Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-03-13 p&z packetCITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION **AGENDA** Council Chambers, 210 Fidalgo March 13, 1996, 7:00 p.m. Chairman Kevin Walker 1. ROLL CALL: 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 28, 1996 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. PZ96-8-Conditional Use Permit-Lot 17, Block 1, Anglers Acres, Part 2 b. PZ96-14-Adoption of City of Kenai's Updated Comprehensive Plan c. PZ96-15-Encroachment Permit-Lot 4, Block 1, Stock Subdivision 7. NEW BUSINESS: 8. OLD BUSINESS: 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: 10. REPORTS: a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. Administration 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. Public Meeting Notice-Airport Master Plan (March 14, 1996 @ 7 p.m.) b. Kenai River Special Management Board Minutes of Feb. 13, 1996 c. Borough Planning Commission Action from Feb. 26, 1996 d. Memo to Cary Graves, City Attorney, regarding proposed single-family zone 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: 14. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION **AGENDA** Council Chambers, 210 Fidalgo February 28, 1996, 7:00 p.m. Chairman Kevin Walker 1. ROLL CALL: 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 14, 1996 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: a. PZ96-13-Herman Subdivision No. 2 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7. NEW BUSINESS: a. PZ96-12-Home Occupation Permit-Sweeney b. Enchanted 9-1-1 Mapping and Addressing Project 8. OLD BUSINESS: a. PZ96-7 Encroachment Permit, Anglers Acres Lot 17, Part 2 b. Proposed Residential Zone (Michael Christian) c. Comprehensive Plan 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: a. John and Randee Wolfe, 1114 First Avenue, Kenai 10. REPORTS: a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. Administration 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. Kenai River special Management Board Minutes of Jan. 11, 1996 b. Borough Planning Commission Agenda from Feb. 12, 1996 c. Borough Planning Commission Action from Feb. 12, 1996 d. Werner-Quade Seminar Request Memo e. Shkituk' Village Phase II Work Session Memo f. Alaska Chapter American Planning Association 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: 14. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF KENAI `" ~. ~,.,~_ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION - -l February 28, 1996 Minutes 1. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Carl Glick, Phil Bryson, Teresa Werner-Quade, Ron Goecke, John Booth, Karen Mahurin Members Absent: Kevin Walker Others Present: Councilman Hal Smalley, City Engineer Jack La Shot, Administrative Assistant Marilyn Kebschull 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Vice-Chair Glick asked if any additions to the agenda. None noted. RON GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED AND ASKED FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY JOHN BOOTH. UNANIMOUS. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 14, 1996 J PHIL BRYSON MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 14, 1996 AS SUBMITTED AND REQUESTED UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY RON GOECKE. UNANIMOUS. 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: No one scheduled to be heard. 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: a. PZ96-13-Herman Subdivision No. 2 RON GOECKE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PZ96-13, PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HERMAN SUBDIVISION NO. 2. MOTION SECONDED BY JOHN BOOTH. La Shot reported that this plat takes three existing plats and removes the interior lot lines to form one large lot. Administration has no problem with the plat. No installation agreement will be needed and there are no building code issues. Bryson commented that in looking at the plotting on the city map it is indicated as Spruce Street and that it should be Cheryl Street, an undeveloped easement or right of way. Bryson stated it is not Spruce Street from the government lot designation. Bryson stated they show Pine Circle Subdivision which is at Fifth Street which is just above the lot and would have it plotting further west than the vicinity map shows. Bryson stated that as long as the government lot is governing it adequately describes where it is there should be } no problem. Glick asked if La Shot agreed with that. La Shot stated he would check on it again noting that he thought he had looked at it. La Shot asked if it was north of Fourth Street. Bryson stated Spruce Street is east of this tract. This is north of Fourth Street but the project of Spruce Street would be to the east of this drawing. Glick asked if it could be approved with this change. Bryson stated he felt it could be approved and that he has already mentioned it to the surveyor who said he would look at it. VOTE: BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES BOOTH YES MAHURIN YES GLICK YES UNANIMOUS. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7. NEW BUSINESS: a. PZ96-12-Home Occupation Permit-Sweeney KAREN MAHURIN MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PZ96-12. MOTION SECONDED BY TERESA WERNER-QUADE. La Shot noted there were no additional comments from the staff report and the application; however, the applicants are available if the Commission has questions. Glick asked if the applicants would like to speak to the request. Ms. Sweeney stated she didn't have anything to add unless there were questions. Glick asked if they expected traffic in and out. Sweeney stated she expected to do all her deliveries and to conduct business on the phone. Glick clarified that there won't be people coming and going. Sweeney stated she doesn't expect to have anyone come to the house and that she will deliver merchandise. VOTE: WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES BOOTH YES MAHURIN YES BRYSON YES GLICK YES UNANIMOUS. b. Enhanced 9-1-1 Mapping and Addressing Project ~ La Shot stated that in the packet there were several pages of information. There is the borough code on street naming methods, several pages of street names, and all of the street Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 2 names within the city. La Shot explained that for some time there has been a project called the 9-1-1 system that the borough has undertaken. They have compiled all the streets within the city and found quite a number of streets that don't conform necessarily for one ~ reason or another. The last 2 %2 pages of the list are all the streets that the borough is recommending revisions of. If the Commission has comments or suggestions on how to undertake this, administration would appreciate it. La Shot stated he thought the only way to approach it was to start through the list and note which streets really need to be changed, which streets may be out in the field with an accepted name that formally have to be adopted by the city, and which ones might take some other action. La Shot stated he tentatively would suggest a schedule since the borough would like to have this completed by May 1St, and recommends that we end up with a final form before council on April 17th. That means Planning and Zoning would have to pass a resolution onto council on April 10th. La Shot stated it would probably be best to have the Commission review it and set up the April 10th meeting for a public hearing to give people a chance to comment. La Shot stated that code doesn't require it and he cannot see the need to notify everybody in the city as you may be looking at half the people in the city as being affected. La Shot he was thinking probably a public hearing at Planning and Zoning and at Council as being sufficient. La Shot stated that the list seems overwhelming but from what he has looked at so far he doesn't think the names on the street signs will be changed 127 times like is on the list. Many of those over the years were street names that never got formally passed onto the borough but were adopted by the city. There were probably a number that never got adopted. La Shot stated there may also be some suffixes or prefixes that change. It will take some time to go through the list but that is probably the best way to proceed. Glick stated that they will need a map they can all look at. La Shot stated the borough sent a map over with all of the names on it as they show officially. La Shot stated he will do some ~ highlighting on the map as he goes through it to show what the changes might be. Glick stated that if he understands then that most of these are probably street names that the city already adopted but they never passed the information to the borough. La Shot stated that is what he thought but there may be some that will actually need to be changed. La Shot stated the best way to do it is as surgically as possible to not cause quite a bit of grief for people if they have to change addresses, etc. Bryson stated that Redoubt Boulevard is a good example to use. On some plats it is called Redoubt Boulevard, on some called Redoubt, some Home Site Loop, I Street NW. Bryson noted that the city had a grid street naming system in the early 70's that created some awkward names. The borough is trying to rectify all the plats in a formal way without having to go individually to the source of those names which in most cases was a platting action. Bryson noted this is being done borough-wide. Glick stated they should sit down with a map after La Shot goes through it or what would the Commission recommend? La Shot recommended that the Commission look at any changes on March 27th as that will give administration time to get the changes made and bring it to the Commission on the 10th of April for a public hearing and more input. La Shot stated that would give administration a month to pick through the list and to come back with a list that is specific in what should be done. Glick asked if that was acceptable to the Commission. Booth stated he will be absent on the 27th. Glick asked if everyone else would be available. No comments. Glick stated to schedule it for the dates La Shot had recommended. La Shot stated that some of the changes may be recommended by the borough to coincide with their street naming system, the city doesn't have to name it's Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 3 streets that way. So, the city may chose not to comply. Discussion on how the different names may have occurred. La Shot stated this project has been needed for a long time to straighten things out and it is a good time to do it to coincide with the 9-1-1 system. Glick 1 stated if no objections then it would be on the agenda for the meeting suggested. Glick asked if La Shot would mind if the Commissioners came in ahead of time to look at the map which could save time. La Shot stated they were welcome and it was at his desk. 8. OLD BUSINESS: a. PZ96-7 Encroachment Permit, Anglers Acres Lot 17, Part 2 Glick stated that according to what he read in the minutes and the memorandum that the Commission would need to rescind the action of the last meeting. Smalley stated they could ask for reconsideration. Glick stated that no one had asked for reconsideration. La Shot stated that whoever was on the prevailing side last time, someone that voted no, could ask for reconsideration. Glick stated that to do that you had to ask for reconsideration at that meeting before the next meeting. Glick stated he looked at that and talked to his wife who said from a parliamentarian view of Robert's Rules the proper action would be to rescind the action from the last meeting and then it would be open again. La Shot stated he felt that would work. RON GOECKE ASKED FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ON ANGLERS ACRES LOT 17, PART 2-PZ96-8. ~ Glick clarified if that was the conditional use permit request since the encroachment permit is moot since one doesn't exist. PHIL BRYSON SECONDED THE MOTION. La Shot advised they should probably vote on the motion and that he had spoken with the attorney today about this. The city attorney would like to see a vote on the motion to reconsider and then not vote until next meeting on the main motion so that parties that may wish to comment can be notified. Glick stated it has been moved and seconded to reconsider the Conditional Use Permit on Lot 17, Anglers Acres, Part 2-PZ96-8. Glick stated if the vote is affirmative, it will be readvertised and be taken up at the next meeting. If it is a no vote, it will stand as was passed last meeting. Bryson stated that speaking to the motion it appears that the conditional use on this lot is essentially the same use that was requested for the conditional use on several lots away on the same evening. Bryson stated he feels that the same general situation exists on this that exists on the other lot and urges approval of the reconsideration motion. Goecke stated he would like to comment on this also. Goecke noted he was adamant at the j last meeting about this because he at the time felt that because of the encroachment that it was a moot point to carry this on. Seeing as there is not an encroachment and this area is Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 4 being used for this type of sports activities for two and a half months in the summertime, Goecke stated he has no problem with conditional uses in the area. Mahurin, noting that she was not at the last meeting but had read the minutes, stated she is confused that how at the last meeting there can be an encroachment shown by a surveyor and at this meeting there is not an encroachment done by a surveyor. La Shot stated it was his understanding that the McLanes who did the asbuilt rechecked the site and felt they had made a mistake on the first survey and have recertified another asbuilt. La Shot stated this can happen and that perhaps Bryson can explain it better. La Shot stated it is easy to understand how it could happen. Mahurin stated she has a hard time understanding how the same company and surveyor can survey it one time and it is voted down and then suddenly the six inches are taken care o£ Mahurin stated that before she votes on this she would like to see the survey herself, a certified survey to know that this is real. La Shot stated that what she is looking at is a certified asbuilt. Mahurin stated that so was the last one. Bryson stated he does not feel these items are connected at all or should they be connected. Mahurin asked what things are connected? Bryson stated the perceived encroachment and a request for conditional use. Bryson reiterated they are different issues. Bryson stated the purpose of an encroachment permit is to potentially clear up encroachments that exist across setbacks. The conditional use is to allow specified use on a lot. Mahurin asked if this is not the same owner that the Commission had another request for a Conditional Use Permit earlier this year that had to do with the way a house was situated and things weren't quite right on that request. Mahurin stated she remembered the discussion about the sewer problem and the mound, water, etc. La Shot stated he did not believe the Lowes have been before the Commission within the last year and it may have been Captain Bligh's operation Mahurin was referring to. Mahurin stated ~ she is having a hard time with credibility and honesty. Mahurin added that she realizes that Bryson has a good point that an Encroachment Permit and a Conditional Use Permit are two separate things. However, if a Conditional Use Permit was denied because of an encroachment that existed two weeks ago, she would like to have proof that the encroachment no longer exists before she would vote on the Conditional Use Permit. Mahurin stated that if she is a minority vote, she will accept that. Goecke noted that they are not voting on the Conditional Use Permit. The only thing they will vote on whether it will be voted on at the next meeting. Glick stated he personally doesn't have a problem with reconsidering it since he wasn't here and at the next meeting he will hear all the evidence to be able to make a good decision. Booth asked La Shot if 6 inches was well within the accuracy of surveying property. La Shot stated it could be that the first time they went out they checked the property corners, came up with their initial measurement, a lot of times the property corners are just rebarr stuck in the ground. It is not too hard for those to move sometimes and be shifted. When they went out the next time, they may have retraced some more corners or some more points in the subdivision. It is understandable that something like this could happen. Mahurin asked if it would be germane to request that when it is voted on at the next meeting to have a new copy of the survey. La Shot stated that the one in the packet is the new copy that superseded the last one. La Shot asked them to note that the one distance was 15.1 feet and the last one said 14.5. Glick stated that something similar had happened to him personally. He had property surveyed in 1964 and he built his fence according to Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 5 Werner-Quade stated she agrees with Bryson. By placing restrictions on areas that are not developed, can get sticky. But, noted she agrees with a zone for single family dwellings but is not sure about the areas denoted. The area creates some hesitancy. Werner-Quade j noted she does not know what the answer is. There is a need for that type of zoning and a need to get it in Kenai but not sure how to go about it. Booth stated he also agrees with Bryson and the first step is to work on the proposed zone type itself and receive public comment to see if this is something that the city wants. Then, the second step would be to see what regions this type of zone would be applied. If there are existing people in those areas to see if they would agree with it. Break it up into two steps. Bryson stated he very much would like to see what is proposed to be applied in some of these subdivisions though noted he feels the criteria should conform to the existing situations in those areas. Bryson stated he felt it would be great if Woodland had something other than the suburban residential zoning criteria to govern their development and they didn't have to fall back on covenants. Glick stated he agreed that having a single family residential zone in the City of Kenai is something that is needed. Glick noted that is the first thing that should be developed. Glick noted that the Commission has a start with the information supplied by Christian; however, there may be a couple items that should be covenants rather than part of the zoning. Glick stated that can be worked out and once the zoning ordinance is created, the city can look at what areas want to be in that zone. Glick stated he felt the important thing is that the people who live in the zones have to be in agreement, at least a majority, to be zoned in that way. Until the zone is developed and determine the restrictions, etc., the city cannot ask the residents to vote on it or get their input. Glick stated that maybe the Commission's instruction to the administration should be to work some more on developing guidelines for the zone and then look at it to see what needs to be accomplished to create the zone. Then, go into the second step. Mahurin asked Christian how he arrived at the minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. Christian responded that in the suburban zone you can go down as low as 7500. Christian explained that what happened in his subdivision is they started out with large lots, the next development decreased, and in the third development they were squished to as small as was allowed. Christian stated that all of them were in the same subdivision and it cheapened the rest of the subdivision. Christian stated they came up with 15,000 because there is a minimum of 20,000 for a rural residential zone and 7500 for a suburban so they came to what was in between. Mahurin stated she just wanted a basic understanding. Mahurin asked Christian if he was saying that when Woodland first went in and there were all those single family homes, they were pretty much 15,000 square feet. Christian stated he didn't know that. Glick stated that some of the reasons that Woodland may have looked good in the beginning was that they built on every other lot. Christian stated that the covenants also had said they were not to cut down trees and now they only leave one or two trees on the whole lot. Christian noted that now it doesn't look like Woodland did at all. Christian asked to add that it is not just Woodland the same thing is happening to areas around Woodland. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 7 Glick stated if the Commissioners agree he would ask staff to come back with a proposal on the zone and then look at that information. Glick asked Bryson if he had something to add. Mahurin stated Bryson was explaining the history to her that he had researched. Glick asked if by consensus to agree to ask staff to start working on a zoning ordinance for single family residences. Bryson asked if it would be reasonable to focus on the lot situation in Redoubt Terrace, Woodland, and some other subdivision of that quality that has water and sewer, paved streets, is a well developed community and come up with something that is appropriate to those areas that would protect their property values. Bryson stated that by zoning, four plexes could go in those areas. Bryson stated he could understand expecting covenants to protect you, they won't always protect you unless you are willing to spend money. Glick advised La Shot that the Commission was in agreement that staff begin developing a zoning ordinance. La Shot stated that what staff would do is start with what has been submitted as a starting point, make administrative recommendations, and ask the attorney and whoever else needs to be involved to input in the recommendations, and then bring it back to the Commission as soon as possible. For the time being, locations will be left out for the zone or zone boundaries. Glick commented that the Commission appreciated Christian's work on the process and noted that is what is needed for citizens to supply input. c. Comprehensive Plan KAREN MAHURIN MOVED TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH. MOTION SECONDED BY JOHN BOOTH. MAHURIN REQUESTED UNANIMOUS CONSENT AND BOOTH SECONDED THE REQUEST. Councilman Smalley noted he will be unavailable for that meeting but a council person will be at the meeting. UNANIMOUS. 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: a. John and Randee Wolfe, 1114 First Avenue, Kenai La Shot advised that a letter was in the packet dated February 9th to the owners of the property at the corner of First and Birch. Staff had. received several comments that they ~ may be running a business there because of the vehicles parked there. The second page is the owner's response. The owners have an explanation for almost every car that is there; Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 8 however, staff is still not sure that they are being honest. La Shot stated if there are any suggestions to staff, they would be appreciated. ~ Mahurin commented that driving by the corner several times a day she noticed he doesn't mention the cream colored blazer that are in the road, not in the road, etc. Mahurin stated she knows there are a lot more cars than this. Mahurin stated she doesn't want to stop in front of the house and jot down license numbers but maybe a city vehicle could do that. Mahurin noted she had wondered about this for a long, long time. In the wintertime it is dangerous when they have cars parked in front of that house on the intersection of the corner. La Shot commented that he tried to stay to the issue of a business operating out of the residence because it does pertain to the zoning code. The junk car is not in Title 14 it is in Title 12 under health and safety. That is something that the city is trying to resolve what to do with and who is going to take care of the enforcement. The police have been asked to develop a list of other junk cars in the city and there may be some of these on there. There are approximately 100 on the list right now. The process to go through with junk cars or abandoned vehicles is lengthy, and time consuming. La Shot stated one is being appealed in the courts and is an example of what can happen when you start with junk vehicles. La Shot noted he has read articles about how Anchorage is handling it. Once they get to the point of taking action, they go into the field with a code enforcement officer and policeman and remove those cars or whatever they need to do. The city needs to decide how far they are going to take it. La Shot reiterated that is why he limited it to the business aspect. Mahurin stated that is what she meant. She drives by and sees vehicles being worked on in the garage. It seems obvious to her that they are running a business; however, she has no proof. Werner-Quade stated that perhaps the Commission should go ask if he wants to fix a wrecked car. Booth stated he also drives by there several times a day and it appears that there is a business being operated there. Booth stated it is unclear what action the Commission is being asked to take by receiving the document in the packet. Glick stated that the procedure is to ask staff to send a letter which they did in this case. If they admit to doing a business, they can come in and ask for a home occupation if it is allowed in the code. In this case, Glick noted he doesn't know where to go since the man insists he is not operating a business. Booth stated for example he is running a business and sticking strictly to the business aspect of this, would there be an economic cost to the person to get a permit to run the business. Glick stated he is not sure what the area is zone but not sure he is allowed to have a garage in that zone. La Shot stated that all he could do is apply for a Conditional Use Permit and it would be up to the Commission if they wanted to allow it. La Shot stated that is not normally something the Commission has allowed in this type of zone. Smalley stated that if it were allowed, he would have to obtain a business license. Glick noted that the city has actually shut down a couple garages that were in residential areas and noted Jacksons for example. Bryson stated that has been one area that the city has held the line on. Bryson noted that decades ago there was a garage on Forest Drive and it burnt down. The city was emphatic that it could not be rebuilt. Bryson noted that administration is Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 9 merely reporting on the action that has been taken; the Commission is not being asked to take any action. Glick asked if La Shot was asking for action? La Shot stated that was correct and the city will continue to keep an eye on it. If the Commissions has suggestions '~ on how to take it further, those could be offered. Werner-Quade asked if the city had a disposal process for junk vehicles. La Shot stated that the city has no way to dispose of junk vehicles. Werner-Quade asked how it could be enforced if there is not solution for the problem. La Shot stated people can have it hauled away to the dump, pay a fee, and they will take it. It has to have all tanks drained, etc. Werner-Quade commented that she felt since the city has no options, it is hard for the city to enforce this and noted she wished that the car crusher was in the area. La Shot stated in his opinion that was the solution but he heard that it doesn't appear it is going to now; hopefully, someone in the future will try it again. Glick asked where cars are hauled to. La Shot stated the borough landfill will take them. They end up taking most of those to Anchorage. The borough charges a $10 fee. Most of the costs come with getting the vehicle to the landfill. Bryson stated he thought they were hauled outside by barge and salvaged. La Shot stated there are places that take them and salvage what they can, the body would usually be crushed and hauled out. La Shot stated there are crushers in Anchorage. It is a matter of economics if there are enough cars down here to make it worthwhile for someone to move in the crusher or haul the cars to the crusher. Werner-Quade asked if the city is going to enforce, will they send a towing vehicle over and then bill them? What is the procedure? La Shot stated that the city hasn't done anything like that. Anchorage may be doing some of that. So far, Kenai has just cited them and gone through the court system to see if they can be alleviated. La Shot noted there is a fine involved but at yet one hasn't been paid. La Shot stated the one case that is still dragging on, there has not been a court order yet. Werner-Quade commented that the vehicles are just still there. Glick stated that most individuals when sent a notice respond and do something, there are just a few that don't comply. La Shot stated usually 1/3 will do something fairly quick, 1/3 will after another letter do something, the last 1/3 maybe nothing will happen or you end up taking it to court. La Shot stated or you could reach a point where there is an explanation for that car that you cannot seem to disprove. The whole process starts with a car, take pictures of it. Then, you need to identify which lot it is sitting on and that may not be easy. Tax parcels are researched for the owner of the parcel. Then, you start the process of sending letters and each time you send a letter, the legal department wants another picture taken to see the status of the vehicle or vehicles. La Shot stated you can see what can happen in you have a number of them and the time involved. La Shot stated the police have spent a lot of time just compiling a list of possible junk vehicles. 10. REPORTS: a. City Council Councilman Smalley reported at the meeting last week there were four sections of public comment. Mr. Barlow from CPGH explained the ballots which were sent out. Laura Measles presented the pamphlet which will be sent to people who may be moving into the area. Patricia Ryan, Interspace Airport Advertising, presented a possible advertising program for the airport. Smalley noted that the presentation included prices, etc. and it Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 10 was confidential. Council's response was to have an RFP developed and have people respond to potentially being involved in the advertising at the airport. Smalley noted they provide advertising across the country. Smalley advised the city would receive funds from the agency for the ability to set up displays within the airport. Glick asked if the advertisement in the city now was owned by the city and the city collected fees. Smalley stated it is owned by the individuals but they rent the space. Smalley explained the city would turn the advertising over to an entity and the city would receive a percentage of the companies fees. Smalley commented that there is a great deal of expense currently to the city the way the advertising is done and this could be a good deal for the city. Smalley noted the Airport Commission was impressed with the proposal. Walter Robson of the Borough Public Works spoke to council about having the city's sanitation system handle the wash down water from the baler. This would involve some modifications to the current system (Smalley explained this.) Booth asked for clarification as to what the baler water was and Smalley explained it. Smalley stated it was approximately 2000 gallons a year. La Shot stated the water would go through the system but the effluent discharge permit may need to be modified. (Discussion clarifying what would be required of the city to accomplish this.) Smalley reported that the borough had provided the funding to have a study done on this, $12,000 to $13,000. The city is reviewing the impact this may have on the future disposal for the city. Booth asked if there would be increased cost for testing based on the new MPDS requirements. Smalley stated there could be and the borough is willing to meet the cost requirements. Smalley reviewed some of the public hearings: Transfer of funds to cover cost of land that storage building sitting on next to Senior Center. La Shot stated it had to be purchased from the airport lands system. Resolution 96-17 awarded a contract for fuel to Kenai Air Fuel Service. Smalley explained the history behind this resolution and the decision based on money that would have been required to fix the city's pumps and the possible liability of maintaining fuel tanks. Resolution regarding the Alaska Children's Trust was tabled awaiting more information regarding funding. Resolution 96-20 regarding the North Zone Hazardous Response Plan was amended stating that if there was an emergency situation the City of Kenai would respond to the city in it's entirety. Resolution 96-21, the Economic Importance of Tourism Industry and Sports Fishing on Kenai Peninsula, was amended and passed in support of uses as they existed with sound biological research and studies. Smalley noted that signatures were obtained at the state level to put the Fish Initiative on the ballot so city action was moot as they were in opposition. Smalley noted he had not supported this and gave information as to why. Under New Business Item 6, regarding the Animal Control Shelter, decision to go ahead with design based on the fact that funds may still be available from government for the well. Council decided to reduce the cost not to exceed one-half million. Council went into executive session regarding Inlet Woods litigation and instructed legal counsel to pursue the matter. Booth asked if going with smaller shelter will undersize the shelter from the beginning by doing so. Smalley stated they were. Booth asked if a smaller facility which met the present requirements would the city not get itself into a bind with ethical treatment of animals in Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 11 the future. Smalley stated he didn't feel the reductions they were talking about would impact the facility in that regard. But that is a concern. b. Borough Planning Bryson noted two agendas in the packet. The February 12th was reported on at the last meeting. At the meeting February 26th the consent agenda was approved as presented. Item El a proposed land classification in the Cooper Landing area. This was as a result of a miner in the area. Administration recommended classifying part of the area as preservation. The area would have a rider on it that areas that sit on top of mining claim areas would be noted on the title. Bryson noted the borough doesn't have any say about curtailing mining in areas where claims already exist. That authority lies with the courts and the performance of the miner's themselves. Thus, a moot point to try to govern even though you own the surface rights. If someone owns the mineral rights and they are utilizing those rights, that is a use that cannot be denied. Action to recommend the area preservation acknowledging the existence of mining activities if found to be valid. One plat from the City of Kenai which was addressed at the last meeting, Sprucewood Glen No. 7, was approved. No other items pertinent to the city. c. Administration La Shot reported on the work session on the Shkituk' Village held on February 27th. La Shot advised that the plans were postponed until a development plan for the area is completed. An environmental site investigation of the Daubenspeck property and areas nearby needs to be completed. The sign may be placed on a temporary basis. La Shot stated he thought the Mayor was going to ask at the next council meeting that money be set aside for the sign. La Shot noted that minutes from the Kenai River Advisory Board are in the packet. Smalley advised that Werner-Quades funding had been approved to attend the seminar in Anchorage. 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: No one present. 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. Kenai River special Management Board Minutes of Jan. 11, 1996 b. Borough Planning Commission Agenda from Feb. 12, 1996 c. Borough Planning Commission Action from Feb. 12, 1996 d. Werner-Quade Seminar Request Memo e. Shkituk' Village Phase II Work Session Memo Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 12 f. Alaska Chapter American Planning Association 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: Werner-Quade commented noting that Smalley has been on the Commission before, Bryson has been on the Commission for many years, and Mahurin is fairly new to the Commission and has a lot of questions. Werner-Quade noted that this evening, and in meetings past, she has noticed that there is a small meeting taking place within the larger meeting by these three people. Werner-Quade has no problem with a little chatter but sometimes sees papers moving about that seem to be important and perhaps should be shared with the entire Commission. Werner-Quade asked that her comments not be considered petty but she would like to have the benefit of the information. Glick asked the status of the borough reclassification of lands. La Shot noted that the city has been working with them some and the process is apparently still within borough interdepartmental review before it is returned to the city. La Shot noted he is anxious because it has a lot to do with the new well site. 14. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at approximately 8:30 p.m. Res ctfull Submitted: )~ Maril n Kebschull Administrative Assistant Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 13 STAFF REPORT To: Planning & Zoning Commission Date: February 1, 1996 Prepared By: JL/mk Res: PZ96-8 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Bryan & Helen Lowe 1 105 Angler Drive Kenai, AK 9961 1 Requested Action: Conditional Use Permit Legal Description: Lot 17, Block 1, Anglers Acres, Part 2 Existing Zoning: Rural Residential Current Land Use: Low Density Residential/Recreation ANALYSIS City Engineer: This is a 2 bedroom home with loft. Applicant wishes to rent nightly/weekly during the summer and monthly in the winter and provide boat parking at this location. The permit should be contingent upon an Encroachment Permit being issued, or other solution. (See Resolution PZ96-7) Building Official: A side yard encroachment exists. This issue should be resolved prior to any permit issuance. RECOMMENDATIONS This activity appears to be consistent to be consistent with other approved Conditional Use Permits along Angler Drive. Approve with noted contingency. ATTACHMENTS: 1 . Resolution No. PZ96-8 2. Application 3. As-built CITY OF KENAI CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NAME /'~ L7.~/ ~D ~= ~ ~ ~ e%%~ ,~ Gjl-'~~~ PHONE C 7 p'1~3 ~~/`'~ MAILING ADDRESS ~J ~~©~~ ~y~ /r' /' /` ~ /~ N ~, r+ ~/+ ~/`L~~~ ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION L 4 ~ / ~ ~i~~ ~c' /' !~ /y C~~~ 5 ;t?c~rf ~- ZONING DISTRICT C RR RR-1 RS RS-1 RS-2 CC CG IL IH R RU1 Si~-~ Section 14.20.150 of the Kenai Municipal Code outlines regulations which allow Conditional Use Permits for certain developments. PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING, COMPLETE THE BLANKS AND INITIAL THE SPACE BEFORE THE ITEM TO INDICATE THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THESE CONDITIONS. A Conditional Use Permit issued by the Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission is required for some uses which may be compatible with principal uses in some zones ` if certain conditions are met. I understand a ~ ~ conditional use permit is required for the proposed . development as described: Please submit site Plan, Map (if available) and Traffic Flow & Parking Please submit plans showing the location of all existing and proposed buildings or alterations, ~ elevations of such buildings or alterations, and data / as may be required. A Public Notification and Hearing is required before the issuance of this permit. A $105.00 non-refundable deposit/advertising fee is required to cover these notification costs. (Please see attached sheet). `~a a+~ ~ ~titi <~+~ An approved conditional use permit shall lapse twelve months from the date of approval if the nonconforming use for which the conditional use permit was approved has not been implemented. The Commission may grant a time extension not to exceed six months upon a \'x~ finding that circumstances have not changed ~ sufficiently since the date of initial permit ~\~~ approval. A request for extension must be submitted prior to expiration of permit. A public hearing ~ shall not be required as a condition to granting the extension. . ADDITIONAL COMMENTS : ~) C ~_! `` ~ ~ ~C ~~ j ,~.~ q ~ ~C ~~ %/~~~!`% Applicant Signature: Date: ~ ~~ ~~ _Apgr-owed at P&Z Meeting: ~- ~~ .Approved: Chairperson ~~ Beaver Creek ~IVc T'idol Flats spa ~ q illi~ ~lllrr YI ``Og; i `S ~;~~~~ ~~OrLR ,9 LOT 17 BLOCK 1 1.177 AC. .. it o, ~S of n LOT 16 W v W la Vl ® Flood line rCi f ~ tc ~ Q ~ ~ 223• '~ 16.1' c FRM . '~ 15.1' a . HOUSE r' LOT 18 38.4' ' I I I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I~ i~ i~ ~ I 224.0 lI it ' I I ~' I ~' 1 W N Sew°~ Zg g~iltio4 ,0 WUity Eayem~t L. ' ,56. w ~p~.ou N ,4~. ER pFt. ~~` R ~w ~~ ,~~ O F AAA ~i *;`49Iti 9* ~i~~.,. LS 91,1 ..•= e0 iFound 5/8' Reber • Found 1/2' Reber Septic Vent O OO Weil Z Meter Pole () Record Oota ~~ 1"=60' 1) The bearings and distances shown hereon relative to the property boundaries were derived from data of record. 2) February 16, 1996 found additional lot comers to better define lot lines. Prepared For. Brian Lowe 1105 Angier Dr. Kenai, AK X9611 as-BU~~T suRV~v I Mrebr wnh toot I heee eureeyed the taYen-tq deeerbed propeRx LOT 17_ANGLERS ACRES PART TWO located N tM KENN paeerdhq geWet Neeko, and that the imprownenb situated thereon ore within tM property lines and de not ewrlap or enaeeeh on the property lytnq edjaeent Nare10. that ne inprevwnenb an the property lynq adpeent Nerob encroach On the prembee in question and toot these are no roadways. lransmis- eian knee or olhw Nsibb eopmenb on soil property eseept os h- dieeted hereon. oet.a: January~l8. 1996 vE'a e~ae`+ee s~`~0f'otaeb,e~~~ EXClU510N NOiE: It b the reaponnbtity of the owner to aetsrmhe tM esbtena of any eoeemenb, tevenanb or nstrbtlone whkh de not appear an the retarded wbdhfebn plat. Under ne eiture- otaneee eheuW enY data hereon De ueW tar eoneWetion ar for eetabiishhq boundary or (once lines, yes Nc 961002 rya tbar N0. 95-19-13 ~~~ CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION KENAI, ALASKA RESOLUTION NO. PZ 96-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE REVISED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF KENAI BY THE KENAI CITY COUNCIL. WHEREAS, The Kenai Peninsula Borough as a second class borough shall provide for planning on an areawide basis in accordance with AS 29.40; and, WHEREAS, The City of Kenai, as a home rule city inside a second class borough, has updated their Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, The Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission has held public meetings; and, WHEREAS, Planning Staff and the Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission have received numerous comments and input regarding the updating of the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, The Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission on March 13, 1996 reviewed the final draft of the updated Kenai Comprehensive Plan and recommends to the Kenai City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the Kenai City Council recommend to the Kenai Peninsula Borough, that: Section 1 - The Final Draft of the Updated Kenai Comprehensive Plan prepared by the City of Kenai is hereby approved and adopted as the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kenai. Section 2 -This Plan is hereby recommended to the Kenai Peninsula Borough for adoption as the official Borough Comprehensive Plan within the City of Kenai planning area of the Borough. Dated at Kenai, Alaska this 13th day of March, 1996. CHAIRPERSON ATE T: Planning Secretary ~~ STAFF REPORT To: Planning. & Zoning Commission Date: March 4, 1996 Prepared By: JL/mk Res: PZ96-15 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Pixie A. Smith 309 Katmai Soldotna, AK 99669 Requested Action: Legal Description: Existing Zoning: Current Land Use: ANALYSIS Encroachment Permit Lot 4, Block 1, Stock Subdivision RS-Suburban Residential Medium Density Residential City Engineer: The home encroaches into the 25 foot front yard set back less that 0.6 foot. Part of the building is a garage which is allowed to be within the front yard set back. Side yard setbacks are okay. Building Official: No building code would be compromised by allowed this encroachment. I would recommend approval. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommend approval. Minimal encroachment with no adverse effect to immediate neighbors. ATTACHMENTS: ~ 1. Resolution No. PZ96-15 2. Application 3. Drawings CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ENCROACHMENT PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PZ 96-15 ` A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KENAI GRANTING A REQUEST FOR AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AS AUTHORIZED BY 14.20.185 OF THE KENAI MUNICIPAL CODE FOR: NAME: PIXIE A. SMITH LOCATED: 308 JAMES STREET, KENAI, AK 9961 1 LEGAL: LOT 4, BLOCK 1, STOCK SUBDIVISION BY: PIXIE A. SMITH WHEREAS, the Commission finds: 1. That an application meeting the requirements of Section 14.20.185 (c) has been submitted and received on February 28, 1996 2. This land is on land zoned RS-Suburban Residential 3. That the applicant has demonstrated with plans and other documents that he can and does meet the following specific requirements as set forth in Sec. 14.20.185 (d): (1) An encroachment as defined in KMC 14.20.185 (a) exists. (2) The encroachment does not encroach upon a Federal, State or City right- of-way or utility easement. (31 The issuance of the encroachment permit will not authorize a use which is not a principal permitted use in the zoning district in which the property is located. (4) The encroachment is not located across a platted lot line. 4. That a duly advertised public hearing as required by Section 14.20.280 was conducted by the Commission on March 13 , 1996. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai that the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed development meets the criteria for said permit and therefore the Commission does authorize the permit to be issued. , PASSED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Kenai, Alaska this 13th day of March , 1996. v.-- A TES :Planning Secretary CHAIRMAN 1791-1991 CITY OF KENAI ___ 210 FIDALGO KENAI, ALASKA ~'~~ TELEPHONE 283.753~~ FAX 907.283-301 ~ ~ ~ ~w APPLICATION FOR ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NAME ~ J l~! E~ ~.~i,~Tty 'STREET"`ADDRESH~ _MAILZNG .ADDRESS . c3D p ,o SGG arm 9!~GG >Y~EGAL~ .DESCRIPTION ~J T ~ C ZCINING DISTRICT:. .:( Circle..: 1 j _ C CC CG R~R RR-1 RR-2 RS RS-1 RS-2 RU R IL IH Section 14.20.185 of the Kenai Municipal Code outlines regulations for Encroachment Permits which is the relaxation of the Development Requirements Table to remedy encroachments which do not fall under Section 14.20.050, nonconforming uses and which satisfy the requirements of financial institutions subject to the following conditions: PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING, COMPLETE THE BLANKB AND INITIAL THE SPACE AFTER THE ITEM NIIMBER TO INDICATE THAT YOII HAVE READ AND IINDERSTAND THESE CONDITIONS. 1. ~ An encroachment means any object or structure above or below ground and constructed or located in a manner other than set forth in the Development Requirements Table. 2. Provide a site plan of the property including location of all existing buildings, rights-of-way or easements, setbacks, elevations, and any data pertinent to the application. 3 . A Public Notification and Hear ' is re ' red before the issuance of this permit. A $105.00 non-refundable depositJadvertising fee is to cover these notification costs. (Please see attached procedure sheet) A D D I T I 0 N A L C O M M E N T S t S/ignature of Applicant: V ...+ ~~ a__.. .~ _~ ~.11.D r C: 11-11 KIANA LANE A.a~'- BL%IIl T .St~rh' U~' ~'" La7~ q, BLVCK ~ ~cTaC.~' SUBDI VI ~alQ,tir PL A 7' K-1 F i 5> K P. D. ~; ~ ~ fD. I I I /~ •I I ........ .-. ., I ( I ~ I ~I I vl I N I ~I •_~ ~ a -- i T I ~ t ~^ ZS' 54CG $E THAGK ANC J - _ I ~ I (,j) ~. I (N89'S9'Gp"E 133 631 i - T• ~' ~ ~ ------F- - - ;, ('~ '! t,~~-. ~` LOT 4._,~LK 1 1 ~ 2~.•1 ;~~ STO~'K ,GLIB. I o C/o '~ S I N i ~ -- t-BtD.y `J~-6, g '~+ I ` T woodfiame /~•+ '~ I - - ~ i wood house /" p .% `ports wood /1//1i I ~ '-1 J ~ i ±AR AGE ~ ~, a2 ~ I I y $L.4 I I `ti~Dror I lasc.t:nc, ~' A85 PLASTIC i I 1]fryv@I I ,~fWQ 2<.f STANOPt?ES I J i- ._ -... . "- -''--~ J ~ ~~ I ~_--JT..- - - - I J I i ($89'53'00"w 133.vG) WINCE-CQRTHEIL-BRYSON KENAI-ANCH4RAG6, ALASKA ~~~~"~, ~ ~ ~ ~- OFI ~~ ucEwo: A~„6uILT CERTIFICATE; ~ ,~~ q~~ ~ t~. f~ ~-.r ` •''••• .V ~ ~ Mew/,y,,,, ey re~nhnt rwne • ~ D~• (r.bor/OW) tw ne I Mreby certity that I nave pufcrmee on oa-bunt tur,.e of the GraDert ettewn d d m \ , ~ , ~ (i ' ' ~ , O got Gager ( w y an aecrlp40 Mrson, thot tn• Improra en is Drs t:cdted a6 Shown vnd Chet t re ar f' ~ .9 .rf ~ ~ , r ar/-roel wt Nec , we Oatt mown , ~ ne e no soeroocnm anti •x C• diCGiN (~ a notes below) yt ~ , •e . ./ e I ~, g -- ^G:~ /~1_ ~ .... . . ' D.erneee o cn,c ~-~- J- _ -- ........ y ~i S PATRICK J;•NALONE r pocn;k ,1 Molor,z. oud5-s ~ ~ ~•. No. LS'+6089 ~ e : NOTES: t The l t • ~ ~ • •.• ,•' ~ eer , e. e enu ano loaetfm of ony undorgrocnd natdloNOn woe NOT dettmnlneJ durlnq thn wrvey A~ ~ ~`,p ~Nt'•. •••i.•••.•`~'~4 ~ E J 96001 P~M J ~'KO: PJM . 2. It la the DraGtrtr ornery re WOn9ioihty tp determ.ne ony eo9amentt, covonmt9, 6r reeltlc Ilona npt 9noen , SS~(NA~ `w {tt` \\\ DaC. r a / Seen. an eha recorded eubdlvglen p1a. 1 under no eieumalDnct9 ee n = ~~Sr``)E 7C'••Ol 1~~3 dO' s eu cry rota nerecn ee Vaed t0 etllobll9n !enCe 7r DCI.':}Or/ i'n29 Ti iTUI C~ ri- ~: ~~ r,~, AGENDA RENAI CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING MARCH 6, 1996 7:00 P.M. RENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS A. CALL TO ORDER 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. B. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT (10 Minutes) 1. Rat Nielson - American Legion/50th Anniversary of World War II Commemorative Committee. 2. Vesta Leigh and Nancy Silverman - Snow Removal Concerns. 3. Bill Rluqe - New Animal Shelter. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS ~~ ~~ 1, Ordinance No. 1675-96 - Amending Kenai Municipal Code, ~~~ `~ Personnel Regulations, Sections 23.25.070, 23.30.030, 23.30.110, 23.40.060, and 23.40.150. 2. Ordinance No. 1676-96 - Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $70,000 in the General Fund for Legal Expenses Related to Inlet Woods Special Assessments. ~~~ ______7 a. Substitute Ordinance No. 1676-96. ~GG~ , 3. Ordinance No. 1677-96 - Increasing Estimated Revenues '~~" and Appropriations in a New Capital Project Fund ~• Entitled "Water System Improvement Project-FY96" and in a New Capital Project Fund Entitled "Water System Improvement Telemetry Project-FY96." -1- `~~ 4. Resolution No. 96-18 - In Support of the Alaska Children's Trust. a. Remove from Table. b. Consideration of Resolution. 5. *1996/97 Liquor License Renewal Application - Alaskalanes, Inc. - Recreational Site. 6. *1996/97 Liquor License Renewal Application - Pizza Hut #9 - Restaurant/Eating Place. D. CO1~4~ISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Council on Aging 2. Airport Commission 3. Harbor Commission 4. Library Commission 5. Parks & Recreation Commission 6. Planning & Zoning Commission 7. Miscellaneous Commissions and Committees a. Beautification Committee b. Historic District Board c. Challenger Steering Committee d. Kenai Visitors & Convention Bureau Board E. MINIITES 1. *Regular Meeting of February 21, 1996. F. G. OLD BIISINE88 H. NEW BIISINE88 ~~~~~A~ 1. Bills to be Paid, Bills to be Ratified G<- ,~~~v~ 2. Purchase Orders Exceeding $2,500 ~'• 3. *Ordinance No. 1678-96 - Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $21,000 in the General Fund for the Purchase of Playground and Basketball Court Equipment. 4. *Ordinance No. 1679-96 - Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $2,700 in the General Fund for Library Books. -2- 5. *Ordinance No. 1680-96 - Increasing Estimated Revenues '; and Appropriations by $8,715 in the Water and Sewer Fund for the Spur Highway Water and Sewer Crossings. 6. *Ordinance No. 1681-96 - Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations by $28,185 in the General Fund for Acquiring Consulting Services for the Design of the Animal Shelter. 7. Discussion - Scheduling of Budget Work Sessions. 8. Discussion - Master Plan of FAA/Daubenspeck and Senior Center Properties. EBECIITIVE SESSION I. ADMINISTRATION REPORTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Mayor City Manager Attorney City Clerk Finance Director Public Works Director Airport Manager J. DISCIIBSION 1. Citizens (five minutes) 2. Council R. ADJOIIRNMENT -3- I~~ KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION I BOROUGH ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ASSEMBLY CHAMBERS ~ ~ 2 3 4 8e SOLDOTNA, ALASKA ~'~ ~~,~ ~ ~ 0 MARCH 11 1996 7:30 P M ~~ y~9 N , . . ~9~ ~v ~ w Tentative Agenda `~~ ~~ y ~ ~~ John Hammelman A. CALL TO ORDER chairman Areawide Term Expires 1996 B. ROLL CALL Philip Bryson vice chairman C. APPROVAL OF REGULAR AGENDA AND ADOPTION OF Kenai City Terre Expires 1998 CONSENT AGENDA Ann Whitmore-Painter Parliamentarian All items on the consent agenda are considered routine and noncontroversial by the Planning Moose Pass Area Commission and will be a roved b one motion. There will be no se arate discussion of these PP y P Term Expires 1997 items unless a Planning Commissioner or someone from the public so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Peggy G. Boscacci regular agenda. PC Member seldovia City Term Expires 1997 If you wish to comment on a consent agenda item or a regular agenda item other than a public hearing, please advise the recording secretary before the meeting begins, and she will inform the Wayne Carpenter Chairman of your wish to comment. PC Member Scward City Term Expires 1996 1. Time Extension Requests -None Hobert Clutts PC Member 2. Plats Granted Administrative Approval Anchor Point Tcrm Expires 1998 3. Plats Granted Final Approval Under 20.04.070 -None Wes Coleman PC Membcr Soldotna City 4. Coastal Management Program Term Expires 1996 Leroy Gannaway a. Coastal Management Program Consistency Reviews PC Member Hamer City Tema Expires 1998 1) Seward; Resurrection River 25; Wetland Fill; Afognak Logging; AK 9602 - 17AA Ellis Hensley, Jr. PC Member 1Vikiski b. Conclusive Consistenc Determinations Received from y Tcrm Ex_esires 1996 DGC Brent Johnsan PC Member KasilofArea c. Administrative Determinations Tcma Exnires 1997 Tom Knock 5. Commissioner Excused Absences PC Mcmbcr Cooper Landing Term Expires 1998 1 Don Gilman, Mayor Lisa Pazker ~ Planning Director Maria swePPY Admin. Assistant a. No excused absences requested. 6. Minutes a. February 26, 1996 D. PUBLIC COMMENT AND PRESENTATIONS (Items other than those appearing on the agenda. Limited to three minutes per speaker unless previous arrangements are made.) E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS -None F. PUBLIC HEARINGS Rename existing streets to help implement the Enhanced 9-1-1 Street Naming and Addressing Project within the Kenai Peninsula Borough a. KIMBERLY STREET within Stubblefield Subdivision Addition No. 7 (Plat 80-66 KRD), Section 21, T4N, R11 W; Robert's Forty Subdivision (Plat 80-111 KRD), Section 28, T4N, R11 W; Doyel Property 1983 Addition Tract "C" (Plat 83-240 KRD), Section 21, T4N, R11 W; in the Tote Road area south of Soldotna, proposed to be renamed to BEVERLY STREET. b. KING COURT within Hideaway Estates Subdivision (Plat 77-169 KRD), Section 35, TSN, R1 OW, off Keystone Drive, proposed to be renamed to STILL COURT. c. KING AVENUE within Kimbrel Subdivision (Plat 76-68 KRD), Section 22 , T4N, R11 W, Arc Loop area near Tote Road, proposed to be renamed to FLATWATER AVENUE. d. KEYSTONE STREET within Great Land Estates No. 2 (Plat 76-172 KRD); Moose River Estates Subdivision (Plat 74-98 KRD); Sections 12 & 13, TSN, R9W; near Moose River, proposed to be renamed to GREAT LAND STREET. KEYSTONE STREET within Heath Subdivision (Plat 76- 32 KRD); Soldotna Creek Hills Subdivision (Plat 83-142 KRD); Loren Lake Subdivision Part 2 Amended (Plat 83- 226 KRD); Sections 27 and 28, TSN, R10W, near Loren Lake northeast of Soldotna, proposed to be renamed to HEATH STREET. f. KEYSTONE CIRCLE within Keystone Estates Subdivision Part 2 (Plat 76-50 KRD); Section 35, TSN, R10W, off of Keystone Drive near the Kenai River, proposed to be renamed to STONE COURT. g. LAKESIDE DRIVE within Foster Lake Subdivision and Replat of Tract A, C. Foster Property Amended (Plat 85- 63); Section 31, TSN, R9W, southwest of Longmere Lake, proposed to be renamed to SAPPHIRE LOOP. h. LAKESIDE DRIVE within Gibbons Subdivision (Plat 78-2 KRD); Section 15, TSN, R10W, off of Mackey Lake Road, proposed to be renamed to GIBBONS DRIVE. i. LAKESIDE COURT within Gibbons Subdivision (Plat 78- 2 KRD); Section 15, TSN, R10W, off of Mackey Lake Road, proposed to be renamed to BROWNS COURT. j. MOOSE RIVER DRIVE within Elsa Louise Subdivision , 1978 Addition (Plat 78-75 KRD); Elsa Louise Subdivision Gilbertson 1978 Subdivision of Lot 2, Block 5 (Plat 87-12 KRD); Elsa Louise Subdivision 1978 Addition David K. Gilbertson 1985 Subdivision of Block 5 (Plat 85-129 KRD); Section 6, TSN, R8W, neaz Moose River, proposed to be renamed to MEANDER AVENUE. k. MOOSE RIDGE ROAD within Moose River Heights (Plat 78-108 KRD); Section 6, TSN, R8W, neaz Moose River, proposed to be renamed to RIVER RIDGE ROAD. 1. MIDWAY AVENUE within E.L. Jackson Subdivision (Plat 1609 KRD); Section 2, T4N, R11 W, off of Echo Lake Road, proposed to be renamed to BOLD AVENUE. m. MICHELLE AVENUE within Ione Acres Subdivision (Plat 79-31 KRD); Section 10, TSN, R8W, east of the Moose River, proposed to be renamed to IONE AVENUE. n. MARY AVENUE within Echo Lake Subdivision (Plat 77- 145 KRD); Section 15, T4N, R11 W, in Echo Lake area, proposed to be renamed to LAKESIDE AVENUE. o. UNNAMED RIGHT-OF-WAY within Blocks 3 & 4 of Sunset Pazk Subdivision (Plat 1397 KRD); Section 30, TSN, R10W, north of Knight Drive, proposed to be renamed to MARY STREET. 2. Ordinance 96-06: An Ordinance Establishing Areas for Regulation of Activities for Kenai River Habitat Protection and Enacting land and Use Restrictions Within Those Areas G. VACATIONS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING -None H. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. Ordinance 96-10: An Ordinance Authorizing the Sale of 47 Parcels of Borough Land by Sealed Bid Followed by an Over-the- Counter Sale I. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS 1. Browning Timber Alaska, Inc. Waugh Subdivision [Name to Change] North of Anchor Point; Preliminary Seabright Surveying KPB File 96-023 2. Tulin Terrace Subdivision Unit 1 Skyline Drive, north of Homer Preliminary; Ability Surveys KPB FILE 96-034 J. COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS -None K. OTHER/NEW BUSINESS L. ASSEMBLY COMMENTS M. DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS N. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS O. ADJOURNMENT The next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting is March 25, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. in the Assembly Chambers at the Borough Administration Building in Soldotna. 4 MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATIONAL ITEMS NO ACTION REQUIRED 1. Seward Planning and Zoning Commission February 7, 1996 Minutes 1 ~~.. PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE CITY OF KENAI AIRPORT COMMISSION March 14, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers KENAI MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN The City of Kenai has initiated an Airport Master Plan for the Kenai Municipal Airport under a grant from the Federal Aviation Administration's Airport Improvement Program (AIP). The purpose of the study is review and update of the recommendations presented in the 1987 Kenai Municipal Airport Master P/an Update. Along-range master plan is being prepared to guide development at the Airport in order to maintain the Airport as a valued transportation facility for both the City of Kenai and those parts of the surrounding area for which the Airport is the most convenient aviation facility. The Airport Master Plan study is being performed by Aries consultants Ltd.; Wince- Corthell-Bryson of Kenai are addressing the engineering elements of the study. Aerial photography and digitizing to prove the 2-foot contours for the Airport are being developed. Non-destructive testing of the Airport pavements and a Pavement Maintenance Plan are also being prepared for the City as part of the master planning process. An Environmental Assessment is also included. The study is being coordinated by the City of Kenai with the Federal Aviation Administration; State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities; and other Federal, State and local organizations. In 1995 a record number of enplaning passengers, over 130,000, used the Airport. In addition, there were approximately 78,000 aircraft operations at the Airport. About 100 aircraft are based at the Airport. An initial working paper describing the Aviation Activity Forecasts to 2015 and the Existing Airport Facilities has been prepared for review and concurrence prior to proceeding with upcoming tasks of the study. This working paper will be presented and discussed at the March 14, 1996 Airport Commission meeting to which the public is invited. The meeting will commence at 7:00 p.m. at 210 Fidalgo at Kenai City Hall Council Chambers. For further information, contact Randy Ernst, Airport Manager, at 283-7951. %~~ RENAL RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA '~ ADVISORY BOARD Tuesday, February 13, 1996 Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call Members Present: Lance Trasky, Pat Bower, Ted Wellman, Jim H. Richardson, Tom Knock, Jack LaShot, Duane Harp, Peggy Mullen (chairperson of meeting), Jeff King, Emily Fiala for Robin West, Robin Nyce, Ben Ellis. Members Absent: Jim A. Richardson, Chris Degernes, Ken Lancaster, Irv Carlisle. H. Approval of January 11 minutes. The minutes were approved as written. C. Agenda Changes and Approval. The agenda was approved as presented. II. PUBLIC COMMENT. Dennis Randa from the public speaks to the board. He tells the board he is an Alaskan resident of 22 years, as well as a Kenai River guide, and President of Trout Unlimited's Alaska Chapter. He addresses the board and especially the Commissioner and Director this evening with his concerns of managing the Kenai River's resources. Dennis states in view of the revision of the KRCMP it is time to realize the need to pick up the effort to head off some of the problems with some wise comprehensive approaches. Dennis tells the board to keep in mind the implications are social as well as biological concerns. He also tells the board to keep in mind humans have destroyed the salmon runs across the country. The water still runs but the fish do not return. Dennis hopes the board recognizes the symbiotic relationship with the river. Dennis tells the board what he would like to see come out of the effort of revising the KRCMP is that it will be an excellent place to address managing uses along the river, specifically fishing. Dennis reminds the board that the 309 Study should be used to identify which areas of the river can afford to be trainpled of net; or how tv direct the landowner on what he can or cannot do. On another subject Dennis reminds the board not to ignore the signs that the water quality is declining. It has been three years since the last water quality study has been done and Dennis states that water quality should be of utmost importance. Dennis leaves the board with his statement "that fish don't care what is on the banks if there is no clean water." ._2 III. NEW BUSINESS A. Address by DNR Commissioner Joha Shively. Commissioner Shively opens by telling the board members he has for each member a letter informing them of their terms as this was not clearly spelled out when the new appointees were made last summer. Commissioner Shively also brings with him the revised Bylaws and informs the board they are approved and signed this date. Copies will be mailed to each board member. Commissioner Shively then states that the revitalization of this advisory board is part of the commitment the Governor has to the Kenai River and this area. The Commissioner views the Kenai as a microcosm of .everything th~.t is good and bad about Alaska. All the resources are here on the Peninsula that are found anywhere else, and yet because of it's particular location it has almost all of the problems that have been created everywhere in the state. Not only does the Governor have a real interest in the Kenai River, but is constantly reminded by the Mayor that this is a very important issue. Commissioner Shively commends Mayor Don Gilman for his leadership on the Kenai River, including his commitment to establishing the Kenai River Center. The Commissioner states the partnership between the local community, State government, Federal government and the public are vital. The problems created here are problems by people. Some people think it is still 1967, and want the river managed for the same kind of experience as in those years. There are others who understand what has happened in the intervening 30 years. It would be nice to say that we have all the freedoms that people had on this river in 1967. The reason the Kenai River has such a high priority, both in this administration and statewide is because it is the most heavily used river of any river in the state. The way we manage the Kenai River will have implications of how other rivers will be dealt with elsewhere in the state. The Commissioner then goes on to say we may have to start to err on the side of making difficult decisions which will have long term implications on protecting the river into the future. Commissioner Shively states we have an even greater responsibility to this river, as the Kenai River is nationally important. We do not want to end up like the east coast or the west coast where restocking occurs. The good news is this board has outstanding support from local government and from the variety of state and federal government officials. The Commissioner closes by informing the board the revision of the KRCMP will be tough one and appreciates all the hard work and tough decisions ahead. B. Address by DPOR Director Jim Stratton. Director Stratton begins by telling the board when he accepted the RENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA ~' ADVISORY BOARD - February 13, 1996 Meeting 3 position as Director of DPOR six months ago at one of his first meetings with the, Commissioner he was told one of the top priorities of the Governor and the Administration was the Kenai River. Director Stratton tells the board that DPOR is very fortunate to have Chris Degernes and Suzanne Fisler as the driving forces for the Kenai River Comprehensive Management Plan Revision. Jim states when he talked to Chris early on it was pointed out that a good working relationship with Borough, Fish & Game, and the Federal Agencies, would be beneficial. But it came down to needing more bodies to help put the Management Plan process together. Director Stratton is very pleased that the Division of Lands will be joining DPOR to assist in putting this plan together. Their planning expertise will be greatly appreciated.. Director Stratton then tells the board he looks forward to meeting and talking with each member and encourages them to speak with him during the breaks. He tells the board he would like to sit back and listen. Div. of Lands Director Jane Angvik then tells the board Lands is delighted to be a part of this process. Jane tells the board it is a team effort and looks forward to working with the Advisory Board, DPOR and the Borough. C. Kenai River Comprehensive Management Plan Revision. Bruce Phelps of the Division of Lands reviews the process of revising the KRCMP. Bruce will be the Project Manager of the KRCMP Revision. Bruce reviews the mailout that was sent to all board members. The revision will address the entire river as well as the entire watershed which includes tributaries, wetlands, etc. The plan focus is based on the identification of issues that have been discussed with this board; habitat protection, recreational issues, water quality, land management. The process will be fairly abbreviated. The intent is that we will build upon the good work that was done initially and hopefully this process will be done in 12 months. The most difficult part will be the identification of the planning issues and will entail more rigorous analysis of environmental, habitat, recreation and land management issues. Those evaluations will be done by the respective staffs of the Div. of Lands, DPOR, ADF&G, USFWS, etc. Lands will take the environmental component, DPOR will take recreation, ADF&G Habitat Division will take habitat, and Lands will work with the planning department of the Kenai Peninsula Borough in the development of land use regulations. Bruce states the Borough is seen as the driving force in developing an approach that is workable and practical for the lands that are non-state and non-federal. This plan is intended to be a plan for the residents of the Kenai Peninsula as well as for the state, Boro, and the cities. It KENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA 7 ADVISORY BOARD - February 13, 1996 Meeting will be more than just a state plan. 4 Bruce then reviews the Decision Making Process graph. The working group should be a group that deals with issues as they come up in the research process. The working group is viewed as being a sounding board for staff analysis and recommendations. One of the concepts discussed at the afternoon committee meeting was whether it would be appropriate or advisable for members of the advisory board to participate in the discussions of the working group? It was decided that it would make slot of sense, since being involved in the technical discussions would make it easier to make well informed decisions later on. Staff will do the analysis and research, and then discuss it with the working group. This body is meant to sort through the competing values that will be difficult to sort through, then information will be taken before the full board. The full board will also be getting information from the public. The level of public participation will be a bit different-than in the original plan, but there will be substantial public participation. When the plan is in final form it will then go in two directions; to the DNR Commissioner, and to the Kenai Peninsula Borough. To make the plan work, it will have to be adopted by the Borough. The KRCMP Revision should be finalized by January 1997. D. Kenai River Center. Mayor Don Gilman speaks to the board about the history behind the creation of the Kenai River Center. The Kenai River is a high priority of the Governor's. The Boro Assembly over a period of several years has wrestled with land use planning and failed attempts at passing ordinances. One of the themes that came through all the testimony last year was the need to have "a place" to obtain information on the Kenai River and get help on permits. This evolved into the idea of the Kenai River Center. The Borough Assembly has set aside money in a fund for the KRC. This is an ongoing appropriation which does not run out at the end of a fiscal year. The Mayor says presently tinere is $225,000 set aside to get the KRC up and running. The Boro Assembly will be asked to appropriate another $125,000 for fiscal year 97. There is also an agreement with ADFG that $100,000 of the money that came to the state from National Marine Fisheries Service will be made available for start up costs for the Kenai River Center. Start up costs include finding an office space, getting the center equipped so it is operational with the necessary equipment, computers, etc. The Request for Proposals is due back on Feb. 15, so office space will be determined soon. When the public goes to the KRC they will have a place they can get all the information they need about the Kenai River. The Boro will be providing two full time clerical staff. The Mayor suggested that these staff members will be available to the advisory board KENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA ADVISORY HOARD - February 13, 1996 Meeting to conduct research, or help in other ways. The Mayor leaves the advisory board with the visiting with the Boro Assembly and keeping progress on the Management Plan, as well as River Center, etc. 5 suggestion of them informed of comments on the Kenai E. Kenai Peninsula Borough's Kenai River Right of Way Study and Flood Plain Ordinance. Lisa Parker discusses these agenda items, which includes three separate topics: the ROW study, the existing flood plain ordinance, and proposed habitat protection ordinance. Currently, there is no rhyme or reason on how a ROW that accesses the Kenai River may be vacated. Fish & Game has done some initial work on where ROWS currently are, but this work is not completely accurate. The Borough is looking at X11 the existing, as well as dedicated ROWs that access the Kenai River and determining which have been actually constructed and which are just platted on paper. Part of the process that is envisioned is to make recommendations in ways to not preclude important accesses to the river but to streamline and focus people to areas to minimize habitat degradation to the banks. Currently the ROW vacation process is done on a case by case basis. Secondly, Lisa discusses the existing flood plain ordinance. The Borough has been criticized in the past for its implementation of the flood plain management ordinance. During the month of March the Borough will be sending to property owners along Kenai River a flyer describing the Borough's flood plain ordinance. If someone is planning to build within the flood plain they will be encouraged to contact the KPB's Planning Department. In mid April the Borough will have a booth at the Peninsula Home Show to provide property owners and homebuilders with info on how to build in the flood plain, retro fitting, repairing flood damaged homes, etc. On the 24th of April, in conjunction with FEMA and the Dept. of Community and Regional Affars,° the Borough will be putting on a one day forum for contractors, title companies, banks and insurance companies, explaining the ordinance and the national insurance program. At the end of April, hopefully in conjunction with State Parks and Fish & Game, the Boro will be at the Sports Show to give info. This will also be a good opportunity for these agencies to disseminate information about the Kenai River Center. Thirdly, Lisa covers the Proposed Ordinance 96-06, The Kenai River Habitat Protection Area. A copy was provided to each board member. This will be introduced by the Assembly on Tuesday February 20, receive its first public hearing before the Assembly on March 19, and be scheduled for a public hearing by the KENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA ~ ADVISORY BOARD - February 13, 1996 Meeting __6 Planning Commission on March 11. The ordinance is~ based on the work of the Kenai River Working group, as well as on the work of the Assembly's Land Use Committee over the last month. The ordinance establishes a 50 foot habitat protection area, with stipulations on what can be done in this 50 foot habitat protection area except for the existing structures which have grandfather rights. The 100 year flood plain is included, with permits required for fuel storage of quantities greater than 50 gallons, and logging activities. F. Draft Board of Fish Testimony - Ben Ellis. The Legislative Committee was assigned to look at possible testimony for the Board of Fish. This board had put forth one proposal, which wculd prohibit anchor dragging as a fishing method. The Chair, Jim Richardson also assigned the Legislative Committee to look at other proposals that this Board might support in either concept or in specifics. In late fall, the Legislative Committee met and continued to support the proposal of anchor dragging, and held discussions over a number of other proposals. At the outcome of that meeting, the committee decided not to provide comment on each and every proposal, but rather provide a philosophical statement that was in line with the mission of the Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board. Comments were incorporated by the committee members and what is presented tonight is the draft material for all to review. The draft does support the anchor dragging proposal and also takes a general position supporting an ecosystem management plan for the river. Robin Nyce has some concerns and questions about the ecosystem statements. She says it looks like a "thinly veiled allocation statement" and thought this board was instructed not to get into allocation issues. Robin had specific concerns with the wording in the last paragraph which refers to a "single species of salmon" as she feels if we are talking about a whole ecosystem the above would be an inaccurate statement. Jim H. Richardson says overall the tone of the draft statement is useful and productive. It is clear what this board is favoring. Jim asks for a better explanation of the last paragraph also. Ben explains that while there are a number of management plans, the driving plan is the late run sockeye salmon management plan. Considering the carcass value for fish, birds, or wildlife has not been included. This last paragraph points to concern towards management plans that put too much focus on one particular species, at the expense of other resources. It is meant to emphasize looking at all the species within the watershed of the Kenai River as being valuable. Ted understands the sensitivity of allocation issues. Ted says this last paragraph actually addresses the central issue which is RENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA 7 ~ ADVISORY BOARD - February 13, 1996 Meeting we very carefully and very certainly said we wanted a full ecosystem approach to this whole management issue on the Kenai River. Ted feels it is entirely appropriate. Peggy feels it spells out allocation issue because of the reference to fish carcasses and the number of fish allowed to return be considered. After much discussion the direction from the chair to the board members was to separate the draft into two areas. The anchor dragging would be one draft and the ecosystem statement would be another draft. Ben then puts the draft material on the floor, dividing the statement into two. Ben asks the board to vote on the anchor dragging statement. Pat Bower abstains from voting. All other members present vote for this draft to be sent to BOF. There is then more discussion about the ecosystem statement. It was suggested by Jeff King to drop the last two paragraphs. Then Suzanne had a suggestion to rewrite the last paragraph to read "that emphasize programs maintaining the complex diversity of fish and wildlife populations in the Kenai River basin". Ted suggests we do not shy away from controversial issues and feels if there is a way the wording can be changed to get the ecosystem statement sent to the BOF we should look at that since it's important that the BOF looks at managing the river in a complete ecosystem way. Ted moves that the KRSMA Advisory should emphasize maintaining the complex diversity which would include all the animals as this is how the board plans to pursue the revision of the KRCMP in our ecosystem approach. The ecosystem statement was then amended, changing the last paragraph to read "The Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board believes fisheries management programs should emphasize maintaining the complex diversity-of fish and wildlife populations in the Kenai River basin." Robin Nyce and Peggy Mullen are opposed. Pat Bower abstains from voting. The remainder of the board vote to accept the statement as amended. G. Schedule of RRCMP Schedule. Bruce Phelps, Project Manager of the revision of the KRCMP asks for some board members to volunteer to work with staff to develop the format and agenda for the first public meeting. There is a need to have the public be given the opportunity to identify issues as well. There also ~ needs to be thought given to how the public meetings will be done such as location and structure. Staff would like to have 2-3 KENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA ADVISORY BOARD - February 13, 1996 Meetiag _$ members of this group on February 29. Ted Wellin~an, Pat Bower, and Peggy Mullen volunteered. The next (2/29) meeting will discuss the plan of study for developing more precise methods and role of responsibility and timeline in products. IV. OLD BUSINESS . A. Permit Committee Report. Suzanne met with the Permit Committee this afternoon at 2pm. The committee discussed a proposal at Poachers Cove to construct a floating dock inside the harbor to accommodate up to 100 boats. There would be no associated reduction in boat parking on the river bank at Poacher's Cove, rather, this is additional parking space for boats. The concerns centered around the associated land development at Poacher's Cove, since there are a number of lots which have not sold yet, in part because there is no boat parking available. Parks can only comment orr the issues related to recreation and not on upland issues. The committee will also be generating a letter in light of the fact that the Kenai River Property owners are now at a point where they are going to be affected by some type of a zone on the first 50 feet of their land. Suzanne says we will be looking at more restrictive ways in dealing with what happens within these 50 foot buffers and that Poacher's Cove should look at their development and consider how the existing and future owners might better care for their lands. The full board will see a copy of the committee's recommendations on the dock proposal once it is drafted. B. Education Committee Report. Jeff King reports for the Education Committee. It was decided to dust off the Kenai River educational flyer that was started a couple of years ago. It will be for river users: boaters and bank fishermen, covering boating safety and fishing etiquette. The idea is to have these available at boat launches, visitor centers, etc. These should be ready and available for the Sports Show in April. What is yet needed is some habitat information, as in pictures and ideas. Jeff would encourage anyone with ideas tc add to these handouts to please let him know. Jeff would like to see it as being fun and educational. Peggy asked what kind of funding would be available to print the flyers? Commissioner John Shively has a comment regarding this issue. He says that this focus could be one of the Kenai River Center's purposes. Because it will be a multi-agency effort there might be funding to do things like printing of handouts. Suzanne says that once the KRC is up and running the handouts could become the Kenai River Center's responsibility. It would RENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA 9 ADVISORY BOARD - February 13, 1996 Meeting also be a good distribution point. V. PUBLIC COMMENT VI. ADJOURNMENT A. Board Comments Ted: Appreciates Bruce Phelps' presentation and help in the revision of the plan. Ted says the KRCMP should become a doctrine that can be used by other agencies and a guideline for public policies and to that extent, a shorter version would be better. As we work with the Borough, this board should set policy directions-even though .there may be-controversies along the way: Ben: Appreciates the votes dealing with ecosystem draft. If this group cannot support a total ecosystem approach, he would call into question what this board's purpose is.- Ben-says his first reaction is to ask for someone else to chair the Legislative Committee because it is no secret he is deeply involved in allocation. He states it his job to work with sportfishing interests, to try to seek a fair and equitable allocation, to protect habitat, and to serve as an informational source for sportfishing and personal uses specifically on the Kenai River. When that job gets in the way of perceptions that are real or concerns that this board has, it concerns him. This project was driven by this board. Ben further explains he did not ask for it nor did he volunteer for it. Ben states if that becomes a problem he needs to be removed from that committee. If it becomes an issue totally he should be removed from the board. Duane: Thanks the Commissioner and the Director for being here tonight. Duane also thanks Bruce Phelps for leading us through this process. Duane states he thinks once we get into the revision itself, we will need more time for meetings. Lance: Thanks Commissioner coming tonight. Lance likes although his biggest concert with DNR. Tom: Reiterates what Lance was right on target when he with the Borough Assembly. Shively and Director Stratton for the process Bruce has laid out, z will be the staff time to keep up said. Tom also mentions the Mayor said this board should communicate P.S.: Ben, do not resign. Jim H: Thanks to Commissioner Shively and Director Jim for being here tonight and supporting this board. Also a thank you to Marty Rutherford, Jane Angvik, Lisa Parker and Mayor Gilman. Bruce Phelps's outline is very solid. Jim also says it is a good thing to have different viewpoints so that this board is not just "rubber stamping issues." FCENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA 10 ADVISORY BOARD - February 13, 1996 Meeting Pat: A big thank you for all the wonderful support from the Commissioner and the Director and their staff. Emily: Bruce's outline does sound solid. Emily calls attention to one of the handouts at tonight's meeting regarding the Moose Range Meadows issue.. The meeting as outlined in the letter is Tuesday, February 20 at Skyview High School. Robin: Thanks also goes to the Commissioner and the Director for being here. Robin comments that she is not against an ecosystem management approach but would like to find out what that means. How is that different from the way it is managed now? Peggy: Back to how to get information (handouts, etc.) out to people. Ben's group made a wonderful visual poster at the Kenai Airport called the homewrecker. This is one way to bring a message home to people. Peggy also did not want to let the Mayor's comment about the pile of salt on the edge of Kenai River go by without mentioning that it was unfortunate that there was no one in the maintenance department with a shred of habitat sense. The intent was good but the place they moved the salt pile to is right next to Soldotna Creek which of course feeds into the Kenai River. (Commissioner Shively reports that is not a permanent location for the salt pile.) Peggy thanks the Commissioner and Director and notes "thanks you's are like hugs, you can never have too many." Jack: Jack says thanks again too! Jack sees a little different direction with more cooperation and he does not feel the "touchy issues will derail this board as they have in the past." Jeff: Thank you to both the Commissioner and the Director. Jeff states he has a clearer understanding of how the board will go about revising the KRCMP. Jeff comments on the ecosystem draft that will be sent to BOF. Jeff feels the motives are sincere. He states the amended version is the only way to word it. Encourages the board to keep it oz file, and send it to the game board when they are doing proposals. Jeff states he is glad the board passed it. Commissioner John Shively: Wanted the board to know that he and the Governor purposely appointed people with diverse interests to this board because it is part of the way the Governor likes to see decisions made. It is expected that board members will have different points of view. What is important in that kind of process is that members have to listen to each other. This kind of situation is much more productive in finding common ground than public hearings where people are forced to drive themselves apart. RENAI RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA '~ ADVISORY BOARD - February 13, 1996 Meeting B. Date/Agenda of Next Meeting. The next meeting will be on March 7 at CZAR (the Boro Assembly Chambers are not available). Committee Meetings are Scheduled as follows: -2:00 pm - Permit Committee meeting -3:00 - 5:00 pm: KRCMP Committee Meeting 11 Respectfully submitted by Denise Dutile. 1~2 ~ ~~ .. February 28, 1996 Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department 144 North Binkley Soldotna, Alaska 99669-7599 (907) 262-4441, extension 260 FAX (907) 262-8618 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 26, 1996 RE: Sprucewood Glen No. 7 Preliminary Plat n.J~~p~~~3 ~~ n`~~~/ ~ ~ NaR as ~ wort ;~ c~, y~v ~~~1~~~?;a:SL lr~v~ The proposed preliminary plat was conditionally approved by the Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission. The conditions of approval are stated in the attached draft minutes. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department. This notice and unapproved minutes of the subject portion of the meeting were sent February 28, 1996 to: City of: City of Kenai, 210 Fidalgo Street, Suite 200, Kenai, Alaska 99611. Advisory Planning Commission: n/a Survey Firm: McLane Consulting Group, P.O. Box 468, Soldotna, Alaska 99669. Subdivider/Petitioner: Craig & Kimi Lofstedt, P.O. Box 3024, Kenai, Alaska 99611- 3024; Vernon and Diana Lofstedt, P.O. Box 1042. Kenai, Alaska 99611-1042; Richard & Peggy Schilling, P.O. Box 36, St. John, Indiana 46373-0036; Louis & Therese Schilling, P.O. Box 7155, Nikiski, Alaska 99635-7155. KPB File Number: 96-024 AGENDA ITEM I. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS ~ 1. Sprucewood Glen No. 7 KPB FILE 96-024 [Preliminary] Staff report as read by Maria Sweppy. PC Meeting 02/26/96 Location: Just off the Kenai Spur Highway, on Beaver Loop Road/Bridge Access Road, within the City of Kenai Proposed Use: Commercial Zoning: Commercial Sewer/Water: City Supporting Information: This is the subdivision of Tract D, Sprucewood Glen Subdivision, into three tracts. Lot size is in conformance with the Kenai Zoning Code. The Kenai Planning and Zoning Commission recommended preliminary approval on February 14, 1996. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Grant approval of the preliminary plat subject to any above recommendations, and the following conditions: REVISE OR ADD TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN KPB 20.12 AS FOLLOWS: Further identify adjacent land status to the north as Lots 3-A and Lots 3-B. ~ ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 20: 2. Survey and monumentation to meet Ordinance requirements or an exception having been granted. 3. Conform to conditions of KPB Planning Commission Resolution 78-6. 4. State of Alaska, Department of Environmental Conservation requires their approval on the final plat and recorded instruments in accordance with 18AAC Chapter 72 Article 3. 5. Compliance with Ordinance 90-38 (Substitute) -Ownership. 6. Compliance with Ordinance 93-59 - Payment of all taxes due prior to final approval. If final approval and filing of the plat are sought between January 1 and the tax due date, the full amount of the estimated taxes will be on deposit with the Finance Department. END OF STAFF REPORT MOTION: Commissioner Carpenter moved, seconded by Commissioner Whitmore-Painter, to grant approval of the preliminary plat subject to staff recommendations. VOTE: The motion passed by unanimous consent. HAMMELMAN BRYSON WHITMORE-PAINTER BOSCACCI CARPENTER CLUTTS YES YES YES YES YES ABSENT COLEMAN GANNAWAY HENSLEY JOHNSON KNOCK TEN YES YES YES YES YES YES ONE ABSENT KPB PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 26, 1996 MEETING PAGE 16 i~~ Memorandum Date: 03/01/96 To: Cary Graves, City Attorney From: Marilyn Kebschull, Administrative Assistant RE: REVIEW OF PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE At the February 28, 1996 meeting the Planning and Zoning Commission directed administration to proceed with developing a single family residential zone. This is based on information submitted by Mr. Christian. The Commission, at this time, would like to develop the zoning. The second step would be to determine which areas may wish to be zoned as single family dwelling zones. I have attached a copy of Mr. Christian's information. Jack requests that you review this information without considering the areas that are mentioned as possible for this type of zoning. If you need further information, please let us know. Thanks. -~hr.~~~GV~ c/(X- ~CCLJ C_if2 G ~~I~ ~' L-vs/2C2LGz'.~iYJ ~jC G/ii2~r,~,' ~v, ~ ~~~~ G%/~"~~e~C /`-~' ` CCu G~ - ~~.-env C~ /L-~n~/ ~2~-'~v~ ~Z~~lar.~u-~/ ~`"~~-' l~~c~.~ s,~,Q-e-~n~ ~~~~~ ~'vLz cad' C'~? C'e-tL,~,c~ ~2oua,~7`' ~f~/ o~ze_ i:Y=~nv~iC ®'LGG~ G~+~"~-2~ /~cc.~ ~i<~~.c~ri~cGf ~Gce.. ~ ~7Z6 G.'~g-,yam ~~,-.. , // !,~ ~jyf1e~~~1 7a '~P/~ /~~'B'vCC~, GC ,c%C ~ if~ /G~ G- ~ ~c~.~~ ~(/~ ',,~~ ~~~! ,G'G ~G,~2~ // ~.1~ O'wti-~ ®~2~n ~ ~~- CG~v~ GfGI~ GIB Lt~aC~i~v /E~~ : GI~a~C-~~ ~~~ ~a-~-,. h~-.~ -_,. ®~ /~' ~~~ ~ G%~~ fib//~ j'4~/f~'1 ~c ~r~'~'J `,~~ ~' L.~". Gc~~ ~~~~ ~~~-- ~~~ 4~- ~ ~~ C~~~-~ `i"~ ~~~ ~;~ ~~~~ oar. .~u-~s. ~`~ °' 4.~ ~ ca,,,. ~~ ~ rte,, r; ~~ -S .. _. z ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q j~~~4.e-%~ y' ~~~~ Q~ ~i.~ ~ L~'~ C djrir,~L~' -~~,~, Sys ~ ~~ 1 ~~za ~~" ~~ ~ ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT OF TAKINGS UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 5TH AMENDMENT "private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation" y4TH AMENDMENT "...nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law physical takings, physical invasion -eminent domain, access easements regulatory takings/regulatory restrictions -zoning, wetl~an~~ restrictions, floodplain ordinances U.S. SUPREME COURT GUIDANCE ON TAKINGS TAKINGS EXIST... 1. where the land owner has been denied all economically viable use of land 2. where regulation forced the landowner to allow someone else to enter onto the property 3. where the regulation imposes burdens or costs on the landowner that do not bear a reasonable relationship to ~ the impacts of the project on the community 4. where government has a choice for accomplishing a valid purpose through regulation or acquisition of property, government did not use the less intrusive regulation 5. regulations intended to prevent or eliminate a nuisance cannot ae considered a taking 6. Dolan-City of Tigard decision - in order to show the required degree of connection, city must show rough proportionality between regulation and degree of impact i NATIONAL TRENDS •takings legislation has been introduced in Congress, applies to federal programs •takings measures introduced in nearly every state legislature •9 states have enacted takings legislation: Arizona, Delaware, Idaho, Indiana, Missouri, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, Mississippi •Washington enacted legislation, was vetoed by Governor, recent ballot initiative failed • Florida enacted mediation process to resolve takings claim •majori#y of legislation requires government to conduct assessrnent of economic effects on private property •many set taking thresholds, with some as low as 10% loss in value WHEN TO CONSIDER THE TAKINGS y ISSUE • preparing and revising comprehensive plans • preparing other plans and background studies • adopting new regulations • revising existing regulations • implementing existing regulations • training Planning Commissioners, Councils, Assemblies EVALUATING THE ACTION • What is the economic impact of the regulation or action on the land owner? • Does~rythe regulation promote a valid public purpose? • What is the character of the government action? ~ • Are there other, less stringent options available? APA GUIDELINES TO AVOID TAKINGS 1. establish a sound basis for land-use and environmental regulations through comprehensive planning and background studies 2. institute an administrative process that gives decision makers adequate information to the apply takings balancing test by requiring property owners to produce evidence of undue economic impact on the subject property before filing a legal action 3. establish an economic hardship variance and similar administrative relief provisions 4. take steps to prevent the subdivision of land in a way that may create economically unusable substandard or unbuildable parcels 5. make development pay its fair share, but establish a rationale, equitable basis for calculating the type of extraction of amount of impact fee. 6. avoid any government incentives, subsidies, of insurance programs that encourage development in sensitive and hazardous areas c~ ~" p m ~. D v °m d ~ °~ ~ ~ x a M iq ~ CJ ~ ~~ Q S ~- ~ .~ ~ ,~ ''~ Oii ~ x r~ o ~ ~ w a N ~ o~ w ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D m ~ ~ q~ p a ~ x v °m °° ~ ~ a ~ m _- 00 x Iq a a a~ o a i ~ ~ ~ N ~+ ~ ~7 C7 ai ~ C7 ~ i 1 ~ O i q D a ~ ~ ac o w ~ a ~ ~ H a a ° ~ ~ ~ c ~ e -~-,.~ e----~, ~j D 1 m .~ w °a d a ~ z v ~ a°o m z ~ v ~ a ~-