Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay. Sorry for the technical difficulties, but we're up and running. Um, thank you for coming to the second work session on temporary dwelling units. Uh we started the first one in November under the under the misnomer of tent camping, but we have revised that definition a little bit based on our discussion back in November. So, uh took the past couple of months taking a lot of your feedback looking into coming up with some definitions. So, this is part two. I think we're getting closer, but I don't think we're quite at the finish line yet. So, definitely encourage any kind of feedback um on what we do have. That was cool. Um so based on our conversation um we decided that it may be appropriate to put some some guidance into into code. Um whether that is to enact a a different section of title 14 as a standalone um temp just for temporary dwelling units possibly. Um you'll see this later. Do we amend the one for recreational vehicles to kind of co-mingle some of these and maybe just rename the title of the recreational vehicle section? Um, a lot still to be determined, but I wanted to get some of this new information uh back out in front of you and then open it up for discussion. Um, one thing we talked about was to move sections that are currently in title 13, which is actually where the penalties are, um, for breaking code. Um, A, B, and C don't necessarily, um, I'm not going to say don't belong there. At the time, there was really no other place for them to be. And they are, if you break these, then you would possibly face a penalty, a civil penalty, not criminal. Um, but taking some of these, and I've highlighted the word camping, cuz camping may infer recreational use. And we talked last time that this may not be limited solely to recreational use of tents and

temporary dwelling units and other things that are commonly used. So looking for a different you word for camping. So that if something rattles around, please please let me know. But um that's why it's highlighted. Um but there are three provisions that are currently in KMC 131060. Uh one is that camping on private property without written permission of the owner is prohibited. Um that the persons must be in possession of the written permission uh unless the owner is actually there then they can give verbal um and that sanitary facilities will be provided on the property owner. So when we were looking at this when we had reports last summer why this came to our attention when we did look at code the only thing we really had to stand on for any kind of enforcement was the sanitary uh facilities. Um so we think keeping a lot of this you know don't reinvent the wheel just move it to where it needs to be. Um temporary dwelling units um we define them I'll define them here in just a couple minutes. Um, and none of this is gospel. None of this is etched in stone. So, if you don't agree with any of this, feel free to for any kind of feedback. But, uh, right now I'm saying that they should be located in the rear yard or sideyard. Um, especially ifyard has a fence. You know, basically, um, discouraging, you know, a lot of visible tents all over someone's front lawn. However, circumstances may warrant that. So, you know, prohibiting that may not be appropriate. we may want to massage that one. Um the exception would be for campgrounds because the understanding once you see the definition for campgrounds might be that it is a commercial activity and that would actually just be the nature of their business. So it wouldn't matter necessarily the location on the lot. Um and that refuge containers also be provided by the property owner or the design um coral area with the sanitary facilities but also we don't want a lot of trash that once people leave we don't

want that blowing around town especially um on most areas you know we have a nice area we want to keep it as nice as we can. Um so one definition that we want to look at is what is a campground. Um, and there's a few things because if you if we mention things in code, they have to have a a very specific definition uh to get rid of as much gray area as there as we can. So, our definition of campground is a little wordy. I apologize, but um our first iteration is a parcel or tract of land privately held by a person, group of people, or an organization. Because if you have multiple owners, but they're not in an LLC, they wouldn't fall into either one. So we wanted it to be as inclusive as possible. Uh in which the use of sites is offered for the public or members of an organization. So they an organization could own a site and restrict it just to the members of their organization um or it could be open to the public. We didn't want to again um leave a lot of gray area there. And they can either not charge a fee or charge a fee. Um, and again, you know, someone says, "Oh, why just let anyone stay?" I'm not charging them. It's not a commercial activity. Personally, from my standpoint, I would disagree. Um, but that is one of the items definitely open for discussion. Um, and then we we set an arbitrary number right now. Um, because I had to start somewhere, so I just put in three. Um, temporary living quarters for three or more uh units or tents. um which I do define both. Um campground does not necessarily include recreational vehicle park at this time. Um it could if we decide we want to merge this with uh the part of code that has recreational vehicle parks uh which is two or more RVs on a lot constitutes a RV park. Um campgrounds may operate

from April 1st to October 31st. Again, this is very similar in nature. Um, we do allow RVs to be parked on private lots. Oftentimes with a building permit between those time frames and, um, I would say after October 31st, you're gambling with the weather. So, um, April 1st, you might be gambling with the weather. So, uh, we trying to lock down an actual time frame. And this third bullet, I took this away from the discussion, but again, we might want to look at this one. Uh but property owners allowing family members to camp in their residential yard uh which we define not only to be in the residential zoning area but also on a lot with a primary structure. So not just a lot that is zoned residential that has no primary structure. Um we're tying it so that if you're if someone has a house and they're camping in the backyard, does that necessarily constitute a campground? And we don't think so in this context. Um, and then we kind of left it vague at the time of our last discussion of how long if someone pops a tent for two or three days, you know, a long weekend or something over a holiday weekend, is that does that make it a campground? Is it 7 days? Is it 2 weeks? Like what what time frame are we looking at? Cuz we know that sometimes family come in for events and they may be here for quite a few days. They come in a few days before a wedding, you know, and there's just too many people to stay in the house. So some people may stay in a trailer in a camp trailer outside. They may stay in tents. Just depends on what kind of

So I've noticed in the past and I've called the city before, but I was told it was perfectly fine and it just popped back into my memory. This was at least a decade ago. you've just recently moved here, but Rogers Road, um I I have a rental house down at the end of Rogers Road. And whenever I drive down there in the summertime, boats and campers and vans, and it's like the road is a parking lot. And this particular house that I called the city about, there was a camper. It's got the cord run from the camper. It's parked on the street in front of the house. It's got the stairs down. They're clearly living in the camper while visiting their friend on Rogers Road. And I'm like, seriously, we're letting people people live in the road now. And I was told it's perfectly fine at that was at that time like 10 years ago. Is this something we can address here? I mean, is it okay to park on the road in front of my house if my family comes with their camper to park there and just stay in it on the road?

Park? Yes. Resside in the trailer? No. And that's a public safety issue cuz if someone were to lose control of their car, um and we actually did have an enforcement activity this past summer. Um not in Oldtown, but just east of there. Um still the older part of town, uh south of the spur. And having a having a trailer parked uh especially during the summer, there is you're allowed to park on the street, but residing in a trailer that is in the public rideway, we don't allow. And that is just for human safety. Um all it takes is one one driver not paying attention, texting, drunk or otherwise just lose control for any reason. Um and that just puts them in danger. So we don't allow people to reside in a trailer on but they could park it there. Um we're also looking at within recreational vehicles. Um that's another a common thing we've seen through the code enforcement activities is a trailer will be in someone's yard with a cord running. So it's not even on the right now it's not out of the rightway. It's on their property. Um but is it being hooked up to power to that power? Is does that um are are they living in it? Uh we find this often with where the houses aren't in the best shape um but they don't have an active building permit because that is allowable if you're fixing up your house um and you have to stay in a trailer for maybe 2 weeks while you gut everything. That's 100% allowed with an active building permit. Um that is an exception that's been carved out. But there's been other times where you just see this extension cord snaking away and like someone living there on your property. And so I think that is why this definition of time may be needed. So if you're staying for a long weekend, you just need to charge your, you know, you have plugged in to their house because you're running your microwave in the camper. Um, and you're going to be there for 3 to 5 days, that might be one thing, but if they're

if the camper is, you know, semi-permanmanently there, like if it's there 6 months, does that constitute someone living there? And as a camper owner, my camper's always plugged in when it's sitting in its spot next to my house just for refrigeration and that type of thing. So that would be hard to determine just from, you know, being parked next to your house. A agreed. Usually what I meant to add to that is usually it's also a lot of them they're extended out. The stairs are down. It looks actively used versus somewhat stored, right? Um

and that was the case with the with the one on the road. It had the slide outs out into the road. I'm just saying. Okay. So, that is handled in our Okay. So, a couple of questions or um thoughts to consider about identifying a definition of time would be, and Stacy, you might know the answer to this. I can't remember. Um how many days in a if you're occupying a rental and you have family um come to visit, how many days is it? usually in the Alaska Landlord Tenant Act before um they need to be added to the lease agreement. Right.

So that's something to consider.

And then have you referenced other um like size cities on their definition of temporary dwelling units? We have looked around. Uh most of these are in the lower 48 and they run the gamut. Some are super strict and it's you can do it overnight in the second bay. You need to start um there needs to be some sort of written permission like either posted in the window. That's generally in I think cal a lot of the ones in California that I was looking. Um Washington, Oregon, and Michigan are pushing a week. Somewhere between 5 and 7 days is kind of the average I'm finding there. I'd be more inclined for those three, the latter three states. Um they're a little bit more like us, a lot more there's a lot of more rural areas and a lot more people that um traditionally will use campers or at least are associated. Um not saying they don't use them elsewhere. Um so for us it's a little bit of everything. Um 5 to 7 to me doesn't sound unreasonable. Again, that gives you some comes in on Wednesday and let's say a wedding's on Saturday and they're staying through Sunday to, you know, pack up and get back together after a long night of partying. Um, and they leave Monday, you know, does that's about 5 days. Is that is that reasonable? You know, is a week reasonable? But at what point does it become, you know, they're staying there? Is it anything past a week, two weeks? Um if we go too long then essentially someone could come down save the whole PU fishery for 3 weeks and then and then leave and then there would be no um I guess new basis on you know by the time we would get to them you know the fishery's over and they're they may be leaving anyway. So that's the only reason we were looking at possibly adding a definition for the time just to um give us somewhat of a leg to stand on

if someone were to cuz we are still a complaint driven code enforcement uh office. Um so we are not going out to actively look if someone's um breaking code uh for any reason. But should neighbors be concerned and call us in, we want to be we want to be like when did you first see them? Do you have evidence uh things like that working on through that definition? I apologize.

I was just curious sometimes when people stay somewhere then they leave for a few days and then they turn around and come back. Is there any time that they would have to be away before their week would start over again?

And I think that would be something worth considering or we can look into. Um, is there a certain number of days within a certain time period? So, could it be maybe it's five consecutive days or if we get reports that they're there 10 days out of 20, you know, does that does that constitute? So, we could look at a few different definitions. Um, but that would be up to and I can definitely look into this. Like I said, this is going to be an iterative process. We'll probably be re revisiting this a couple more times before we um feel comfortable, but we want to make sure we do it right now because what we don't want is to leave a a lot of gray area that can be exploited. Um and b that we limit it down to address the problem that we have. We don't want to we don't go off the rails and not any one direction. and we want to make sure to make sure that we're um that we're um you know putting the rules that need to you know putting the rules that need to be in place in place without unduly be in place in place without unduly burdening or disenfranchising anyone. So burdening or disenfranchising anyone. So kind of striking that balance. kind of striking that balance. Uh but that was a that was a good Uh but that was a that was a good question because I'm certain that that question because I'm certain that that will happen. will happen. Um Um and at any time if you have questions and at any time if you have questions definitely feel free. Um I just have definitely feel free. Um I just have this to keep me organized. and we want this to keep me organized. Uh so to define a tent um which I know we're looking at temporary dwelling unit but um we wanted to tent is a part of the definition of temporary dwelling unit and right now we have it defined as any type of collapsible shelter. Um there's an extra of sorry about that that'll get strict struck out but made of canvas or other material. So we didn't want to limit the material necessarily. Um and that it's suspended. It could be on poles. It could be online. You know, if you tie twine between two two trees and pop a sheet over it, does that constitute a tent? This would capture that. Um, used

primarily for human habitation outdoors and may be used as a temporary dwelling unit. And then specifying that for the purpose of definition that these are not limited to products marketed as tents. So, if you go to the camping section of um Walmart and says, "Hey, there's a pup tent." It's not limited just to those. It can be anything that is made in I'm not going to say looks like a tent, but functions as a as a tent. And the reason that's important is I went a little little much on this one, but I wanted to be inclusive. Um, so temporary dwelling unit could be a tent, but it could also be, and this is why merging it with RVs may or may not make sense, or at least seeing where they coming. Uh, it could be a travel trailer. Um, and I will let you read all of these and they will be posted online so anyone listening in can find it in the what will be the packet for this work session January 28th, 2026 uh on our city website. Um, could also be a camping trailer, could also be a truck camper, so just the camper and the bed. Um, and you'll see that they're commercially available or custom design units. Um, we did that because there are very creative individuals out there uh who it's not just a truck camper on on the bed. There are I've seen some doozies um both here in Alaska and back where I'm from uh where I came from originally in Ohio. It's we just wanted to make sure that it covered the gamut

and that's what we saw too. Um, so some of these, um, may need to be a little tweaked to be a little more inclusive. Um, cuz maybe it's not called a travel trailer. It could just be a trailer, anything that's on a chassis. Um, but like I've also seen tiny homes basically built into the bed of a truck. So that's where that custom design unit kind of is like, you know, get there, like I said, there's some doozies. I don't know how they go down the highway without blowing out, but they're there. Um, but again, slide in campers, chassis mount campers, there's a lot of different nuances. We want to make sure we dig a little deeper, but I will definitely look at like tiny homes and um,

mobile home, no new mobile home parks can be put into the into the city. Um, however, existing ones theoretically could expand with a conditional use permit. And there the ones that do exist, trailers could be added to if there's active spots available. Um, so there are two major ones that I know of off the top of my head. One's near Wildwood, one's on the other side of town. Um, the one off Wildwood does actually have a significant number of empty areas that a trailer could be brought in there because it's already grandfathered in, but nothing new. Um, currently

that would that would not preclude a modular home, but that is more fixed on a foundation. I was just going to clarify the fixed foundation for that. But um I'm concerned about us having um in there the cabover um campers because a lot of us own cabover campers. I mean, you disclosed that you own a motor home. So

I don't think this is this would be if it also meets the length of time and people are actively staying in it on on private property, you know, without um and and we're open without like if Yeah. If it if you're staying in there because you're fumigating the house and you're going to be in your camper for a week, you know, to me that's temporary. fits in within the maybe the 5 seven days. If we said something like that, it would be okay. But if someone is actively like that is essentially their address, they come they come back to that property and then just go straight into the camper every night. Um because maybe they're not in the house, they're staying in this camper. Like we just the reason we included all of these is because someone could say, "Oh no, I've just parked my truck here." But you're essentially living in the bed of your truck. like at at what point, you know, we don't get too nuanced, but at the same time, we don't want to leave a lot of gray area cuz someone could exploit it. Um, or we've seen where people have made structures that are not through the building code um that would possibly be qualified like a dry cabin in a way. And then on top instead of a roof, it actually has a truck camper. Uh I found that in the burrow so that it wasn't in the city but it has it has happened close by. So where there's a will there's a way. Um but again open to feedback if we want to go into the weeds we can look into it. If we want to be a little less in-depth in this area definitely open to feedback but we wanted to provide this. So just to show you what we were looking at when we were looking for definitions. Um so a potential code changes uh if we

do define a campground through this process um I think campground is the one that we can use as a land use um like an RV parks RV park something like that campgrounds could in could also be merged with RV parks we we could look at that I think that would be appropriate uh given the direction we are given from council Um, and currently RV parks are conditionally allowed. They're not permitted by right anywhere, but they are conditionally allowed in all of these. So, conservation, uh, rural residential, suburban residential, and urban residential, but not the variance of the rural residential, suburban. So, there's R1. It's not allowed. Um, I believe there's two in suburban and they're not allowed in those variants, but they are in the primary. Uh, central commercial, general commercial, light industrial, heavy industrial, recreational, towns site, historic, central, mixed use, and working waterfront. Um, one that is potentially missing um where I could see possibly some interest might be limited commercial, which is more that transition zone as you start heading uh towards soul on the highway. There's some limited commercial where it's you some commercial is allowed. Um generally lower impact, not large big box stores. Um and then you graduate into general commercial before you get to central commercial here in this downtown area. Um that might be the only possible change I would add. But again, this is just where it is for RVs. This is not binding for where campgrounds could be. So that would be a discussion, but that would give us the opportunity if we did want to once we have this set, if we wanted to um have some oversight, possibly the conditional use permit process could be a a way to do that um for certain things. Again, we have to get the definition right because we wouldn't want to make a a family get it just so they their kids can pop a tent. I don't think that's the direction either the

commission nor council wanted to go when we were discussing it initially. Um but if someone's going to have some sort of campground enterprise. Uh what is what does that look like and how would we monitor that throughout the city? And because of the need for um sanitary facilities and refuse and all that um for health and safety, I think it may be appropriate to keep it conditional in certain areas and that way we do have that oversight. Um, and if there are issues that are brought to us, we have a way to with the cup, we could revoke that CUP. Um, there are provisions and codes. So, I think that may be an appropriate way for oversight once we do settle on definitions. Yes, ma'am.

I texted my property manager and he said 12 days. Now, I don't know if that's just our lease agreements that if they're in there, if you have someone stay for 12 days, then we add them to the list or if that's Alaska tenant law because I couldn't find it quickly on the Alaska landlord tenant act. So, I just texted one of my property managers. So, 12 days is what we do we go by. I appreciate that. And that will give us it'll give me look something to look into deeper um as we start hammering things down. Mh. Question. What do we do? So, right now there's something on the books. What is it? 30 days for not living more than staying more than 30 days in the camper unless you have a building permit. Is that what we have right now?

For RV? For for RVs? Yes. We have nothing for any other temporary dwelling unit, which um we started with tents, but as I was explaining to them, that tent isn't inclusive of all things that you could possibly be living in that isn't a primary structure. Yeah. wasting conxes and all kinds of fun stuff. Green houses. Green houses. Yes, exactly. So, that's why I was like, are we wondering if we're talking about moving it to the same amount of time as that? Because my only concern is that is that pretty much gives them all that season and doesn't really solve the problem what this all came about.

And we right now we don't have a definition time. So, we did um I think we're speaking this right before you we got here uh sir, but um what is that? So that's why um I think Commissioner asked Commissioner Krauss um who has a real estate background what if there's tenant laws because that may give us a basis saying you know could be 12 days it could be could be less could be more um it would give us somewhere to look where there's already statutes in place that we can kind of piggy back off of. I agree that 30 days kind of gives you the entire PU fishery which kind of renders some of this moot um which is ultimately where this came about is the history on this is that it came about because of complaints about people doing this long-term staying during intents during the PU fishery is kind of what spurred a lot of this from my understanding.

Yes, that that's what initiated this um we did receive a number of complaints this past year during the PU fishery time. Um but when we looked at code, we said, "Oh, we don't have much." Um and that's why um council gave us the direction to start looking into this because if there are things that we want to add, tweak um in code, it would be appropriate to um likely it would fall under this under this body. Um and we may once we have a solid definition, we may also take it to the parks and recck commission just to get their um get their feedback on it too because I think it affects the city and I think there's a lot of different facets that possibly could look at. So, we want to make sure that we're getting all the feedback we can so that when we do deliver something to council, it is robust, well researched and um should need minimal if any modification at that point.

Director, I just had a question. We keep saying a number of complaints, but do we know exactly how many complaints there were? My office received two directly. Um, planning and zoning holds code enforcement. So, code enforcement normally will come to us first. Um, I know that the city manager got at least one and I think possibly two or three. So, um, all of them centered around one singular area.

Mhm. Uh but once we once we've received those complaints uh we heard and it was anecdotal um that other times in similar areas this kind of behavior had happened. It didn't happen last year in 2025. So that's why we felt it appropriate to bring it to council see if they wanted us to look at it and they and they did. Um, so I'm assuming, again, this is just me assuming, um, that other council members at that time had had some sort of at least anecdotal um, reports of it in the past. So, I think this is not a one-off thing that we're like, oh, we have to address. I think it's been bubbling for a while, but last year kind of started to bubble over.

Okay. And then there how many residents in the city of Kenai? Roughly 7,500. Okay. So, five complaints and 7,500 people, but probably not that many property owners. Um, some property owners were the ones that were complaining, but it wasn't happening on their property. It was just in their neighborhood, right? The um we are a complaint based code enforcement. So, you know, we we weren't going around saying, "Oh, you have a tent. You have a tent. You have a tent." It was what was reported to us and then we went and looked at it.

Right. So if you have like okay for instance my kids are coming up for the month of July and they're going to stay on my property and I have pretty good sized piece of property for a residential area. So I can't let them pitch tents and use my shower and my restroom and go to the beach and have fun and go to vacation and go down to Homer and and this is where comes in. Okay. Um but we also have to just kidding. We all this third bullet is what we're looking at. Um but we also have to define what are family members, you know, and daughters and their and their spouses and children.

Yeah. Yeah. Do we do we limit it to like immediate family? Um and again, if we put this into code, how on the on the flip side, how do we enforce it? I'm not going to say police it because we're not I'm not police. But um how then would we enforce it? So, you know, again, if no one makes a complaint, that's what I was going to ask. But if it's not complaint, if nobody complains about it, nobody cares. It's not an issue.

Exactly. But if and I think that I think how this came about um at least in 2025 is this wasn't someone letting someone camp in their backyard. It was a new landowner bought a derelict house that was collapsing, tore down the house, cleaned up the lot, did great things. It's in my neighborhood. Uh, and so the now these other landowners who live in the neighborhood had no idea who this land owner was. They didn't build a house or anything. It just all of a sudden turned into a fish camp literally overnight. And they said, "I don't know who this person is." But it was responsibly run. Not to interrupt you.

Yes, this this year was responsibly run. We met with the the people um that were running it. Um they had porta portaotties. They had a dumpster which went away right after they left. The dumpster was gone. So were the porter johns. So but there was that's when we realized that there was once they had sanitary facilities that was the only thing that I could have enforced and I couldn't do that because I provided them. So, um I think the intent for them is is this an allowable use in a on a residential lot, especially if it's not someone's house, like if I buy lot X in the woods, I'll just say that just to pick on another subdivision. Um, if I buy a lot, just a clear lot, and I decide, hey, I want all my buddies from Anchorage or low 48 to come up and camp on my lot, you know, June, July, and August. Right now in code, there is nothing that forbids that whatsoever. As long as I provide dumpsters and uh and I I don't even have to do dumpsters by code, but as long as I had sanitary facilities available, I meet the intent of code. And I think that's what the the neighbors in this particular instance were worried about is there's no way for them to say, "Hey, this is not an appropriate use of a residential lot in the city of Kenai." Is it appropriate in a commercial area where someone's running what we might now define as a campground? Possibly. Um, but I I think that was the concern of the citizens that did report that they just didn't feel safe because they didn't know who these people were cuz they weren't locals. they were coming from another city um at the behest of a group that they knew nothing about.

I think the critical thing here that we need to have in code is the property needs to have a primary structure on it. That eliminates the ability for some people to buy these cheap lots. I'm a I deal with this all the time back behind us. They buy these cheap lots that can never really be developed in back behind my office there. They can't get water and sewer, but they're dirt cheap. And somebody thinks, well, heck, for six, seven grand, I'm going to build a tent structure and move a motor home in there and start a shanty town. And right now, we don't have anything to say it's very difficult to prove otherwise and do this. And so, if we don't want that in every single neighborhood, we need to have something that says there needs to be a primary structure. And I'm totally okay with at least the 30 days even on a primary structure. And to say that we didn't receive 6,589 complaints. Well, the only people that complained were the people that were around it, the the direct neighbors. So, the other 5,899 people in the city didn't complain because they didn't know was going on because it wasn't in their neighborhood. And so, we need to take these things and find even with one small issue, it's critical to take and and move forward so we don't we're not reactive all the time. This is proactive planning for future issues that arise. If we just say, "Well, we don't give that many complaints. We're not going to do anything about it." Now, what the next year we get 10 complaints. Then the next year we get 20. Right now, we put a little bit in there. We have some meat and potatoes behind this to say, "Hey, we found an an issue. We need to fix it. Let's fix it now before it gets worse." And I'm already dealing with this. So, if you wanted to dissect it, that was one instance, but that doesn't include all the instances. cuz I know I made several complaints behind me where I have two or three different people doing that back in the subdivision back there. And I know there's I've also had it over on Lilac. Same exact thing. Put up a fish camp, vacant lot, bulldoz, and putting the illegal driveway in without a permit. Threw up a fish camp, had fish camp.

We're running hoses from other people's yards into their yard to clean fish across the road and we couldn't do anything about it. The only reason I got was able to get any teeth on it on that lilac issue was that they were a running hoses across the roads, which isn't copathetic. You can't do that. And b, their driveway was never permitted. So, they were have to they had to remove their driveway and then they said they didn't want to put any money into it. And they went back to Anchorage and never been back since. And they never put a structure on it, but they got a really dirt cheap lot and they were going to make a fish camp out of it surrounded by residential houses. So that's why I think it's important these little loopholes to fix them now and put it in black and white so there's not a lot of weird gray area. So I I I appreciate us moving forward with this. I personally know of at least four complaints that I've had to deal with multiple complaints in the last two years. No, I appreciate that and I I will definitely um take from this recording because I'm going to take notes, but um take a lot of that back and address some of those to flesh out some of these definitions. Um and just to catch you up real quick, um there are right now there's four provisions that kind of deal with it. Uh in title 13, these first three bullets um uh those are from 13. their A, B, and C under that reference. Um, right now 13 is the penalty section for civil penalties. Um, these I think we could pull out. I don't like the word camping cuz camping infers recreation. Um, so we may we're working on fixing that. But currently in code, that's what we have. That's the very limited piece um that we had any basis with. So um but in our last iteration, that's what we're calling. they're not tents or temporary dwelling units because of the varied nature of them. And then um but I think to your credit I think you know addressing primary structures in

residential areas I think that may be appropriate to look at and I'll come up with some more um more or at least amended definitions. Oh sorry this might be nitpicky but the fact that he talked about hoses and stuff going from a different property. Can it be that any water or electricity be restricted to the property of which they're sitting on, not from another property?

I will look to make sure there's no other we don't contradict any other provisions of code. Um, but I I know you can't have service lines go across, but also um looking to see if I know of at least one instance where one lot is used to store RVs. Um, occasionally one at least one, sometimes two, and the water was actually coming from the neighboring house. Like there was water and it it was a I don't know what the proper way of saying this. It was an actual commode in essentially it's like a modern toilet in the modern equivalent of an outhouse if that makes any sense. But it was plumbed. You it would function just like anyone's restroom would in their house, but it was a standalone structure on a separate lot across a lot line. and it had water and septic or water and sewer service coming from a different house. Um because I think at one time they were owned by the same person. Uh and then when it sold, the two lots sold separately. So we did address that earlier this summer as well. There was no RV at the place, but the plumbing issue we discovered was an issue cuz you're not allowed to have a service lot cross lot lines. Um, so it was it's the first time I've ever seen something like that. But hey, nothing new under the sun, right? Where there's a will, there's a way. And that's why as we go through this, we're trying to get rid of as much gray so that we when there's a complaint, we can address it and address it to the best of our ability. So, I appreciate you the discussion tonight and I'll definitely there's still time. So, if anyone has comments, um, but I appreciate you house help giving some of your feedback cuz it's going to help us make this the best

it can be going forward. I was going to reference um uh Commissioner Woodard's um comment on um you know people being there for 5 to seven days or whatever the time frame that we come up with and then they they leave and then they come back over a certain amount of time um down at the river while fishing. There are people who change their clothing um and put on hats and they basically I mean they look like kind of a different person but their voice sounds the same. and Aussie and I know that they are the same people but they're out there limiting again but as a different facade and then I think it would be useful for us to um to work with you on the land use map um you know to button that down a little bit better

definitely so um if you do have any comments or you have any suggestions between now and the next work session which I don't have scheduled yet. Um, we definitely could, you know, if you if you have any ideas, we can start baking them into the pie, so to speak, now so when we come back, we have a better uh better thing. So, I I invite you call, text, email, um, and we can get everything put into the pot and stirred around so that it comes out as a better product. I I do like the idea of when we do do a time, whatever you come up with that it should match similar to RV so that we're not doing RVs for one time and then temporary dwelling for another because I think they can all kind of go in the same

and we mentioned it may be appropriate to amend the RV section to incorporate some of this um maybe just rename instead of recreational vehicle parks we rename it to be more inclusive um because I think there is going to be a lot of overlap on both sides. Uh but we also Commissioner Krauss had the idea to look at like tenant laws as well. So maybe the adjustment may be possibly downsized from what our visa is currently. Maybe bring all of it down to a stricter time. Um and then the exceptions for like building permits would still stand or something like that. So um we we'll definitely look into a lot of it and then bring back different suggestions. Yeah, just like you know inclusive in both like I think the RV thing you know having a if it doesn't I can't remember if it says does it say anything about a primary structure on the lot when you have an RV for 30 days unless it's a building I don't know RV

I believe so it it I believe so okay I just one of the things too you know so you don't have that unless they're actively have a building permit they're not just camping on a lot for temporary amount of time and then leaving I know there's another I just thought of another complaint I know of. Same thing, but it's on second or over by the prison, you know, over by the There's one up there that they just have a gravel pad. First or second, somewhere in there. They just have a gravel pad and they only come in the summer and they bring it. That's the one with the the fancy uh cabin and commode.

Yeah, that one. I know the guy the gentleman that's lives directly behind that and he was complaining to me about that this summer about it. It's been going on for a couple years now. Put a really nice gravel pad and everything and they only come in there with a camper, stay for fishing for a little while and then leave. But he goes, "They also make a mess with fish guts and then they have fish smell all you're talking closer to California." California side. Yeah. Yeah, I know that one too. Yeah. So, I think if we were to compile all the different complaints that people have filed over the last three or four years in this general area, I think it would be substantial. So, I think this is a pretty important one to kind of work on

and we'll get that map. So for the next meeting, we'll definitely have something to report. We'll go back. I I'll look back 5 years. I think that's reasonable cuz that's kind of the anecdote of what we've been talking about. So where is this and what's going on? Awesome. Well, I appreciate the discussion. Uh we have a few minutes before our business meeting at 7. Um but again, if you have any comments, questions, or anything, feel free to contact me anytime and we'll get them. We'll make sure it's brought forward for um our next iteration.

You're on the record. I'd like to call the January 28th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting to order. If you are able, please rise and join me with the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. That was talent. Whatever mouth, it came out clear. Uh, may we have the roll call, please? Thank you.

Commissioner Ersley, present. Commissioner Krauss present. Commissioner Fees here. Commissioner Woodard here. Vice Chair Doett here. Chair Keaton here. Commissioner Asin is absent. You have a quorum. Is there It's Is there a motion to approve the agenda and consent agenda with the lay down or and a second? Okay.

Make a motion to approve the agenda and consent agenda with the layowns. Second. Thank you. Are there any amendments to the agenda or consent agenda?

Yes. Uh, I move to amend the agenda and consent consent agenda by removing from the consent agenda item B1, approval of the regular meeting minutes of January 14th, 2026. And also for the regular agenda, item H3, action approval recommending the city council determine an approximate 2700 ft section of the northwestern corner of tract A Woodland subdivision part 4 is not needed for a public purpose. And then I can I get a second on that? Is that good?

And staff, if you can explain the reasoning on that. Did I hear uh any uni unanimous consent to that? Is there any discussion on removing these items? Yes. If I could get a staff report on or staff reasoning on the justification.

Yes. Uh thank you through the chair, Commissioner Commissioner Dit. Um although the completed draft minutes for the January 14th, 2026 planning and zoning commissions were were done. They are complete. I put together the packet last week and inadvertently omitted them from being published and I didn't want to ask you to approve something you didn't have time to read. So at the next meeting you'll have two sets of minutes for the 14th and the 18th. Uh again that is my mistake and I apologize for that. Um the second item um the administration is not currently bringing forth the legislation for recommendation that we norm that we were projecting we would related to item H3. Um we as we continued research we realized that there was actually um a public purpose already attached to this subject property. Um so that kind of flipped the script of um when we receive that land sale application um that it actually has to go to council first to see if they are even open to the idea of um possibly taking off that public purpose. But that would be a decision for them. So, it felt inappropriate for us to comment on legislation that now does not technically exist, and that's why we removed item H3. Is there any objection to removing these two items? Hearing none, items B1 and item H3 are removed from the agenda. Are there any other revisions to the agenda? Are there any objections or approving the agenda as amended? Hearing no objection, the amend the agenda is amended as approved. Are there any scheduled public comments? Thank you, clerk. Um, we have none.

And is there anyone from the public wishing to speak to anything that is not on the agenda? Are there any remote attendees wishing to speak? There is nobody online.

Thank you. We have no plats to consider at this time. Uh we have no public hearings at this time and we have no unfinished business at this time. Under new business, the first item is action approval transfer of conditional use permit PZ209-01 for the use of a boarding house. Is there a motion to approve this transfer? I will move to a move to approve the transfer of conditional use permit PZ2019-01. Is there a second? A second.

Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to this transfer? Seeing no one, we'll bring it back to the commission. Is there discussion from the commission on this transfer? Commissioner Doit if we can just a quick overview from the staff.

Sure. Through the chair, Commissioner Doit and the commission. U so we received a CP transfer form if this current one is a boarding house. It is at 160 Phillips Drive. The only change this is going to be is right now it is in the individuals uh is a husband and wife team that run this boarding house and they are putting it into an LLC in their name. So, they're taking out of the personal name, putting into LLC name. Nothing else changing no changes the use of the property or operations at all. It's just a um changing the name who it's assigned to. And the I believe in the packet on page seven is their new business license uh showing that it they do indeed exist. Uh there is also a map on page five for the location. Um and their applications on page six.

Thank you. Would anybody like to request unanimous consent? I'll request unanimous on that. Unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Clerk, please call the role. Oh, if no objection. If no objection

Oh, hearing no objections to the unanimous consent transfer is approved.

Okay, thank you. Next we have item H2, action approval recommending approval of proposed ordinance to city council determining four city-owned properties known as lots 1, 2, 3, and four Beaverloop acres addition number three are not needed for public p purpose. Is there a motion to recommend council approval? I'll make a motion for action approval of recommending approval of proposed ordinance to city council determining four city- owned properties known as lots 1, 2, 3, and four in Beverly Loop acres. Addition number three are not needed for a public purpose.

Is there a second? Second. Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to this recommendation to city council? Seeing no one, we'll bring it back to the commission. Discussion from commission. Do we again presentation from staff, please?

This one's a little bit more involved, so bear with me. Um, in 2019, uh, the city did retain a engineering consultant to excavate 10 test pits. Uh, for the southern portion of a 320 acre parcel that we owned. Uh this is generally the area between the gravel pits that exist on um Beaver north of Beaver Loop Road. Um and they lie in that area south of the golf course kind of where it drops off the bluff and goes into the lowlands. Um a large section of this is still wetlands has still been put off into a tract, but there were four sites uh ranging from 23.8 acres to about 23.63 at the largest. Um, page 11 of your packet has the legal descriptions, uh, as well as the, um, parcel numbers, and then page 12 has a map showing where they're at in relation to everything else. But, um, the potential for extraction natural resources, uh, is consistent with the city's land management plan for this area. Um, it is allowable by conditional use permit for surface extraction as it is rural a rural residential zone. Um, our default zone, if it is not otherwise stated, is rural residential. So, this was not um at the time planned to be an actual residential area. Just that's the default. Um, in January 20 um in January 22nd, 2025, the planning and zoning commission passed resolution PZ2025-03 for the Beaver Loop Acres number three subdivision. That resolution granted an exception to KMC 141070D1 allowing a block length greater than 1400 ft which was requested by the city in order to maintain the large parcel suitable for future material sites. The commission also granted an exception to KMC 141070D3 street design. It was also requested by the city considering the west, south, and east boundaries were subject to a

50-foot road reservation created by Alaska statute 1910, the sectional line easement. The development of culde-sac and/or turnaround were emitted. It was noted that the possible that the rightaways could be extended in the future as the development of the sites uh increased. Pursuant to ordinance 34312024, the city subdivided the property into four parcels containing gravel resources in a separate tract consisting primarily of wetlands, which is not proposed for sale. The the highest and best use of the four parcels is gravel extraction, which aligns with the rule of residential zoning and prior city policy supporting resource development along this corridor. The proposed public sale would place underutilized city land into productive use, support local construction and infrastructure needs, encourage private investment, and generate revenue. Sale by public seal bid auction is authorized under Kenai Municipal Code. Establishing the minimum bid price of the estimated quantity of gravel above the water table for each parcel calculated using the state of Alaska's Department of Natural Resources South Central Reason region base price of 350 per unit and discounted over 20 years at a 5% discount rate ensures a fair and transparent starting value. Minimum bids would be as follows. And there's table um with each lot as it's labeled on page 12 um with the burough parcel number, the amount, the acreage, the legal description, and the minimum bid per lot. Um if approved, the parcels would be marketed and the sale conducted this spring. Um and is up to the commission if they would like to recommend um that these are no long these lots are no longer needed for a public purpose to council. I just like I say this has been something that's been in the works for quite some time. Um I know that the originally the public purpose stating was the wetlands and by doing in this subdivision we get rid of that wetlands that were needed for the quote public purpose and so by doing this I think it it clearly defines this as why it

wouldn't be needed. Also these are already surrounded on multiple sides by existing gravel pits. So it makes logical sense to switch this to a gravel pit. Um I'm assuming these would also go if developed or when developed um would fall under the burrows uh code I believe is what it is for rules and regulations for the current new development of pits and setbacks and burms and that kind of thing for would that revert back to the burrow or no? It would be new. It would not have grandfather rights because new so it would fall under the new regulations. So there would be standards that they currently have to follow for new development. A

and it would also require a conditional use permit which gives the city then also we could through that process set those standards um to align with the bureau if that's what the body chose. All right. Thank you. Just out of curiosity, does this have to go through DNR review or any of that uh for for the sale? No. Uh for any development uh all the licensing everything would have to go through all the applicable state, burrow and city regulations. Thank you.

How did we come to the market value? Um, I will say that there are smarter financial people than me, but um, so we had a study done, I believe it was MLAN, uh, put together a gravel study to determine what the estimated amount of gravel. Um, they also looked at with those test boards, they did 10 test, um, so they could determine where that water table is.

So, we set it at the estimated quantity of gravel per lot above the water table. There are provisions where you can go below the water table, but that's a additional additional permitting process. So, assuming they're not going that low. Um, and then we calculated that using the state DNR's South Central region base price for when they do sales off state land. Theirs is 350 per unit. So, we use that and that's where the minimum bid and we also then stretch it out over 20 years and depreciated at 5% a year. Um, which again that's smarter financial people than to me. Um, that's where the discount rate came. So that's where the minimum bid price was calculated from.

And like I said, that is minimum bid price. So if there is somebody that's interested, we might get in a little bit of a bidding war, I would assume. But I would hope so. Those are good prices. Yeah.

Hopefully it'll get people interested and want to start bidding on it, but I was just curious um is it better to sell it or is it a value to lease it for that purpose? We looked at different options uh we being the administration um so more than just myself. Um, and the reason we are opting more for a sale is if we leased it and had some sort of concession air agreement, um, like I know the burrow has on certain lands that they own that they allow gravel extraction. Uh, we don't have a surveyor or anyone like that on staff to verify how much. So if someone says we took out 100 100,000 cubic yards of material, we really can't independently verify that without an additional cost to the city, which would kind of negate getting some of those royalties. So um we we felt that sell it, you know, to get it to be productive and then um as things are sold, we would get a portion of the sales tax as you know, material sold. So it would benefit us and the burough that way getting the sales tax, but we just felt that the cost of having a surveyor like on retainer would probably just negate any benefit we would have for having a long-term lease.

Thanks. Is there anyone else that would like to make a comment on this issue? Anybody in the audience? None online. There's nobody online.

Okay. Unanimous consent. Anyone? Just real quick, since it was brought up about the burrow, just some of the examples of the new code would be um the new operator would be required to utilize what's called um backup alarms on all the equipment to diminish the beep beep beep beep beep sound. And then there was hours put in place as far as operation would not be allowed to take place at night. and then um crushing and processing. And those are broken down into typically the conditional use permit. So you could have one operation taking place at the site or near the site and then another would just be crushing or vice versa kind of thing.

And and that's something to bring up too is as the city level um talking about adding code, the bureau put a lot of time and effort into a brand new gravel pit code. And if we're gonna have gravel pits operating in the city, we might look into maybe adopting the same code.

Basically, it's already put a ton of time and effort into it to make a lot of that verbiage and what was felt to be important with a lot of different people. And so it might be something to look into adding something into code that specifically outlines rules and regulations referencing burrow code just brought right over. So there's not like a huge difference. Um, let me not say this. If the commission would like me to bring forward something, um, to that effect, um, we would do this separately, but you could make Could they make a motion? No, I'll bring I'll bring back a um discussion action, some sort of action at the next meeting. Um, so you guys could take action to then ask me to because then we could suggest it to council um and that might be the appropriate mechanism. But at this time um for the sale um it I believe it is going to be contingent on them getting a cup. And I think right now as it stands today with no changes to code, um the CU process would give us this this body, not me, um this body the the authority to put some of those same limitations. Um but I think at the time we're going, we may also be able to make some of the other changes uh kind of concurrently.

So are we going to table this until you can put that together? No, this is the sale. This is the sale. Okay. Not part of the regulation of the pit. Yeah. No, totally separate. Okay. That was just something I was bringing up as a totally separate item to think about in future since we're talking about it. Might be something to add into the future discussion. But as far as the sale goes, we have Yeah, I think we're good on that. So, back on that same topic, when uh can we expect the body since we're in the month of January to tackle that land use to get rid of some of these condition use permits? And this is going to be a hot sale, I believe. So the sooner we can come up with some kind of legislation probably the better.

Uh when I get to the director's report, I think we can uh throw out dates for another work session because I think it is time to bring CPS back to the forefront. We were just we were directed by council to bring some of the other ones like tent camping and subdivision regulations. Um so that kind of pushed that but I think CPS was a working project that this body was working on and I think we can bring it back anytime. So we can throw out dates after the motion's taken care of. So you say CUP's in reference to the entire land use table where you got C's and N's and P's and

that that's definitely going to be a component. I think uh clearing that up might help dictate other changes to the CP. sooner the better would be my opinion cuz I think as we lead into 2026 it's going to be a big building season and I think we have a lot of cleanup to do in that table that's changed in the last 10 years in my opinion. Okay, I'll bring it up during the director's report and we can um after we clear this motion then we can talk about that. I'll move for unanimous on this motion. Second.

Are there sign there's no objection? Um

yeah. Are there any objections to unanimous consent? Thank you. Um hearing no objection to unanimous consent, the recommendation is approved. That brings us to reports. Um, planning director Butner, may we have your report, please?

Sure. Um, so I want to bring we did adopt uh the layown and these are allformational items that generally they're there. They're presented to you, but we don't necessarily go have to go over them. But I just wanted to introduce you cuz it's a little bit new, but we're going to be instituting this process as we go forward. But um there are three conditional use permits that have been closed. Um there are provisions in code that either will um let them expire with if there's no activity within a year, just an automatic provision doesn't take any action from the body. Um and so some of these as you'll see there are the three um under the lay down that um some have moved from the building so they no longer need the cup. One um the person just shut down the business is no longer operating that business or requested just to to end everything which is um if it is requested by the CUP holder is an automatic another automatic thing. Um, so there were three. We're just putting these in here so that we have a complete file and we can close them out in our system. Um, and just inform the commission that these are no longer in effect. So, um, since they take no action, we just put them underformational items so that they're there. um going forward they'll be in the actual packet but these we came up with this week as we are cleaning up some of our we're going through all the cups right now and um some of them we realized had been closed for some time but we're officially making them closed on January 1st of this year.

Just a quick question on that same topic. Um I understand sunsetting them but out of curiosity if we have another applicant come forward as a reference point for research will we be able to go in reverse and know that or would it be wiped from the history? Does that make sense?

We we keep the we will keep a synopsis in our database. Um the file itself after our record detention policy, the records itself will probably be destroyed. Um certain ones go for quite a while because they're tied to legislation. So we'll always have the resolutions. They that's part of our permanent record. Some of the associated materials like the annual compliance reports and all that stuff, those may may go away with records retention. Um but we will know that this happened at this address at some point that will always be there. Um and then our database used as a reference that is usually a document that um if it's for reference use only is not um it's subject to pro you know public records laws but it's not an active like case file which has a different retention. So, um, we will have the history. We just might not have the right now exceptionally thick, um, files that go with some of these cups.

Thank you. Yeah. And then that just means that, you know, somebody buys Nick's Iron Works house and decides to open another one, we can say, well, it worked for 30 years in this residence. Yeah, that's just the records. So, we would still be able to look that up. Okay. I do appreciate the the information on actually doing it this way. I was on this commission for a quite a while and we never got this kind of report knowing what was closed and open and I appreciate this. This is very helpful.

We're trying to be as we're trying to have Windexing. It'll be super transparent. So, um and also lightens up how many file cabinets I have upstairs if I can start getting rid of some. Um, and then the other thing, um, as it was mentioned by Commissioner Fees, I was going to bring up, uh, right now the subdivision regulations, we're waiting on some reports and some, uh, design guidance that's coming from another department. So, that one's we push pause on that one. We'll keep working on the, uh, temporary dwelling units to keep hammering out that as, um, it'll be iterative. So, I would assume maybe late next month, early March, coming back, you know, with some additional information. But prior to all this, we were working on the conditional use permit process. A and as a part of that, one of the major findings we found were just the plethora of potential conditional uses. Um, and Commissioner Doth wasn't here, but we have 549 conditional uses potentially, which is more than any by right and or prohibited.

Everybody knew what a C stood for. Um, it was pretty much, oh, there's a blank. Let's put a C in there. Um, so cleaning that up I think would be appropriate for this for this body and help us because if we do start the comprehensive planning process, I think having as much of our affairs in order going into that process is going to help streamline how we exit the process. So yeah, we'll stay down the road and out of the

and I don't like the weeds. I don't like being in the rough. I don't play golf, but I know it's bad. Um, so if if you want I would um I could bring this up. The earliest would be our next meet before our next meeting. However, I'm supposed to be traveling out of state if the weather agrees. So, touching base. So, I'd say maybe the 2nd. Um I think that's this is close to being the updated. Um so, 25th would be our would be the last one in February. Um 11th is our next meeting. um

I can start putting some stuff together. I'll be back for that meeting, but I'm coming back the day before. So, um to be better prepared, I would advocate for the 25th, but it is up to the body. I will be prepared either way. Can we get either what you had on the screen on digitally or have it printed out because I can't really see the screen that good right now. My vision comes and goes, so just depends on what you No, 100%. I'll make sure there's I'll make sure that it's presented both ways. I blew out this eye so I can see this one. So yeah. Yep. I I'll make sure it's printed. Awesome. I'm If just before the meeting at like six o'clock, is that what we're thinking for?

Do six o'clock um for work sessions to accommodate as many schedules as we can or at least that's fine. Yeah, I'm totally fine with the 25th before the meeting. That'd be work for me and give you plenty of time to do it. I'm leaving the next day. I don't know TBD, but you'll be here that day. See, so you sold yourself out. Oh, yeah. The day before you get on the phone, but we would have the stuff uh I can get to you ahead of time and then if you do have comments, even if you're not at the actual meeting, um my door is always open, so we can always talk when you get back. Does that conclude your report? Yeah, if the 25th. Any more questions? Just for clarification, we just need to make sure the 25th works.

Okay. Okay. That clue. Sorry, that concludes my report. Um, I have no report for today. Uh, Commissioner Fikes, may we have your report, please? All

righty then. Um, let's see. We had a conditional use uh permit in the Nikkisi area and we were looking to stabilize a culver by placing 75 yards. Oh yeah, that was the um permission to get rip wrap in a 50-foot habitat protection district. So yeah, there was no issues on that one. Um, in the Nikiski area, mile 35 of the Spur Highway. Um, they just needed permission. The river center gave a report and there was no conflict. And then the other one was in um Snow River, which was I believe um Primrose Moose Pass. Snow uh Moose Pass. H Sterling or Beyond Sterling. What am I trying to say? Uh Sewart. Sewart the S. I was looking for the S. Um and that was a conditional use permit. And they were looking for Department of Transportation. um wanted some construction wells and culverts and there was no issues there and same kind of thing. Um all part of the DOT road project that's taking place so there's no conflict or questions on that and then we did the plat because we didn't have a quorum and I think there was four we reviewed four and we passed all four. Um, yes. Oh, excuse me. There was two and we passed all two. Yes, we reviewed two pass two. Uh, in session at 7:30, out of session at 7:53. Fastest meeting.

Yeah. And then we had director's comments and he said something. What did he say? Dear Lord. I wrote it down somewhere. I think he might have been talking about the, believe it or not, the gravel cuts. I thought I wrote it down. Oh, there we go. Um, oh, the sewer commissioner resigned. So, if you know anybody in Seward, they need a um commissioner for Seward. Um, and then the assembly Oh, yeah. It was a nothing burger. Um, the assembly member was there. So, yeah, 20-minute process and yeah, wham, bam, we were out the door. the one that's driving.

Yeah. Yeah. Oh, we had new iPads distributed, too. So, we got new iPads. I did not, but others did. Apparently, mine has not expired or exceeded its limit. Excellent. Anybody have any questions for Miss Vikes? Thank you, Commissioner Cassenna or Council Member Cassenna, may we have your report, please? Yeah, thank you. Uh because this meeting's been so quick tonight, I feel compelled to maybe hold you hostage for one to two hours while I read an interpretive reading of the minutes from the last council.

I'm not much of a dancer, but uh no, try to keep it short. Uh so we had a scheduled report. It was an update for the small community air service development program uh from Valair Aviation Consulting. So, this is the update on where we're at with getting direct flights from Kenai to the lower 48. So, I'll I'll run through all these and if you have questions about any of them, feel free to ask and I'll try to update you. But, there was also some information um a packet that was provided. So, that's maybe something we could have uh distributed, I think, cuz it was it was pretty compelling. So, uh, then public hearings. We adopted the capital improvement plan and financial goals for 2027. Adopted the schedule for a special election on April 14th uh, to vote on amending our annual election date and the corresponding things that go with that. Adopted a contract for the design of a new approach um, for the temporary runway while we have the main runway under construction this summer. So, an approach is a thing I didn't know about. It's basically something I still don't know about, but it's how planes decide they can land or not. And um

yeah. Yeah.

And so, uh and and so there was a lot of discussion about that and uh anyway, that that project is on schedule to be completed before the runway pro main runway project kicks off. um which I think is the big concern. Uh and then new business uh we approve the nomination of Autumn Carlson to the beautifification commission and parks and recreation commission and uh authorized the use of cameras for operational and safety purposes. Basically during CO said he bought some cameras, installed them to keep track of how many people were in buildings cuz you had to monitor that sort of a thing. And the council at the time said, "If you use those cameras for anything else, you need to get council approval." And so there was a discussion on what that use would be, it's just security. Um, you know, how are they going to provide limited access and stuff like that. So there's a policy developed for that. And um, making sure they weren't uh flock cameras or things like that. So yeah. Uh, and then we had a work session this evening with Kaiti. Uh we have an annual work session with them and talked about a number of joint things that I can run through real quick because I have the notes. Uh they were looking for some fee wavers for the uh elder housing project that they're putting in. Uh so there was a discussion about maybe waving the plans review fees because it's eight of the same building essentially. But I think that was as far as that went. And then um there were some discussions about um their collaboration with the Siri gold mine project across the inlet. Uh and then uh just potential impacts for both the tribe and and the city for LNG plant if that comes through. Um and then they asked for an update on or

offered support on a water treatment plant if we ever needed funds to do so. and um they're still looking for grant funds to help us jointly build a playground uh in Oldtown. So yeah, any questions uh please feel free to ask.

So yeah, so initially I heard that parting of the money.

So So currently that's a great question. Um, when this was first kicked off years ago, I was on parks and rec commission and it was budgeted for right around 1.6 million. That was scrape the whole pad and start fresh. Um, and Kiti had some involvement and interest in doing that because of its location. Um but since then both groups have had difficult times finding grant funds or other funds and so the city is currently looking at ways to maybe peel that back to where we can use the existing property and maybe yeah do a phased approach that saves money. So

is that the are we talking about the land across from where Kacnu is that where the playground already is? right next to the the art center. Yeah, they've got a a rendering online. It's pretty cool. It has like Native Youth Olympics and all kinds of really neat stuff. But as Jerry McGuire would always say, "Show me the money." That was the point. So So no money anywhere right now.

You have any further questions? Sure. Sure, I got more um airport questions. So, talk to me about your deadlines here. Um when are we doing this airport runway construction? Is that in June, July? Uh miday I believe. So, the deadline for the new approach has to be done before that. So, it's a pretty short timeline, but the fairly confident that the contractor is going to be able to do that. Um and is the float plane basin going to be open at that time? Yes, that was not discussed. uh float plane will be open uh the basin the parallel taxi way

to the runway will be open so most of the aircraft that are scheduled to come in um will be able to use that it's not quite as wide but it's I think it's 70 ft 75 ft and certain people have restrictions depending on their experience level so they got two choices VFR and IFR and if they miss the first one which is the visual the rookie yeah then you got to go to the experience instrumentation So yeah, and if you're at 75 then and you're all tore up, it can be an issue with getting in,

which is why the that's why they did um appropriate um or allowed to go into the contract to get the IFR approaches done by a private party. Um they will be available to anyone who requests them, but they will not be um published by the FAA. Um because the FAA is not the one doing the actual approaches. They will provide them. So, so they call center or where am I gonna where am I send center will have them um any of the um anyone who's using the airport anyone who basically request it. So if they call a notam

so FAA is going to put a notem out saying okay um that there will the approaches that will be out there

um will not be FAA driven and so they will not be published like in a normal FAA approach. However, anyone who requests it, so all of our grant illution, all them, they're going to have it. All of our um the airport commission is going to work to get it get the word out to a lot of the private pilots and general aviation, but anyone who requests it will be able to access it because it will be a public approach, just not an FAA published approach. And so with that um consulting, do you know if we have available lands if we were to have space at the airport for another ticket counter or do we have additional building space if we wanted to put in another hanger for another airline?

We are currently going in phase two of the airport master plan. Um I'm sitting in on part of the city consortium on that one. Um we are looking at the layout for over the next 20 years. Um where's if any changes to where the gravel strip is um what the west northwest side um on the other side of the float plane what is that you know what is the future development of that uh one of the projects is the Willow Street extension to go further north where curves and goes into Marathon taking it straight up uh opening up some more land down there as well. We do have at least one lease lot available currently um that's been cleared and grub but not actually developed um that the city took back because a lease was terminated. So um we are looking at what the future of the airport looks like over the next 20 years I believe. Next month there is a presentation to the airport commission and then there will be a public meeting if I'm not mistaken and it will be published on the website. I believe it's February 19th. I think that's a Thursday. Um it'll be here in council chambers. Um but it'll be a public meeting to look at some of the initial alternatives. This is not published in stone, but it'll money was no object which um and you know we rub our crystal ball and see where is it going to be. This is there's at least at least three and possibly four alternatives. The one's a no build. Nothing changes and then some some staggered approaches of what it may look like. So, um, highly encourage attendance, uh, either online or on Zoom for that.

No, thank you. Thank you. That was a great report. There's a lot of good news you had there. Share with us. Um, next meeting will be February 11th. Oh, wait. I'm sorry. Is there anyone on the public wishing in the from the public wishing to make a comment? up. I knew she was going to talk at some point.

I don't really want to, but I'll do it. Marian Nelson, formerly on the Well, I'm still listed as part of the Arts Center board, but I am one of the founders of the arts. That makes me one old chick here. Um, just to speak to the playground. We didn't scrape the the ground clean in terms of the plan. The plan was to work with the Kennesis and Terry and the committee that was talking about that for a while. The plan, the great part of that plan, uh, concept of a plan, as we sometimes say, is to use NO patterns, tra uh, game if you will, patterns, event patterns as part of the inspiration for the pathways uh, in that on that piece of land. So, I can't tell you exactly how that was going to end up, but uh it was really good plan and there everybody decided there just wasn't going to be any money for it. You know, not the um I hate to say the predictable outcome of that, but uh often predictable outcome, that sort of thing, but it's something to keep in mind from that perspective. Terry's wife was on that committee as well as uh two or three other members and then others. Uh anyway, it got a little got going a little bit. I wish it was still going cuz it uh Oh, what's the architect's name? My friend. Come on, somebody. knows so many people that doesn't narrow the list down much.

I I I know her very well. I can't pull her name up right now. Anyway, she sat in on that and she drew up the plans for that as they exist. So, you've got plans in storage somewhere. Was it Kimber? Pardon me. Was it Kimber? Was it what? Kimber. Was she the architect lady?

No, I just can't think of it right now. Nancy, I think. Anyway, um the information is there. There's enough there with enough meat in it that you could go pick up from that and go with it. And the like where's where should we put the um outouses so to speak and anything else? Move the new move the playground or the uh areas around where you would have a team layout influence blah blah blah. and it went all the way over to the back side of Kenai Joe's. So, it was it was it's a good plan and I think it should uh remain in a few people's minds as a possibility for the future. Um, obviously we were interested, we being the art center were interested because it came right up to the building and part of that caused us to get a second building to bring in. So there's two buildings as you anybody who's looked over there in the recent history. part of part of that is was influenced because of what we hoped we could do at some point um with that park be a great addition for sure. And I do want to say we know we've talked a lot about the Kiti tribe, but there's another tribe in town too that the city has also got with.

Cat, you got to talk louder. There's more than one tribe in town and I know that I know the council has some of that tribe participated in the conversation too. And it sounds like, you know, maybe we can work two angles and more participation. So I think it's not dead stick yet. Everybody can throw money at it for sure. Anybody else? Does anybody have some comments for Miss Nelson? I have lots of opinions on everything. We love it. Thank you very much. Sure. Next meeting, Friday, February 11th, 2026. Friday.

I'm sorry. February is an issue. Where is it? February. February 11th, 2026. Isn't that what I just said? You said Friday. Friday. Friday through everybody. Right. Okay. February 11th. February 11th. 2026. Sorry, I've been a I've been awake for a lot of hours. Anyway, um, is anyone planning to be absent or attending remotely? Okay. Um, commission comments and questions. Would anybody have anything to add to our meeting tonight before we close? Yes. Sonia, no comment. Gwen,

let's just welcome Marian to our group tonight. Uh, thank you for all of the work you're doing on those um, cups. It's really great getting those cleaned up. All good. headlight.

Uh, not a whole lot, but I did want to comment on the if you haven't looked into the whole, you know, direct flights thing, there's a good presentation online that talks about it. Um, basically right now we're just waiting on the grant. Um, and from my understanding, and I could be corrected, but the grant was supposed to be already awarded for that from the feds, but it got delayed because the government shutdown. So, we're waiting on that. If that grant comes in, they're talking within a couple years of probably about two years possibly having service out here. Um it's pretty exciting. I think it's a huge thing um for the area and I think it could be really a really great thing for the area. Um but that report just read through it. It's got a lot of good information. It shows that it's feasible and I think that uh and also one interesting thing I think is that uh this year we were the only ones in the state to apply for that grant. So, we should have a pretty good shot because we lost it last time to Fairbanks. So, if we're the only ones around, hopefully that narrows down the choices. So, I'm excited for that. So, look forward to hopefully moving forward with that.

Thank you, Alex. Um, I too am excited about the airport work. Um, I live next to the airport and it's like listening to the drag races all day long. It's pretty cool. Um, and especially the float planes. So, um, I'm looking forward to that expanding as well. Private air.

Oh, yeah. It's awesome. Especially when the big ones come in. That's awesome. So, uh, also I appreciate the opportunity to to be the chair. Um, this is just a huge learning curve for me and I want to thank everybody for your support. We have no pending items which means seeing no further business before this body we are adjourned.

Well, they're also looking at we have three sections. Will the the lines are