feels to be a justified decision. ,31.7_ w Marilyn Kebschull From: Winegarden, Florence & Walton [wfwlaw@acsalaska.net) Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:26 PM To: Marilyn Kebschull Subject: Re: Rezone from McCollum Drive to No Name Creek This is your verification. Thanks Charles A. Winegarden Winegarden, Florence & Walton 220 Main Steet Loop, Suite B Kenai, Alaska 99611 Phone: (907) 283-5774 Fax:(907) 283-5771 NEW EMAIL: wfwlaw(a),acsalaska.net THIS MESSAGE, INCLUDING ANY ATTACHMENTS, IS FOR THE SOLE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) AND MAY CONTAIN ATTORNEY -CLIENT CONFIDENTIAL OR PRIVELEDGED INFORMATION. ANY UNAUTHORIZED REVIEW, USE, DICSLOSURE OR DISTRIBUTION IS PROHIBITED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, PLEASE CONTACT THE SENDER BY REPLY E-MAIL, DELETE THIS MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENTS, AND DESTROY ALL COPIES. To: Cary Graves; Winegarden & Walton Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:22 PM Subject: RE: Rezone from McCollum lrhm to No Name (_raa;v, Mr. Winegarden, Please verify if you are requesting the emails between you and Mr. Graves are to be included as a lay down tonight. Thank you. Marilyn K. Kebschull, AICP Planning Administration City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Avenue Kenai, AK 99611 907-283-8235 From: Cary Graves Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:09 PM To: Winegarden & Walton Cc: Marilyn Kebschull Subject: RE: Rezone from McCollum Drive to No Name Creek l 'Mr. Winegarden: sm Thank you for the information. Mr. McCollum's ownership of 25%of EZ Management does not change my opinion regarding whether Mr. Twait has a conflict of interest. In my opinion, the alleged conflict remains too attenuated and speculative to be a substantial indirect financial interest. Again, thank you for the information . Cary R. Graves City Attorney From. Winegarden & Walton [mailto:wfMaw@acsalaska.net] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 1:59 PM To: Cary Graves Cc: Marilyn Kebschull Subject: Re: Rezone from McCollum Drive to No Name Creek I do not mind if the February 10th smalls are included. Also, as far as Glen McCollum Jr. is concerned, he is a 25% owner of EZ Management, LLC who owns Lot 40. The deed and biennial statement are attached. To: Winecarden, Florence & Walton Cc: Marilyn Kebschull Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:55 AM Subject: RE: Rezone from McCollum Drive to No Name Creek Dear Mr. Winegarden: The reason I refer to page 249 in the citation of the Balough case is because that is how the Alaska Supreme Court cited it in Cabana v. Kenai Peninsula Borough, 21 P.3r° 833, 835 n. 9 (Alaska 2001). That footnote reads: "9/ See Balough v. Fairbanks North Star Borough, 995 P.2d 245, 249 (Alaska 2000)(holding the rezoning of 75 acres on the north side of a single rural road to be a legislative decision); Griswold v. Homer, 925 P.2d 1015, 1019 n.3 (Alaska 1996)(describing City Council's ordinance amending the zoning of a 7.5 acre parcel of land in Homer's 400-acre Central Business District as legislative enactment)". (Emphasis added). I think the better reference in Balough would be to page 267, but I defer to the supreme court. On page 267 of Balough the court stated: First, the Borough Assembly sat as a legislative body when it enacted both the grandfather rights ordinance and the ordinance that resulted in the rezoning of the seventy-five acre parcel. In Griswold we stated that "we have repeatedly held that it is the role of elected representatives rather than the courts to decide whether a particular statute or ordinance is a wise one," The Borough Assembly, therefore, was acting in its proper legislative capacity when it enacted FNBSCO 18.56,020, and when it rezoned the seventy -acre parcel within the FNSB as RR. (Footnotes omitted). Thus, in Balough the court refers to rezoning the parcel as a legislative act. The Alaska Planning Commission Handbook on page 31 states: In Alaska, a rezone is legislative. It affects all those with property in the area that is rezoned and the legislative body has the discretion to approve or deny the rezoning. Although there may be statutory rules that govern legislative proceedings, there are no procedural due process rules that apply to legislative proceedings. Courts are hesitant to -319- invade the procedural realm of the legislative branch. The handbook, I believe, reflects that law in Alaska. Moreover, the Coffey case was a quasi-judicial proceeding rather than a rezone. The reference to it in Griswold is not about a pre -judgment issue, but rather on the question of improper spot zoning. I also wanted to ask if you wanted the e-mails from February 10"' and my responses to be given to the Planning and Zoning Commission as a "lay -down". The City Planner indicated to me that she would provide them as a 'lay -down" if you wished, otherwise they will not be included. Thank you for your input. Cary R. Graves City Attorney From: Winegarden, Florence & Walton [mailto:wfwlaw@acsalaska.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:47 PM To: Cary Graves; Carol Frees; Rick Koch Cc: Marilyn Kebschull Subject: Re: Rezone from McCollum Drive to No Name Creek You are correct. I must agree from the plain wording of Cabana v. Kenai Peninsula Borough, 21 P.3d 833, 836 (Alaska 2001) that rezoning is a legislative process. I could not find any reference to the issue in Baiougn v. Fairbanks North Star Borough, 995 P.2d 245, 249 (Alaska 2000) on page 249 or anyplace else. However, none of those cases addressed the basis for my protest and I do not agree that the Alaska Supreme Court has ruled on the issue of prejudgment or appearance of fairness. In fact, in Griswold v. City of Homer, 925 P, 2d 1015, 1019 n.3 (Alaska 1996), the Griswold court stated: However, we will invalidate zoning decisions which are the result of prejudice, arbitrary decision -making, or improper motives. See South Anchorage Concerned Coalition v. Coffey, 862 P.2d 168, 174 (Alaska 1993) ("In reviewing zoning decisions, courts generally try to guard against prejudice, arbitrary decision -making, and improper motives.") (citing 3 Edward H. Ziegler Jr., Rathkoph's The Law of Zoning and Planning § 41.06, at 41-29, § 41.14(3)(b), at 41-93 (1992)). Thank you for your response. I greatly appreciate it. Zoning is not in my area of practice nor is municipal law, Charles A. Winegarden Winegarden, Florence & Walton 220 Main Steet Loop, Suite B Kenai, Alaska 99611 Phone: (907) 283-5774 Fax: (907) 283-5771 NEW EMAIL: wfwlawaacsalaskamet THIS MESSAGE, INCLUDING ANY ATTACHMENTS, IS FOR THE SOLE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENTS) AND MAY CONTAIN ATTORNEY -CLIENT CONFIDENTIAL OR PRIVELEDGED INFORMATION. ANY UNAUTHORIZED REVIEW, USE, DICSLOSURE OR DISTRIBUTION IS PROHIBITED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, PLEASE CONTACT THE SENDER BY -320- REPLY E-MAIL. DELETE THIS MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENTS, AND DESTROY ALL COPIES. ��1LL!lliC-1�11I:i.TT.y,I� To: Carol Frees ; Rick Koch Cc: Marilyn Kebschull ; wfwlawna acsalaska.net Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 11:04 AM Subject: RE: Rezone from McCollum Drive to No Name Creek Carol, Thank you for forwarding Mr. Winegarden's e-mail. Mr. Winegarden asserts that the Alaska Supreme Court has not ruled on the issue of whether zoning is a legislative act in Alaska. That is not correct. There are in fact three Alaska Supreme Court decisions stating very clearly that zoning is a legislative act in Alaska. See Cabana v. Kenai Peninsula Borough, 21 P.3d 833, 836 (Alaska 2001); Bolough v. Fairbanks North Star Borough, 995 P.2d 245, 249 (Alaska 2000) and Griswold v. City of Homer, 925 P. 2d 1015, 1019 n.3 (Alaska 1996). Cary R. Graves City Attorney From, Carol Freas Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:41 AM To: Cary Graves; Rick Koch Cc: Marilyn Kebschull Subject: FW: Rezone from McCollum Drive to No Name Creek FYI From: Winegarden, Florence & Walton [mailto:wfwlaw@acsalaska.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:06 AM To: Carol Freas Subject: Rezone from McCollum Drive to No Name Creek I would have replied earlier if I had known of the City Attorney's opinion but I did not see it until the Agenda was published. In response to the City Attorney's opinion concerning the two commissioners, the Alaska Supreme Court had not ruled on the subject of whether or not a rezoning question is a legislative function. In fact, a number of states have treated rezoning as adjudicatory. Kentucky is one of those states and the following case is pertinent and should be brought to the attention of the Planning & Zoning Commission. Hilltop Basic Res. v. Boone City, 2002-CA-001081-MR (Ky.App. 10-10-2003) In December 1999, Hilltop submitted to the Boone County Planning Commission an application for a zoning map amendment. At issue was a 534-acre area currently zoned for agricultural use which is located north of 1-275 along the southern bank of the Ohio River in Boone County. Hilltop proposed that this tract be rezoned in order to accommodate its limestone mining operation. The proposal met with considerable public opposition. Following a public hearing in January 2000, the zone change committee of the planning commission held five meetings to review the details of Hilltop's application in relation to Boone County's zoning regulations and comprehensive plan. The committee concluded that the proposed use of the property was in compliance with the requirements of the zoning regulations and that it was consistent with the comprehensive plan. The zoning decision was appealed because: Hilltop claims that it was denied a fair hearing before the fiscal court since two of its members had pre- judged the issue of whether the zone map amendment application should be approved. It points to allegedly -321- prejudicial statements, both written and oral, made by County Commissioners Cathy Flaig and Robert Hay prior to the argument -style hearing conducted by the fiscal court in mid -August 2000, Two zoning commissioners had made the following statements: Commissioner Hay on July 30, 2000, and a series of messages sent to Peggy Taylor, an opponent of Hilltop's application, on August 29, 2000. Hilltop contends that in these messages and publicly at the hearing on August 29, Hay openly expressed his hostility to the permitting of subsurface mining anywhere in the county FIaig told a Boone County property owner that regardless of how Hilltop's proposed mining activity might benefit the county, "she would never vote for a mine in this area of Boone County," adding that "[t]he people in Boone County just don't want it." In overturning the zoning decisioon, the court stated Zoning decisions are particularly vulnerable to charges of bias and conflicts of interest because they inevitably involve the intermingling of the adjudicative, legislative, and political roles of a local legislative body on sensitive or inflammatory issues of public interest. Marris v. City of Cedarburg, 498 N.W.2d 842 (Wis. 1993). Local legislative bodies are composed of "elected officials who represent the community and will be subjected from time to time to contact from constituents concerning issues, upon which they must ultimately decide." Houghana v. Lexington -Fayette Urban County Gov., Ky.App., 29 S.W.3d 370 (1999), Despite such pressures, an unbiased decision -maker is the critical component of fundamental fairness, the "sine qua non" of due process.L3l The very perception that a decision -maker may have prematurely judged the issues taints the proceedings and erodes public confidence. Id. Common sense and reality dictate that a member of a fiscal court is likely to have an opinion or at least an impression with respect to local land use planning issues. Consequently, a commissioner's general opinions on land use and development would not disqualify him from hearing a zoning matter. See Morris, supra. In contrast, however, blatant revelations of personal bias indicating prejudgment of an issue in a pending case are wholly repugnant to the guarantee of fundamental fairness. The court concluded by stating: Our decision is not based on any allegedly "improper ex parse contact" between the officials and their constituents. We reverse based upon the unavoidable perception that the commissioners' comments revealed an improper bias. Taken together, the statements create a clear appearance of impropriety in derogation of the presumption that the proceedings were undertaken in conformity with the fairness and integrity integral to due process. Without an opinion from the Alaska Supreme Court, the rezoning issue can not be classified as "legislative". We, affected property owners, have a right to expect a fair and impartial hearing on the issue. I certainly do not have any confidence that such impartiality will be present. i Charles A. Winegarden § Winegarden, Florence & Walton € 220 Main Steet Loop, Suite B Kenai, Alaska 99611 Phone: (907) 283-5774 Fax: (907) 283-5771 i ! NEW EMAIL: wfwlaw(c)acsalaska.net -322- KOW 4 g 12 flt 36A 1 Pigs: 9 fR 2, [B®® If g7L®FOY ItiNRD AT A➢gilB4P OF: Are'har Pemaw Ce.W Amutra W Y¢M iEC.URDi36 BRP VRAI TO Nam 62MANAdH', LLC' AOPoae PA. B01: i243 DfeY. Smm Ylp 1� K aahlY ima.xnmla,: i&ils QMT CLAIM IDEM T8i 4RAYIT'D¢ WATRICfl.RN.tC6N®6RC. Raaemce¢pUAB.MltD WBAPdRALTRUS'd OR PLORQtli R&BabDLLIIPk akwm miieyaddmeaie: P.D.BosJ295, 1(aouL AK fA611 fmmduwoodaedmaf'1TsND4LL9&5 ANO014f8R GOOD AND VALVABLB L]TNSIDFRA'iLON wm yawa wiawmmiaASANAcii@<t.eu Bm 6fbomidaamedroatamm. timedmike ieco[diai Dimiaa gmaat, SmmorAmafrA mbbbm aimall ot4aaquuod dtle ofdmpmrm(a) Ibmem: PAt208L L• Lao. Hmek 4,mwadtii meaaphLL afBOCEP06E SUDDRTSfPNr IDkdrmilm Pica Numbrc'19�Sr Rawb of tls lleool inwdreg D IMm1 ZkIN IodlciN DieaeL 5bm of Aiuta PA4CSLIIS Loma ui d,acrmimg m IM pluo(&OPBA iUiDtYtiION .6kdemJa PlofNumhexiGANP, ixwtlaafde@W Raomdgg D'uoia5ThWlvfmu:Dmdn, gmmof ALvkv PARCEf.@t TnaB•] , azmdmg mdxpW MMM 9ATTaiiiMAT, ffid aafhPlea Nmdm ]eMi•li, i mlcdtle Ywcl Rrcmding Diroci, TidN ]w4cisl Dimucimrcot'AIeLLa BAfiC6d.&Vt r/Owvvaxaf Lae M aad N,afiadon 35. Tosnabgf NmG, Nwiu i& wed SmrvudMmdimy Rcaade of me Kmal iawtd'mi Dbh[q, TkYd IudsiW Duamr. Smq dALaha. Daad �_yyd This inatrumont Is being racoM-d by Fino Am -loan Title of Alaska as __mILL MST0v P1"L:_an aeacmmodatlen only. It has-01 WOULIdlM bean asaminad d- to tta ae-cl it ��. �� arty, ontha Hll-o9m-eWare immin. Palrleln FW kwbmi, Tm W m'1 1. -323- L Qr@Cleim D.0 Haunt TY dR7mimk McCollum PW Tw SPATE OF ALASCA ) 79drd YeNdai Diehict ) �pypu•Crr � 6r dn:9hho[Alo E ,api�RY 1 # JJ�.yw`ci'�3 for pll11, It �s.aaesas -324- —, - —, w w-,, rn ainic 6r to 1ANiPlk((iftms .a W, kL TWLA %d L4N w�15 wwAW4y 00=bem J6 4bo tJe�dUYWgCnoped lshluw. FAX M, V 485 3W a n, pl69> Deh FIb1M2 OWMT U2, NA BMW oR.WaM BMW illu lyoHnNntMCmnttxfw 1 Naey AL-"W-A i.9I S'9.1 ron� wuu ww ue-cI 9` v.aA4, kV- 0R96tt TBN Maioq Mom Gy.su p ew :•M Awak..iF t�@WBEQ4m g;K— 3?4'$ bt I 31 496I( MOMW 70 Is a t�N Rl G t p u w-% IA211 ARtt.tiu i6EWi.i E�,ST' ts� S Nwmwm a.same.rwu.. Betltl sr�awnwa. AmountDue* 137.S0for2005BfemsidwVort - 131•�a $137.S0jor2007Biennial Agport 13l•�® t4137.30farRawtatar.-.s-Fee 5412 ✓0'AWUR Due aw "aBtnieemens ' ft" ol.w(MIMd eff A sorb WAI"Im eimrvet Nwi- ILC, d LLP i Poo(s) TMI3441W -325- Suggested by: Administration AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY $45,501 IN THE AIRPORT FUND AND BY $1,820,000 IN THE RUNWAY IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL PROJECT FUND FOR ADDITIONAL PHASES OF THE AIRPORT APRON PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2386-2009 appropriated funds for Phase A of the Airport Apron Rehabilitation Project which is projected to have a total project cost of $9,012,573; and, WHEREAS, it is anticipated FAA grant awards for several years will be necessary to fully fund the project; and, WHEREAS, FAA 2008-2009 Entitlement and Discretionary grant funds totaling $1,820,000 are now available for Phase B of the project and the City has been awarded a grant totaling $1,820,000 comprised of 95% FAA $1,729,000, 2.5% State of Alaska $45,499 and requiring a 2.5% local share of $45,501. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, estimated revenues and appropriations be increased as follows: Airport Fund Increase Estimated Revenues: Appropriation of Fund Balance $45,501 Increase Appropriations: Transfer to Capital Project Fund $45,501 Airport Runway Improvement Capital Proiect Fund Increase Estimated Revenues: Federal Grant Revenue $1,729,000 State Grant Revenue 45,499 Transfer from Airport Fund 45,501 $ L 820 Q Increase Appropriations Administration $ 36,400 Engineering 145,600 Construction 1.638,000 $1 s2cl.o_9R New Teak Underlined; (DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] -326- Ordinance No. 2394-2009 Page 2 of 2 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this first day of April, 2009. PAT PORTER, MAYOR ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk Approved by Finance: ( Introduced: March 18, 2009 Adopted: April 1, 2009 Effective: April 1, 2009 New Text Underlined; (DELETED TEXT BRACKETED1 -327- Suggested by: Administration Ehe a[tyof CITY OF KENAI NO.2395-2009 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY $2,415,000 IN THE AIRPORT APRON REHABILITATION - STIMULUS FUND FOR THE GRANT FUNDS AWARDED THROUGH THE "AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT (AREA) STIMULAS PACKAGE. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2386-2009 and 2394-2009 appropriated funds for Phase A and B respectively of the Airport Apron Rehabilitation Project which is projected to have a total project cost of $9,012,573; and, WHEREAS, "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act" (ARPA) grant funds totaling $2,415,000 are now available for Phase C and the City has been awarded a grant totaling this amount with no local or State required matching funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, appropriations be increased as follows: Airport Apron Rehabilitation -Stimulus Capital Proiect Fund Increase Estimated Revenues: Federal Grant Revenue $2,415,000 Increase Appropriations Administration $ 48,300 Engineering 193,200 Construction 2,173,500 $2 415,000 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this first day of April, 2009. ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk Approved by Finance: PAT PORTER, MAYOR Introduced: March 18, 2009 Adopted: April 1, 2009 Effective: April 1, 2009 New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRAC1=ED] -328- COUNCIL/COMMISSION MEE77NG CALENDAR 1 day 2 Tuemilcy 3 4 5 6 7 i Library CITY COUNCIL !!! Commission MEETING, 7p, meeting, Council hamber Chambers - ChCouncil mbe Chambers I I4 I � 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Harbor 13"utificetion PLANNING & Airport Commission Committee ZONING Commission meeting, 7p, meeting, 7p, COMMISSION, meeting, 7p, Council Council 7p, Council Council Chamber; Chambers Chambers Chambers Council on Aging, 430p, Wit GI V Senior Center t�EZUr i 15 116 17 18 19 20 21 CITY COUNCIL Ad, Cemetery MEETING, 7p, Councli Committee, 7p, Council p, i Chambers Chambers 22 23 i24 25 126 27 128 PLANNING & ZONING j COMMISSION (Ut MEETING, 7p, Council Chambers 29 30 ��i 31 >�t>_oos Or apr2ao9 s.-ru[ T w t r s s M T w F a YI' II 1' 2 1 4 5 1 7 N '9 10 11 12 13 14 2 .3 -0 5 t 7 R 9 ]U i' 15 M 17 18 19 20 21 12 19 t4 15 16 17 ip, 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 lJ 2c 21 22 224 25 I 7rj ® 21 27 28 29 30 -329- COUNCUICOMMSSWN MEETMC CUENDt �1 Wednesday Thuhnan� Friday 3 i;tmii� 4 Mar 2009 Muy 2009 (br S M T W T F S S M 'T W T p S l CITY COUNCIL Pam &p MEETING, 7p, Recreation 1 2 ., 4 5 6 7 '1 2 Council Commission S 9 10 I I 12 13 14 3 4 3 5 7 S 9 Chambers meeting, 7p, Council 15 16 17 18 le 20 21 10 11 12 13 IA 15 16 Chambers 22 29 24 25 26 27 28' 17 18 19 20 2t 22 23 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 71 5 j6 7 8 9 l0 11 Harbor Library PLANNING & Airport Commission Commission ZONING Commission meeting, 7p, meeting, 7p, COMMISSION meeting, 7p, Council Council MEETING, 7p, Council Chambers Chambers Council Chambers Chambers Council on ° Aging, 4:30p,�' Senior Center 12 13 14 15 16 .17 18 COUNCILG°?�.Fr<G^ CITY MEETING, 70, j 1, 10 I Council Chambers 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, 7p, Council Chambers 26 27 28 29 i 30 -330- Sunft vhm� Tuesday ay ., 2 Apr 2009.. Jun 2009 S M T W T F S S M 'T W T F S 1 2 3 a i_ 3-. 4 5 0` 5 6 7 8 9 i0 it 7 8 9 10 It 12 13 12 U 14 15 16 17 '18. 14 IS U 17 18 19 20 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 22 23 24 25 26 27, 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 '30 I 3 I4 5 7, 6� 7 g 9 Library CITY COUNCIL ! Commission, MEETING, 7p, 7p, Council Council i Chambers Chambers I j 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 Harbor Beautification PLANNING& M,rt Commission, Committee, 7p, ZONING ommiccwn 7p, council Council COMMISSION, meeeim, To, Chembws Chambers Chambers 7p, Council 7p, i Chambers Cwncn vn Agmg, 17 118 PW 20 21 22 �23 CITY COUNCIL Aaviaory f 0 MEETING, 7p Ca natery Council Committee, 7p, Chambers Council Chambers 24t�2526 27 28 "29 30 PLANNING & ZONING "f' A. MEETING, 7p, council 0 fj - Chambers �1 -331- thetc<nof // CITY OF KENAI Suggested AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING KMC 14.20.270 AMENDMENT PROCEDURES BY ADDING STANDARDS THE COUNCIL SHALL CONSIDER WHEN REVIEWING A PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENT. WHEREAS, KMC 1.4.20.270 contains the process by which the Kenai Zoning Code and Official Zoning Map are amended; and, WHEREAS, the amendment procedure in KMC 20.2J(c),rdoes not contain any standards for the Council to review rezone a ons than having the minimum size requirement for a rezone is one a WHEREAS, KMC 14.20.270(c) should contain stand - ' or the Council to use when evaluating whether a zoning amendment is in the best 1 st of the public; and, WIDER �„ KMC 14:20.2'�0(c) should also require that w a proposed zoning amendment is opposed or protested by one-third (1 J3) or more of the property owners or lessees of the land wi ' -ea to be rezoned or within three hundred feet (300) of the outer boundary, "'udi d owned by the City of Kenai unless it joins in the opposition, the City ncil shal etermine whether there is a compelling public policy or public p for the oning amendment that outweighs the detriments proposed by the oppo or NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the City of Ken de, of Ordinances is hereby amended as outlined in Attachment "A." y PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this day of .2009. PAT PORTER, MAYOR ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, City Clerk Introduced: 2009 Adopted: 2009 Effective: 2009 New Teat Underlined: [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] -332- Ordinance No. *-2009 Attachment "A" Page I of 2 KMC 14.20.270 Amendment procedures, (a) intent. This section shall govern any amendment to the Kenai Zoning Code and Official Map. (b) Initiation of Zoning Code and Official Map Amendments. ('1) Amendments to the Kenai Zoning Code and Official Map may be initiated by: (A) Kenai City Council; (B) Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission; (C) Submission of a petition by a majority of the property owners in the area to be rezoned; (D) Submission of a petition bearing the signatures of fifty (50) registered voters within the City of Kenai to amend the ordinance text; (E) Submission of a petition as provided by the Home Rule Charter of the City of Kenai. (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 rights -of -way) unless the amendment enlarges an adjacent district boundary. (3) A proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance which is substantially the same as any other proposed an submitted within the previous nine (9) months and which was not approved shall not be considered. (4) The zoning amendment request shall include the names and addresses of the applicant, a map showing the area involved, the present and proposed zoning, a non-refundable deposit/advertising fee one hundred dollars ($100.00) and any other pertinent :nlormation requested by the City. (c) Amendment Procedure: (1) A completed application, as described in this section, shall be submitted to the administrative official. The administrative official shall schedule a public hearing and make notification arrangements. (2) The Commission shall hold a public hearing in accordance with the requirements of this chapter. (3) Standards for approval. When reviewing aproposed amendment to rezone property, the Commission shall consider the factors set forth below in making its rg rpo t and recommendation to the Citv Council. and the Citv Council shall determine if the nroposed amendment is in the best interests of the nublic, considerine the followine factors (A) The proposed amendment furthers the goals and policies of. and is consistent -333- Ordinance No. *-2009 Attachment "A" Page 2 of 2 with, the existine comprehensive elan The -proposed amendment is consistent with the public health. safety, welfare and convenience: (C) Public facilities such as schools. utilities. and streets are adequate or will be adequate to support the proposed amendment; (D)- The proposed amendment is compatible with the surrounding zoning districts and the established land use pattern (F) Changed conditions affecting the land to which the amendment applies or the surrounding neighborhood support the proposed amendment, (G) Whether the proposed amendment is opposed or protested by one-third (1/3rd) or more of the property owners or lessees of the land to which the amendment applies or the land within three hundred feet (300') of the outer boundary to which the amendment applies. excluding Iand owned by the Cit of Kenai unless the City loins in the opposition or protest If so opposed or protested, then the Commission and the City Council shalt determine whether there is a compelling public policy or public purpose for the proposed amendment that outweighs the detriments presented b the he opponents or protestors. f31 (4) The Commission shall, upon public hearing and upon consideration of the standards for approval, forward its written recommendation to the Kenai City Council, along with all certified minutes and public records relating to the proposed amendment. [414 The Kenai City Council in accordance with the provisions of the Kenai Municipal Code, upon public hearing and upon consideration of the standards for a nrp oval, may or may not adopt the amendment as a City ordinance. -334- KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 9, 2009 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER &s ROLL CALL ITEM 2: AGENDA APPROVAL ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MEETING SUMMARY - February 9, 2009 ITEM 4: PERSONS SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD ITEM 5: OLD BUSINESS a. Discussion -- Drift Boat Pull Out ITEM 6: NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion -- River Access -- Bird Viewing Platform ITEM 7: REPORTS a. Director b. City Council Liaison ITEM 8: COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/OUESTIONS ITEM 9: PERSONS NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEART? ITEM 10: INFORMATION a. Kenai City Council Action Agendas of February 4 and 18, 2009, ITEM 11: ADJOURNMENT -335- KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION 2009MARCH 9, COUNCILCITY s0 CHAIR TOM THOMPSON,PRESIDING Chair Thompson called the meeting to order at approximately 7:05 p.m. Roll was confirmed as follows: Commissioners present: P. Morin, B. Osborn, A. Poynor, T. Thompson, R. Peters Commissioners absent: G. Foster Staff/Council Liaison present: Parks & Recreation Director B. Frates, Public Works Director W. Ogle, Council Member H. Smalley A quorum was present. ITEM 2: AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION: Commissioner Morin MOVED to approve the agenda as presented and Commissioner Osborn SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MEETING SUMMARY - February 9, 2009 My T ivia: Commissioner Morin MOVED to approve the meeting summary of February 9, 2009 and Commissioner Osborn SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED, 5-a. Discussion -- Drift Boat Pull Out Commissioner Morin updated the Commission on the student's effort toward researching a drift boat pull out, noting the student discussed the issue with Jack Sinclair of Alaska State Parks who indicated monies were available for a feasibility study. Morin suggested a letter of support from Administration supporting her efforts would be appreciated. -336- Parks and Recreation Director Frates reported he had also spoken with Sinclair and was told the State would be conducting a user survey along the river this summer with questions pertaining to a drift boat pull out and data would be assembled during the following winter. ITEM 6: 6-a. Discussion -- River Access -- Bird Viewing Platform Frates reported he had met with Wayne Ogle, Mike Edwards (US Fish and Wildlife Service) and Robert Ruffner (Kenai Watershed Forum) concerning access from the bird viewing platform to the river and inquired if the commission was in favor of continuing to allow access. Commissioner comments included: • Fencing and geotextile fabric would be used to identify the trail. • The gate would need to be moved to allow access during the winter months. • Since it had been traditionally used for access it should continue. • Support of the idea if grant monies could be used for path work, fencing and signage. MOTION: Commissioner Morin MOVED to recommend river access continue from the bird viewing platform and the gate be relocated to accommodate winter access, Commissioner Peters SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. ITEM 7: REPORTS 7-a. Director -- Frates reported the bird viewing platform dedication was being planned for May 20, 2009 as part of the Chamber of Commerce luncheon program; the bid was awarded to Kodiak Island Native Supply for beach posts and chain; and, Administration was considering increasing the boat launch fee from $15 to $20. 7-b. City Council Liaison -- Council Member Smalley reviewed the City Council Action Agenda items included in the packet and noted he would be interested in the justification for increasing the boat launch fee. ITEM 8: COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/OUESTIONS Peters requested an update on the Bluff Erosion Project. ITEM 9: PERSONS NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD -- None ITEM 10: INFORMATION HARBOR COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 9, 2009 PAGE 2 -337- 10-a. Kenai City Council Action Agendas of February 4 and 18, 2009. ITEM 11: Commissioner Osborn MOVED to adjourn and Commissioner Peters SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:55 p.m. Meeting summary prepared and submitted by: Corene Hall, Deputy City Clerk HARBOR COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 9, 2009 -338- PAGE 3 KENAI LIBRARY COMMISSION KENAI COUNCIL 2009MARCH 3, 1' f P.17. ITEM 2: AGENDA APPROVAL APPROVALITEM 3: OF MEETING SUMMARY-b00• ITEM 4: PERSONS SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD ITEM 5: OLD BUSINESS a. Discussion -- FY10 Budget Update b. Discussion -- 2009 Goals and Objectives C. Discussion -- Library Expansion Project ITEM 6: NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion -- Migration to New Library Automation System b. Discussion - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Federal Stimulus Package) and Libraries -- httn: / haww.ala.ori/ala f aboutala/offices /wo/woissues/washfunding/ fedfund arral0l.cfm ITEM 7: REPORTS a. Director b. Friends of the Library C. City Council Liaison ITEM 8: ITEM 9: PERSONS NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD HTWO a. Kenai City Council Action Agendas of February 4 and 18, 2009. ITEM 11: ADJOURNMENT -339- KENAI LIBRARY COMMISSION KENAI COUNCIL MARCH 3, 2009 i' a P.M. VICE CHAIR ROBERT PETERS, PRESIDING ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL Vice Chair Peters called the meeting to order at approximately 7:03 p.m. Roll was confirmed as follows: Commissioners present: K. Heus, E. DeForest, M. Graves, R. Peters Commissioners absent: E. Bryson, C. Brenckie Staff/Council Liaison present: Library Director M. Joiner, Council Member R. Molloy A quorum was present. ITEM 2: AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION: Commissioner DeForest MOVED to approve the agenda as presented and Commissioner Heus SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MEETING SUMMARY — February 3, 2009 Commissioner DeForest MOVED to approve the meeting summary of February 3, 2009 and Commissioner Heus SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED, ITEM 4: PERSONS SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD -- None ITEM 5: OLD BUSINESS 5-a. Discussion -- FY10 Budget Update Joiner reported changes to the draft budget that came out of her meetings with the City Manager and Finance Director. Discussion occurred regarding budget work session dates and personnel. 5-b. Discussion -- 2009 Goals and Objectives Joiner summarized the changes to the draft based on last month's discussion. m Commissioner DeForest MOVED to accept the Goals and Objectives as presented in the packet and Commissioner Graves SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 5-e. Discussion -- Library Expansion Project Joiner reported changes in the floor plan incorporated ideas discussed at the last commission meeting, General discussion followed, ITEM 6: NEW BUSINESS 6-a. Discussion -- Migration to New Library Automation System Joiner reported the contract with Sirsi Dynix had been signed, a schedule for implementation would be forthcoming, and the library might need to close for two days for the implementation. 6-b. Discussion -- American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Federal Stimulus Package) and Libraries -- http: Z /www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/wo/woissues/wash funding/ fedfund/aarra10 l .cfm Joiner reported there might not be money for Lbrary construction in the stimulus package, loans might be available through the USDA, and the State Library was keeping her informed. ITEM 7: REPORTS 7-a. Director -- Joiner reviewed her monthly report, noting she would be attending the AKLA conference in Kodiak the following week. 7-b. Friends of the Library -- Heus reviewed fundraising ideas and noted the next meeting would be March 10, 2009 at 5:45 at the library. 7-c. City Council Liaison -- Molloy reviewed the action agenda items included in the packet, noting he appreciated the opportunity to sit in for Council Member Boyle on the commission. ITEM 8: COMMISSION COMMENTS/QUESTIONS Heus -- inquired about applicants for the vacant position on the commission. Peters -- suggested commissioners contact people they think might like to serve on the commission. LIBRARY COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 3, 2009 PAGE 2 -341- ITEM 10: INFORMATION 10-a. Kenai City Council Action Agendas of February 4 and 18, 2009. ITEM 11: MOTION: Commissioner Heus MOVED to adjourn and Commissioner Graves SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:09 p.m. Meeting summary prepared and submitted by: Corene Hall, Deputy City Clerk -342- LIBRARY COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 3, 2009 PAGE 3 Goals and Objectives 2009 Kenai Community Library Commission Goal 1: Make recommendations to the Library and Council to improve library services and continue to provide quality services to all library users. Objective l: Maintain and extend effective library and information services for users by providing library staff with training and support. Objective 2: Increase the public's awareness of the value and use of the library's resources and services by working closely with the media, developing relationships with community groups and improving communication with individual citizens and local schools. Objective 3: Continue to support programs by providing equipment, materials, technology and individual help. Objective A: Encourage the library to design services and programs that target individuals of diverse geographic, cultural, socioeconomic backgrounds, special needs, and other underserved populations. Objective 5: Support budget increases as they become necessary for additional library personnel and services. Objective 6: Review library policies and rules annually as well as the Library Commissions' goals and objectives. Objective 7: Evaluate the reinstatement of Sunday hours in the summer. Goal 2: Provide support and assistance to the library director and staff in reviewing the present library facilities and developing a building program plan. Objective 1: Commit to an annual review and reevaluation of the building and its facilities. Objective 2: Actively seek local, state, and federal support for a building program and renovation of present library facilities. Objective 3: Encourage the city administration to include eco-friendly "green" considerations in the library building program. Goal 3: The library will provide library users with a modern, clean, safe, accessible, and inviting facility which encourages learning and leisure reading, provides access to up-to-date electronic resources and fosters community discourse for all age groups. Objective 1: The library will provide an up-to-date collection of current topics and titles in a wide variety of formats; audio-visual technology, information databases and other technological resources, arranged in a customer -friendly manner for easy access. Objective 2: The library will make available to all library users more popular items in more formats and greater numbers to alleviate long waiting periods. -343- Goals and Objectives 2009 Kenai Community Library Commission Objective 3: The library program will provide an environment for young people that is rich in stories, literature, and reading material and support the development of the skills, interests, and passions necessary to succeed in school, careers and life. Objective 4: The library will present a welcoming place that supports teens' special interests, developmental needs and enhances their interest in reading for pleasure. Objective 5: The library will provide and promote classes and workshops to enable patrons to become familiar with various services and technologies offered at the library. Goal 4: The library will serve as a centralized, convenient community destination by providing formal and informal gathering spaces for a variety of programs, meeting spaces, and events. Objective l: Provide money in the budget for programming for all ages. Objective 2: Encourage staff to apply for grants to support innovative programming. Goat 5: The library's staff, commission and Friends will continue to find means, by way of grant writing and private fund raising, to enhance the library's services and collections beyond what the local tax support makes possible. Objective 1: Promote the recruitment of library volunteers. Objective 2: Work together towards a library expansion. Objective 3: Exchange information and ideas for enhancing library programs. Goal G: Make recommendations to the City Council regarding capital and other improvements to the library. Objective 1: Increase the materials budget. Objective 2: Increase the opportunities for staff continuing education. Goals Achieved: 1. Review the facility to support compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2. Provide public access to legal resources while the courthouse undergoes renovations. 3. Recommend funding towards an updated automation system, including both software and hardware. Approved March 3, 2009 -344- CITY OF KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS March 11, 2009 - 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER: a. Roll Call b. Agenda Approval c. Consent Agenda d.. *Excused Absences *All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non -controversial by the Commission and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders. 2. *APPROVAL OF MINUTES: a. *February 25, 2009 3. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT: (10 Minutes) 4. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: a. PZ09-13 — Kenai Cemetery Expansion (A replat of Government Lots 123, 173 & 174.) Plat submitted by Integrity Surveys, 8195 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony limited to 3 minutes per speaker.) 6. OLD BUSINESS: a. PZ09-03 — A resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai, Alaska, recommending to the Council the enactment of KMC 14.20.255 establishing a process for the regulation and establishment and placement of communications towers within the City of Kenai and amending the Land Use Table in KMC 14.22.010 to provide that communications towers/antennas are a conditional use in the CMU zone. Discussion. (Postponed from January 28 and February 25, 2009.) 7. NEW BUSINESS: a. Alaska Historical Commission Geographic Name Proposal — Discussion/Recommendation 8. PENDING ITEMS: a. PZ07-25 — Recommending Council enact KMC 9.10.015 to require dumpsters be screened on at least three sides. -345- 9. REPORTS: a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. Administration 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: {3 Minutes} 11. INE+ORMATION ITEMS - a. 2008 Annual Report — Conditional Use Permits b. "Zoning Bulletin" — 1/25/09 c. Kenai River Center Permit Application —Mack Padgett 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: 13. ADJOURNMENT: -346- CITY OF KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 11, 2009 7.00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CHAIR JEFF TWAIT, PRESIDING MINUTES Chair Twait called the meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m. I -a. Roll Call Roll was confirmed as follows: Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: Staff/Council Liaison present: A quorum was present. I-b. Agenda Approval J. Twait, P. Bryson, K. Rogers, J. Brookman, K. Koester, S. Romain R. Wells (excused with lay down) City Planner M. Kebschull, Council Member R. Molloy Commissioner Bryson read the following changes to the agenda: ADD: I-d. Excused Absences Letter from R. Wells 4_a: P7-nQ.13 aerial phatoa aph Drawing by P. Bryson MOTION: Commissioner Bryson MOVED to approve the agenda with the above -mentioned lay downs and Commissioner Romain SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 1-c. Consent Agenda Commissioner Romain MOVED to approve the consent agenda and Commissioner Brockman SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 1-d. *Excused Absences Approved by consent agenda. -347- *All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine and non- controversial by the Commission and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commission Member so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders. ITEM 2: *APPROVAL OF MINUTES -- February 25, 2009 Approved by consent agenda. ITEM S: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT -- None ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF PLATS 4-a. PZ09-I3 — Kenai Cemetery Expansion (A replat of Government Lots 123, 173 & 174.) Plat submitted by Integrity Surveys, 8195 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska. Kebschull reviewed the staff report included in the packet, noting a cemetery would require a conditional use permit. Twait opened the meeting to public hearing. There being no comments, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson MOVED to approve PZ09-13 including staff comments. Commissioner Brockman SECONDED the motion. Commissioner comments included: • The high pressure gas line in the area was a concern. The slope of the lot was an issue. • It was suggested Administration vacate the easement lines along First and Second Avenue and Float Plane Road. • s • Commissioner Bryson MOVED to add the surveyor show the high pressure gas line and easements on the plat. Commissioner Remain SECONDED the motion. VOTE ON AMENDMENT: Twait YES Bryson YES Ro ers YES Brookman YES Koester YES Remain YES Wells EXCUSED j PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 11, 2009 PAGE 2 Twait YES Bryson YES Rogers YES Brookman YES Koester YES Romain YES J We11s EXCUSED MOTION PASSER UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM 5: PUBLIC HEARINGS -- None ITEM 6: OLD BUSINESS 6-a. PZ09-03 — Discussion -- A resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai, Alaska, recommending to the Council the enactment of KMC 14.20.255 establishing a process for the regulation and establishment and placement of communications towers within the City of Kenai and amending the Land Use Table in KMC 14.22.010 to provide that communications towers/antennas are a conditional use in the CMU zone. (Postponed from January 28 and February 25, 2009.) Kebschull reported she did not have a revised draft resolution and would set a work session to discuss the revision at a future date. ITEM 7: 7-a. Discussion/Recommendation -- Alaska Historical Commission Geographic Name Proposal Kebschull reviewed the memorandum included in the packet, noting the creek had a Dena'ina name and recommended the Commission support the Kenaitze request to maintain the tribal name. MOTION: Commissioner Romain MOVED to recommend supporting the Kenaitze request and support the Tribe's request to keep the creek's name as "Shk'ituYtnu." Commissioner Bryson SECONDED the motion. VOTE: Bryson YES Ro ers YES cYES Brockman i YES Koester YES � Romain YES Wells - � EXCUSED � � � PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 11, 2009 PAGE 3 -349- ITEM 8: PENDING ITEMS 8-a. PZ07-25 - Recommending Council enact KMC 9.10.015 to require dumpsters be screened on at least three sides. A brief discussion took place on removing PZ07-25 from the pending items on the agenda. The resolution had been tabled at the July 11, 2007 meeting. Commissioner Brookman MOVED to remove PZ07-25 from the pending items on the agenda. Commissioner Bryson SECONDED the motion. VOTE: Twwnit YES Bryson I YES Ro ers YES Brockman YES ; Koester I YES Rom�ain_ _ YES Wells EXCUSED L MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM 9: REPORTS 9-a. City Council -- Council Member Molloy reviewed the City Council action agenda items from the March 4, 2009. 9-b. Borough Planning -- Bryson reviewed the March 9, 2009 Borough Planning Commission meeting agenda, 9-c. Administration -- Kebschull reported a building permit had been issued for the cell tower behind Stanley Chrysler. ITEM 10: PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED -- None ITEM 11: INFORMATION ITEMS 11-a. 2008 Annual Report - Conditional Use Permits 11-b. "Zoning Bulletin"- 1/25/09 11-c. Kenai River Center Permit Application - Mack Padgett ITEM 12: COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS -- None PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 11, 2009 PAGE 4 -350- F�I+l�it'r#fc .Tii7i[i]N.7�MJi�l.`Y� a, s Commissioner Romain MOVED to adjourn and Commissioner Brockman SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:30 p.m. Minutes prepared and submitted by: Corene Hall, Deputy City Clerk PLANTNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 11, 2009 PAGE 5 -351- KENAI BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE MARCH s 2009 0, rf9 s ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MEETING SUMMARY -- February 10, 2009 ITEM 5: OLD BUSINESS ITEM 6: NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion -- Gazebo Placement b. Discussion -- Volunteer Plant Day C. Discussion -- Leif Hansen Memorial Park Beds -- Design d. Discussion -- All America City Sign Bed -- Design. ITEM 7: REPORTS a. Committee Chair b. Parks & Recreation Director C. Kenai City Council Liaison ITEM S- COMMITTEE MITTEE nTm--Q'rT-nwO AND COMMENTS ITEM 9: PERSONS NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD ITEM 10: INFORMATION a. Kenai City Council Meeting Action Agendas of February 4 and 1.8, 2009. ITEM 11- ADJOURNMENT -352- BEAUTIFICATIONKENAI s MARCH t 2009 7:00 CLERK'S CONFERENCE ROOM CHAIR KAY SHEARER, PRESIDING 1. •' 0 0. Chair Shearer called the meeting to order at approximately 7:04 p.m. Roll was confirmed as follows: Committee Members present: K. Shearer, L. Stanford, P. Baxter, S. Lovett, T. Canady, L. Seymour, M. Dimmick Staff/Council Liaison present: Parks & Recreation Director B. Frates, Mayor P. Porter A quorum was present. ITEM 2: AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION: Committee Member Baxter MOVED to approve the agenda as presented and Committee Member Lovett SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MEETING SUMMARY -- February 10, 2009 MOTION: Committee Member Baxter MOVED to approve the meeting summary of February 10, 2009 and Committee Member Lovett SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. ITEM 4: PERSONS SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD -- None ITEM 5: OLD BUSINESS -- None ITEM 6: NEW BUSINESS 6-a. Discussion -- Gazebo Placement Frates reported the city had acquired a metal gazebo from Scott Hamman of Metal Magic and requested placement ideas from the Committee. General discussion occurred with regards to pros and cons of several possible locations outlined in the packet. -353- Mi?ai[&i'C+3 Committee Member Dimmick MOVED to recommend placing the gazebo at the bluff near the Senior Center. Committee Member Canady SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 6-b. Discussion -- Volunteer Plant Day Frates reviewed last year's event and general discussion followed. Committee comments included: ® May 10, 2009 from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. were the date and time suggested. • Available beds were reviewed. • It was suggested a public service announcement through the paper be submitted. • Mayor Porter and Committee Member Canady agreed to plant at the Visitors Center. Committee Member Baxter MOVED to recommend setting the Volunteer Plant Day for May 10, 2009 from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Committee Member Stanford SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. 6-c. Discussion -- Leif Hansen Memorial Park Beds -- Design Frates reported the "bean bed" near the flag needed a makeover and suggested the week of May 18, 2009 as a starting point. Comrittee cormnents included: • Some of the plants in the bed could be salvaged. • Committee Chair Shearer and Committee Member Baxter agreed to design the bean bed. • It was suggested a work session be requested for April to discuss specific design criteria for specific beds. Frates reported he would check available dates with the City Clerk. 6-d. Discussion -- All -America City Sign Bed -- Design Committee comments included: • This bed needed to be low maintenance. • Suggested plants included shrubbery, specifically nine bark. • Concern was expressed regarding the rustic sign being near the modern signage from the Wal-Mart property, It was noted the All -America City Sign was resting on or over the property line and future consideration to moving the sign would need to take place. BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING MARCH 10, 2009 PAGE 2 -354- ITEM 7: REPORTS 7-a. Committee Chair -- None 7-b. Parks & Recreation Director -- Frates reported the department was currently conducting interviews for summer hire positions and he was considering sending Groundskeeper Hernandez to a tree pruning workshop. 7-c. Kenai City Council Liaison -- None v ♦ n - •:'PiWtA ITEM 10: INFORMATION 10-a. Kenai. City Council Meeting Action Agendas of February 4 and 18, 2009. ITEM 11: ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Committee Member Baxter MOVED to adjourn and Committee Member Seymour SECONDED the motion. There were no objections. SO ORDERED. There being no further business before the commission, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:35 p.m. Meeting summary prepared and submitted by: Corene Hall, Deputy City Clerk BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING MARCH 10, 2009 PAGE 3 -355- Kenai Community Library Monthly Report March 2009 February Circulation Figures Adult Fiction 1,870 Internet Access 927 Adult Non -Fiction 1,417 Music 138 Periodicals 74 Puzzles 2 Juvenile Fiction 462 Videos 565 Juvenile Non -Fiction 243 DVDs 2,007 Easy Fiction 1,412 Audio books 109 Easy Non -Fiction 329 Miscellaneous 13 Interlibrary Loan 46 Computer Programs I I Total Print 5,853 Total Non -Print 3,772 1 Total Circulation 9,625 internet Express Use 508 Total Catalog Searches 5,895 Library Door Count....... 7,222 In -House circulation 134 Downloadable Audio 99 The people counter registered an increase of 8% over the number of people who used the library last February. Circulation for February 2009 is 17% higher than in February 2006, my first month here. The City Manager signed the agreement for a migration from our Horizon automation system to the Symphony automation system from SirsiDynix. SirsiDynix will assign a team and we will devise a schedule for implementation and staff training. Library director participated in the Kenai Chamber of Commerce Job Shadow program this year and was delighted to have a motivated and interested student from our high school who would like to be a librarian. Director acted as a volunteer judge for the Letters about Literature contest, a national contest sponsored in Alaska by the Alaska Center for the book. I was a judge for the Level I (Grades 4 — 6) and Level lI (Grades 7&8.) Director went to Juneau to serve on the SLAM Statewide Advisory Committee meeting this month. SLAM is an acronym for State Libraries Archives and Museums. The purpose of this committee is to plan for the construction of a facility in Juneau that will house the state archives, museum and library in one place. After a half day of meetings, we toured all of the existing facilities that will be combined in this project. Our next meeting in March will be by teleconference. -357- Date: March 10, 2009 To: City Manager From: Fire Chief Tilly Subject: Midmonth report Runs for the timeframe of 2-11-09 to 3-10-09: Run total for the year 342 Total last year at this time 289 20% over this time last year Last 30 days 120 requests for service Summary of activities for last month: 1) 2 members of the department are attending KPC to finalize their degrees. 2} Participated in the KPC Paramedic r Me a long program 3) Participated in the community reading program. 4) One member of the department is finishing his EMT III class 5) Hosted one station tours for 2 adults and 4 children. 6) Proctored 1 State of Alaska fire extinguisher exam. 7) Battalion Chief Prior attending training in Fairbanks. 8) 1 Structure fire in old town. Investigation on going. M01 To: Rick Koch, City Manager From: Gus Sandahl, Police Chief 17 [Sate: 3/11/2009 Re: Police & Communications Department Activity — February 2009 Police handled 573 calls for service. The Communications Center received 106 emergency 9-1-1 calls. Officers made 91 arrests and wrote 290 reports. On 2/20/09, officers arrested an adult male for hindering prosecution, by trying to help a wanted person evade police. When the male was arrested officers found heroin on his person, and so he was further charged with felony drug possession. On 2121109 police responded to a burglary of a residence, and subsequent investigation led to the arrest of the adult, male neighbor for the burglary. On 2120/09, Police responded to numerous vandalisms to homes, vehicles, and school buildings near Lawton Dr. and Rogers Rd. The case was solved, and the juvenile offenders were referred to juvenile intake. Traffic enforcement resulted in 90 warnings, 13 speeding tickets, 26 seatbelt tickets, 9 citations for equipment violations, and 29 citations for "other" traffic violations. There were 6 DUI arrests. Police investigated 10 vehicle crashes (no injury crashes). The 10 crash investigations resulted in 7 citations and no arrests. In the schools, Officer Langseth handled 3 criminal investigations and 3 handicapped parking problems. He also facilitated the departments' annual commitment to Job Shadow Day with 2 student participants. Officer Langseth and Officer George continue to teach the Elementary DARE program to students at Mt. View and Kaleidoscope. v r--r Langseth continues weekly DARE Middle School presentations at IN —MS, and has ongoing mentorship at KMS. On February I r, Alex Prins started work as a police officer, and his hiring brought the department to a full staff of 18 swom officers. On February 22nd, Alex Prins, Jayms Harris, and Dan Smith departed for police training at the DPS Law Enforcement training academy in Sitka. They will graduate on June e, and return to training with field training officers at KPD. On February Ir, Officers Langseth and Whannell attended a forensic computer class in Anchorage. On February 26"', Officers Langseth and George attended annual DARE in-service in Anchorage. Dispatcher, Lindsay Sackman, resigned on February 121". The department is currently advertising the open dispatch position until March 1 e with Alaska Job Service. Officers continue to work DUI and Click -it or Ticket campaigns (funded by the Alaska Highway Safety Office). -359- ANIMAL CONTROL REPORT February 2009 2009 2008 2009 2008 STRAP 37 51 ADOPTED 47 66 Dogs 23 34 Dogs 38 46 Cats 12 17 Cats 6 20 Other Animals 2 0 Other Animals 3 0 RELEASED BY OWNER 41 60 CLAIMED 4 15 Dogs 29 28 Dogs 4 11 Cats to 32 Cats 0 4 Other Animals 2 0 Other Animals 0 0 D.O.A. 6 12 EUTHANIZED 26 28 Dogs 5 8 Dogs, 10 4 Cats 1 4 Cats 16 24 Other Animals 0 0 Other 0 0 WILDLIFE RELEASE 1 0 Borough Animals 29 59 Field Investigations 31, 34 Total Dogs 57 70 Volunteer hours 25 98 Total Cats 23 53 Total phone 649 917 Total Other 4 0 Kennel Permits 0 0 _ "�`lae wit�t a Fast c" tur` a r�u�e" 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 b: Telephone: (907) 283-7535, Ext. 236 / FAX: (907) 283-3014 199E tie -ay af KENAI, AIASKA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MARCH 2O09 REPORT TO: Rick Koch, City Manager FROM: Wayne Ogle, Public Works Director?/dA DATE: March 11. 2009 SUBJECT: Mid - Month Report; Public Works Department The status of previously reported projects is as follows: • Kenai Visitor's Center Heating System Upgrade — 2009 (engineering by RSA Engineering, Inc. and construction by Blazy Construction, Inc.) Project includes: Installation, replacement & upgrades to heating, control, ventilation, boiler, carpeting and painting. Visitor's staff has moved to temporary offices for the remainder of the project. Exhibits and taxidermy items have been moved away from the immediate project construction area. Interior painting is complete. All new carpet is installed along with ceramic tile in the entryway; mechanical work is nearing completion. • Kenai Community Library Expansion Proiect - ECl/flyer, Inc.'s issued `schematic plan' on 19 February 2009; City staff and interested members of the public are reviewing the schematic report. • Kenai Courthouse Parking Expansion - 2009 (Design by Wince-Corthell-Bryson). Design complete on 2/2/09, Plans issued on 2124/09, Pre -Bid meeting on 3/12; Bid Opening on 3/24/09 at 2PM. • South Ames and Basin View Drive Paving LID. (Design: Nelson & Associates). Design complete 2/23/09, Public Review Meeting on 2/26109 at 7PM; Plans issued for Construction on 3/3/09; Pre -Bid meeting on 3/12; Bid opening on 3/24/09 at 3PM. • Cabin Relocation Project - Historical Society is coordinating work; four cabins are being jacked up and logs replaced as needed in preparation for the move. • Kenai Municipal Airport Apron Rehabilitation & Widening — 2009. (Design by Wince-Corthell-Bryson) Plans to be issued 4/7/09. Project phases could span two summers for completion based on funding package available. • Kenai Municipal Airport Runway Safety Improvements Taxiways F G. and H Lighting Grading and Drainage- 2009 (Design by Wince-Corthell-Bryson). Design completed on 2/2/09, plans issued 2/24/09, Pre -Bid on 3110 Bid Opening on 3124109 at 1 PM. • Vintage Pointe Dry Sprinkler System Replacement — 2009 Bids opened on 3/3/09 at 2PM. Council will consider recommendation for award of contract at 3118 meeting. • Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement — 2009. This will replace 64 windows in Vintage Pointe with energy efficient, easy to open and low maintenance windows. Bids will be opened 3/3/2009 at 2PM; Council will consider recommendation for award of contract at 3/18 meeting. • HEA Access /Baron Park Place Improvements — 2009 (Design by Hattenburg, Dilley & Linnell ) Phase 2 to Marathon Road Improvements; Design expected to be complete in April, Bid awarded in May. ADOT is to bid the contract & HDL to do construction management. Other Public Works Activities: • North Beach Fence Materials — 2009 Will provide materials for a fence with wooden posts and galvanized chain for the protection of North Beach Dunes. Bid opened on 2124/09 at 2PM contract is awarded. • North Forest Drive — 15 street lights between Fifth Ave. & Kenai Spur Highway have been replaced with Light Emitting Diode (LED) Lights for energy efficiency; 16 lights between Redoubt Ave & Fifth Ave. and other street light conversions to LEDs are planned. • Small Projects - Planned for Summer 2009: Upgrading of boat launch ramp, expansion of Park Strip picnic pavilion, structural condition survey of the City dock, more curb and sidewalk repairs -361- „VilrlIe wick a Fast, Gi� witk a Faturre n 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 Telephone: 907-283-3692 / FAX: 907-283-3693 tkeciyOf KEM AL SKA MEMORANDUM To: Rick Koch, City Manager Thru: Wayne Ogle, Public Works Manager From: Robert J. Frates, Parks & Recreation Director Date: March 11, 2009 RE: Monthly Admin. Report A total of 28.5 hours of ice is currently reserved for the month of March. This compares to 40 hours this time last year. The Kenai Peninsula Hockey Association concludes their season effectively March 17th. Redline Sports will be conducting a Spring Ice Session similar to last season from March 16th — April 10t”. This program will again involve a 3 on 3 league, private skate lessons, and shinny hockey. Approximately 72 participants skated in this program last year. Department has been busy conducting interviews for summer positions. The department took delivery of a new water reel similar to the one purchased last year at this time. This unit will be placed at the Kenai Sports Complex. Department also took delivery of 100 wooden posts earmarked for Municipal Park. Bid was awarded to Kodiak Island Native Supply for fence and chain material for north beach. restoration/protection project. Quotes for construction of a storage facility at the Kenai Sports Complex are due March 23`d. Director has been working on permit applications for upcoming projects, namely the replacement of concrete ramps at the dock facility and installation of posts and chain on the north beach. Director has been coordinating with Rob Jones, Cemetery Director for Municipality of Anchorage, in attempt to bring him to Kenai for a meeting with our Cemetery Advisory Committee. We are tentatively looking at April 16t". The department utilized a community service worker for the past 4 weeks for a total of 80 hours. The department is also looking at participating in a Job Fair on March 31 ". -362- lr• Aaunicipal Airport FAA Grants — The airport has been approved for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)1 Stimulus Program funding in the amount of $2,415,000, These funds will be directed to the Apron Rehabilitation Project. There are many accounting, reporting, and certification requirements that come with this money. Kenai Peninsula Air Fair — Planning is moving along. Airport staff is busy contacting volunteers, military, pilots, and vendors. We are always looking for event volunteers. If you can volunteer or have ideas to ensure our event is a great one please contact us. Volcano Preparedness: The Alaska Volcano Observatory has decided on the Kenai Airport for its "volcanic ash radar". The conex was delivered to the airport on Friday, March 13 and AVO personnel are on -site constructing the dome. They are very excited about the location and the reception received from City Administration/Airport/FAA personnel making this happen. 2008-12 -363- To: Rick Koch, City Manager From: Rachael S. Craig, Senior Center Director Date: March 9, 2009 Subject: February Monthly Report Total number of days rented In February 2009: 3 February Monthly Meal Count 2009 Served: Total Congregate Meals Served: 1,163 Total Home Meals Served: 1,724 Total Non -Seniors Meals: 6 February 2008 Monthly Meal Count Served: Total Congregate Meals Served: 1,332 Total Home Meals Served: 1,964 Total Non -Senior Meals: 6 Total Volunteer Hours for February: 605 hours The administrative assistant had 24 Medicare, Medicaid, social security and senior issue appointments. Director completed the United Way Grant. Through the stimulus package, the DHSS will be receiving $486,000 designated for senior nutrition programs. The state will disburse the funds based upon the formula they use when distributing funds for the Title III grants. There has been funding set aside for evidence based prevention and wellness programs that deliver specific measurable health outcomes that address chronic disease rates. How the state will disperse these funds is still unknown. Social security beneficiaries will receive a one-time payment of $250. This one-time payment will be a separate payment not included in the regular monthly benefit payment. The social security payments should be received by late May or early June 2009. February is Waffle month. Every Friday during the month of February we served breakfast of waffles, sausage and orange juice for $3.00. 65 seniors participated. The senior center came in third at the Senior Olympics. For the second time in a row, Nikiski Senior Center took the traveling trophy home, however, many of our seniors did take home medals. Seniors enjoyed an evening Valentine's Party. We had 75 seniors present and the "Forget -Me -Not" Band entertained. Seniors prepared for the Mystery Dinner -Theater fundraiser held the first weekend in March. -364- a�= \\ Mei�laf r// KENAI, ALASKA To: Rick Koch, City Manager ""Village with a Past, C y wA a Fatare" FINANCE DEPARTMENT 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 Telephone: 907-283-7535 ext 221 1 FAX: 907-283-3014 From: Terry Eubank, Finance Director �Z Date: March 12, 2009 Re: Monthly Report The past month has been a busy one with much of the department's focus on the preparation of the FY2010 Budget. The first draft is ready and will be distributed on March 13th. The draft will be available on the City's website for public download and a copy will be made available at the Kenai Library. Budget work sessions are scheduled for March 30th and April 2"d at 6:00pm. In addition to budget the department is preparing for insurance renewals and is gathering information to implement recommendations made for the 2009 Dip Net season. -365- 3/ 18/2009 Purchase Orders Between $2,500 and $15,000 for council review. 2/9/09 Commissioner Irwin, DNR letter related to discharge of firearm regulation proposed change. 3/09 Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board meeting agenda and 2/ 12/09 meeting minutes. -367- PURCHASE ORDERS BETWEEN $2,500.00 AND $15,000.00 FOR COUNCIL REVIEW COUNCIL MEETING OF: MARCH 18, 2009 VENDOR DESCRIPTION DEPT. ACCOUNT AMOUNT FIRE SERVICES OF ALASKA DAVID FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING PETER & LUANN BARRETT EMERGENCY PANEL POWER SOURCE CONSULTING SERVICES - HEALTH ENGINEERING REPORT ON DRY SPRINKLERS INSURANCE COSTS CONGRAGATE HOUSING REPAIRS & MAINT. NON -DEPARTMENTAL INSURANCE CONGREGATE HOUSING CONSTRUCTION NON -DEPARTMENTAL INSURANCE 2,995,00 5,000.00 4,000,00 8,701.57 V FIiNLLJI✓ VVL-Pft NG f tWPI !/6V W6pOt "A brill i P 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611-7794 Telephone: (907) 283-7535, Ext. 236 / FAX: (907) 283-3014 1992 TO: Rick Koch, City Manager FROM: Wayne Ogle, Public Works DirectorAA DATE: March 11. 2009 SUBJECT: Water Damage Loss on 1/19/09 — 1804 Julie Anna Dr.; Peter & Luann Barrett -_P0, 9987 3 go As you know, the Barretts experienced water damage to their home on January 19th of this year. City workers had been trying to mitigate a significant standing water problem in the street adjacent to the Barrett home during a thaw period. The workers had partially opened a manhole and a large amount of water entered the sewer system which came up in the Barrett's home. The water flooded their finished basement area. The Barrett's house did have a sewer back flow preventer installed but it is unclear if the valve was functioning correctly prior to the incident, if the valve was overwhelmed by water pressure exerted against it or if the valve was damaged by the pressure exerted. The Barretts fully iimriarctanri their raannncinifitu fn assure the valve functions ^"^^.rl,, it, � ^'d future t',aCkfinvd incidents. The Barretts used reasonable water restoration methods following the flood -out. Mr. Barrett was clear there was no sheet -rock damage or that there was any further issue about sanitary conditions in the house. The carpet and pads had to be replaced along with a bathroom vanity which could not be moved intact. It is clear that the Barretts have replaced damaged carpet & pads and with 'in kind' materials. The Barretts have filed a claim with the City to cover their costs for the water damage. I have reviewed the invoices submitted by the Barretts regarding their claim and believe they are reasonable. I recommend the City pay this claim. Please let me know if you have any questions. -369- C44-61, C" i P 3 / i e ZP �Ijlv V 9T UA4 M DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE OF THE CGAMISSIONER February 9,2009 Mr. Joe Connors KRSMA Advisory Board President P.O. Box 1247 Soldoma, AK 99669 Re: Discharge of Firearm Regulation Change proposed Dear Mr. Connors: SARAN PALM, GOVERNOR El 650 WEST 7m AVENUE, SUITE 1400 ANCHORAGE, AL4SKA 98564.9650 PHONE: (907) 269 Wl FAX: (M 269 16 1ii'Ti1!i?iil2rdQftl Thank you for your letter and accompanying maps that support your desire to see a change to DNB's firearm regulations for the Kenai River Special Management Area (KRSMA ). This proposal would allow the use of a shotgun for lawful waterfowl hunting as long as the person is'A mile or more away from a developed facility or dwelling. The current regulation requires a % mile separation. This appears to be a reasonable request and one that could be included in the next regulation. package proposed by the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation. in order to be most efficient with limited regulation staff, we put all proposed regulation changes together and go through the lengthy public and legal process every year or two. We have tentatively planned to conduct another park regulation review in fall 2009fwntter 2010. I appreciate all of the efforts of the KRSMA Advisory Board in listening to concerns of the community and advising me on changes that need to be addressed. I will request that Parks Director James King include the firearm regulation change in the next regulation review. Sincerely, �`hJ omas E. Irwi Commissioner cc: James King, Director, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation Jack Sinclair, KenaitPWS Area Park Superintendent "Develop, Conserve, and Enhance Natural Resaurces for Present and Fature Alaskans" -370- KENAI RIVER Special Management Area "Working together —for the river" Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board *** Meeting Agenda*** Thursday, March, 2009 5:30 p.m. Kenai River Center CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call B. Minutes Approval C. Agenda Changes and Approval Presentation: Alaska Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) Presentation Tom Campenella: Human Waste Option on the River Ill. REPORTS A. Agency Reports a. State Parks —Sinclair, Russell b. DEC- Stevens c. ADF&G- Vane/ Begich/ d. USF&WS-West e. USFS/Chugach-Skibbo B. Committee Reports a. Guide Advisory b. Habitat c. River Use d. Permits e. 1 eg:Slatl`Je1G�nyarnnyont Act:vftfes f, Board Development g. Agenda/Board Structure/Housekeeping IV. OLD BUSINESS ACTION ITEMS V. NEW BUSINESS VI. CORRESPONDENCE Commissioner's response to discharge of firearms regulation change request VII. PUBLIC COMMENT Vill. ADJOURNMENT A. Board Comments B. Date/Agenda of Next Meeting April 9, 2009 5:30 p.m. Kenai Area Office, PO Box 1247, Soldotna, AK 99669, 907-262-5581 ` .` Kenai Peninsula Borough, 144 N. Binkley, Soldotna, AK 99669 907-262-4441 Kenai River Center 514 Funny River Road, Soldotna, AK 99669, 907-260-4882 Alaska Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, Department etural Resources, in cooperation with the Kenal Peninu a Borough , c n 7- r rs Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board Minutes Kenai River Center Thursday, February 12, 2009 5.30 p.m. Call to Order A. Members Present: Milli Martin, Wayne Ogle, Peter Micciche, Brenda Trefon, Robin West, Bobbie Jo Skibo, Tom Vania, Jack Sinclair, Tim Stevens, Joe Connors, Ted Wellman, Carol Padgett, Richard Dykema, George Heim, Adam Reimer, James Czarnezkl, Bruce King. B. The Minutes for January 8, 2009 were approved as written. C. Agenda Changes and Approval: Tim Martin and Doug Whittaker presentations moved to Public Comment portion of the agenda. II. Public Comments Tim Martin commented on his home in Rapids Avenue and problems with public access in state parks and borough easements. Doug Whittaker, the contractor for recreation use study, gave an update on the study. Robert Ruffner gave a presentation on 2008 Turbidity Study work on the lower river. Ken Tarbox commented regarding Robert Ruffner's turbidity study. III. Reports A. Agency Reports. a. Kenai River Center / State Parks Report Jack Sinclair, ADNR/Parks, gave a status report on the bill regarding Kenai Lake and Kenai River special management lands addition. The bill is still being assembled and a land status check is still being conducted. Jack stated some state park staff participated in training with the borough's office of emergency management last week. Jack stated the state is also dealing with the hiring freeze, right now they have to request any seasonal employees, mainly the Alaska Conservation Corp workers, that are coming back to be approved by the office management and budget. The capital projects are still on board for this next year, two of these are Biing's Landing restoration and Pillar's Dock rebuild. -372- Pam Russell, ADNR/Parks, stated that state parks is up and going for the 2009 guide season. b. Tim Stevens, DEC, Final Report for Kenai River Petroleum Assessment, reviewed the process of water quality sampling for new board members. Stated the good news from the report is that all the water quality samples, some 190 taken, met water quality standards for petroleum hydrocarbons. It appears that the legislative action taken by both DNR and ADF&G were successful in their actions to reduce the conventional 2- stroke engines on the Kenai River in July. They plan to collect hydrocarbon data again this summer. The policy to remove the Kenai from the impaired water body status requires having 2 years of data to say the river is meeting standards. This year's data says it was met for one year, last year they didn't have an exceedence at river mile 10.1. They are proposing to only collect samples at river mile 1.5. One reason is cost, and the other reason is that data collected for 2 years at river mile 10.1 says it is clean. They want to sample at river mile 1.5, because if they can show it is clean, they can demonstrate to EPA that they have solved the hydrocarbon issue on the river. c. ADF&G, Vania/Begich, nothing to report. d. USF&WS, West, nothing to report. e. USFS/Chugach, Sklbo, researched FERC's regarding the hydro -power proposals. It will be FERC's environmental process that will be followed rather than USFS. At the Russian River Complex, we are looking at a change in fish carcass management. in the past, they have encouraged people to stop, chop, and throw, however this year, they are going to encourage taking the fish out whole or gut and gill in an effort to minimize conflicts with bears. Looking for good ideas on how USFS can manage fish carcass disposal. `haou''.d ii; e to talk to the other agendes aid o�V iiriS will affect tricn'i. B. Committee Reports a. Guide Advisory, Joe Connors reported the committee met and had 13 members present. They were able to get through 2 of the 5 items on their agenda. First item on the agenda was a voluntary guide PFD°program and they hope by the next meeting to have a proposal for a PFD program. Second item discussed was the state park permit issues for groups of 40 or more people in the KRSMA area. The guide advisory committee is looking at possibly adding some stipulations to this permit. Lastly, a new topic brought to guide advisory committee was a new form of guide suspension for those who do not turn in logbooks. b. Habitat, Bruce King, stated they have about 12 or so members. Bruce reported most of their time has been spent working on the management actions matrix. It started as a way to look at what is being done on the Kenai River and make sure they have the right background for talking about the issues. They plan to focus on getting agency input for the management actions matrix. For the next year, the committee has elected to Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board Minutes — February 12, 2009 Page 2 of 4 -373- educate itself on the turbidity issues on the Kenai River. Also, the habitat committee is interested in what the borough comes up with in the analysis of the 50' Habitat Protection Ordinance. The committee would like to have more training on the habitat planning process. Brenda is seeking participants for a video regarding the benefits of the 2-stroke motor restriction limitation and the motor buy back program. The habitat committee is also in the process of requesting an update on the Cooper Landing Sterling Highway bypass project. c. River Use, Ted Wellman, reported they had an all day work session on Monday February 9t' 2009, where they primarily talked about the river use study. They had a lot of items on the agenda; two of the items discussed were the PFD issue and education. The committee is in the process creating priorities for 2009; primarily looking at river study because it will take a lot of time. Top priority is to look at how they relate to and deal with river use study. They looked at the habitat committee's matrix to see where it might be used in making decisions in the river use committee. Ted asked if anyone has issues related to river use to contact him so they can be put on the agenda. Ted will be sending out an email for comments on scheduling the river use meeting on a weekend. d. Permits, Jim Czarnecki, committee did not meet. Jim gave a brief history of the permit committee. e. Legislative/Government Activities, committee did not meet, Joe Connors will work on setting up a chairperson. f. Board Development, Jack Sinclair reminded everyone on February 21, 2009 from 9-3:00 pm, they are going to reconvene to refresh everyone's knowledge of Kenai River Comprehensive Management Plan. IV. Old Business Action Items A. Habitat Committee Draft Letter to Legislature to restore Deferred Maintenance funding to State Parks. Jack Sinclair will make changes to draft letter and send out to everyone on the KRSMA board torreview, before sending to the legislature: V. New Business A. President's report. Committee assignments and member responsibilities, Joe Connors gave a review of KRSMA history. Joe asked that each KRSMA member provide a backup for attending the KRSMA meeting. B. Issues for Committee Assignment: Zoning and land use issues adjacent to the Kenai River, Ted Wellman commented regarding zoning and land use issues adjacent to Kenai. River Special Management Area Advisory Board Minutes — February 12, 2009 Page 3 of 4 -374- the Kenai River. Ted stated it's time to have assignments to committees to get some kind of focused strategy to influence the borough assembly. VI. Correspondence - None VIII. Public Comment Monte Roberts president of KR Professional Guide Association, spoke on turbidity issues and asked for follow-up on duck hunting regulation. Vill. Adjournment A. Board Comments Bruce reminded people about Brenda Trefon needing participants for movie. Joe gave update on Kenai River Guide Academy, currently 2 seats open in the 4 remaining classes. B. Date/Agenda of Next Meeting March 12, 2009 5.30 p.m. Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board Minutes — Februarys 12, 2009 Page 4 of 4 -375- •,, • • • • L;la[i331Iii7iaY.1A7:L•1.153i� ri • D TO: E-3, Ordinance No. 2392-2009 -- Letter from Everts Air Fuel, Inc. with concerns related to fuel flowage fees. AIRPORT MGR. ADD TO: E-5, Resolution No. 2009-07 -- 3/9/09 Dr. Alan Boraas Letter of objection related to the creek name of Shk'ituk'tnu and a brief history of Shk'ituk'tnu. CITY CLERK ADD TO: E-7, Resolution No. 2009-09 -- Bid award for Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement - Letter of protest submitted by Dan Sterchi/Sterchi Construction w/ attached letter from Milgard Windows & Doors. CITY CLERK SUBSTITUTE: H-2, Purchase Orders Exceeding $15,000 -- Addition of an increase to the existing purchase order to RSA Engineering with memorandum of explanation. PUBLIC WORKS No changes. Via E-Mail March 18, 2009 Ms. Mary Bondurant, Airport Manager Kenai Municipal Airport 305 N. Willow, Suite200 Kenai, AK 9961.1 Re: Ordinance No. 2392-2009 - Fuel Flowage Fees Dear Ms. Bondurant: Having been out of the State since February 28, 2009,1 just received your March 11, 2009 letter this date. While we appreciate your reduction in the fuel flowage fee charge, we do feel that this is a very unusual situation. We understand that the fuel flowage fee should apply to fuel going into the operation of our aircraft; however, we do not feel that this charge should apply to fuel being sold to customers, particularly since you do not charge any additional fee for freight being delivered to customers. The State of Alaska eliminated their 8% fuel tax on all fuel products until September 2009 because of the high fuel prices and to help out the Alaskan residents. It does not seem reasonable in these trying times to assess yet another charge to customers who require fuel to live on a day-to-day basis. Your landing fees have already been increased to $100.00 for every landing and in addition, the City and Borough charge 6% sales tax. Thank you for recognizing there is a need for a reduction in costs; however, again we feel that ine fuel flowage fee should be limited to our operation of aircraft, but should not be assessed to customers purchasing fuel from us for their own use. This is a very unusual situation because of the definition of delivery of "freight" versus delivery of"fuel" since delivery of fuel by air is primarily only done in Alaska. Your consideration of the foregoing comments/circumstances will be appreciated. Very truly yours, EVERTS AIR FUEL, INC. BY v ��.��. Cliffo d . Everts, President (907) 450.2375 < Fax (907) 450.2326 • PA. Box 60908, 5525 Airport Industrial Road • Fairbanks, AK 99706-0908 MAR-18-2009 WED 10:24 AM SBS KENAI MILLWORKS FAX NO, 3355580 P, U2 March 16th, 20% Re: Kenai Sr. Center a a# « - -.bs .-• P. # P b #fat....: # • # • ,.#.. # ' #':.♦:^# :, i. Y. P RC. :. Ih# ^Y Y'. Ak lY::...V :y _. YPR3 All •' a laY t' f I can only guess that this decision was made solely based on prise, not quality, performance, warranty, reputation, service, anrt sales support. I had a conversation with Mr. Floyd over two weeks ago making sure that he understood, the requirements_ of the project as they retate to windows.and he responded that "Actually, I don't really know what any of that stuff means". I took the initiative to help him along by answering questions and directed him to our websfte for further clarification and support. Itook the time to explain the features, advantages, and benefits to the Mill Fiberglass products. Lastly, I explained that we at Mill understand #hat times are challenging for everyone fight now and that we would be happy to revise our proposal to try and better meet the budgetary needs of the city if -needed. f followed this conversation up with an e-rust# as well, but never gota response, i was left worrying that this. decision would be made based on a pdoe, without any consideration to the spec or the actual product It appears that my worries have been confirmed. I felt "it necessary to share the facts of this window supplier decision for the Kenai Sr. Center because I just couldn't sit back and watch the well being, comfort, and peace of mind of the residents at the Kenai Sr, Center slip away and not say anything: I look forward to tare opportunity to serve the city on this and future projects. Should there be any questions regarding this or any other correspondence, please feel free to contact me at the below listed information. Milgard, as well as our preferred window vendors In Kenai, are excited about the opportunity to ear your business on this project and will do whatever it takes to make sure that this project gets the windows that it deserves, Milgard Fiberglass. Milgard 425-766-2066 iascinMggpokftaal March 18, 2009 RE: Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement- 2009 Advertisement for Bid TO: The City of Kenai and Kenai City Council: KENAI CITY CLERK I formally protest Resolution No. 2009-09 that suggests awarding a contract to Worldwide Roofing & Construction, Inc. for the Vintage Pointe Casement Replacement-2009, Advertisement for Bid. World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc. cannot and has not produced the necessary documentation to show that the windows they used in their bid meet specifications set forth by the City of Kenai. The Fairbank window supplier says that they can build these windows to meet the city's specification for the Solar Heat Gain Coefficient, Sound Transition Class and Visible Light Transmittance. But they have not included the test results that say these windows were tested by a independent test lab such as Fenestration Testing Laboratory ( AAMA Accredited Laboratories). Where are their engineers stamps and test results? I strongly urge you to throw out all bids using windows that do not meet specifications and to award the bid to the lowest bidding contractor who included qualified windows for this project. Thank you. Sin c ly, _ Dan Sterchi Dan Sterchi Construction 907-283-3878 TESTIMONY SIGN -IN SHEET NAME ORGANIZATION RESIDENCE ADDRESS/ PHONE NUMBER � IF CITY RESIDENT A, \21 q Lls,3 P� 44 'c )z- STOZZ(# �p v M COUNCIL MEETING OF: NAME ADDRESS TOPIC Agenda or Non -Agenda Item? cc-3 Lo r 7> COUNCIL MEETING OF: J1,14-z M S V JOHNSON ROSS MOLLOY BOYLE PORTER SMALLEY Q MOORE ? ELDRIDGE �'�5 fy- M S V JOHNSON ROSS i MOLLOY BOYLE PORTER SMALLEY MOORE ELDRIDGE REM • • BOYLE - 16.1 AA RAN I I Page / Of l Wm fTo-S s MOLLOY BOYLE PORTER SMALLEY MOOREELDRIDGE SMALLEY MOORE ��I COUNCIL MEETING OF: 0// 2`b I f' JOHNSON ROSS MOLLOY BOYLE PORTER SMALLEY MOORE ELDRIDGE / u...f�.�..�t%... ........M s v JOHNSON i ROSS MOLLOY BOYLE PORTER SMALLEY ni MOORS ELDRIDGE Page �2 of _ -), 000 Ems M s v JOHNSON ROSS MOLLOY BOYLE PORTER SMALLEY MOORE ELDRIDGE M s v JOHNSON ROSS MOLLOY BOYLE PORTER SMALLEY MOORE ELDRIDGE f I COUNCIL MEETING DATE: '7)— 1 �t* Ma or/Council Attorney Tn for/Flo d Clerk Police Department C k City Mann er Finance €t V, Kebschull/Carver Ole V, Senior Center V Air ort v�- Kim ^ Library (2) V 1 Parks & Recreation i% Clarion Fire De artment Schmidt } Mellish V, Student Pe . KSRM AGENDA DISTRIBUTION Sewer Treatment Plant Streets e ShO2 Dock V Building Maintenance Animal Control V Water/Sewer Counter V/ DELIVER Council and Student Representative Packets to Police Department Dispatch desk. The Clarion, K5RM, Mellish & 5chmidt's Office will pick their packet up in my office. The portion of the agenda published by the Clarion should be emailed as soon as possible on packet day. The camera-ready agenda c:/myfiles/documents/minutes/agenda form for paper) is emailed to Denise at Peninsula Clarion (at email folder Work Session/Special Meetings, or Composition in Contacts or (bell@acsolaska.net). Home Page documents (agenda, resolutions, ordinances for public hearing, and ordinances for introduction) are usually emailed to me and I hold them in my HTML file. Place information (meeting e-packet and agenda, resolutions and ordinances for public hearing, etc. on the city's webpage as soon as possible before leaving the office for the weekend. e • • • •a•i ;e! • s NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN the City of Kenai will conduct a public hearing on the following Ordinance(s) and/or Resolution(s) at its regular meeting of March 18, 2009. Ordinance No. 2389-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.260 to Better Provide for Enforcement for Violations of the Kenai City Code and to Provide for Appeal of Administrative Enforcement Orders to the Board of Adjustment. (Clerk's Note: At its March 4, 2009 meeting, Council moved to adopt Ordinance No. 2389- 2009 and subsequently postponed action to allow time to correct verbiage omitted from Attachment A. The motion to adopt is active.) a. Substitute Ordinance No. 2389-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.260 to Better Provide for Enforcement for Violations of the Kenai City Code and to Provide for Appeal of Administrative Enforcement Orders to the Board of Adjustment. 2. Ordinance No. 2391-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) to Allow an Extension for the Ninety (90) Day Time Limit for Skirting in Mobile Homes Placed in Mobile Home Parks. 3. Ordinance No. 2392-2009 -- Amending KMC 21.05.085, Airport Fuel Flowage Fee. 4. Resolution No. 2009-06 -- Supporting the Efforts of the Kenai Watershed Forum to Secure Financial Support, Both Private and Public, for Renovation of the House and Adjacent Property at Soldotna Creek Park Leased to the Kenai Watershed Forum and Owned by the City of Soldotna. 5, Resolution No, 2009-07 —Supporting the Continued Use of the Cultural and Historical Name of Shk'ituk'tnu for the Creek Situated Approximately One Mile North of the Kenai Spur Highway, East of Marathon Road. 6. Resolution No. 2009-08 -- Awarding the Bid to Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc. for Vintage Pointe Dry Sprinkler System Replacement - 2009 for the Total Amount of $49,574.00. Resolution No. 2009-09 -- Awarding the bid to World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc. for Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement - 2009 for the Total Amount of $94,297.00. 8. Resolution No. 2009-10 -- Authorizing the Kenai Police Department to Participate With the Bureau of Highway Patrol Traffic Team and to Authorize the Kenai Police Department to Hire a New Officer to Meet Staffing Needs Within the City of Kenai as a Result of the Department's Participation with the Bureau of Highway Patrol Traffic Team. 9. Resolution No. 2009-11 -- Authorizing a Budget Transfer Within the City Shop Department to Cover Costs in Excess of Budgeted Amounts for Operating and Repair Supplies. New Business Item/Ordinance Not on the Consent Agenda: 3. Ordinance No. 2393-2009 -- Amending the Official Kenai Zoning Map by Rezoning Approximately 22 Acres Located North of the Kenai Spur Highway From McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek From Rural Residential 1 (RR1) and Conservation (C) to Limited Commercial (LC). The public hearing will commence at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as business permits, in the Kenai City Council Chambers, 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska, 99611. All interested persons are invited to attend the meeting and participate in the public discussion. Written comments may be sent to the Kenai City Council, c/o Kenai City Clerk, 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, AK, 9961.1. Copies of the ordinances are available in the Office of the Kenai City Clerk and will be available at the meeting for public review. Please be advised, subject to legal limitations, ordinances may be amended by the 1 prior to adoption without further public notice. AGENDA KENAI CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 1 - MARCH 8, 2009 ,.7:00 P.M. MENRA PIfSXW KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS httpa/www.ci.kenai.akus ITEM B: SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS (10 minutes) 1. David Horton -- ATV and Snow Machine Use on City Streets ITEM E: PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimony limited to 3 minutes per speaker. 1. Ordinance No. 2389-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.260 to Better Provide for Enforcement for Violations of the Kenai City Code and to Provide for Appeal of Administrative Enforcement Orders to the Board of Adjustment. a. Substitute Ordinance No. 2389-2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.260 to Better Provide for Enforcement for Violations of the Kenai City Code and to Provide for Appeal of Administrative Enforcement Orders to the Board of Adjustment. 2. Ordinance No. 2391.2009 -- Amending KMC 14.20.240(c)(6) to Allow an Extension for the Ninety (90) Day Time Limit for Skirting in Mobile Homes Placed in Mobile Home Parks. 3. Ordinance No. 2392-2009 -- Amending KMC 21.05.085, Airport Fuel Flowage Fee. 4. Resolution No. 2009-06 -- Supporting the Efforts of the Kenai Watershed Forum to Secure Financial Support, Both Private and Public, for Renovation of the House and Adjacent Property at Soldotna Creek Park Leased to the Kenai Watershed Forum and Owned by the City of Soldotna. 5. Resolution No. 2009-07 -- Supporting the Continued Use of the Cultural and Historical Name of Shk'ituk'tnu for the Creek Situated Approximately One Mile North of the Kenai Spur Highway, East of Marathon Road. 6, Resolution No. 2009.08 -- Awarding the Bid to Alaska Automatic Fire Protection, Inc. for Vintage Pointe Dry Sprinkler System Replacement - 2009 for the Total Amount of $49,574,00, 7. Resolution No. 2009-09 -- Awarding the bid to World Wide Roofing & Construction, Inc. for Vintage Pointe Casement Window Replacement - 2009 for the Total Amount of $94,297.00. 8. Resolution No. 2009-10 -- Authorizing the Kenai Police Department to Participate With the Bureau of Highway Patrol Traffic Team and to Authorize the Kenai Police Department to Hire a New Officer to Meet Staffing Needs Within the City of Kenai as a Result of the Department's Participation with the Bureau of Highway Patrol Traffic Team. 9. Resolution No. 2009-11 -- Authorizing a Budget Transfer Within the City Shop Department to Cover Costs in Excess of Budgeted Amounts for Operating and Repair Supplies. ITEM G: UNFINISHED BUSINESS -- None ITEM H: NEW BUSINESS 1. Ratification of Bills 2. Approval of Purchase Orders Exceeding $15000. 31 Ordinance No. 2393.2009 -- Amending the Official Kenai Zoning Map by Rezoning Approximately 22 Acres Located North of the Kenai Spur j Highway From McCollum Drive West to No -Name Creek From Rural Residential 1 (Ri and Conservation (C) to Limited Commercial (LC). 4. *Ordinance No. 2394.2009 -- Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $45,501 in the Airport Fund and by $1,820,000 in the Runway Improvement Capital Project Fund for Additional Phases of the Airport Apron Pavement Rehabilitation Project. 5. *Ordinance No. 2395-2009 -- Increasing Revenues and Appropriations by $2,415,000 in the Airport Apron Rehabilitation --Stimulus Fund for the Grant Funds Awarded Through the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Stimulus Package." 6. Discussion -- Schedule Work Session/Kenai Salmon Task Force Presentation. 7. Discussion -- Draft Ordinance -- KMC 14.20.270/Amendment Procedures. EXECUTIVE SESSION -- None Scheduled. ITEM N: ADJOURNMENT The public is invited to attend and participate. Additional information is available through the City Clerk's office at 210 Fidalgo Avenue, or visit our website at hitp://wwwci.kenai.ak.us. Carol L. Frees, City Clerk D/211