Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. I'd like to call the June 10, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting to order. If you are able, please rise and join me in 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.

Clerk, may we have the roll, please?

Thank you, Chair. Commissioner Krause?

Here.

Commissioner Fikes?

Here.

Commissioner Woodard?

Here.

Vice Chair Dauphit?

Here.

Chair Keeton?

Here.

Commissioner Askin is absent. You have a quorum. Commissioner Ersley?

Present.

My apologies. Sorry, Commissioner.

Is there a motion to approve the agenda and consent agenda?

Make a motion to approve the agenda and the consent agenda in a second.

Second.

Are there any amendments to the agenda or the consent agenda? There are none. Hearing no, oh.

Make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented.

Second.

The agenda is approved. We're now on C, scheduled public comment.

there any schedule excuse me um i need to read the consent agenda into the record please please go right ahead the uh regular meeting minutes of may 27 2026 and that is your consent agenda for the night

Back to item C, scheduled public comment. We have none. Unscheduled public comment, item D. Is there anyone from the public wishing to speak to anything that is not on the agenda? Clerk, is there any remote attendees wishing to speak?

No, there are not, Chair.

Okay, that brings us to item E, consideration of plats. The first item is resolution PZ2026-17 recommending that the preliminary plat mica subdivision running group replat be approved. Is there a motion to approve the resolution? Second. A motion.

I'll make the motion first. I'll make a motion to approve Resolution PZ2026-17, recommending the preliminary plot in MICA subdivision re-plot attached hereto be approved.

I'll second. And I also need to say that my daughter does live connected to this property, if that makes any difference.

I find no conflict of interest. Director Buettner, may we have your report?

Thank you, Chair Keeton. Preliminary plans have been submitted from Jason Strollenberg, PLS, on behalf of the property owner for a replat of Lot 156B, Micah Subdivision, and Government Lot 155, Township 6 North, Range 11 West, Section 34, Seward Meridian, and vacating approximately 210 feet of the 30-foot-wide Glacier Street right-of-way to create one parcel. Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 1410 Subdivision Regulations states preliminary plats or replats must first be submitted to the city for review and provide recommendation to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission. The proposed replat meets a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet or approximately 0.47 acres for the rural residential zoning district. The size of the proposed lot is approximately 134,165 square feet or 3.080 acres. City water and wastewater are not available in this area. However, private water and wastewater have been installed on site and are subject to the regulatory requirements of the State of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Direct access to the proposed lot is provided via Rambo Drive, a maintained gravel city road. The portion of right of way along Misty Haven Lane to be granted this plot was granted by BLM Land Patent 50-65-0236, dated October 12, 1964, and is a continuation of the unimproved Misty Haven Lane right of way. The approximately 210 foot by 30 foot portion was granted to the city of Kenai at the MICA subdivision of government lot 156 and does not reflect a patent right away, which are included in the attachments to this report. The Kenai City Council must declare the approximate 210 feet of the 30-foot wide Glacier Street right away not needed for a public purpose and approve the vacation of these rights away as shown on the preliminary plat. The City of Kenai Public Works Department has reviewed the preliminary plat and has no comments. Therefore, staff finds that an installation agreement is not required for the preliminary plat. During a field survey of the subject lots, it was discovered that the existing improvements encroach on the building's flatback and utility easement, thus making the improvement a nonconforming structure. The building file has been flagged and no construction or modification will be allowed that will increase the nonconformity of this structure. Staff finds that the preliminary plat for a replat of lot 156B, Mica Subdivision, and government lot 155, Township 6 North, Range 11 West, Section 34, Seward Meridian meets the following requirements of Title 14 of Kenai Municipal Code Sections and aligns with the intent of the Kenai Zoning Code. One, pursuant to KMC 14-10-070 subdivision design standards, the preliminary plat for subdivision subject to the listed conditions provides utility and access easements, provides satisfactory and desirable building sites, and the existing onsite private water and wastewater system are subject to the regulatory requirements of the State of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Two, pursuant to KMC 14-10-080, minimum improvement required, the access right-of-way within the proposed preliminary plat exists prior to this plat. The right-of-way is a continuation of existing street and is determined acceptable access. Therefore, an installation agreement is not required. Three, pursuant to 14-24-010 minimum lot area requirements, the preliminary plat meets city standards for minimum lot size in the rural residential zoning district of 20,000 square feet with a proposed lot size of 3.080 acres. Pursuant to KMC 14-24-020 general requirements, the preliminary plan meets city standards for minimum lot width and depth and access utilities compliance with the maximum lot coverage, maximum height, and sub-ax will be reviewed during the building permit review. Staff finds that the proposed preliminary plat for Micah Subdivision Renanger Replat meets the general standards of Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 1410 Subdivision Regulations and 1424 Development Requirements Table and hereby recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of Resolution PZ2026-17 for a replat of Lot 156B Micah Subdivision and Government Lot 155 Township 6 North, Range 11 West, Section 34, Seward Meridian to the Kenai Peninsula Borough subject to the following conditions. One, further development of the property will conform to all federal, state of Alaska, and local regulations. Two, the Kenai City Council must declare the approximate 210 feet of the 30-foot wide Glacier Street right-of-way not needed for a public purpose and approve the vacation of the rights-of-way as shown on the preliminary plan.

Thank you. Is there anybody from the general public that would wish to speak to this resolution? Is the petitioner here? No? Are there any remote attendees wishing to speak?

No, there are not.

Thank you. Seeing no one or no one else, we'll bring it back to the Commission. Discussion from the Commission.

Yes, the chair. I just have a question. I'm assuming the other end of Glacier Street comes out on an improved right-of-way. Is that correct? I just can't tell from the picture provided in the packet.

Through the chair, Commissioner Douthat, yes, Glacier on the south end hits Lawton. It does provide access to three subdivide lots south of this. However, there is no extension of Glacier Street to the north. It's not platted on any plat from there all the way to the spur.

Okay, that's what I was curious about. So there's still it's not going to landlock any lots. And from what we've determined, there's no utility easement issues in this current location, correct?

Correct. The utility easements come in off Rainbow Drive to this particular lot. And then on the south end of this preliminary plat is actually right away granted to make a cul-de-sac for Glacier Street. So it does complete that right of way there and ends on their property. But utilities come off Rainbow.

Okay, that's what I was checking on. I will be in favor of this due to the fact it doesn't appear to be encroaching on anybody else or landlocking anybody's property. Still allows access to the other lots off of Lawton. And just for clarity, this is only a 30-foot easement, correct? So it wouldn't be an artery street even if it was, correct?

The lot, so the three subdivided lots to the west of Glacier Street have already been subdivided. The government lot to the east has not been subdivided. If in the future it were to be subdivided, the other 30 foot of the Glacier Street right away would be dedicated at that point. So no, it would not be a... It would not meet city specs if a road were to go in there. It would be essentially a driveway at this point. But if the government lot gets subdivided in the future, it would be a complete right-of-way. But the cul-de-sac on this covers assuming that there will be a 60-foot right-of-way in the future.

Okay. Thank you.

Any further comments from the commission?

I'm in favor of it.

Thank you, Ms. Woodard.

I'm in favor of it as well with the clarification on where the utilities come in.

Anyone else? Okay.

I'd like to request unanimous consent.

Are there any objections? Seeing none, the motion passes. The second item is resolution PZ2026-18 recommending that the preliminary Thompson Park Myers edition number three be approved. Is there a motion to approve the resolution?

I make a motion to approve resolution PZ2026-18 recommending that preliminary Platt-Thompson-Park-Myers edition number three attached here to be approved. I will second.

Thank you. Director Buettner, may we have your report?

Thank you, Chair. A preliminary plat has been submitted from Edge Survey and Design LLC on behalf of the property owners for a replat of Lot 4A, Block 6, Thompson Park Replat No. 2, and Lot 6, Block 6, Thompson Park Edition No. 2, Township 5 North, Range 11 West, Section 1, Seward Meridian to create one parcel. Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 1410 Subdivision Regulations State Preliminary Plats or Replats must first be submitted to the City for review and provide recommendations to Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission. The proposed replat meets a minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 square feet or 0.47 acres for the rural residential zoning district. The size of the proposed lot is approximately 52,577 square feet or 1.207 acres. City water and wastewater are available in this area. Property owners currently have water and wastewater services provided by the City of Kenai. Direct access to the proposed lot is provided via Wild Rose Avenue, a maintained paved city road. If approved, the owners intend to keep the 3840 Wild Rose Avenue address. The City of Kenai Public Works Department has reviewed the preliminary plat and has no comments. Therefore, staff finds that an installation agreement is not required for the preliminary plat. Staff finds that the preliminary plat for a replat of Lot 4A, Block 6, Thompson Park replat number 2 and Lot 6, Block 6, Thompson Park addition number 2, Township 5 North, Range 11 West, Section 1 through Meridian meets the following Title 14 of Kenai Municipal Code sections and aligns with the intent of the Kenai zoning code. One, pursuant to KMC 141070 subdivision design standards, preliminary plat for a replat subject to the list of conditions provides utilities access to easements, provides a satisfactory and desirable building site, and the accessible water and wastewater systems are subject to the regulatory requirements of the City of Kenai Public Works Department. Pursuant to KMC 14-10-080 minimum improvement required, the right-of-way within proposed preliminary plat exists prior to this plat. The right-of-way is continuation of an existing street and is determined acceptable access. Therefore, an installation agreement is not required. Pursuant to KMC 14-24-010 minimum lot area requirements, the preliminary plat meets city standards for minimum lot size in the rural residential zoning district of 20,000 square feet with a proposed lot size of 1.207 acres. Pursuant to KMC 14-24-020 general requirements, preliminary plan meets city standards for minimum lot width and depth and access utility easements. Compliance with the maximum lot coverage, maximum height, and setbacks will be reviewed during the building permit review. Staff finds that the proposed preliminary plat for Thompson Park Meyers Edition No. 3 meets the General Standards Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 1410 Subdivision Regulations Chapter 1424 Development Requirements Table and hereby recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of Resolution PZ2026-18 for a replat of Lot 4A, Block 6, Thompson Park Replat No. 2 and Lot 6, Block 6, Thompson Park Edition No. 2, Township 5 North, Range 11 West, Section 1, Seward Meridian to the Kenai Peninsula Borough subject to the following conditions. One, further development of the property will conform to all federal, state of Alaska, and local regulations. And two, add plat note, flood hazard notice. Some or all of the property shown on this plat has been designated by FEMA as a flood hazard area district as of the date of this plat and is recorded within the district recorder's office. Prior to development, the city of Kenai floodplain administrator should be contacted for current information and regulations. Development must comply with Chapter 1430 of the Kenai Municipal Code. See FEMA firm panel 02122C-0240F for information on floodplain zone XU.

Thank you. Is there anybody from the general public who would wish to speak to this resolution at this time? Okay. Seeing no one, we'll bring it back to the Commission. There's still nobody up. Okay. And for discussion from the commission.

Is the petitioner for this available? Are they supposed to be here for these or no?

For plat reviews, it's not mandatory. It's for any final decision made by the body. Generally, we recommend, so CUP, any kind of permit. They are required. It's highly encouraged that they be either in attendance or available, but it is not mandatory by code.

Okay. I just want to clarify. Thank you. This seems like a pretty straightforward one. Property owner just getting rid of a property line doesn't seem to impede anything else there, so I'm totally fine with this.

Unanimous consent.

Anybody? I'd like to request unanimous consent.

Are there any objections to unanimous consent? Seeing no objections, the motion is passed. Item F, public hearings. We have none. That brings us to item G, unfinished business. We have one item that was postponed at the May 27, 2026 meeting. The first item is resolution PZ2026-10, granting a conditional use permit for cabin rental of a single family dwelling at 1510 Tundra Rose Lane. Is there a motion to approve the resolution?

I'll make a motion for resolution PZ2026-11, granting a conditioning use permit for cabin rentals.

Second. Thank you. Director Buettner, may we have your report?

Thank you, Chair Keeton. I apologize for the error on your script. That's okay. To clarify, it is resolution P02026-11. The applicant is requesting to operate a future single-family dwelling as a short-term rental. Conditional use permit is required to operate a single-family dwelling as a short-term rental in the rural residential zoning district. Pursuant to KMC 142150A, the intent of a conditional use permit is to allow some uses that may be compatible with the designated principal uses in specific zoning districts provided certain conditions are met. Prior to granting a conditional use permit, the Commission shall determine that the identified criteria, as outlined in KMC 1420.150 , conditional use permits review criteria, are met. Criteria 1. The use is consistent with the purpose of this chapter and the purposes and intent of the zoning district. The rural residential zone is intended to provide for low density residential development and outlying in rural areas in a form which creates a stable and attractive residential environment. The specific intent in establishing the zone is to one, separate residential structures to an extent which will preserve the rural open quality of the environment, B, prevent health hazards in areas not served by public water and sewer, and two, to prohibit uses which would A, violate the residential character of the environment, or B, generate heavy traffic in predominantly residential areas. The proposed use would not necessarily violate the residential character of the neighborhood as it was functioned or remained as a single family dwelling and would be seasonally used as a short-term rental. Furthermore, the proposed use is not anticipated to generate heavy traffic as the use is limited to the future single family dwelling. There is adequate parking available, the number of anticipated users will be limited, and the dwelling will be owner-occupied seasonally. The existing density will remain unchanged since there is no intention of adding additional dwelling units. Staff finds that the proposed use meets the intent of the rural residential zoning district. Criteria two, the economic and non-economic value of the adjoining property and neighborhood will not be significantly impaired. The proposed use is similar to other properties in the Greater Beaver Loop area where there are many cabin rentals or lodges in operation. The applicant intends to construct a single family dwelling on the subject parcel this summer, the summer of 2026. The applicant states that there will be a limit to the number of users, traffic will be seasonal, and the dwelling will be occupied by the applicant for about half the year. Staff finds the proposed use, similar to the nearby properties, would not have an adverse impact on the neighborhood and adjoining properties. Staff finds that the proposed use would not impair the economic and non-economic value of adjacent properties and neighborhood. Criteria three, the proposed use is in harmony with the comprehensive plan. The land use plan from the 2016 comprehensive plan identifies the subject property with a low density residential land use classification. The low density residential land use classification is defined in the comprehensive plan. as low density residential because of location and poor site conditions is intended for large lot, single family, low density residential development. The area will typically be developed with individual onsite water supply and wastewater disposal systems. Streets will typically be constructed to rural street standards, i.e. gravel, and sidewalks will not be typically included in the subdivision design. Rural residential becomes low density residential to avoid confusion with zoning category. The surrounding uses are a mix of residential, commercial, and recreational uses. The proposed use would be compatible with the existing uses and would not require any buffer between surrounding areas since most lots are one acre or larger. Additionally, the applicant states the impact to the area will be minimal given they have no intent to remove more vegetation than that required to build or heavily modify the natural aesthetics of the property. As stated by the applicant, the proposed use of the cabin rental is consistent and in harmony with several goals of the 2016 comprehensive plan, specifically goals one, two, and three listed below. Goal one, quality of life is to promote and encourage quality of life in Kenai. Ensure that Kenai is a community where people and property are safe. Goal two, economic development is to provide economic development to support the physical health of Kenai. Objective ED-9, capitalizing on the tour industry by marketing Kenai as a destination for recreational activities. conventions, festivals, arts and cultural, and other events. And goal three, land use strategies to implement a forward-looking approach to community growth and development. Establish siting and design standards so the development is in harmony and scale with surrounding uses. Objective LU2, promote the inflow of existing improved subdivision lots and LU11, where fees will consolidate access to and between land uses via frontage roads or by shared driveways onto main streets and highways. Criteria four, public services and facilities are adequate to serve the proposed use. City water and sewer is not in the vicinity of the subject property, but onsite water and wastewater treatment and disposal systems will be installed. Applicants are required to be in compliance with wastewater disposal regulatory core requirements of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Tundra Rose is an unpaved, unmaintained road. Criteria five, the proposed use will not be harmful to the public safety, health or welfare. There's adequate parking and buffer for the proposed use to minimize the impact of the surrounding area. Staff finds that the proposed use falls in line with other property uses in the area and will be indistinguishable from surrounding uses. It is not anticipated that the continued use will be harmful to the public safety, health or welfare. As noted by the applicant, the proposed use will not be harmful and the impact on the neighbors will be minimal. There's a natural buffer zone around the properties and they intend to maintain and enhance those zones for feeling of privacy and seclusion. Criteria six, any and all specific conditions deemed necessary by the commission to fill the above mentioned conditions. These may include but are not limited to measures relative to access, screening, site development, building design, operation and use and other similar aspects related to the proposed use. Staff finds that allowing short-term rental activity in the planned single-family dwelling would not cause any adverse impacts to the surrounding property. Staff finds that additional specific conditions are not deemed necessary to fill the above-mentioned conditions. Pursuant to Key Nine Municipal Code 1422 ADC, notices of the public hearing for the conditional use were mailed to property owners within the 300 foot periphery of the subject property. City staff published notice of the public hearing in the Peninsula Clarion. City staff submitted an affidavit opposing verifying a sign was placed on the parcel with information on the public hearing for the conditional use permit request. No public comments have been received at the time of this report. Staff finds that the proposed use or conditional use permit of a cabin rental in the planned single-family dwelling on the property described as Lot 3, Block 1, Wild Row Subdivision meets the criteria for issuance of conditional use permit as set forth in Sections E1 through E6 of Kenai Municipal Code 142150 and hereby recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission adopt Resolution PZ2026-11, approving the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions. One. Any development or use of the property shall comply with all applicable federal, state of Alaska, and city regulations, regardless of whether or not the requirements are listed as conditions for the approval of the conditional use permit. Two, pursuant to KMC 1420-150F, the applicant shall submit an annual report including a summary of on-site activity to the City of Kenai due no later than December 31st of each year. The applicant or representative of the applicant will meet with city staff for on-site inspections when requested. Four, if there is an Expansion, change of use, or sale of the above described property, the applicant will notify the city and a new conditional use permit must be obtained, if applicable, as stated in KMC 1420.150L5. The applicant will have a routine fire inspection performed every two years. The applicant will ensure that the property will be adequately maintained and kept free of trash or junk. Seven quiet hours will be observed from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. daily.

Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to this resolution? Okay. I understand that the applicants are here, but at this time don't have any comments. Thank you. Do the commissioners have any comments?

I would just like to say thanks to staff for adding in the quiet hours to these conditional use permits as conditions. I appreciate that. It's been kind of a standard for these Airbnbs and short-term rentals that we've been approving lately, and I like to see that it's getting in there. Where, I guess I just had one question, where does the applicant or who is the land gonna be managed by in the summers? Is the applicant planning on living on the property during that time? I guess I didn't clarify that during the timeframe. Just kind of curious of who's gonna be managing or who's there. Who do we call if there is an issue, so to say?

We intend on being here most of the time. But if we do rent it out, if it does turn into where we start renting it out, we will have a property manager. We're 3,500 miles away.

Okay, as long as there's going to be some kind of a property manager or somebody to contact if there's an issue. That's what I was going to ask about. Thank you.

Any further comments or questions from the commission?

I think you hit that button again. Yeah.

Based on that, I would like to be requesting unanimous consent.

Are there any objections? The motion passes. Under new business letter H, we have none. I report planning director. May we have your report, please?

Thank you, Chair Keeton. Keep it short and sweet. Thank goodness it's summer and we'll have daylight when we walk out of here. Our department has been hard at work, both with code enforcement, because we found that April showers do not bring May flowers necessarily. They bring code enforcement cases. So we have been actively working a lot of different ones, so we should have updates, plan to provide those as informational items going forward. We also have been working on a couple of grants. So we did a Safe Routes to School, or no, just kidding. Safe Streets for All that mimicked a Safe Routes to School grant application for improved sidewalks and street lighting along Lawton and Tinker. We did get a letter of support from Kniece with that one and the school district actually. So it was, Definitely showing that there's some partnership there. I think if it gets funded, I think it's a very competitive application. This particular area is the number one priority for the entire borough. So we're crossing our fingers we're going to be successful and that will turn what was just going to be a repaving project into a full scale redo of Lawton and Tinker in that area. We're doing another one for fish passage culverts currently. It's due at the end of this month. We've worked with both tribes and with the Watershed Forum, reached out to them, so we're also hopeful that this might actually get some culverts between Cemetery Creek with the City Cemetery all the way down to North Beach so that juvenile salmon can get up into the freshwater streams and have a good life cycle, so hopefully keep the numbers up. And we'll be working, I think, with the Parks and Rec Department later this summer for another one to look at Old Town Park improvements potentially. That's still TBD, but we're looking at finding additional grant opportunities just to move a lot of these projects. It's one thing to be in a plan. I mean, planners love plans, but we also want to see them executed. They don't like collecting dust on a shelf, so we are trying to move some of these projects forward and Going forward, maybe bringing you just some summaries of what's going on just so you're more aware because people may ask you questions in the community. That's a snapshot of what we're doing.

Yes, just a real quick question on the old town park. I know there was mention of grants. I know we were hoping was going to step up with some grant application or some help on that. Have we heard anything on that front?

The conversations are ongoing, but we're probably going to take a more phased approach, so we may not take the Cadillac version that do everything all at once, we may chunk it out. And a lot of times, if a funder funds phase one and it's done successfully, you can go back and say, hey, we're on phase two, phase three. And that way, if there's more opportunities to take little bites of the apple, but also more opportunities for other entities, whether it be our friends with the tribes or private foundations, other ways so that the funder isn't the only one with, you know, money in the bag. It's a little bit of everything. So we think that the smaller phased approach is going to be a little bit more successful, but ultimately get to where we want with a full redo of some of our facilities.

And maybe, you know, have we reached out to Salamantoff too? I know they're big into the children and helping out with that as a possibility. I know it's not in quite their neck of the woods, but I know they might be interested in the NYO portion of that.

Yep, we have an open dialogue. We have an MOU with both of our tribes here and right now our city manager is that liaison between, but we've been working actively to send letters of support templates and ask them to review certain documents as well just to make sure that we're capturing stuff on their behalf that may not be my forehand writing a grant. I don't want to misrepresent their history. So yes, they are definitely active partners across the board.

And it's my turn for a report. I don't have much of a report. I just would like to continue to thank everybody for their participation in exercising their ability to come and speak to us and ask questions. And thank you very much, everybody, for participating. Commissioner Fikes.

All righty. We had a meeting on Monday. And let's see, we had We had an ordinance authorizing the acquisition of property in the Sudatna area for the hospital. So if everybody's familiar with the Pharmacy it's now in possession of the hospital. So we help facilitate that And that was approved and then we had a drainage easement in the sterling area moose river estate subdivision there was a crest to vacate 20 foot approximately of the 277 foot drainage easement and We approve that, and we had a right away vacation in the fritz creek area buttermilk meadows and that was request to vacate the eastern most approximately 25,662 square foot portion of presidy avenue and its associated utilities, it did not interfere with any other land owners access so that one was approved. And then we had another right away vacation this time in the sylvia area. Mountain Brook Heights and that was to vacate a 16,857 square foot portion of the 60 foot wide Mountain Brook Road right away and associated utility easement and there was no conflicts and so that one was approved and then we went into a conditional land use permit waiver for Coalaska Inc. requesting a modification to their CUP adding a project-based waiver to the hours of operation that would allow QAP to work at night outside the standard hours of 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. They were requesting basically the freedom to work 24-7, and so there was quite a bit of discussion, and in obtaining their conditional use permit the first time around, a lot of the same testimony was brought up. And so when it came back around for a waiver, there was no new evidence to support it. So it was declined. And we spent the rest of the evening coming up with findings.

Thank you very much. Councilmember Daniel, may we have your report, please?

Thank you. Council was busy last meeting. Lots on the agenda. I'll hit some of the highlights. sure there'll be some questions i'll do the best i can here but budget was passed with some surprising additions we had a addition for to capture uh leakage at the airport for runway fees and landing fees which will hopefully be a self-sustaining investment and then another amendment for the budget was to upgrade the technology in this room which i'm really excited about for um Ease of meetings for more public participation. Not a whole lot of information yet what that looks like, but it is in this cycle for a capital project. Other than that, we upgraded some, approved the fee table, a lot of budget related stuff. Also, mill rate's the same as it was last year. Had a very interesting, I guess we'll call it a swap of land for the cannery. That was so they could develop a piece of property and tie into city water and sewer. That also passed. And then let's see here. Another vacation that was contentious before it passed this time over in the Wildwood area. Since that project's now moving forward. And let's see what else would be of note. Oh, the camping deal. So the camping deal that came from this body, it was passed by council, but it was... There's some changes to it, basically just cutting it down to more of a, if it's a campground versus not. So two or more tents is kind of where they landed, three or more. Thank you for that clarification. So all the other stipulations were removed. There's some concern that people wouldn't be able to use their property to camp like for the kids and whatnot but uh at least we got something on the books so i'm very excited there's something but nothing because the way it was looking it wasn't going to go and so that was the compromise so that did pass but uh one thing i do want to bring your attention to just so in case you get asked for it is uh ordinance number three 3510 uh 2026 this is the uh The one that we took the bite multiple times to rezone that conservation to suburban residential area on the Princess Street back there. So that was a split vote on the council. It could have gone either way, but it did get enacted as suburban residential, not RR1. So that's how that ended up playing out on that one. But I'm happy to answer any questions. I know there's a lot in here, but I don't want to go through everything. So if there's something you want to know, let me know.

I have a question about the camping ordinance. Three or more tents. Is there a lot size? Did you guys attach any geographic? No, that was it. And then what's the time span? How long can they do it? The duration of the summer?

Yeah, there's no time limit. And so, I mean, excuse me, I'm getting out of my reporting hat, but I would be curious to see what the data looks like after the summer to see if we need to tighten that up. Excellent, thank you. And we may have to take another pass at it. The RV ordinance may need to take another pass at it, the RV piece too. But I am happy we got something on the books instead of nothing, which we had before.

Okay, thank you.

I would just add to that. I think I was there at that meeting, and the biggest contestion that came up is that There was some misalignment on timeline for they allowed RVs to be 30 days in code and the tent camping regulation was only five days or seven. I think it was seven. It was five days, and that was the issue that Councilman Grimmie brought up that she didn't like was that there was a discrepancy between the two, because they didn't match, and she didn't understand why they didn't match, and that was a big contestant issue, and so that just got thrown out completely. But I did email the planning director and put it, hopefully we'll get it back on our But another body so we can work on it and try to refine it and maybe get those to line up a little better. So hopefully in the future, we have a little more enforcement on it is the three tenths was what was decided on as a little bit of something but the timeframe, which is what we were looking for, I believe didn't get put on. And I think the biggest contestant on that was the the 30 days versus five days. So hopefully, we'll be able to come back and look at it a little bit more. Correct. That was exactly it.

One other thing I want to add to that I forgot to mention, not related to the tent, but camping is, in case you could ask, the pools, funding was approved for the Piranha Swim Club to pay for utilities at the Kenai pool. So that was a good win for the community. So hopefully they can make it happen. That was also in our budget.

Anyone else have any questions for Councilmember Daniels? Thank you. Is there anyone from the public wishing to comment? Are there any other people up there? Okay.

They are not.

All right. So the next meeting attendance notification is for June 24th, 2026. Please note, is anyone planning to be absent or attending remotely?

I will not be here and unable to attend remotely due to the fact I'll probably be in Canada somewhere. I'm not logging into Starlink, I'm sorry. I'll probably be driving like a madman to get up here by then.

Okay. Commission comments and questions. Commissioner Ersley.

Director Boehner, that's exciting that you submitted the grant for the lighting on Lawton and Tinker. And I'm happy to see that you got it submitted.

Commissioner Woodard.

I'm enjoying the sunshine, planted my flowers, weeded, and I'm finally able to stand up without pain. Go ahead.

I did notice that the meeting for tonight was on Facebook, and I did see people sharing it, so thank you. That was great.

Excellent. Commissioner Fikes. All good. Commissioner Dothit, or Vice Chair Dothit.

Not a whole lot. The other thing, one thing I would like to hopefully put is maybe we can look at some ideas for these conditional use permits for a recommendation to council for short-term rentals to maybe update that code a little bit. Maybe we can have a work session on that to streamline these. So maybe we can do just a instead of having to do the conditional use permit, maybe just an application or some kind of one-page form that they get, and we don't have to keep hearing a bunch of these as much, and they can just sign on, kind of like Salatna did. I'd love to hear that also.

I agree. We have no pending items. Is that correct? Okay. Seeing no further business before this body, we are adjourned.