Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-28 p&z packet~ CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS January 28,1998 - 7:00 p.m. http://www.Kenai.net/city 1. ROLL CALL: 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 14,1998 4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7. NEW BUSINESS: 8. OLD BUSINESS: ~ a. Goals & Objectives 9. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: 10. REPORTS: a. City Council b. Borough Planning c. Administration 11. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: 12. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. Kenai River Bridge Access Road Rehabilitation Permit Information b. Historic District Board Minutes of January 19, 1997 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS: 14. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION January 14, 1998 - 7:00 p.m. Chairman: Carl Glick *** MINUTES *** Chairman Glick called the meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Carl Glick, Phil Bryson, Teresa Werner-Quade, Ron Goecke, Barb Nord, Karen Mahurin, Michael Christian Others Present: City Engineer Jack LaShot, City Attorney Carey Graves, Administrative Assistant Marilyn Kebschull, Councilman Hal Smalley, Councilman Duane Bannock, Contract Secretary Barb Roper 2. ELECTIONS Glick called for nominations for Chair. BRYSON NOMINATED CARL GLICK AS CHAIR. NOMINATION SECONDED BY MAHURIN. BRYSON MOVED TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS. SECONDED BY GOECKE. MAHURIN MOVED BY AFFIRMATION THAT CARL GLICK BE REAPPOINTED TO CHAIR. SECONDED BY BRYSON. With no objections noted, Glick was reappointed as Chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Glick called for nominations for Vice Chair. GOECKE NOMINATED PHIL BRYSON AS VICE CHAIR. NOMINATION SECONDED BY WERNER-QUADE. WERNER-QUADE MOVED TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS. SECONDED BY CHRISTIAN. MAHURIN MOVED TO REAPPOINT BRYSON AS VICE CHAIR. SECONDED BY GOECKE. Planning 8s Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 1 With no objections noted, Bryson was reappointed as Vice Chair for the Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: GOECKE MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA WITH THE ADDITION OF THE HANDOUT PRESENTED BEFORE THE MEETING. GOECKE ASKED FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. MOTION SECONDED BY CHRISTIAN. AGENDA WAS APPROVED AS PRESENTED WITH THE ADDITION INCLUDED. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: -December 10, 1997 CHRISTIAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 10, 1997. GOECKE SECONDED THE MOTION AND ASKED FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Werner-Quade requested that the second sentence in the last paragraph on page six be changed to read "When the first Commissioner Werner-Quarde was asked... Werner-Quade also asked that "to use Kristine Schmidt's term" be inserted before "politically correct" in the third sentence of the last paragraph, page six. The minutes were approved with the above additions noted. ~ 5. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: None 6. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: a. PZ98-02 -Buffalo Run Subdivision -Phase 1 GOECKE MOVED TO APPROVE PZ98-02. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY NORD. Bryson noted for the record the firm for which he works and is part owner of did the water, sewer, storm drains, and street design on the original subdivision and as a result requested a determination by the Commission concerning a conflict. Bryson confirmed that he was not presently doing any work for the project. After a brief discussion it was determined a conflict did not exist. Kebschull stated that staff had nothing additional but noted the surveyor was present should there be any questions. Christian asked if this was a part of the original plat or is it a new segment. Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 2 Cliff Baker, Integrity Surveys -Tract 1 had an additional 8 lots across the north of the public easement and then 4 or 5 lots south. It is still the plan to do those. Per the engineer's statement in the front, he is needing to use this as collateral so that he can do the rest of the development. This will be done later and is all part of phasing. Christian asked if what was really being done was eliminating the two lot lines. Baker confirmed that it was but it would be temporary. Baker continued, the reason this parcel was selected was due to a lot of controversy and problems with the easement across the north side of the particular piece. Once the City has gone through and completed the final approval of the easement vacation there is only one year to get it recorded. Christian asked if Tract 1 is a similar situation. Baker replied, Lot 1 was always intended to be one lot. Goecke called for question. No other comments were made. VOTE BRYSON YES GOECKE YES MAHURIN YES GLICK YES WERNER-QUADE YES NORD YES CHRISTIAN YES Motion passed unanimously. b. PZ98-03 - Tanglewood Subdivision-A subdivision of Tract One-A Parson's Homestead No.3 WERNER-QUADE MOVED TO APPROVE PZ98-03. MOTION SECONDED BY NORD. Staff had nothing additional but noted the City Engineer and the surveyor were available to answer any questions. Bryson noted that his firm has not been asked for a proposal, however, a representative did come in and talk to an employee concerning the project. The question concerned whether soil tests were required. Bryson indicated the firm may be asked to submit a proposal in the future. This may happen because they have worked with the contractor with other projects. Bryson confirmed that they were not currently doing any work for the contractor. Goecke stated that he felt Bryson would vote the way he feels is correct regardless of whether he was or was not doing any work for the contractor. Goecke had no problem with Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 3 Bryson voting on this item. Mahurin stated since there was an audience and this is the second time Bryson brought up this subject, it probably needed to be noted that whenever there was a conflict Bryson has never hesitated to state it and, if necessary, abstain. It is appreciated that Bryson would bring it before the Commission and she felt very confident to his integrity and is comfortable with him voting. With no objection from Commissioners, Chair ruled there was no conflict at this time because Bryson's firm was not doing any work for them. Goecke commented on naming the streets in the subdivision but felt it could be handled at a later date. Mahurin asked if the main motion was just to approve or were the City Engineer's recommendations included. It was confirmed that the main motion was just to approve. MAHURIN MOVED TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO INCLUDE THE CITY ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH STATE APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT UPON THE RE-ZONE TO INCLUDE PAVED STREETS; WATER AND SEWER TO ALL LOTS; ADEQUATE STORM WATER DRAINAGE; SEEDED BACK SLOPES; AND STREET INTERSECTION LIGHTING. MOTION SECONDED BY GLICK. During discussion on the amendment, Christian asked the City Engineer if curbs and gutters were not allowed because the water is supposed to drain into the ground. LaShot replied, the developer's plan is to not have curbs and gutters but to have ditches, although it was not clear whether DEC would allow adry-well type infiltration. Christian asked when paving the street if it would be the same basic level as the lot? LaShot answered, until the final design is presented it is unknown if the streets would be paved, strip paved with ditches, or if they would have to be raised. Christian indicated that he was trying to picture what would happen if there was a wet fall and wondered where the excess water would go if it was not designed to drain. LaShot replied, in that case proper ditch storage would be required. Christian asked if DEC would determine the depth. LaShot answered it would be determined by the engineer who does the design. DEC regulates whether dry well or infiltration systems could be used. Christian asked if these would be added to the recommendations once DEC comes up with a determination. LaShot stated that he left it simply requiring an adequate storm drain system. Planning 8s Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 4 Christian asked where the water in Inlet Woods drained to. LaShot confirmed it was a dry well. Christian expressed his desire to make some positive comments toward the plat. The first being this Commission has had plats submitted by this developer before and questions were raised about them. In this particular plat he has brought some of those concerns to include multiple access to the subdivision. Christian noted there are three streets that access the subdivision from Redoubt and one that accesses from Inlet Woods, this is a real plus for the subdivision. Christian also stated that he liked the size of the lots, they are very large, 15,000 to 20,000 sq. ft. Christian understood this was too large a size for a developer to consider last year and yet there are 161 in this subdivision. Christian also noted there is water and sewer to all lots and he liked the paving. Christian asked if the developer would make these large size lots single, two, three, or four family dwellings? It was noted the developer was not in the audience and Glick asked Administration if they knew what his intentions were. Kebschull replied that staff did not know what his intentions were but this zone would allow for up to a six family dwelling. Christian expressed many concerns with the developer's plan to include whether or not he would develop from Redoubt in or do spot development and whether or not he will strip trees and bury the excess wood on the properties, which he had done in the past. Christian stated there were a lot of unknowns with regard to what the future holds for this subdivision. Cliff Baker, Integrity Surveys indicated that he may be able to answer some of Christian's questions. Baker stated that he has already been out to survey the subdivision to centerline the roads. This piece of property and Inlet Woods has a very large beetle kill problem. Baker reported that a wind storm blew down 4 or 5 trees in that area so there are a lot of hazardous trees the developer will probably want to take out due to the liability. Baker also stated the developer had completed a subdivision in Soldotna called Redoubt Haven which is pretty much developed with half acre lots. He left 60 to 70 percent of the trees and would prefer to do that as it sells the lots much faster. Baker continued, he couldn't answer as to how many per lot, he knows what it is zoned for and evidently this Commission and the City has determined that it is not an adverse impact with that size of lot. The developer is considering phase development and is planning on two or three years to do the entire project. Christian asked if he was planning on starting with Lots 1, 2, 3, 4? Baker replied, the developer will try to plan around what is available for water and sewer and the existing facilities. There are some Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 5 facilities available off of Redoubt Avenue and coming in off of Inlet Woods so these are probably the areas the developer would try to develop first to make the connecting loop. Baker continued, there is also the possibility that the developer would have to put in a lift station and that would probably be in a later development due to the big expense. Werner-Quade asked that staff state for the record who "he" the developer is. Kebschull replied, Clint Hall. Mahurin stated that she was going to save her comments until the main motion but since Christian brought some things up on the amended motion she would as well. Mahurin expressed her concern about the amount of trees that would be cut down and whether or not they would be buried on the property. Mahurin also expressed concern with the street names and understands how confusing those names are. Mahurin stated, however, that with checking with the City Attorney, this Commission has no authority to make a request on trees or burying them. Mahurin continued, this brings out an interesting point that the Commission should think about because discussion is taking place on property between Redoubt and Inlet Woods Subdivision. The Commission has no control over what the landscaping and that is a great concern. Mahurin further stated, had this Commission had any power to make some of those requests she would have included them in the amendment but, like Christian, she has many concerns which she wanted in the minutes so that the developer continues to hear them. VOTE - (Amended Motion WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES NORD YES MAHURIN YES CHRISTIAN YES BRYSON YES GLICK YEg Amended motion passed unanimously. Discussion on the main motion. Christian commented that it was just one month ago when the subject of changing this zone from RR to RS was brought up. At that time the Commission was told that the developer was not going to do any work on platting until the zone was changed. Christian wanted to commend the developer's work over the Christmas vacation and holiday season to come up with this very large plat in such a short amount of time. Christian continued, it would have been nice to be able to see the preliminary plat at that time but apparently it was not complete. Christian pointed out he had a problem with the fact that the plat came Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 6 so quickly. He wasn't sure how many people are aware of the development plan except for those within 300 feet and the fact that the Commission got the plat and only have a couple of days to review it. Christian stated he would like to see this postponed for two weeks until the next meeting to allow for public input as there aren't too many people aware of what might be going on due to vacations, etc. Bryson stated that assuming the re-zoning has already occurred the developer's responsibility is to develop to the zoning standards and platting requirements. Bryson felt the developer is doing that and if there are any other aspects of the City code that they haven't addressed they should be discussed now but otherwise it should be approved without delay. Mahurin stated that after looking into it, only the immediate property owners are required to be notified, not the entire city of Kenai or people who live further down in Woodland or Inlet Woods. Mahurin continued, there again that's something that is not in the current zoning code and there is a couple of areas this subdivision has brought up that the Commission hasn't really addressed or thought about. Glick stated that the Commission has no legal reason not to approve this plat. VOTE (Main Motion GOECKE YES MAHURIN YES BRYSON YES NORD YES CHRISTIAN YES WERNER-QUADE YES GLICK YES c. PZ98-04 -Leo T. Oberts Subdivision -Ross Replat GOECKE MOVED TO APPROVE PZ98-04. MOTION SECONDED BY WERNER-QUADE. Staff had nothing additional except that this removes the lot line and the surveyor was present to answer any questions. VOTE NORD YES MAHURIN YES CHRISTIAN YES BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES GLICK YES Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 7 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. PZ98-O1 -Conditional Use Permit for Business/Consumer Services and Retail/Wholesale Business for the property described as Lots 6 8s 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision, 9520 and/or 9488 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Hugh Chumley and Joe Chumley, P.O. Box 753, Sterling, Alaska 99672. GOECKE MOVED TO APPROVE PZ98-O1. MOTION SECONDED BY NORD. Glick opened the meeting for public hearing and requested that testimony be limited to three minutes. Goecke was appointed time keeper. Exceptions would be if there was something in writing that would be read. Verbatim begins Glen McCollum, Sr. 399 McCollum Drive -Chairman and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Ladies and Gentlemen my name is Glen McCollum Sr., I live at 399 McCollum Drive and I've lived there for 39 years. I worked in the oil industry most of my life and have a company Northern Oil Operations, it was incorporated in 62. The reason I'm here is to ask you to not let the developer, Mr. Chumley, change this neighborhood from rural residential to commercial. We have two duplexes and a single family dwelling on Cinderella Avenue, just across the street from this proposed development. They would be seriously disrupted if those families living there had to face a commercial business right from their front door. The proposed site plan the developer presented is just a well engineered sketch or picture, the suggestion that the wood frame buildings included there could house a dental office or a beauty parlor is just a mere possibility, engineered to quell our objections. Therefore, I strongly suggest you do not grant this permit, now or ever. We just met in 96 over this same issue. We had to point out how detrimental it would be. This is not, or ever will be, prime commercial property. It's proximity to the public schools and large auditorium, athletic track, football field, hockey rink, make it a prime area for family homes or rental units. That area would not safely support a traffic of conditional use, whatever that might be. Thank you. Glick: Thank you, anyone else wishing to speak to this item. Vesta Leigh, 610 Magic, Box 905, Kenai, Alaska - I'm out of the 300' zone but was here two years ago to object to this and I am again tonight because we got together as a small community there years ago and asked to have that zone. We came before the Commission, we did our Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 8 paperwork, we had an attorney to have it zoned for just people and ~ families, and now we have to go back every time and say, (Sigh) "Why this again?" Now, the owner bought that and cut the trees down first of all and I remember when they cut the trees for where Carr's and K-Mart is now and left it sit for a couple of years, baby-butt naked, the wind blew that dust all over and I could hear stuff coming out of the fire department that I never heard before, as far down as I am there because of the trees being gone. So, now you have a piece on the highway that the trees are all gone but I don't think it's right to change it now and this... this thing of... um... permit for business/consumer services and retail/wholesale... why not just say... Hey, I don't want any zoning there at all because that's what this amounts to. I mean, just leave it open to whatever anybody wants to do with to it. Then those people living there are going to be like in a fish bowl and then it's going to be done across, right across the street from me. When the fire hall started going in, it's right... I mean... it's out of my area, I'm about half way between this proposal and where the new fire... um... school is... 24 hours a day, month on month, went on, the noise... the... sounded like boulders grinding in a rock tumbler, night after... and that's down the other direction with a bunch of trees blocking that off so I don't want to see any commercial go in here, or any retail, or any wholesale because it's going to break us up and first thing you know there will be a dog kennel over there and then there would be something over here and guys working on motors, retying them all night long. Also, one last thing, ~ that school, if you put any retail there that a kid wants to go get a bag of popcorn or anything that is bad because you can't tell me that any feisty, female, freshman or football player is going to wait and go down to Tinker and stop and use the light to come down, he's going to try and cross four lanes of traffic. Thank you very much. Glick: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak to this item? Karen Rubsman, 307 Cinderella - I'm here to speak regarding this... um... I'm opposed to any commercial building in this residential area. Um... the name of the street... I really don't... really know the history of how those streets got the name, but I will tell you that... um... something happens when you turn on Cinderella that once the pavement stops, it only goes for about a half a block and you hit that dirt road, it becomes, it's very serene, it's very quiet, and it's uh..., it's ah... really, I just find it so pleasant to be able to live so close to town but still be able to enjoy some of the aspects of Alaska. Um... I don't like to drive a long distance to work and yet I could come home and I can leave the city, which is only five minutes away, behind. Um... I think having a commercial business right there, that close... um... would disrupt... um... this peacefulness. And that's on a personal level and as far as the community goes, I just oppose a commercial facility that close to the high school... Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 9 ah... Kenai Middle School... um... and the high school... ah... adjoin each other and I feel that's very detrimental to that kind of school community. I think schools belong in residential areas... Um... we need to keep that kind of theme. I don't know what the... ah... um... the plan... I don't... I don't know what your goals are... um... as a committee but I feel like we need to keep our city not looking like California. I don't want businesses... I think the car dealership on that side of the road is the last business and then we have that sign that says "Welcome to Kenai" and that's when I feel like I'm starting into the city. I get that sense of... I'm in the Town... and um... we would need to move that sign and I just feel like well just have businesses across there and we've built that beautiful... um... bike path that I feel would be disrupted. Um... I'm just opposed to it. I think we need to preserve our residential areas. Thanks. Glick: Thank you, anyone else wishing to speak. Debbie Adams, 606 Laurel Drive, Kenai - I am the PISA President at Kenai Central High School and... Um... as a PTSA our sole goal is to... whatever is going to work to the betterment of our, of our kids at the school. That's the only the... our only agenda and we really oppose any kind of commercial business across the street for several reasons. One is, if it is a successful business you would have to increase the traffic on Spur. You have inexperienced drivers, you have just mom's and dad's, if you're coming out from the high school onto Spur, it's difficult at the best of times with an experienced driver. If you put a business across the street then you're complicating on already very complicated... ah... situation there and... and then if it's a business that, at all our students want to go to, then you have a real mess. Ah, we do have a closed campus. We don't want anything that's going to encourage our kids to cross the street. Like it was brought up before, they're not going to go down to a light to cross a street, it's not gonna happen. The other thing is, we don't want any excuse for people to be loitering in the area that we don't want in contact with our kids. The parents send the students to an environment they expect to be protected. Um... I don't want my child to be able to cross the street and go to someplace to become in contact with someone who is trying to sell them drugs or anything else, we just don't need to be there. This is supposed to be residential. I'd like to see it stay that way. Glick: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak to the item. Margie Campbell, 402 Birch, Kenai, Alaska - I'm before you as the President of the PTA at the Kenai Middle School and Deb's already stated the feelings of myself and our Board. We've met and discussed it and we are... um... opposed to any change in zoning there for the same reasons that she's saying. We... we really don't want an increase in, ah... traffic. Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 10 We don't see... ah... we are certainly are opposed to anything that would ~ be drawing students away from the campuses there. Ah... I.. I would like to point out to you that parents are really crummy lobbyists, you know, we haven't... it was today when I finally got the last signature from our Board on a letter that I had prepared for you, so I didn't get it to you early. Parents are busy doing a lot of other things to take care of our families and so you know we aren't here in numbers, there are just a few of us but, ah.... I think we stand fairly united in believing that this is not the right thing for that school area. (Campbell handed the letter to Chairman Glick who in turned provided it to other Commissioner's to review -the letter was given to Kebschull). Glick: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Sherry James, 303 Cinderella, Kenai, Alaska - I have a letter to from a friend, I don't know if you want me to give it to you or me to read it, I'm not sure. Glick: Do you want to read it? It's okay. James: She had to go out of town. Okay, (James reads the letter) "Members of the Kenai City Council, my name is Tracy Lee, I live on Cinderella Lane in Kenai. I'm writing to you in regard to the application for a Conditional Use Permit for Business/Consumer Service and Retail/Wholesale Business filed by Hugh and Joe Chumley of Sterling. My concerns are mostly for my child and the students of Kenai Middle School and the Kenai High School. I am also concerned for the city and it's residents. My family moved (pause) my family moved here when I was younger and I can tell you from a student's point of view a business of those sorts is only asking for truancy and trouble from the students of these schools. James: And then her concerns are the same, I mean, we're all.... here basically saying, I guess, the same thing. I'm.... I'm the one right there, I'm 303 Cinderella, I'm right after you turn on the Spur. I'm 150 feet from where he wants to put a business. I have a ten year old daughter, we have a nice little yard, I don't want any business across the street from me whether it be a beauty shop or ah... a dentist office this year, last year it was a beauty shop. Um.... we have one to two people a day, that I see, I have a job, my husband has a job, we have one to two people, at least that turn in our driveway right there and it's more traffic, it's more everything, it's more noise. I already got my buffer cut down because they clear Gutted it right there. Nobody could see our little place hardly from the Spur until now it's open view. You know, and again, I have a ten year old daughter who I like to let go outside and play Planning 8s Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 11 in the yard and you don't know... you know, who is going to come to what business, and so my family and I are very much opposed to it, and, I would have one question I guess at the end when Mr. Chumley comes up to speak and is it.... is it going to be every year, are we going to have to come do this every year to.... to take time out and come fight for what's already been zoned. The way it is people fight a long time ago for it and we would just like to keep it that way. Thank you. Glick: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak to the item: Jo-an Buzzell, 1103 Aliak, Kenai, Alaska -Twelve or thirteen years ago, when this all came up when we wanted water and sewer in our neighborhood, I was, along with ah..... Ingrid Manzek, who was my neighbor at the time, ah... went over this neighborhood several times because we had to keep going over and people would sell property and new people would move it and in order to get the correct number of... of... names on the petition, that...it meant several trips around the neighborhood, lot of....er...telephone calls and writing letters to people who own property in this area, I would state, um....everybody at that time was very anxious to have this, and they still are, to have this zoned rural residential, and ah.... I'm sure people that are far away even now would be unhappy if they knew that this was going on. Almost everybody had to be notified. It would be nice if they could so that they would have a chance but I would hate to think of all that work going to waste um..... and have this go back to the ah.... commercial use. Thank you. Glick: Thank you. Anyone else? Debbie Sonberg, 410 Cinderella Street, Kenai, Alaska - I just want to go on record as to agreeing with the things that have been said so far. A lot of it doesn't necessarily need to be repeated. One thing that I don't understand is how something can be considered for re-zoning, or conditional re-zoning when it's supposed to fit in with the area. All the way around is housing, the other side is schools. That's the whole area is residential in... in nature and I think it needs to stay that way. I cannot see how putting a business in there is going to, in anyway, enhance the neighborhood. Ah... I've lived there for nearly 20 years now, my husband's lived there longer and we have a daughter going to Kenai Central High School and I think it would be a big problem having a business in that neighborhood with the high school and the roads the way they are. I think it would drastically change the neighborhood and the rules that you have go by state that it can't drastically change the neighborhood. But it's.....and I don't have the wording, I just got home from work before we had to come in here but I know if you look up your rules that you need to go by, whatever goes into conditional zoning has Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 12 to fit in with the neighborhood, enhance the neighborhood and I don't see that putting a commercial business here would enhance the neighborhood. It would drastically change the atmosphere. I just want to go on record as agreeing with.... with what people have been saying and encourage you to follow those guidelines that are in your rules. Thank you. Glick: Thank you, anyone else wishing to speak to this item? Ralph E. Ash -Good Evening Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Ladies and Gentlemen. My name is Ralph E. Ash and I resided at my current address going on 15 years. It is directly across Cinderella from the proposed project. I first flew into Kenai from my employer, Star Airlines in 1941. Professionally, Ihave adoctorate degree in Outdoor Recreation from Indiana University. At one time I was a civilian advisor for the Headquarters Alaskan Air Command at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. I was Chief in the Recreation Services and Facilities Division. I was responsible for 26 remote sites and two main air bases, Elmendorf and Eielson. Wildwood was one of the remote air force stations. Now I'm going to reference my comments I made before the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 21, 1995. I'm firmly opposed to the changing of the zoning from residential to general commercial, adding congestion to a main arterial highway between an entrance and exit of Kenai High School is not an example of good planning and zoning. It should be considered an accident waiting to happen. It is also near the entrance and exit of the Kenai Middle School. It will only contribute to the accident potential in these two areas. No mention has been made about the type of commercial venture which is to be placed on this property. Additional multi-housing will definitely adversely affect the present rural residential environment of the area. It would bring the usual problems associated with multi-family facilities. A commercial zone and multi-family dwellings will totally change the residential character of the area. I'm absolutely opposed to such planning and re-zoning. The propriety of clear cutting and leveling before the re-zoning is in question. Okay, this evening I'm going to reiterate and say some of the things I said before plus a few extra. I'm adamant about the thought of changing the classification of rural residential and granting a conditional use permit for who knows what. No mention has been made on the application. I do not believe there is a demand or a need for any business ventures in this area, especially across from the Kenai High School. The intent of rural residential zoning is to provide for a low density residential development in the form which creates a stable and an attractive residential environment. Granting the conditional use permit will do the exact opposite. I am firmly opposed to changing the present zoning and granting a conditional use permit for some unknown business venture. Adding traffic congestion to a main Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 13 especially when it's between the exit and entrance of the Kenai High School. Again, it will only contribute to the accident potential of the area. The entrance and exit on Cinderella is suicidal traffic planning. Some students now use Cinderella as a walkway to and from school Can you imagine what it would be like if 500 students wanted to cross the Spur Highway. We all know what congestion is. When there is a special event at the high school that will tell us something about congestion. If necessary, I will get a court order to prohibit the use of my driveway as a turnaround point. It's bad enough the way it is right now. Added traffic congestion isn't good planning and zoning. I believe the comprehensive plan discourages ah... commercial re-zones in neighborhoods which can be adversely impacted. Glick: Sir, are you about.... Ash: Pardon? Glick: Are you about ready to end there, are you about ready to wrap it up? Ash: Yes. Glick: Okay. Ash: I'm totally against the granting of a conditional permit for some unknown business venture. I do.... I do not believe there is a demand or a need for a business venture in this particular area. I highly recommend the Planning and Zoning Commission refuse this unknown business request. I recommend the current rural residential zoning remain and not be changed. There is no need to adversely affect a comfortable rural residential area. Thank you. Glick: Alright, thank you. Sam Stewart, 306 KIM N' ANG, Kenai, Alaska - I'm also Principal at Kenai Central High School. I11 be real brief. I would just like to register my concern with the application as written where it says Business/Consumer Services Retail/Wholesale. If that is opening the door for business to come into the area that would be an attraction to our students, that does cause a severe supervision problem or us. We are a closed campus, we try to keep our eyes on what's happening. Kids crossing the street by foot there would be a problem. If you do... ah... decide to grant a conditional use permit, I'd at least ask that you grant some kind of conditional use that doesn't allow for that type of business, anything that would be an attraction to our students. Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 14 Glick: Thank you Sir. Anyone else in the audience wishing to speak? .~ Paul Sorenson -Good Evening, I live at 36790 Chinulna Drive, Kenai, Alaska. I'm the principal at Kenai Middle School. I had an opportunity to talk to ah.... my PTA member parents and as we look back into the past when we started to build the road along Spur Highway and they expanded that particular road, we were concerned about the traffic at that time for our kids. And ah.... we've looked at a cross way for the kids, an overhead cross way, there wasn't any business projected across even, and to do some compromising they looked at the traffic and they put a traffic light at Tinker and that allows our kids, early in the morning, when I come to work, even at 7 o'clock, I have kids meandering along the road and at that stop light and it's very difficult to see them. And ah.... that stop light does help in that process but when they were planning the overhead passage for kids the cost was prohibitive. The fencing that would take place along there to prohibit kids to cross that road and the safety was the issue for kids and if we start putting businesses along that particular road, I think we have some real issues and there should be a buffer zone to protect those kids; and when I look at my closed campus I notice that kids do not make good decisions at times and ah.... as they can... pass through the woods there and go across the road. Right now I find kids... some of my kids do venture out and I find them at K-Mart and that's a ways, so that's two or three. Once you start establishing businesses along the Spur Highway it's not going to be K-Mart. I'm going to be searching for kids across the road and I would appreciate you... to look at this issue. Thank you. Glick: Thank you. Anyone else in the audience wishing to speak? Colleen Ward, 708 Magic Avenue, Kenai, Alaska - I own parcel, Lot 5 in Cinderella Subdivision and I would like to request an time extension. Glick: You have a written proposal? Ward: Yes Sir. Glick: Anybody opposed. (No objection) Okay. Ward: Councilman Smalley, Chairman, Commissioners, I do not want to stand before you tonight and say the things that I have to say. I find myself in the position of opposing a former and potentially future neighbor and a man I have a lot of respect for. Mr. Chumley, I wish you no ill will but I am compelled to represent what I strongly believe to be true. I would like to begin tonight by commending the Commission for their action regarding the new Land Use Table. Although I'm not in complete agreement with the new table I believe the action of the Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 15 Council last Wednesday night in passing this Ordinance was a step in 1 the right direction. True planning and zoning success, however, will be tested on a case by case basis as we implement the theories and principals behind such table as we have the opportunity to do here tonight. First, I would like to address you from the perspective of a resident of the area impacted by this conditional land use permit application. The history of this neighborhood, and I~1 regress just a minute to thank you again for giving us... neighbors, an opportunity to gather. This is a very familiar gathering place for us because the history of this neighborhood and it's interaction with both the Kenai City Council and this Commission demonstrates a highly collaborative effort of the majority of the property owners to preserve and maintain the low density residential character of this neighborhood. In other words, we do not now, nor have we in the past, wanted or needed commercial enterprise in our rural residential neighborhood. Although there is much support for the rejection of this and future applications in both the Kenai.... the City of Kenai Comprehensive Plan and the Kenai Municipal Code, Ike limited my extractions due to time limitations. The comprehensive plan states, "support development of neighborhood serving commercial use such as grocery stores and laundromats in commercial zones." I suggest that, in congruence with our City's own comprehensive plan you support commercial uses in commercial zones. This area is in close proximity to commercial properties that provide ample support for a developing neighborhood. Not only do those commercial zones already exist, they have high vacancy rates. The Kenai Municipal Code, 14.20.150 as quoted on page 2, number 3 of the staff report pertaining to this application states, "Conditional uses may be permitted providing the following conditions are met: 1. Uses be similar to principal uses permitted in the zone, which in this case are one to three family dwellings, churches with 30 foot set back lines, essential services, and general agricultural. Commercial enterprise unquestionably is not similar to any of these primary uses. The second condition is, "Uses must be in harmony of the intent of the zone," residential zoning is simply is not intended commercial. I submit to you that neither of these conditions have been met. The Kenai Municipal Code, 14.20.080, #2 as quoted on page 2, #4 of your staff report states, "Ushes.... Uses should be prohibited which would, violate the residential character of an area, generate heavy traffic in predominantly residential areas. The staffer who compiled this report then states their opinion that "it does not appear this would generate heavy traffic uses with ingress and egress off the Spur Highway." If you look closely at this schematic, and if your not doing so, I encourage you to do so, what you will find is two separate lots; one of which that has ingress and egress to the Spur Highway and one, which as presented, will use Cinderella Road access. At first glance Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 16 we might assume both lots will share and entrance/exit, however, for all practical purposes we must not assume these lots will be sold. We must assume these lots will be sold separately and dependence on shared usage is a law suit waiting happen. Therefore, I must disagree with the opinion stated by the author of your staff report, traffic uses as currently described in this application will in fact violate the residential character of this main area. In the interest of time, I will move out of the Kenai comprehensive plan and the Kenai Municipal Code to another significant factor and that is surrounding schools. Whether you support development along the Spur Highway or not, I suggest this area be considered unique. Several hundred students may be impacted by your decision tonight. The safety of these students is somewhat contingent on the lure of a commercial enterprise, somewhat contingent on responsible development of traffic patterns must be paramount in your decision. One accident is one too many. Please consider setting this issue... settling this issue once and for all by creating a well designed, responsible and compatible buffer zone surrounding the schools that ensures safety in all future development so we don't find ourselves standing before you year after year. Secondly, I would like to address you from the perspective of a member of this community and someone who is concerned about the economic development of this community. I've been hearing a lot of anti- development, pro-development debate as I've discussed this debate with councilpersons, commissioners, realtors, neighbors, etc., over the last week and although we differ in where we fall on the development continuum most of us have a common interest, the economic vitality of the City of Kenai, that is our common ground. So I've tried to remove myself from my residential bias and approach the issue for a purely economic perspective. The reality is that this condin... conditional land use permit application transcends this particular applicant, it transcends the surrounding residents and it even transcends you in your positions here tonight because it sets a precedent, the action you take will set a precedent that, for years to come, will serve as a measure of accountability for the City of Kenai. Sometimes economic vitality is best achieved through new development and sometimes it is best accomplished through wiser use and nurturing of existing infrastructures and resources. The challenge presented tonight is to discern the difference. The intricate economic balance between supporting new development along a commercial corridor lining the Spur Highway as stimulating new business and the old commercial hub of the City is a critical matter. The former commercial hub along the Spur west of the Carr's is a ready resource of high vacancy and established commercial zoning. In it's current state, this section of our City is very vulnerable. It can become a vibrant part of our economy of a burden to the City. Commercial growth along the Spur is one of it's greatest Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 17 hazards in equivalent to the proverbial nail in the coffin. Allowing ,t another balance that we have to look at is allowing a single, or a few land owners to benefit at the cost of many surrounding land owners. This could become a problem in terms of cost benefits but also a legal liability. I believe we unanimously agree that commercializing clot increases it's market value, however, most City officials, elected or otherwise, in current conversations I have had with them, have been reluctant to admit that such commercialization also devalues surrounding residential properties. So, I have called realtors to try to move outside the realm of my bias. Every realtor I have talked to have stated they felt that commercializing aresidential lot does definitely impact the value of surrounding residential properties and often in a very negative fashion, not always but often. They also went on to tell me of several documented cases where such devaluation has resulted in successful land suits by those property owners who suffered the devaluation. I'm not presenting this as a fact, I'm not the suing kind and I'm presenting that simply as ah... what has happened in other areas, I mean, as a threat, but that is something that has happened. The impetus behind developing this Spur commercial corridor is to attract revenues to offset declining Municipal Assistance Revenue, ah.... Sharing that we receive from the State and our sluggish rev..... local revenues. The balance that must be achieved is to do just that, attract through desirable, attractive, and responsible development and to avoid inappropriate, unsightly, or incompatible growth that detracts from what ? the City has to offer. I do not want the Spur to look like the Sterling Highway at some point in time. That is not attractive for the City of Kenai, or economically acceptable. The balance between honoring the needs of the schools and satisfying the wants of developers is also critical to economic vitality because the schools are one of the top rated selling points of most communities. When someone is moving to a community that is one of the things on the top five lists they will check out. The exception might be retirement communities. A balance I believe we are struggling with tonight, and bear with me I'm getting close the end, is the immediate pressure to increase City revenues and the time required to resolve remaining issues that ensure responsible development that, I believe will ultimately will result in stronger, longterm generation of revenues to the City. When we're looking at economic vitality we also have to look at the long term implications and there are three that I will quickly address. What will in... occur if there are violations in fractions of this permit, and I'm not suggesting the current land owner will do this, but I do anticipate the current land owner will at some point in time sell and we are assured by members of the Council, we have been, that if this happens and conditions of the permit are violated, then the permit is pulled. Okay, so you have two buildings with businesses in there that are violating the code, you pull their permit, lets take that the next step, then what? Quite frankly, the ~ Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 18 City does not have an established track record of enforcement policy and the track record they have is a little shaky for a neighborhood to put their confidence in at this point. Quite frankly, this is a major concern to me and my neighbors. The second long term implication I'd like you to consider is some of the Spur frontage parcels are much larger than the two lots that we are discussing tonight, approximately 2.5 acres and could amount to a sizable enterprise. How will we discern who can and can't set up shop? How will we protect the residential traffic flow while providing safe, which in the Department of Transportation language, is often synonymous with limited Spur Highway access. The only alternative, as undesirable as it is, is to use your residential roads as proposed in this application. The third long term implication relates back to a statement made in your staff report. The staff report states, "Commission may identify these lots as no longer appropriate for residential development based on their proximity to the Kenai Spur Highway. How many of my neighbors would agree with that? (Ward addressed this question to the audience) That they would no longer be suitable for residential, we live there, we don't agree with that, that is a matter of opinion. As the schematic shows, the developer is attempting to use trees as a buffer zone, or buffer lines, the same thing could be done with residential properties. Proximity to the schools is often very desirable in residential properties. So in reality the truth of this statement is dependent on what you determine tonight. It is not a truth that already exists other than in the minds of the author and those who agree with it. The last thing I'd like to speak to you about, and it.... ah... is the issue of compromise. I will reiterate, I believe any compromise will come ultimately at a great cost to the City, however, it if there must be compromise should the Commission disregard the desires of the majority land owners, I would like to recommend the application be approved with the following conditions: Require the City honor Mr. Chumley's informal offer to change the designated use from that of Business Consumer Service and Retail/Wholesale Business to that of Professional Offices. A designated use alloted in the newly adopted land use table. 2. The second condition is to provide expanded definition of professional offices to outline the parameters between professional and business consumer services. For example, if a doctor or lawyer's offices are professional and hair salon and video rental are business consumer services, where does an architect, an engineer, a graphic designer, a photographer, or for that matter, a massage Planning 8s Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 19 therapist fall? If you follow my line of reasoning, the l ambiguity of the definition for the listing of designated uses provides ample concern for me and my neighbors. So that would be the second condition. 3. The third condition relates to aesthetic considerations. The Kenai Municipal Code, 14.20.080 as recited in your staff report, under analysis, page 1 states, "The intent of the rural residential zone is to provide for low density residential development outlying in rural areas in a form which creates a stable and attractive residential environment. I suggest the conditions of approval specify as Mr. Chumley as indicated informally, his willingness to conform with a residential appearing, therefore, aesthetically compatible structural design, decor and landscaping. 4. The fourth condition relates to traffic violation to the residential character of the area which must be prevented by requiring Spur Highway ingress and egress only. The application must be revised to remove the Cinderella driveway. I cannot stress to you the importance of this condition. I believe it is a precedent setting move, long term implications and balancing the needs of the residents and the desires of the Department of Transportation are somewhat mind boggling. In closing, I am opposed to the approval of Mr. Hugh and Joe Chumley's conditional land use permit application. In spite of the overwhelming oppostion, should this application be approved, I urge you to approve only with the clearly defined conditions I just outlined. I would like to suggest or recommend future action of the Commission be that they pursue a buffer zone around the school, involving the school in the process of what that buffer zone should look like. Secondly, that they set up a task force to specifically research the Spur Highway corridor. In my discussions with a number of people, our City is headed in a million different directions when it comes to that stretch of land. And thirdly, extend notification parameters from the existing 300 feet to one mile of the location of conditional land use permit applications. I thank you for your patience, for the extended time and I urge you to carefully and wisely make your decision concerning this application. Thank you. Glick: Thank you. Anyone else in the audience wishing to speak to this item. Anyone else? Mr. Chumley, you care to speak about what your Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 20 doing? What your intentions are? ~l Members of the Commission and Ladies and Gentlemen of the audience, thank you once again for your time. Ah.... I ah.... I will not respond to some of the things that were said tonight Glick: Would you state your name and address for the record Hugh Chumley, P.O. Box 1356, Sterling, Alaska - I did reside on Princess Lane in Kenai, still own property there as well as this property. I will not respond to some of the comments that was made tonight for I feel it was totally inappropriate and inaccurate on some of it. Ah.... I have faith in the process, I will admit, as one gentleman mentioned here, a year or so ago when I appeared before this Commission, it was out of ignorance. I come in and applied for re-zoning. I did not know that... that... that was not going. I had no idea so I apologize for that, I apologize for taking up your time. The only thing... I have faith in the system, ah... that you folks will make the right decision and make a good decision whatever that may be. Ah...as far as the question that will we have to keep doing this time and time again. It's my understanding there is only one other time after this if this is unsuccessful, so... but again, thank you for your time, I appreciate it, I thank all of you residents for your time and your concerns. Thank you. Glick: Thank you. Mahurin: Question for Mr. Chumley. Glick: Mr. Chumely? Mahurin: Do you wish to share with the Commission what your intentions are for a business consumer, retail/wholesale business? Chumley: Yes Mam, when I appeared ah... here a year or so ago we had ah, ah... one lady that owns a beauty shop in Kenai that wanted to lease one of the spots as well as buy a lot behind it. Ah.... since then, just here recently that has gone away because she's had to do something else. We had an insurance agent that was interested in one and since then that's gone away. Something along these lines as we've stated to some of the concerned residents ah...this is what we want to do. There was not a place on the application to state that so we did not state it, we simply tried to follow the guidelines and list what we felt would cover that category. Mahurin: So at this point you don't know what businesses exactly would go in there. Planning 8s Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 21 Chumley: No Mam, I don't, something like the... the professional ~i services as Mrs. Ward had mentioned and..... and we did, as she stated, agreed to... to change the application if that would help. Mahurin: Thank you for answering my questions Mr. Chumley. Chumley: Pardon? Mahurin: I appreciate you taking... answering my questions, thank you very much. Glick: Anyone else? Okay, thank you. Anyone in the audience wishing to speak to this item? Seeing or hearing none I will bring this back to the Commissioner's, public hearing is now closed. Verbatim Ends When asked if staff had anything else to add to this, Kebschull responded that she had a couple of items she wanted to clarify from the staff report. The code requires, under the new land use table, that this property must have ingress and egress off the Spur Highway to allow this conditional use. This is one problem that does not exist. The second clarification Kebschull made was in regard to the statement Ward read from the comprehensive plan which states "the City support development of neighborhoods serving commercial uses such as grocery stores and laundromats in commercial zones". That statement is taken from the section on residential land use strategies so by looking at that in context, that is a strategy that the City is supposed to use as far as development for residential land use. Kebschull stated that when she looked at this application, the zone, and the intent it became very confusing because the intent in the definition for the rural residential zone doesn't appear to fit that zone. Kebschull continued, it is difficult to look at that zone as being outlying and rural when it's within walking distance of the city. So that's a problem staff has because the code is sometimes outdated when we look at these things. Another problem is that the land use table allows for a conditional use in this area but when you look at the conditional use section of the code it says that uses may be allowed as long as they are similar to principal uses, so why would we have a "C" in the land use table if the only principal use is the zones of residential. Kebschull further stated that all staff can do is bring these conflicts to the Commission's attention. Kebschull pointed out that the City Attorney was available to answer any questions. Christian reminded the Commissioners that they had gone through the Planning 8s Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 22 land use table and it was thrown back during the work session to ~ reconsider and in fact there was very strong pressure to change that. Christian stated he can see a rural residential area and the group of people with a strong intent on what they want there and it's apparent they don't want anything commercial anywhere in that zone. Christian indicated that he would have to agree. Mahurin reported that she voted against this the last time and will vote against it again. Mahurin agrees with what Christian said about the land use. Mahurin stated the Commission had a hot and heavy work session with City Council over several of these areas and what will happen with the Spur Highway corridor is one of the areas where she personally have a disagreement with many of the City Council members. Mahurin felt the green strip, bike path and walking, at least from east Aliak into town, is just a wonderful feeling to drive into and she would hate to give that up when there is a lot of commercial openings around town. Mahurin stated she doesn't want to take away the right of property owners but she also understands how strongly the surrounding property owners feel. Mahurin apologize to Chumley for not voting to allow a conditional use permit, particularly when the type of business has not been identified. Mahurin continued, she trusts what he may have in mind but she cannot vote for an unknown and can't vote for a business contrary to what some may feel. Mahurin feels the area should remain a green strip and buffer zone. Nord wanted to go on record by stating that she will also oppose the conditional use permit application for several reasons. Normally when a conditional use permit is approved the type of business is stated. In this case the type of business is not known. Nord continued, the opposition from the residents in the area leads her to believe this is not what they want and it was not their intent when they purchased their property. Nord stated, as a realtor she has agreed to protect the rights of the private property owners. However, on the other hand Nord felt that Chumley has a right as a private property owner as well but the code does state that the uses must be similar to principal uses permitted in the zone and the use must in harmony with the intent of the zone. Nord further stated that perhaps the cart is before the horse here because there is some discrepancies in the code which have been brought out tonight that the Commission will need to look at in the near future. Nord indicated that at this time she will vote against the application. Goecke reported that he does not feel the same way as the other Commissioners because he thinks there should be a complete commercial zone from city limit to city limit, bordering the Spur Highway and that should be one block or 200 feet deep. Goecke also felt the bike path or walking path can coexist with a commercial zone. Goecke stated Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 23 he did not personally use the bike path but this year with the snow the State was keeping it cleared for residents to use in the winter. Goecke also addressed the existing vacant commercial property. He stated that it would be nice to see everything full but what is vacant today may not work for the business that wants to operate. Goecke did not feel a person should be expected to open a business in an existing building that is not suitable. Goecke also addressed the comments with regard to the schools. He heard the concerns about kids going to these businesses during school hours. He heard from the educator that said that he finds his students at K-Mart during the day, in respect to that item, so much for the closed campuses. Goecke asked what is a school other than a place of learning for kids, in a loose, liberal sense it could also be construed as a business. Goecke continued, not in the true definition, but is can kind of be construed as a business because we are paying people to educate our children. You pay employees to work for you to sell goods, so in the loose definition, a school can be called a business. Goecke asked that this not be taken completely out of context but sometimes people get out to left field and need to back up and take a better look at things. Werner-Quade reported that she will be opposing the conditional use permit because she agreed with what Mrs. Sonberg said that it is not in harmony with the zone. Werner-Quade said she also agreed with Mr. Ash who said the 45 mph speed limit around a business is an unwise decision. Werner-Quade further stated that she agreed with the two principals that it is unwise to allow a business that may attract kids away from school. Bryson indicated that he had several areas of concern and several areas that are desirable to a business. First being the access to a street, encouraging access to a street is a much better and safer situation that a driveway with a guaranteed visibility; a visibility that is maintained by the agencies. Bryson felt it was appropriate in a conditional use situation to define what the proposed use was going to be. Bryson expressed concern with the vicinity of the school being directly across the street. Again it depended on the type of business that would go in. Bryson stated with the four lanes of traffic it is awkward at times to get across the highway. Bryson indicated that at this time he will vote in opposition of the re-zone but also feels there are areas that can be worked out. Mahurin pointed out that people also walk their dogs along the bike path. Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 24 Bryson also commented on the area being referred to as being a green belt and as a buffer situation. He reminded the group that it is not a green belt nor a buffer, it is a residential area. VOTE MAHURIN NO BRYSON NO GOECKE YES GLICK YES CHRISTIAN NO WERNER-QUADE NO NORD MOTION FAILED NO Glick informed Mr. Chumley of his right to appeal to Council should he so desire. 5. NEW BUSINESS: a. Kenai River Water Monitoring Plan Work Group Glick directed attention to the memo in the meeting packet from the City Clerk requesting a volunteer to participate in the activities of the work group. It was pointed out that Kornelis, the Public Works Director, already attends the meetings. Nord asked what the commitment was, what days the meetings are held, how long is the work group going to last, and what is the intent of the work group? Smalley answered, it could be up to two meetings per month but did not know the date and time. Nord asked how can the Commission commit to something where the intent is not known. Kebschull stated that Kornelis went to the first meeting and it lasted from 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. and another meeting was scheduled in two weeks. It appeared the meetings will be held very two weeks and there was no indication as to how long this would go on. Nord stated that she read their goals and she still couldn't determine what they were trying to accomplish. Nord asked what Council intended by sending someone from Planning and Zoning to the meetings. Smalley replied, this particular group will be responsible for monitoring the different aspects of what's going on within Kenai with regard to the Kenai River Watershed. Nord asked if this is something that came from the Watershed Task Force? Smalley confirmed the invitation came from them. He continued, in the past there has been a lot of decisions and discussion about the watershed within the city limits of Kenai with very little input from the City. Council felt this might be an opportunity to give individuals from the Planning 8v Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 25 City some responsibility for regulations, etc. Smalley directed attention ~ to the first, second and third aspect on the monitoring plan which focuses on what the goal areas were. Nord felt that perhaps it was necessary to have the Kenai River Water Monitoring group attend a Planning and Zoning meeting to explain what the commitment and goal is. Smalley stated the City already monitors the water quality because of the sewage treatment plant but it is not monitored in upper river. Nord asked if Council wanted this Commission to take the position of being a watch dog to this committee. Smalley replied by reading a portion of the memo from the City Clerk which stated, "Council encourages a member of your Commission to participate in the activities of the Work Group", so a volunteer will be a participant and will report back to this body, or directly to City Council. After more discussion Nord volunteered to attend the meetings on behalf of the City and requested information on the date and location of the next meeting. Glick volunteered to serve as back up to Nord should she not be able to attend a meeting. b. Assignment of and Amendment to Lease -Ronald Yamamoto, Lot 3, Block 1, Gusty Subdivision GOECKE MOVED TO APPROVE THE ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE FROM YAMAMOTO TO NATASHA LOTT AND NINA MARION. MOTION SECONDED BY MAHURIN. Staff had nothing additional. VOTE CHRISTIAN YES BRYSON YES WERNER-QUADE YES GOECKE YES NORD YES MAHURIN YES GLICK YES Motion passed unanimously. c. 1998 Planning and Zoning Commission Goals and Objectives Mahurin asked who drew up the goals and objectives. Kebschull replied that she did with input from the City Engineer. Kebschull also pointed out the list was rather extensive so the Commission may want to prioritize it. Christian requested that a couple of things be added to the list. One item was notifying property owners more than just through public Planning 8~ Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 26 hearings. An example Christian used was home occupations. People ~ around the business should be aware that this is being considered as a conditional use. Christian stated he realized this was expensive but was unsure if the people were being served properly if they don't know something was being considered other than a notice in the newspaper. Mahurin shared the concern with Christian and that some time should be devoted to discuss the topic. Glick asked that this topic be added to the goals and objectives list. Kebschull noted there are many inconsistencies that need to be looked at. What happened at this meeting is an example of such differences and since these are so vast it's difficult to clarify. It was noted that one section affects another section. Kebschull further stated that Soldotna was going through the same thing as a result of a similar problem and had hired someone to assist them. Kebschull briefly went through the list and explained what needed to be done with each item. Kebschull noted that the subdivision design standard is an area where the City Engineer would need to be involved because the code is non-specific. Kebschull continued stating she thought all items on the list were important and by starting on any of them would be a step in the right direction. Kebschull also pointed out the landscape site plan issue was not included on the list but is an item that has been of concern. Nord thought perhaps more concentration should be given to the definitions as it was difficult at this meeting to define harmony or what some may consider harmony. It makes it very difficult when looking at the overall picture. Christian suggested the RP zone be reconsidered with input from the Commission. Christian reminded the group that the main objection was the size of the lots and that's one of the reasons it was voted down. Christian felt it was necessary to find a zone category that has single family dwellings only where people can buy into this particular zone and be assured they are not going to have duplexes, etc., going into their neighborhood. Goecke stated the only way he would even think about an RP zone is if it was only available to a new development and it was what the developer wanted. Goecke indicated that he would not vote for this if this was for an existing development, regardless of where it was in this town. Christian clarified the zone would be for new developments only. Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 27 Mahurin indicated that she wasn't ready to fight the fight again with } zones. Glick asked how many Commissioner's wanted the item added to the list. No show of hands so the item would not be added to the list. Christian suggested that an applicant be required to attend the meeting when their application is before Planning and Zoning, whether it is for public hearing or consideration. Christian stated it is difficult to determine what a person's intent is and staff should not be expected to try to explain their plans. If the applicant could not be present then the item should be postponed until he can be present. Kebschull pointed out that would have to be stated in the Code as at this time it is not required. She also stated it was the same with the Use. After more discussion it was determined that the items suggested were already included on the list. GOECKE MOVED TO ACCEPT THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES LIST AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. SECONDED BY MAHURIN. NO OBJECTION -MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. OLD BUSINESS: -None 10. CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS: Smalley stated that Blockbuster Video is entering and existing on the bike path at the west entrance off the Spur Highway. This area is even being plowed. Glick noted that Subway was doing the same thing. Graves confirmed that this was a code violation and he suggested a letter be written advising them of the violation. It is possible to get volunteer response and Graves expects that would probably happen. Goecke asked if the State would pursue something like that since the bike path is on State property. Graves was unsure if they would or not but since it is in the City it is a code violation. Christian suggested they place their dumpster there to block access. 11. REPORTS: d. City Council: Smalley gave the following report (1 /7/ 98 Council Meeting) A number of individuals came to speak about the issue of the land use table that was being approved. These individuals wanted to specifically talk about the issue that was discussed tonight. The group was Planning 8s Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 28 encouraged to attend this meeting as this is where the issue would be voted on. Smalley asked Council if they would be interested in changing code with regard to notification of new development. The City Manager is going to do some research to identify the cost that came up in the past with regard to notification. This will vary due to location. Smalley noted that public hearings are advertised in the newspaper ten days prior to the meeting, the agenda is advertised generally the Monday of the meeting week, it is on the City's web site, and it is also posted on the bulletin board at City Hall. Smalley added that the City does an admirable j ob and is meeting code with the contact being made. Public Hearings: Items 1 through 6 passed. Item 6 deals with lighting replacement at the library. This is an ongoing maintenance project the City will be doing at a number of their facilities. The figure noted is lower than what was budgeted. The cost savings once the project is complete will be approximately 40%. Old Business -Item 1 -The issue was encroachment of a pad and partially constructed building on City property in Cunningham Park. Confusion came when the City installed the fence which was well inside the City property. Garcia originally thought it was the property line. Garcia contacted the Cunningham family and they sent back some proposals. At this point the City is pursuing a land sale to eliminate a right of way problem. Nord asked if the City allows Garcia to purchase the property would the funds from the sale go back towards Cunningham Park. Smalley confirmed that would happen and it was a request from the Parks Department. Nord asked if there was any chance of a new boat ramp. Smalley reported the boat ramp was put in illegally. The Airport Manager position is being re-advertised. The two individuals that were seriously considered did not accept due to the salary. As a result, the City Manager is looking at the job description and salary. Department heads are working on their budgets. Council and Administration will be involved with the Board of Fish meetings that start on February 4, 1998 in Soldotna. The issue to be discussed is the dip net fishery at the mouth of the Kenai River. The City would like to get the State to change the boundary line. The State will provide more dumpsters and post signs for litter and fish remains. The Forest Drive completion date is now 2000. There is a reconsideration for curbs and gutters. A meeting is scheduled for February 17 to discuss the project. Senator Ward is on the Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 29 Transportation Committee and will attempt to get this project moved up to an earlier completion date since it has been engineered. Mr. Wehrstein in Homer requested the City consider a 20 year lease to put a Kenai Visitor Center on the Homer Spit. Council declined. Smalley will not be at the next meeting as he will be in Juneau attending the Alaska Municipal League meeting. Councilman Bannock will attend the meeting. b. Borough Planning -Bryson made the following report: Two meetings were held since the last Planning and Zoning meeting. The most recent was January 12, 1998. There was one item that drew the greatest comment which was item F-1 -Proposed classification of approximately 20 acres of land in the Homer area for a single, residential use. The determination was the property had to have reasonable access to be reclassified and this did not. The application was turned down. All plats were approved. December 15, 1997 Meeting: The item that drew the major amount of comment was item K-1, Kenai River road construction in the wetlands area. This is referred to as the Carter project in the Big Eddy area. There is a subdivision along the river that did not have dedicated or developed access. The owner of several of the lots along that area proposed construction of a road to provide access to the subdivision. He went through the Corp permit procedure and the determination is not yet known, however, the project was found to be in conformance with the Coastal Zone Management Plan. c. Administration: Kebschull drew the Commission's attention to the two reports included in the meeting packet regarding; the 1997 Planning and Zoning Commission Report and the Summary of 1997 Building Permit Activity. 12. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED: 13. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. 1998 Planning and Zoning Commission Meting Schedule b. KPB Planning Commission Action of December 15, 1997 c. Letter from Kenai River Center dated December 15, 1997 d. Letter from Kenai River Center dated December 16, 1997 e. Planning Commission Roster Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 30 i f. Historic District Board Minutes of December 15, 199? 14. COMMISSION COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS: None 15. ADJOURNMENT: GOECKE MOVED TO ADJOURN. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Roper, Contract Secretary Planning & Zoning Commission January 14, 1998 Page 31 ~0. CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GOALS & OBJECTIVES 1998 1. Review KMC Title 14, Zoning Code, and update or modify where necessary. • Review and update each section. • Clarify that intent of zones is accurate as zones exist today and consistent with changes that have taken place within city. • Compare Comprehensive Plan with Title 14 and zoning and resolve any conflict. • Update Development Requirements Table to incorporate Land Use Table changes, DEC requirements, building code requirements, etc. • Update definitions and include definitions for all designated uses in the Land Use Table. • Update subdivision design standard requirements to provide specific development standards. 2. Review Planning Commission's relationship with Townsite Historic District Board. • Consider ad hoc membership for both the Planning & Zoning Commission and Townsite Historic District Board. ~,/ ~,. AGENDA KENAI CITY COUNCIL -REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 21, 1998 7:00 P.M. KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS http:/ /www.Kenai.net/city 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) C. PUBLIC HEARINGS ~~~~,~ ~. 1. Ordinance No. 1770-98 - Establishing an Equipment Replacement Fund. ~~~ ~. 2. Ordinance No. 1771-98 -Appropriating $1,500;000 in the General Fund to be Transferred to the Equipment Replacement Fund. ~~~~,~~ ~ 3. Resolution No. 98-3 -Transferring $4,000 in the General Fund for Communications Department Overtime. ~~~ Z~ ~ 4. Resolution No. 98-4 -Transferring $5,000 in the General Fund for Legislative Expenditures. ~~~ G{ 5. Resolution No. 98-5 -Extending the Contract with Brown Agency for Insurance Brokerage Services. 6. *CONTINUED OPE Kenai Joe's Kitchen Express & Seafood Saloon Oaken Keg Spirit Shop #58 ;RATION OF BIENNIAL LIQUOR LICENSES - Pizza Paradisos BPO Elks Lodge #2425 Eadies Frontier Liquor Peninsula Oilers Don Jose's Restaurant & The Rainbow Bar Cantina Peninsula Moose Lodge Kmart Liquor # 1942 -1- D. COMMISSION/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 Board d. Kenai Visitors & Convention Bureau Board e. Alaska Municipal League Report E. MINUTES 1. *Regular Meeting of January 7, 1998. F. CORRESPONDENCE G. OLD BUSINESS H. NEW BUSINESS ~~~~~/~ 1. Bills to be Paid, Bills to be Ratified ~~~^~z~ 2. Purchase Orders Exceeding $2,500 3. *Ordinance No. 1772-98 - Appropriating a $116.01 Donation From Barry Norwood to the Animal Shelter. ~~~~~ 4. Discussion -City of Kenai/Kenai Chamber of Commerce Relocation Brochure. ~~ 5. Discussion -Schedule Board of Adjustment Hearing -Appeal of .,~ ~~,7,~~ Planning & Zoning Commission Action -Conditional Use Permit/Lots 6 and 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision/Hugh and Joe Chumley. ,~p~py~ 6. Approval -Consent to Assignment of and Amendment to Lease and Consent to Security Assignment of Lease -Ronald Yamamoto, Lot 3, Block 1, Gusty Subdivision to Michael J. Lott/ Natasha L. Lott and Darrin/Nina Marion. -2- ~~~~~~7 Approval -Change Order No. 2/Alaska Regional Fire Trainin Center - g ~pyOY Alcan General/$116,234.15 Decrease. EXECUTIVE SESSION -None Scheduled. I. ADMINISTRATION REPORTS 1. Mayor 2. City Manager 3. Attorney 4. City Clerk 5. Finance Director 6. Public Works Director 7. Airport Manager J. DISCUSSION 1. Citizens (five minutes) 2. Council K. ADJOURNMENT -3- IGb KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION BOROUGH ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ASSEMBLY CHAMBERS SOLDOTNA, ALASKA JANUARY 26, 1998 7:30 p.m. ~ ~ '~ Tentative Agenda '~,~ '4" ~ John Hemmelman - A. CALL TO ORDER L~t~e~ti9,r Chairman Areawide Tee Expires ~~ B. ROLL CALL Philip Bryson ViceChainnan Kenai city C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Term Expires 1998 Ann Whitmore-Painter All items on the consent agenda are considered routine and noncontroversial by the Planning Commission Parliamentarian and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Moose Pass Planning Commissioner or someone from the public so requests, in which case the item will be removed Term Expires 2000 from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the regular agenda. Pe99y ~a~' PC Member If you wish to comment on a consent agenda item or a regular agenda item other than a public hearing, Seldovia City please advise the recording secretary before the meeting begins, and she will inform the Chairman of your Tenn Expires 2000 wish to comment. way~c~ Met 1. Time Extension Requests ~a Ciiy .~ Expires 1999 RobertclrAts a. Inspiration Valley [Imhoff] Pc "''ember A h P i KPB File 96-247 (2 year request -time exp. 2/10/98) nc or o nt Term Expires,99s Location: Elliott Avenue, south of Diamond Ridge Road Wes Coleman PC Member 2 Plats Granted Administrative A royal -None pp Soldotna City . term Expires lass LeroyGannaway 3. Plats Granted Final Approval Under 20.04.070 -None PC Member Homer City term Expires,998 4. Plat Amendment Requests -None Ellis Hensley PC Member Wik~ki 5. Coastal Management Program Tenn Expires 1999 Brent Johnson a. Coastal Management Program Consistency Reviews PC Member Kasilof Area Tenn Expires 2000 1) Resurrection Bay; Thumb Cove; Dock and Tom Knock Floathouse• Von Imhof• AK9712-02AA PC Member ' ~ Cooper Landing Term Expires ~sss 2) Kamishak River; Fishing Camp; Sims d/b/a Newhalen Lodge, Inc.; LAS 14063 b. Conclusive Consistency Determinations Received from DGC -None 1 c. Administrative Determinations ` 6.~ KPBPC Resolutions ~:}~ ._,{ , a. SN 98-01: Renaming a Certain Public Right-of-Way I ~ t Within Section 3, T7N, R11W, Seward Meridian, Alaska; ,~~4Mq ~ Within the Emergency Service Number (ESN) Area 501, \ S ~~ ..~ Daniels Lake Drive to Wild Rose Lane; Nikiski Area r - ~-, ~.~f' Commissioner Excused Absences a. No excused absences requested. 8. Minutes a. January 12, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes D. PUBLIC COMMENT AND PRESENTATIONS (ftems 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 1. Petition to vacate portion of Bay Ridge Road bounded on southwest by Lot 3; on the northeast by Lots 1 and 2, Emerald Highland Estates Unit 4 (Plat 78-128 HRD); within Sec 13, T6S, R14W, S.M., AK. North of Homer, west of West Hill Road; KPB File 98-010 2. Ordinance 98-02: An Ordinance Authorizing the Purchase of 84.05 Acres in the Anchor Point Area as the Site for the North Pacific Volcano Learning Center, Appropriating Funds from the Land Trust Fund for the Purchase and Authorizing the Negotiated Lease of the Site to the North Pacific Volcano Learning Center, Inc. 3. Ordinance 98-03: An Ordinance Accepting and Appropriating a Grant from the United States Forest Service in an Amount up to $500,000 to Address the Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation Problem G. VACATIONS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING -None H. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS -None 2 CONSIDERATION OF PLATS 1. Homer J W S/D; Homer City Preliminary; Ability Surveys KPB File 97-291 Carried forward from January 12, 1998. 2. Guy Waddell Replat Tract G; Homer City Preliminary; Ability Surveys KPB File 97 290 Carried forward from January 12, 1998. 3. Piper's Haven Unit 3; Stariski Creek Preliminary; Ability Surveys KPB Fiie 98-013 4. ASLS 97-53; Lower Summit Lake Preliminary; Fleming Surveying KPB File 98-012 5. Lake Shore Acres Hutton Addition; Cooper Landing Preliminary; Swan Surveying KPB File 98-014 J. KENAI RIVER HABITAT PROTECTION (KPB 21.18) -None K. COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS -None L. OTHER/NEW BUSINESS 1. Appointment of new Plat Committee. Members will serve February, March, and April 1998. M. ASSEMBLY COMMENTS N. DIRECTOR COMMENTS O. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS P. PENDING ITEMS FOR FUTURE ACTION 1. Creekwoods Park S/D Tract A -Building Setback Exception; KPBPC Resolution 97-45: Granting an exception to the twenty foot building setback limit for a portion of Tract A, Creekwoods Park S/D (Plat 86-100 HRD); Sec 20, T2S, R14W, S.M., Alaska. Located North of Happy Valley; KPB File 97-233 3 Postponed until additional information is provided. 2. Carried over from the November 24, 1997 Meeting Public Hearing; Towle S/D Vacate portion of Towle Avenue cul- de-sac Cooper Landing area; Vacate the cul-de-sac portion of Towle Avenue, as shown on Towle Subdivision No. 3 (Plat 56 Seward Recording District); being within Section 28, Township 5 North, Range 3 West, Seward Meridian, Alaska; KPB File 97- 249 Postponed to February 9, 1998. 3. Ordinance 97-75: An Ordinance Amending KPB 17.10 Regarding Classification of Borough Lands Postponed to March 23, 1998. Q. ADJOURNMENT PLAT COMMITTEE THE PLAT COMMITTEE WILL NOT MEET JANUARY 26, 1998 FUTURE MEETINGS The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Plat Committee is February 9, 1998 at 5:30 p.m. in the Planning Department of the Borough Administration Building in Soldotna The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission is February 9, 1998 at 7:30 p.m. in the Assembly Chambers at the Borough Administration Building in Soldotna. Miscellaneous Informational Items No Action Required 1. Cooper Landing Advisory Planning Commission December 10, 1997 Minutes 2. February 13 & 14, 1998 Planning Commissioner Training Seminar 4 Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department web site: www.borough.kenai.ak.uslPlannin~ htm Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Department a-mail address: planning_(a,borough. kenai. ak.us OTHER MEETINGS KPB Assembly Anchor Point Advisory Planning Commission KPB Assembly Moose. Pass Advisory Planning Commission Kachemak Bay Advisory Planning Commission Funny River Advisory Planning Commission Cooper Landing Advisory Planning Commission KPB Assembly Kachemak Bay Advisory Planning Commission January 20 February 3 February 3 February 4 February 5 February 9 February 11 February 17 February 19 5 I~~~ ~, i i KB 97-HP- 1 /28/98 f' . ~ ~ i ,~ . ~ ~.. ~ - , X , _ ~ `~ - SF k 97 KA-0205 I 1128;93 ~ } ~ ~' k ir~~' b ~ ~ DH .~ 97-KR-0199 1 X28198' ~ ~~ uu r.~gc.i ~ -~-ACry A -~ ~ 3 - :3,, .. , ;d z ` ° • 41=Req Date i ect)afe• }~ ~. _ _ _„ s, KEPi~,t PtiBLiC 'W~:•tY5 DEN'T'. ." ~1d tltr: ~~J s~nl. Cent. f;i;n cngY. ---~~ 1f~tY & SVff. ?l:,ir Sec. ---i ~ 5tP26tS -G ~;~c. iusn . _.__.~ Shop _ ~~.,,t~ ~ ~ vs...- [~ 5TP ---.. ~~> TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR 6 O ~ ~ ~ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES 4711 AV/AT/ON AVENUE P. O. 196900 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99519-6900 CENTRAL REG/ON - D/V/S/ON OF DES/GN AND CONSTRUCT/ON (FAXI 243-6927 - TDD 269-0473 PRELIM/NARY DES/GN & ENV/ROMENTAL (9071 269-0528 of /907) 269-0542 December 24, 1997 Re: Kenai Bridge Access Road Project No. 52482 Permit Application Submittal Ken Bryant, Resource Planner Kenai River Center 36130 Kenai Spur Highway Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Dear Mr. Bryant: ~;~ -~~ ,~~~ ~ ~~ RECEIVED ~ ~ ~~ =-~ DEC 30 1991 ~`_; ;:;, KEN~RN~ __ ;,\_,/ ~ ~~.;. ~~_~ The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) is proposing to rehabilitate the Kenai Bridge Access Road and wishes to be notified of any permits which will be necessary prior to beginning the work. Permits already applied for include: Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 3 for rehabilitation of an existing facility, Alaska Division of Governmental Coordination for Coastal Zone Consistency, and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game for a Title 16 permit. A Project Description is enclosed as well as copies of the aforementioned permit applications. During a phone call with you earlier this month, I explained that the surface of the Warren Ames Memorial Bridge over the Kenai River would not be rehabilitated. The project now includes the resurfacing of the Bridge. The existing asphalt surface and underlying membrane will be removed and replaced as part of the proposed work. Although clearing and grubbing will occur as a part of this project, no clearing or grubbing will be done within 50' horizontal feet of the Kenai River. Enclosed is a completed Kenai River Center Multi-Agency Permit Application as well as drawings on separate sheets which depict the project and location. 1`~I f~ -, . r,/~,. RECEIVED JAN 5 X998 KENAI RIVER CENTER MEMORANDUM STATE OF ALASKA Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Division of Staten~ide Design & Engineering Services Preliminary Design and Environmental To: Stewart Seaberg Date: 12/24/97 Habitat Biologist ADFG Phone No.: 269-0535 Project: Kenai Bridge Access Road ~,j~~~~, Rehabilitation ~~`"" ~ Project No. 52482 From: Mary Leykom Environmental Analyst Subject: Title 16 Permit Application Attached to this memo is a General Waterway/Waterbody Application for activities associated with the rehabilitation of the Kenai Bridge Access Road near Kenai. The road upgrade will require the replacement of a culvert which carries an unnamed stream under the road near Station 4+500. This stream is known to support anadromous fish. Also, the Warren Ames Memorial Bridge, which crosses the Kenai River will be resurfaced as a part of this project. The existing pavement on the bridge will be removed, and replaced. Also attached to this memo are copies of authorization requests to the Alaska District Corps of Engineers and the Division of Governmental Coordination. Please contact me at the above number if you have questions pertaining to this request or if you require additional information. Attachments cc: John Dickenson, P.E., Hwy. Design Carol Sanner, Permits Officer, PD&E Susan Wick, Environmental Team Leader, PD&E ALASKA D"ci'T. G. 1=1SH & GAMt i'~ ~ I G~t=L i`~~IV II HA51T.fiT ;.N~ ;2~STG?:aTlG(V QiVlS;Cti 1 h:lmary\ 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage, Alaska 99502 Office Use Only FG# GENERAL WATERWAY / WATERBODY APPLICATION ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME KENAI BRIDGE ACCESS ROAD A. APPLICANT 1. Name: Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities 2. Address: P.O. Box 196900 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6900 Telephone: (9071269-0535 3. Project Contractor Name: n/a Address: Telephone: B. TYPE AND PURPOSE OF PROJECT: Road rehabilitation project. C. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: 1. Name of River, Stream, or Lake: Unnamed creek or Anadromous Stream #: 244-30-10010-2003 2. Legal Description: Township SN Range 11 W Meridian Seward Section USGS Quad Map: Kenai C-4 3. Plans, Specifications, and Aerial Photograph (See specific instructions.) See attached project description and plans. D. TIME FRAME FOR PROJECT: March 1998 E. CONSTRUCTION METHODS: Yes No 1. Will the stream be diverted? X How will the stream be diverted? The stream ~zzll be diverted from the existing culvert to a new culvert set parallel and exactly 8' off center from existing culvert. How long? For the life of the culvert ~50 years. Yes No 2. Will stream channelization occur? X 3. Will the banks of the stream be altered ar modified? X Describe:_ Stream diversion to the new culvert will require channelization for several feet at culvert inlet and outlet. 4. List all tracked or wheeled equipment (type and size) that will be used in the stream (in the water, on ice, or in the floodplain). None. How long will equipment be in the stream? n/a 5. a. Will material be removed from the floodplain or bed of the stream or lake? X Culvert placement will occur "in the dry", isolated from the flowing water using sandbags. b. Will material be removed from below the water table? X Excavation for culvert placement may intercept the water table which is likely very close to the surface at this location.. Quantity is unknown. Is a pumping operation planned? _ X 6. Will material (including spoils, debris, or over-burden) be deposited in the floodplain or in the in the stream or lake? _ X 7. Will blasting be performed? _ X 8. Will temporary fills in the stream or lake be required during construction (e.g., for construction traffic round construction site)? X Sandbags will isolate new culvert excavation from flowing water and will be placed in the floodplain. The placement of temporary fills within the floodplain may be required to facilitate pile driving Will ice bridges be required? _ X y,~ F. SITE REHABILITATION /RESTORATION PLAN: On separate sheet present a site rehabilitation /restoration plan (see specific instructions). G. WATERBODY CHARACTERISTICS: Width of Stream: ~ 3' Depth of Stream of Lake: ~ 2' Type of Stream or Lake Bottom: Sand and fines. (e.g., sand, gravel, mud) Stream gradient: Unknown. Existing culvert gradient is 1.8%.. H. HYDRAULIC EVALUATION: Yes No 1. Will a structure (e.g., culvert, bridge support, dike) be placed below ordinary high water of the stream? X If yes, attach engineering drawings or field sketch, as described in Step B. Attached. For culverts, attach stream discharge data for a mean annual flood (Q+2.3), if available. Not available. Describe potential for channel changes or increase bank erosion, if applicable. Culvert replacement will be executed so as to eliminate bank erosion. The channel change to divert flow through culvert will be minimized. 2. Will more than 25,000 cubic yards of material be removed? _ X If yes, attached a written hydraulic evaluation including, at a minimum, the following: potential for channel changes, assessment of increased aufeis (glacering) potential, assessment of potential for increased bank erosion. HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL INFORMATION MADE ON OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS APPLICATION IS TRUE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. Signat~r~ of Applicant Date COASTAL PROJECT QUESTIONNAIRE AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT Please answer all questions. To avoid a delay in processing, please call the department if you answer "yes" to any of the questions related to that department. Maps and plan drawings must be included with your packet. KENAI BRIDGE ACCESS ROAD REHABILITATION ^ APPLICANT INFORMATION 1. Dept. of Transportation & Public Facilities 2. Name of Applicant P.O. Box 196900 Address Anchorage AK 99519-6900 City State Zip Code {907) 269-0535 Daytime Phone (907) 243-6927 Fax Number Agent (or responsible party if other than applicant) Address City State Zip Code Daytime Phone Fax Number ^ PROJECT INFORMATION Yes No 1. This activity is a: [ ]new project [ X ]modification or addition to an existing project. If a modification do you currently have any State, federal or local approvals related to this activity? ......................... [ X ]' [ ] Note: Approval means permit or arty other form of authorization. If "Yes'; please list below. Approval Type Categorical Exclusion Approval # Has this project ever been reviewed by the State of Alaska per the ACMP? ................................................................ [ Previous State I.D. Number: AK Previous Project Name: ^ PROJECT DESCRIPTION [X] 1. Attach the following: • a detailed description of the project and all associated facilities; • a project timeline for completion of all major activities in the proposal; • a site elan depicting all proposed actions; • other sunyottine documentation that would facilitate review of the project. Note: If the project is a modification, identify existing facilities as well as proposed activities on the site plan. Proposed starting date for the project: May 1998 Proposed ending date for the project: Sept. 1998 2. Provide a brief description of your entire project and ALL associated facilities (access roads, caretaker facilities, waste disposal sites, etc.). Rehabilitation of the_ existing Kenai Bridge Access_.Rpad will include rotomilling the existino pavement incorporating it into the road base material and resurfacing with new asphatt cement. The Beaver Loop Road intersection will be improved by adding a left turn lane and lighting. A damaged culvert, which carries an unnamed creek under the road will be replaced. This stream has been designated as an anadromous fish stream and consequently a Title 16 permit will be obtained prior to culvert replacement. A roadside ditch on the right side near the end of the project will be altered to improve drainage adjacent to the road where small springs. emerge and it winter cause icing over the road. Issuance Date Expiration Date 10/25/96 n/a Kenai River Bridge Access Road Revised 4/95 Page 1 ^ PROJECT LOCATION Attach a copy of the topographical map with the project location marked on it. 2. Location of project (include nearest community or name of land feature or body of water. Identify township, range and section Township 5 N Range 11 W Section Meridian Seward 3. The project is on: [ X ]State Land* [ ]Federal Land [ ]Private Land [ ]Municipal Land *State land can be uplands. tidelands, or submerged lands to 3 miles offshore. See Question #1 in DNR section. 4. Project is located in which region of the state (see attached map): [ ]Northern [X] Southcentral [ ]Southeast [ ]State Pipeline Coordinator's Office Yes No 5. Is the project located in a coastal district? .................................................................................................................•-• [ X) [ ] 6. Identify the communities closest to your project location: City of Kenai. ^ FEDERAL APPROVALS Is the proposed project on U.S. Forest Service (USFS) land or will you need to cross USFS lands for access? .......................................................................................................................( ] ~] Does the cost of the project exceed $250,000? ................................................................................................. [ ] [ ] If yes, have you applied for a USFS permit or approval? .................................................................................( ] [ ] Date of submittal: Is the proposed project on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land or will you need to cross BLM lands for access? ......................................................................................................................( ] [ X ] Does the cost of the project exceed 5250,000? .................................................................................................( ] ( ] If yes, have you applied for a BLM permit or approval? ..................................................................................[ ] [ ] Date of submittal: 3. Will you be constructing a bridge over tidal (ocean) waters, or navigable rivers, streams or lakes? ............................ [ ] [ X ] If yes, have you applied for a U.S. Coast Guard permit for a bridge? ............................................................ [ ] [ ] Date of submittal: Will you be dredging or placing structures or fills in any of the following: tidal (oceans) waters? streams? lakes? wetlands*? ........................................................................................................[ X ] [ ] If yes, have you applied for a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) permit? ........................................... [ X ] [ ] Date of submittal: Concurrently with this application. (Note: Your application for this activity to the Corps ojEngineers also serves as your application to DEC. 'If you are not certain whether your proposed project area is in a wetlands, contact the Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Btanch at (907) 753-2720 for a wetlands determination (outside the Anchorage area, call toll free 1-800-i78-2712.) Have you applied for a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit? ....................................................................................................... [ ] [ X ] (Note: for information regarding the need for a NPDES permit, contact EPA at (907) 27/-5083.) Date of submittal: Less than 5 acres of ground disturbance. 6. Will you have a putrescible waste discharge within 5 miles of any pubic airport? ..................................................... [ ] [ X ] If yes, please contact the Airports Division of the Federal Aviation Administration at (907) 271-5440. Does the project include a nonfederal power project affecting any navigable body of water or located on federal land? Kenai River Bridge Access Road Revised 4/95 Page 2 Yes No Or, is utilization of surplus water from any federal government dam proposed? ....................................................... [ ] [ X J (Power projects consist of dams, water conduits, reservoirs, powerhouses, and transmission lines.) If yes, have you applied for a permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)? .........................[ ] [ Date of submittal: (Note: for information contact FERC. Office of Hydropower Licensing, at (202)108-0200.) 8. Have you applied for permits from any other federal agency? ...................................................................................... [ X ] [ ] AGENCY APPROVAL T~CPE DATE SUBMITTED FHWA Categorical Exclusion Approved 1025196 ^ DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (DEC) APPROVALS 1. Will a discharge of wastewater from industrial or commercial operations occur? ....................................................... [ ] [ X ] Will the discharge be connected to an already approved sewer system? .........................................................[ J [ ] Will the project include a stotmwater collection/discharge system? .................................................................[ ] [ ] 2. Do you intend to construct, install or modify any part of a wastewater (sewage or greywater disposal system)? ..........................:................................................................................................................................ [ ] [ X ] a) If so, will the discharge be 500 gpd or greater? ................................................................................................[ ] [ ] b) If construciing a domestic wastewater treatment or disposal system, will the system be located within fill material requiring a COE permit? .............................._....................................................[ ]. [ ] If you answered yes to a or b, answer the following: 1) How deep is the bottom of the system to the top of the subsurface water table? 2) How far is any part of the wastewater disposal system from the nearest surface water? 3) Is the surrounding area inundated with water at any time of the year? ............................................................. [ ] [ ] 4) How big is the fill area to be used for the absorption system? (Questions 1 & 2 will be used by DEC to determine whether separation distances are being met; Questions 3 & 3 relate to the required si: e of the ft11 if wetlands are involved.) 3. Do you expect to request a mixing zone for your proposed project? ............................................................................ [ ] [ X ] (If your wastewater discharge will exceed A laska water quality standards, you may apply jot a mixing one. If so, please contact DEC to discuss information required under /8 AAC 70.032.) 4. Do you plan to store or dispose of any type of solid waste resulting from this project? ............................................... [ ] [ X ] (Note: Solid waste means drilling wastes, garbage. refuse, sludge, and other discarded material. including solid liquid semi-solid or contained gaseous material resultingfrotn industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations, and from community activities.) 5. Will your project require the application of oil, pesticides and/or any other broadcast chemicals to the surface of the land and/or waters of the state? ............................................................_.................................................. [ ] [ X ] 6. a. Will you have a facility that will generate air emissions from processing greater than five tote per hour of material? ........................................................................................................................ [ ] [ X ] b. Will you have one or more units of fuel burning equipment, including flaring, with a heat input rating of .i0 million Btu per hour or more? ..................................................................................... [ ] [ `' ' Kenai River Bridce Access Road Revised 4/95 Page 3 Yes No c. Will you have a facility containing incinerators with a total charging capacity of 1, 000 pounds per hour or more? .................................................................................................................... [ ] [ X d. Will you incinerate sludge? ............................................................................................................................[ ] (X ] e. Will you have any of the following processes :................................................... ............................................ ( J [ X ] [ ] Asphalt plant [ ] Coal preparation facility [ ] Petroleum refinery [ ] Portland cement plant [ ] Petroleum Contaminated Soils Cleanup f. Will your facility use the following equipment? .............................................................................................[ ] [ X ] [ ] diesel internal combustion engines? (Total capacity greater than 1,750 kilowatt or total rated brake specific horsepower greater than 1300 bhp) [ ] gas fired boilers (total heat input rating of 100 million Btu per hour) [ ] oil fired boilers (total heat input rating of 65 million Btu per hour) [ ] combustion turbines (total rated power output of 8,000 Hp) g. Will your facility burn more than the following per yeaz in stationary equipment? ....................................... [ ] [ X ] [ ] 1,000,000 gallons of fuel oil [ ] 35,000 tons of coal [ ] 900 million cubic feet of natural gas h. If you have answered "yes" to any of the above questions (6a-f), have you installed replaced or modified any fuel burning or processing equipment since 1977? .................................................. ( J [ ] 7. Will you be developing, constructing, installing, or altering a public water system? ................................................... [ ] [ X ] 8. a. Will your project involve the operation of waterborne tank vessels or oil baz~es that carry crude or non-crude oil as bulk cazgo, or the transfer of oil or other petroleum products to or from such a vessel or a pipeline system? ........................................................................................................[ ] [ X ] b. Will your project require or include onshore or offshore oil facilities with an effective storage capacity of greater than x,000 barrels of crude oil or greater than 10,000 batreis of non-crude oil? .............. [ ] [ X ] c. Will you be operating facilities on the land or water for the exploration or production of hydrocarbons? ............................................................................................................................................. [ ] [ X ] If you answered NO to ALL questions in this section, continue to the next section. If you answered YES to ANY ques#ions, contact the DEC Regional Office for information and application forms. Please be advised that all new DEC permits and approvals require a 30-day public notice period. Based on your discussion with DEC, please complete the following: Approval Type: Date Submitted: Q. Does your project quality for a general permit for wastewater or solid waste? ............................................................. [ ] [ X ] Kenai River 3ridge access Road Revised 4/95 Page 4 10. If you answered yes to any questions and are not applying for DEC permits, indicate the reason below: [ J (DEC contact) told me on that no DEC approvals are required on this project. Reason: [ ] Other: ^ DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME (DFG) APPROVALS 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Yes No Will you be working in or placing anything in a stream, river, or lake? (This includes work in running water or on ice, within the active floodplain, on islands, the face of the banks, or the tidelands down to mean low tide.) (Note: if the proposed project is located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency Zone, a Floodplain Development Permit may be required Contact the local municipal government for additional information and a Floodplain determination.) ............................................................................................................................................. [ X ] [ ] Name of [ X ]scream, [ ]River, or [ ]Lake: unnamed Will you be doing any of the following? ............................,......................................................................................-•-• [ X ] [ ] Please indicate below: [ ] Build a dam, river training structure, or instream impoundment? [ ] Use the water? [ ] [ ] Pump water out of the stream or lake? [ ] [ X ] Divert or alter the natural stream channel? [ ] [ ] Block or dam the stream (temporarily or permanently)? [ ] Change the water flow or the water channel? [ ] Introduce silt, gravel, rock, petroleum [ X ] products, debris, chemicals, or other [ ] organic/inorganic wastes of any type into [ ] the water? [ ] Alter or stabilize the banks? [ ] Mine or dig in the beds or banks? Use explosives? Build a bridge (including an ice bridge)? Use the stream as a road (even when frozen) or crossing the stream with tracked or wheeled vehicles, loj dragging, or excavation equipment (backhoes, bulldozer, etc.)? Installing a culvert or other drainage structure? Construct a weir? Use an instream structure not mentioned here? Is your project located in a designated State Game Refuge, Critical Habitat Area, or State Sanctuary? ................................................................................unknown ........... [ ] [ ] Does your project include construction operation of a salmon hatchery? ..................................................................... [ ] [ X ] Does your project affect or is it related to a previously permitted salmon hatchery? .................................................... [ ] [ X ] Does your project include the construction of a aquatic farm? ..................................................................................... [ ] [ X ] If you answered "No" to all questions in this section, continue to next section. If you answered "Yes" to any questions under 1-3, contact the regional DFG Habitat Division Office for information and application forms.. Kenai River ?ridge access Road Revised 4/95 Page ~ If you answered "Yes" to questions 4-6, contact DFG at CFMD division headquarters for information and application forms. Based on your discussion with DFG, please complete the following: Approval Type: Title 16 Date Submitted: Concurrent with this application 7. If you answered yes to any questions and aze not applying for DFG permits, indicate the reason below: [ ] (DFG contact) told me on that no DFG approvals are required. Reason: [ ] Other: ^ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPROVALS (DNR) APPROVALS Yes No 1. Is the proposed project on State-owned land or will you need to cross State-owned land for access? ("access" includes temporary access for construction purposes) ........... ADOT OWneLI rl9ht-Of-W2y....... [X] [ ] Note: In addition to State-owned uplands, the State owns almost a!/ land below the ordinary high water line of navigable streams, avers and lakes, and the mean high Tide line seaward jot three miles. 2. Do you plan to dredge or otherwise excavate/remove materials on State-owned land? ................................................ [ X J [ ] Location of dredging site if other than the project site:: For culvert replacement only . Township Range Section Meridian 3. Do you plan to place fill or dredged material on State-owned land? ................................ Location of fill disposal site if other than the project site: Township Range Section Meridian Source is on : [ ]Stan Land [ ]Federal Land [ ]Private Land [ ) .Liunicipa! Land 4. Do you plan to use any of the following State-owned resources :................................... ............................................... [ l [ X ] [ ]Timber: Will you be harvesting timber? Amount: [ ]Materials such as rock, sand or gravel, peat, soil, overburden, etc.: Which material? Amount: Location of source: [ ]Project site [ ]Other, describe: Township Range Section Meridian 5. Are you planning to use any fresh water? .................................................................................................................... [ ] [ X ] Amount (gallons per day): Source: Intended Use: 6. ~ Will you be building or altering a dam? ....................................................................................................................... [ ] [ N ] 7. Do you plan to drill a geothermal well? .......................................................................................................................[ ] [ X ] 8. At any one site (regardless of land ownership) do you plan to do any of the following? ............................................. [ ] [ X ] [ ] Mine five or more acres over a year's time? [ ] Mine 50,000 cubic yards or more of materials (rock, sand or gravel, soil, peat, overburden, etc.) over a yeaz's time? [ ] Have a cumulative unreclaimed mined area of five or more acres? Kenai River Bridge ycoess Road Revised 4/95 Page 6 Yes No 9 If you plan to mine less than the acreage/amount stated above and have a cumulative unreclaimed mined area of less than five acres, do you intend to file a voluntary reclamation plan for approval? ........................................[ ] [ ] Will you be exploring for or extracting coal? ...............................................................................................................[ ] [ X ] 10. Will you be drilling for oiUgas? .................................................................................................................................... [ ] [ X ] 11. Will you be investigating or removing historic or archaeological resources on State-owned land? .............................................................................................................................................................................. [ ] [ X ] 12. Is the proposed project located within a known geophysical hazard area? ................................................................... [ ] [ X ] 13. Is the proposed project located in a unit of the Alaska State Pazk System? .................................................................. [ ] [ X ] If you answered "No" to all questions in this section, continue to certification statement. If you answered "Yes" to any questions in this section, contact DNR for information. Based on your discussion with DNR, please complete the following: Approval Type: Date Submitted: 14. If you answered yes to any questions and are not applying for DNR permits, indicate the reason below: [X] [ l (DNR contact) told me on that no DFG approvals aze required. Reason: ADOT owns the right-of-way upon which this project will be constructed. Other: Please be advised that the CPQ identifies permits subject to a consistency review. You may need additional permits from other agencies or local governments to proceed with your activity. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The information contained herein is true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I certify that the proposed activity complies with and will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Alaska Coastal Management Program. ~~~ L~` I~ Signature of A I cant or Agent Dau Note: Federal agencies conducting an activity that will affect the coastal zone aze rewired to submit a federal consistency determination, per 15 CFR 930, Subpart C. rather than this certification statement. This certification statement will not be complete until all required State and federal authorization requests have been submitted to the appropriate agencies. ^ To complete your packet, please attach your State permit applications and copies of your federal permit applications to this questionnaire. Kenai River 3r'dge Access Road Revised 4/95 Page 7 O U DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES CENTRAL REGION - D/VISION Of DES/GN AND CONSTRUCTION PRELIMINARY DESIGN & ENVIROMENTAL December 2 TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR 4111 AV/AT/ON AVENUE P. 0.196900 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99519-6900 (FAXJ 243-6927 - TDD 269-0473 (9071 269-0518 or (907) 269.0542 2, 1997 Re: Kenai Bridge Access Road Rehabilitation Project Project No. 52482 NWP Notification Mirian Magwood, Unit Coordinator Alaska District Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 898 Anchorage, AK 99508-0898 Dear Ms. Magwood: The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) wishes to notify you of our intent to undertake construction activities associated with the rehabilitation of Kenai Bridge Access Road in the Kenai Peninsula Borough, and to request your concurrence that this work can be conducted under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 3. Kenai Bridge Access Road provides a connection between Kenai Spur Highway and Kalifornsky Beach Road and lies within the city limits of Kenai. The existing road was constructed in 1975 and is comprised of two driving lanes of 3.6 m (12 foot) each with 2.4 m (8 foot) shoulders. The rehabilitation will include the rotomilling of existing pavement and mixing it into the existing crushed aggregate base material, then overlaying with new asphalt. Work on the Warren Ames Bridge at R.M. 5.2 will include the removal of existing asphalt pavement and resurfacing with new material. There are two areas of Section 404 involvement: the first area is on the north side of the road between stations 4+500 and 4+900, approximately 1/4 mile south of the Kenai Spur intersection (see enclosure sheets 2-4 which depict the ditch and Kenai Spur intersection, for reference). Year around springs emerge at this location and can cause icing over the road. ADOT&PF intends to conduct new ditching here and may add additional subsurface pipe to insure that flows move down gradient and stay within the existing ditch. The second location is a culvert replacement at station 4+500 which conveys this flow under the road and on to the Kenai River flats. The 72" replacement culvert will be laid pazallel and adjacent to the existing pipe allowing construction to take place "in the dry". After placement, flow will be restored through the new pipe and the old pipe will be dewatered and then removed (see enclosure sheet 5). A substantial number of reaz end accidents occur at the intersection with Beaver Loop Road. ADOT&PF proposes to create a left turn pocket here to allow through traffic to continue on without stopping, reducing the potential for accidents. This 1/4 mile long length of widened road will increase the road footprint by about 10 feet on each side of the existing road. No wetlands will be affected. Applications to the Kenai River Center, Division of Governmental Coordination and Alaska Depaztment of Fish and Game aze being submitted concurrently with this letter, copies aze attached. A Site Restoration Plan is also enclosed. Mary Leykom, ADOT&PF Environmental Analyst at 269-0535 has discussed this project briefly with Houston Hannafious of your office. Please contact Mary if you require additional information or have questions pertaining to this request. Sincerely, Jim Wolfe Special Assistant to the Commissioner Enclosures cc: Mary Leykom, Environmental Analyst, PD&E Mary Ann Paulson, P.E., Highway Design Carol Sanner, Permits Officer, PD&E Susan Wick, Environmental Team Leader, PD&E PROJECT DESCRIPTION KENAI BRIDGE ACCESS ROAD The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) is proposing to rehabilitate the Kenai Bridge Access Road during the 1998 construction season. The existing Kenai Bridge Access Road was constructed in 1975 and is comprised of two driving lanes of 3.6 m (12 foot) each with 2.4 m (8 foot) shoulders. The rehabilitation will include the rotomilling of the existing pavement and mixing it into the existing crushed aggregate base material and then overlaying with new asphalt. The Warren Ames Bridge over the Kenai River will be resurfaced as part of this project. Clearing and grubbing in the road right-of--way will be undertaken in areas where the number of vehicle/moose accidents is high. Acreage will remain below ~ acres. No clearing and grubbing will occur within 50 horizontal feet of the Kenai River. Year around springs emerge at station 4+850, on the north side of the road in the ditch immediately adjacent to the road. During winter, ice builds up here causing glaciering over the roadway. ADOT intends to conduct additional ditching and perhaps install more subsurface drainage pipe here to insure that flows move down gradient and stay within the existing ditch. A damaged culvert will be replaced at station 4+500 which conveys this flow under the road and on to the Kenai River flats. The proposed method for replacing the culvert will be to install the new culvert adjacent to the existing pipe, 8 foot off center, and use sandbags to keep the area dry. When installation is finished, the flow will be directed through the new pipe, the old pipe will be dewatered and removed. A substantial number of rear end accidents occur at the intersection with Beaver Loop Road, likely because vehicles stop here to make a left turn on to Beaver Loop. A left turn pocket will be created here to allow through traffic to continue on u-ithout stopping. This 1/4 mile long length of widened road will increase the road footprint by about 10 feet on each side of the existing road. No wetlands will be affected. Applications are being submitted to the following agencies for permits or authorizations: Corps of Engineers for a Nationwide Permit 3 concurrence Alaska Department bf Fish and Game for a Title 16 Permit Alaska Division of Governmental Coordination for Coastal Zone Consistency Kenai River Center for a Prior Existing Activity review Kenai Bridge Access Road -Rehabilitation Site Restoration and Revegetation Plan Best management practices which will be employed to minimize disturbance to wetlands and to restore endemic vegetation include, but are not limited to the following: 1. Equipment will avoid operating outside of the slope limits in wetland areas. 2. Silt fence will be installed at the toe of slopes adjacent to wetlands to eliminate water borne sediment from leaving the project area. 4. Seeding will occur as soon as slopes are graded to final configurations. 5. Seed, fertilizer and mulch will be applied then tracked with a bulldozer to punch the material into the embankment material. 6. Seed mix will be selected from endemic species, if available, incorporating a fast growing annual balanced with one or more perennials. 7. Watering of seeded areas will be undertaken until the Project Engineer determines that the plants have become established and watering is no longer necessary. ~~~.~o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Property Owner Sttbdi4tsteR KPB Parcel No. 5- R/L River Mile 1) Project is located within city limits of: Soldotna Kenai ~_ Neither 2) Is the project located within 50 feet of ordinary high water (OHW) or mean high water (MHW) of the Kenai River? Yes~_ No Not sure where OHW cr MHW line is 3) Does any portion of the project cantilever or extend over the OHW or MHW line of the Kenai River'? Yes ~ No Not sure where OHW or MHW line is 4) Does any portion of the project extend below the OHW or MHW line of the Kenai River'? Yes No~_ Not sure where OHW or MHW line is NOTE: If you answered YES to either 3 or 4 above, please be sure to enclose a check for $25.00 payable to State of Alaska. Your application can not be processed until payment is received. 5) Does this project replace a prior existing structure? Yes~_ No 6) Will material be extracted or dredged from the floodplain or river bed? `!es No~ If yes, what type? Amount: 7) Will material (including spoils, debris, or overburden) be deposited in tre floodplain or river? Yes, temporarily How long? 5 Yes, permanently No~ If yes, what type?~(~ (~~~ ~~,j~J'n~, {~p~_ Amount: f . r ~'T ,. ~ 8a) List all motorized equipment to be used on the project: 8b) What motorized equipment is to be used below OHW or MHW:_ (1 n 8c) Length of time motorized equipment is to be used below OHW: ~CL 8d) Length of time motorized equipment is to be used above OHW: n_fC~. 1 HtKtt3Y C;~R i I -Y -THAT ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED ON OR IN C:,NNECTION WITH THIS A~PP~ICATION IS T~UE~ND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOW! =DGE AND BELIEF. Sidrhdt~re Revised 0~.^_ 1: 9 i -!~•'~~ - ~ate KENAI BRIDGE ACCESS ROAD END OF PROJECT KENAI ~ SPUR KE"'~ 1 /~ o /( aP ':::. `! ;~~~ .:.._,__.. ~F'~qi. ~ BEGINNING OF PROJECT e 9OC`~ ~ BEavER ~e .... .... ............ ... ~ D vTn, °a ~ V O ` ¢.. d .. K4LIFORNSKY 'J D Q ~ ' ~ SO<_OOTNA .l _ ~ ~~ I x i v a ::. W m ~--_ i IS.l7 ~ S.~ T i EXISTING i PAYED StF~ACE 2 L- 3Q ae ASPIIA~i CJ1O7ETE PAYEIENT, TYPE I I. ~A55 B C55-1 E141.SIFIED ASRYILT FOR TACK COAT i00 ~ CRUS/ED ASRNLT BASE CCURSE TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS SECTION Enclosure Sheet 1 a '~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ II - C ~ ~ T ! r ~, . ~ ~~ s' ly ~~ p 9 0 ~ ~ ~ u. e ~ ` e ~ ~''~%; ~ ~Ii red ~ W 88 G~ Y rI . } vv-tg ~Y1S 3NIl ~ I HO1VW ~j 1 ~ ` p I jt I I I S I ~ 1 ~ ~ ~I j I II I I 11 & I I~ I ~ I I ( I' 1 ~ ~ I,'i I I I `~ I I I ,~ I ~ 11 ; I I 1 e ~ 4 I I' f I o I' ~ ~ I I 1 I ~ .na I II~ ~ I ' ' I l i I~t / I ' I I I 1 ~- _~ ( I I I~ I ; ~ ~ _ I ° l`dMHJIH 2~f1dS 1`dN3~i ~ I ~~ 1 \ l 1 I I I ~ \ I ( / 3 ~I ~ \ I ; I, '~I I I , 1' ~ I ~ I I~ I I I I I I I I I I I ) /IOU ~ I 'I~ I I rou ~~ ~ ~ ~~a.fi.1d II unz:' ~ ~- -: I '~I II I I . "oov~i~~ ~ ~ ~ III I I ' 'aN ~ J ~ I ~ 11 I I _o~n~ ~ ; It~ I I Fem. 3 I _1_.111._ ...~._1_.1..___ ..__.. ~~ ' ~ ; ~ I ~d~ I ul , i t h~y ;Wa .U .._~~ ~~ II I . , am.~ ~ ~ II ~ II~J I ~ I I ;i~ 1 I I I I + I~ .I I I I I co~-- s • x~ I ~ I t I ;I 1 , fl II I = II i lip II = II i I I~ I t ~l I s MATCH LINE STA. 5+100 ~ I ,~ I~ I I II is II 004+5 'V1S 3NIl H~1VW \ fV 6> ,,s^ Vl L 7 H V W y _ a_ ~. & b n _~ n q Q B d r e _a~ ~ a~~~ a MATCH LINE STA. 4+6u I ~~ ~ I / ' I / / I ~ I ~ I ~ I, I ~ I i I ~ I I ~ I~ I I I I~ I; I I i i I .r ie ~ I I ~g~ I ~ ': I I I i I i I I z I ~ W I ~ ~ f I' O I ~ ~D r III ~ (~ ~ F ~I ~t I o it I I II I I I I '_~...J I ~ r r 1 i ~ ~i 1 ,f , i ~ I ~ ~i ~ e ~ ~$ . .~, ~ .~ ~~ o0 it • :~~ ~~ ~~ ~''~ ~.`~ c~g Y .. ~`:,,.:...~ W~ ~~ i Y NN ~~/ 1 ~ ~ I ,/ ~ '1 1 0 1 / I I Z f F I f w I ~,; ~ I ~ I 1 W I _ ~ ~ ~ O I ~ a I ~ I I ~ I ~n 1 -- Q ~ U ~ w ~ ~r ~ ~ ~ cl o I cl E.. I I I Z I W I I W I e __ __ _ _~ I .. _ _ ._ t_. _ R~~C ~ i ~ _~o~ o I I I a°`~~ I ~ I I •tlp~ ~ it I I lI I I $~I I I I I ~ it ~ I I I I I ~ I ~ i S I 1 i it I 1 I I I 1 I- 1 I 11 ~a.LO..x ;I 1 1 I RI 1 I T 1 1 '~ 1 I II e~ ~ ~ M w s u L '~ H ... u C W a ~~ ~, r~a~ ~S~ 1t n 4 Y g~ ,t'~1~ B a :: ~ d ( ~j~~ 00 9 Y NN +Y 'V N l H VI'1 p I I T A. 4+50 MA1CH UNf. S I I I E., I ( C,~ . I ~l I W II I ~ C I I ~ 1 a I ~ ~ 1 a I i ~ ~ 1 ~ II I I ' 1 s I I I I 1 tl F I I ~ II 1 A +I I II I~ 1 _Z I I }1 1 V i I ~ ~_ 1 pWq e l I , I I I ~ a t ~I I i it 1 II I I I I I I I it I ~I i I I I ~ YI I~ o I I ~ p'°~ ~ I n$n~ I I I~ I ~ i I I~ I I ~ i I I I I I I I +I i I i I 1; I I - I ~ I I$ I I i II I I=•i---1; ,• I~ I I ~ ' '~ ' I I I , ~, I I, I II ~ i ( t ~ i~ I I I I I ~ ,., ~ I i' I I ~i I ~ ~ I _ ! j~ ~ I I ., ~ I I; I I +I Id, +I I ~ ~~ ~ ~ I i I I 006+f 'Y15 3NIl H~1dYY OOZ+y V15 3NIl H~lyW v y d Z L h u C W CULVERT REPLACEMENT -UNNAMED STREAM PLAN VIEW EXISTING CULVERT IN DASHED LINES -PROPOSED CULVERT PLACE_'v1ENT IN SOLID LINES New Culvert will be Placed 8' on Center from Existing Elw. 2.44 Elav. Z.59 Section A-A E Enclosure Sheet 5 rn N v z ,,, Section 8-9 STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPaRTATI AND PUBLIC FACILITIES KENAI BRIDGE ACCESS ROAD REHABILITATION I~b ~~ HISTORIC DISTRICT BOARD January 19, 1998- 7:00 p.m. Kenai City Hall Council Chambers Chair Dorothy Gray *** MINUTES *** 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chairperson Gray called the meeting to order at approximately 7:05 p.m. Members Present: Dorothy Gray, Cecelia Richard, Michael Huhndorf, Bill Kluge Members Absent: Ethel Clausen, Gloria Wik Also Present: Jack La Shot, Contract Secretary Barb Roper 2. Gray announced that elections will be held for the Chair and Vice Chair positions and called for nominations. KLUGE MOVED TO REAPPOINT GRAY AS CHAIR. MOTION SECONDED BY HUHNDORF. VOICE VOTE: All is favor, motion passed unanimously. KLUGE MOVED TO REAPPOINT HUHNDORF AS VICE CHAIR. MOTION SECONDED BY RICHARD. VOICE VOTE: All in favor, motion passed unanimously. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA KLUGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. Agenda was approved as presented. Gray introduced Cecelia Richard, a new member on the Historic Board. Richard, who was born and raised in Alaska, has been a resident of Kenai since 1980. Richard was most recently employed with the Kenai Visitor's Center and had just taken another position at "Good Books and More" store. Historic District Board January 19, 1998 Page 1 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -November 1?, 1997 Minutes of November 17, 1997 were approved as written. 5. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD -None Gray introduced Tom Murphy who was present at the meeting but was not scheduled to be heard. Murphy reported that he attended this meeting as he is in the process of writing a book on the history of Kenai. Since he intended to sit through the entire meeting, Murphy will be heard under Item 10, Person's Present Not Scheduled to be Heard. 6. HISTORIC BOARD REVIEW -None 7. a. OHA FY 1999 Grant Priorities Gray indicated the Board chose not to write a grant this year because the other one wasn't quite fmished. She noted the applications for 1999 will not be available until late summer or early fall. Gray pointed out that things on the list were in line with the Historic Board's preservation plan, such as increasing public awareness on historical preservation, strengthen efforts to identify archaeological and historic resources, etc. b. 1998 Goals and Objectives Gray suggested the Board consider becoming involved at the State level to highlight the gold rush activities in Kenai since Kenai was the first place where gold was discovered. Huhndorf asked if there could be a commemorative notation to be included in the historic district of Old Town. Gray suggested a bronze sign. A group discussion took place on the gold rush and the actual date. Gray indicated that she would provide the actual date at the next meeting. Kluge pointed out that bronze signs could be quite expensive. After more general discussion La Shot pointed out the last sign grant was very time-consuming and at this time it is probably not a task the City would want to undertake. Gray asked that the gold rush commemorative project be included on the 1998 goals and objectives list. Discussion took place on the Erick Hansen park proposal and the suggestion made by Parks and Rec that a chronological time line sign be included, perhaps the gold rush could be noted there. Gray asked that Historic District Board January 19, 1998 Page 2 Parks and Rec be made aware of the walking sign tour and that the Historic Board would be interested in being a source of information for the chronological signs. Kluge suggested, with the cooperation of the Visitor Center, that an exhibit be available on the history of Old Town showing specific photographs, artifacts, etc. Richard noted the walking tour schematic and signage is going to be very helpful for the visitors. Huhndorf asked if there was any information on the battle of Kenai and exactly where that was. Discussion took place on the actual location and it was decided that more research would be done. Gray requested that completion of the walking tour be included on the goals and objectives list. Gray suggested that Murphy obtain a copy of the Townsite Historic District Survey book. Huhndorf indicated that a copy is available for $45.00 but it does not have the color codes included. Gray explained that some goals and objectives were noted in this survey book which included urging some of the owners to keep their properties from deteriorating further. Huhndorf noted that the properties noted were significant with regard to history. Gray pointed out that in the ordinance one of the ongoing goals and objectives is to educate the residents about the history of Kenai. Something commemorating the gold rush will fall in this category. Gray noted this will remain a working list and it can be added to as necessary. Gray also noted these items would not require anv money or a grant. Gray requested the following items be forwarded to staff (Kebschull) to be included on the agenda for the February meeting. Gold Rush Commemoration Hansen Park Historic Signs Visitor Center Old Town Exhibit Complete Walking Tour and Brochure Research Battle of Kenai Historic Library Huhndorf reported that the "Once Upon a Kenai" book is out of print and suggested the Board make some effort to put it back into circulation. Richard reported that several people have asked about the book at the Visitor's Center. Historic District Board January 19, 1998 Page 3 c. Annual Survey of Historic Properties (KMC 14.20.105 (4jj Huhndorf stated the Board is required to review existing properties to see if the historic status had changed. Gray pointed out this was also required by ordinance but the survey of historic properties would be updated to include any additions or changes. It was determined there were no properties that should be included or changed at this time. Kluge asked what was required of tie Board in order to be compatible with the Alaska Heritage Resources Survey. He asked if a document needed to be issued on an annual basis. After discussion it was determined this was the numerical way in which the State identified the properties. The properties were submitted to the State on formatted cards that had an identification number compatible with their system. These identification numbers are used when one wants to identify a particular property at the State Office of History and Archaeology. Kluge suggested these cards be on file here in the event something changed. Gray requested that Kebschull write a letter to the State office of History and Archaeology asking for copies of the properties and their identification numbers. Gray stated information would also be helpful for the library information service discussed in the past. d. February Meeting Date It was noted the date of the February meeting falls on a holiday. The Board elected to change the date to Tuesday, February 17, 1998. Council will be asked to make this change. 8. OLD BUSINESS a. Preservation Plan -Reports from December meeting assignments. Item 7 -Kebschull; Item 9 -Huhndorf; -Item 10 -Kluge. Huhndorf gave a brief report on the work session held on December 15, 1997. The following items were discussed: Decreasing the number of Board members. Huhndorf contacted Councilman Moore and Kebschull regarding this issue. Discussion also took place on the number of meetings and it was determined the monthly meetings were sufficient. Nomination Process: Kebschull provided a streamlined list. Historic District Board January 19, 1998 Page 4 ''~ Work with Visitor's Center and the role of the tourists. r Discussed Boraas' position on the Board. Huhndorf reported a letter was provided to Boraas removing him from the Board. Other items discussed at the work session included the preservation plan, the walking tour and soliciting more anecdotes and stories to be included in the brochure, community calendars, and applying for various grants. ~,irther discussion took place on the nomination process and Huhndorf asked about the rights of owners. He indicated that it wasn't clear if a property could be nominated regardless of the owner's wishes. Huhndorf noted that he was under the impression that it could not be nominated. Kluge clarified that it could be nominated and the property owner has the right to object. Kluge provided a draft for development recommendations (included with these minutes). Kluge read the document. Discussion took place afterwards and Gray commented that she liked the green belt suggestion. Kluge suggested that when the City is developing the piece of property along the bluff, that consideration be given to a master plan for Old Town and where it is going in the future. Kluge commented on the walking tour and the signage and how it can be incorporated into the master plan. He also mentioned the road improvements that are currently taking place and those planned for in the future. Kluge thought street signage with a historic flavor would be nice for the. area. Richard made the comment that several visitors ask how they can go down and look over the bluff. Richard indicated it was very difficult to direct anyone to the area due to parking and the areas that are blocked off. Gray suggested when the preservation plan is complete that this Board present it to Council. Each member could take an item and briefly walk members through the plan. Kluge requested that members review his draft list and add or delete as necessary. Discussion took place on beach access and Huhndorf noted there presently is no way to walk down to the beach from Old Town and there is the problem of erosion. Gray pointed out that it is all private property in the area. Historic District Board January 19, 1998 Page 5 Kluge suggested the City consider acquiring land to accommodate a master plan for Old Town. Gray indicated that the Mayor thought about that at one time as many of the parcels in the center were postage size lots that are not suitable to be built on. La Shot reported that a master plan was done for the area at one time and street alignment got complicated. Gray asked if Huhndorf had anything else to add to his item. Huhndorf indicated that he needed to complete the walking tour to include the map, funding, etc. He reported that he received some revisions that need to be incorporated. Kluge suggested when the final draft is complete, perhaps the printer could incorporate some graphics. Gray suggested the development recommendations draft be looked at again at the next meeting and accepted with or without changes. This will be put on the agenda. Gray asked about Item 13 on the preservation plan, "Agenda for future action/projects (5 Year Plan/ 10 Year Plan). This item may make the survey an outdated document each year. After a group discussion it was determined that Gray would write a clarification with regard to the duties of the Board. Gray requested that Kebschull provide a rough draft of the preservation plan in order to identify what has been completed to date. The Board will then have a final work session to complete it and make it a working document. Huhndorf referred to Item 9 and thought perhaps more could be done with regard to education and making this Board more visible to the visitors. 9. REPORTS a. City Council Gray brought attention to the memo in the packet regarding the change in Board membership. There was also a memo regarding Mission Street and the decision to not add color to the sidewalks. Gray referenced the letter from the State Department of Natural Resources and complimented Kebschull and Kluge on the work in completing the sign grant. Gray reported that Kluge did all the work at the Rotary Club. Gray also reported that the State recognizes the sign Historic District Board January 19, 1998 Page 6 j grant as a model project showing a good example of partnerships between a Board and a community service organization. b. Administration Gray brought attention to the Historic Preservation newsletter included in the packet. Huhndorf asked about the "Ten Most Endangered" list and whether or not there was something we wanted to add to the goals and objective list. After discussion it was determined there were no properties at this time that could be considered for the list. Kluge suggested the City participate to encourage development to draw people in. Council would like to see more tax cuts but to get that tax base people need to be encouraged to take advantage of it. Discussion took place on the retail businesses in the area and the fact that Gary King's has closed and the possibility the video store will be next. Kluge pointed out that a lot of historic districts die because retail businesses close. In these cases the city came in and made pedestrian areas, public malls, landscaped areas, etc. which could attract other retail businesses. Huhndorf asked if there was money in the budget to possibly send an individual to the National Trust Conference. La Shot replied there are some budgeted funds for staff. 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD: Tom Murphy is writing a book on the history of Kenai and his project is in the beginning stages. He has discussed his plans with the City Council and they are receptive to the idea. His basic need at this time is resources and he would like to talk to board members to get some information. Murphy stated he has books and government material but what is difficult to find is articles, papers, primary sources, pictures, etc. Suggestions for materials included the Chamber Cabin and their newspaper articles, photos, etc., the Anchorage Museum's library of photographs of Kenai, the Juneau archives, etc. Murphy asked if it would be possible to get on the mailing list so that he could receive a copy of the meeting minutes. He also asked if he could attend some meetings. Gray stated the Board would be happy to help out as much as possible. Gray also stated that she has information from the University of Alaska which has diaries of priests from the area, of which about thirty have been translated into English. Huhndorf stated he has photocopies of the Muster Reports from Ft. Kenai. Gray again stated the Board would be happy to help out as much as possible. Historic District Board January 19, 1998 Page 7 11. BOARD QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS Richard asked what the preservation plan was. Gray explained the preservation plan was a required document of being a certified local government. The City of Kenai applied for the certified local government and as a result, the Board (and City) is eligible for State funds. 12. INFORMATION a. "National Register of Historic Places Publications" b. Letter dated December 18, 1997 to Alan Boraas c. Memo from Clerk Freas regarding change is board make-up dated 12/18/97 d. Historic District Board Roster e. "National Trust for Historic Preservation" information flyer f. The Alaska Association for Historic Preservation membership letter dated 12/9/97 g. Letter from OHA dated 12/3/97 h. "Preservation Advocate News" November 1997 i. Letter to DOT dated 11/20/97 regarding Mission Street Project j. "The Alaska Association for Historic Preservation" 13. ADJOURNMENT MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Roper, Contract Secretary Historic District Board January 19, 1998 Page 8 210 FIDALGO, SUITE 200, KENAI, AK 99669-7794 (907)283-7933 ,~ ~'. ~. To: Terry From: Marilyn Kebschull Fax: 283-3299 Pages: 1 Phone: 283-7551 Date: January 9, 1998 Re: ADVERTISEMENT CC: FILE ^ Urgent ^ For Review ^ Please Comment Please Reply ^ Please Recycle • Comments: Please publish the following advertisement on Monday, January 12, 1998. This will be charged against the open Purchase Order you have. Thanks. w January 9, 1998 CITY OF KENAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION **AGENDA** KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS January 14,1998 at 7 p.m. http://www.Kenai.net/city 1. CONSIDERATION OF PLATS: a. PZ98-02-Buffalo Run Subdivision -Phase 1 b. PZ98-03-Tanglewood Subdivision-A subdivision of Tract One-A Parson's Homestead No. 3 c. PZ98-04-Leo T. Oberts Subdivision -Ross Replat 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. PZ98-0l~onditional Use Permit for Business/Consumer Services and Retail/Wholesale Business for the property described as Lots 6 & 7, Papa Joe's Subdivision, 9520 and/or 9488 Kenai Spur Highway, Kenai, Alaska. Application submitted by Hugh Chumley and Joe Chumley, P.O. Box 753, Sterling, Alaska 99672. 3. NEW BUSINESS: a. Kenai River Water Monitoring Plan Work Group b. Assignment of and Amendment to Lease-Ronald Yamamoto, Lot 3, Block 1, Gusty Subdivision c. 1998 Planning and Zoning Commission Goals and Objectives 4. OLD BUSINESS: The public is invited to attend and participate. For further information call 283-7933. Marilyn Kebschull Administrative Assistant Publish: January 12, 1998 • Page 2 Interoffice Memo date: 1 /16/98 n ,: to: Carol Freas, City Clerk From: Marilyn Kebschull, Administrative Assistant ~: PLANNING & ZONING COMIVIISSION ELECTIONS The Planning and Zoning Commission held elections at their meeting on January 14, 1998. Carl Glick was reelected to chair the Commission and Phil Bryson was reelected asvice-chair. 1/16/98