>> All right. We will call the April 13th. Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to place of the roll call Congress Ben Here, Chair Gardner Thank you, Christina. Here, Scott fullest here. Megan males. It a key here. Jeff Run ran deeper Abbas are excused if acquired. Thank you. >> Okay. May we please have a motion to approve the minutes from Wednesday. March 25th. Moved by Commissioner Christian a second Commissioner Mills. Are there any corrections? Or objections? To the approval? The minutes. Here and seeing none minutes are approved. Next. >> We will have. >> But next, a special order of business and any disclosures are there any disclosures commissioner pull >> regarding the Seward highway into the road interchange per infill item. I saw that Joe Taylor was listed and left with clouds very is on the application and my employers loans very I've had no knowledge of this project. What so ever been involved with that at all up to this point? Other than whatever it in the package. I don't think of a conflict remain neutral. But, Ali, that the commission to decide that. >> There a motion to direct commissioner post up her Moved by Commissioner McKee seconded by Commissioner Gardner. Commissioner McKee. Would you like to speak your motion? >> I intend to support this motion. There is no conflict of interest and there's no prior knowledge and no financial >> Anybody else wishing to speak the motion. Commissioner Christian? >> I think I would add for the record that your employers, not the petitioner. So I would at that and also intend to support this motion. >> Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. will call for the vote. That motion passes. >> Any other commish? Here's wishing to disclose. The commissioner McKee. >> Yes, hi. Also need to disclose that. Galen Jones, current project manager for the Stuart Highway to the road interchange project. Pm with the DOT is also pm for a project that I am. The consultant project manager for. But I am not familiar with the Tudor Road Interchange project until I read the packet this weekend. And I also have no financial gain directly from this project. >> Okay. Is there a motion? Directing commissioner MC you to just to pay for? Moved by Commissioner Garner seconded by Commissioner Police Commissioner. Gardner would be like speech in motion. Just briefly. I don't see it. Conflicts specific to this particular case and has no financial considerations at stake playing tennis. But the question. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Here and seeing none. We'll call for the vote. That motion passes. >> Now I will hand the gavel to. >> Vice Chair Krishna. And I will disclose that much. >> housing in Residential land development. I also still some garage condos and some storage facilities. >> And >> this is pertinent because there are. 2 cases Twenty-twenty 6 Dash, 0, 0, 3, 5, and 2026 Dash 0, 0, 3, 4, Propose some changes in the codes. Regarding self storage. Garage. Condos Shao says I believe staff referred to them one point in the packet. I don't believe I have a conflict. I don't. believe. I don't currently have in garage projects planned it. My last garage condominium project is completed and nearly sold out. That's my disclosures. >> With someone like to make a motion to direct chairs been only too partisan, most cases. Moved by Commissioner Polis. Commissioner. Plus, would you like to speak to that motion? >> Yeah. Intend to support the motion. I think basically the fact that there are no grudge town projects going on by Commissioner Spinelli that he has no financial game at this point. It will impact future projects if he intends to go that way. But no financial gain or interest at this point. >> But seconded by Commissioner Mills are is there any further discussion? Hearing? None. We will call for a vote. That motion passes and I will hand the gavel back. >> We covered all the disclosures. >> May we hear from staff on the C S stp review concept. Information report. >> Good evening. Thank you. Chair and commissioners. This is a state Alaska DOT project to reckon struck this sort highway and the 2 in a row. The interchange to replace of these East Cambridge and address no motorized facilities, safety congestion and connectivity. The project team quietly recommends that tight diamond interchange as the best alternative for this project. Members of the project team out of between question regarding the concept to report. These reports. It information item to formalize commission. We for the project before the team submits that 35%. A design study report which this information will reveal doing the future public hearing. Are there any questions for staff? >> May we have a motion to accept the CS S TP concept report from Seward Highway. Or guess there's a question is dot here in do they which twos to the commission? >> Yeah. Galen Jones from Alaska DOT for the record. I am here and available for questions. But we don't necessarily have thing we'd like to add. >> Are there any questions for DOT commissioner pull us? I have questions for Questions, but you can say you don't know if that's perfectly fine. Do you know will there be pet facilities on both sides of the road? >> Yeah, absolutely. There will be widened pat facilities on both sides of the new bridge and there are existing pet facilities on both sides of Tudor Road through the project limits and we expand to improve those we intend improve those. Just one more quick. Go >> And then right away impacts. Are you guys buying any full lots? Are you just kind trying to eke we take from people? Do you do? You know, there are huge air. You're taking that kind of information. >> At the moment, our concept design shows only minor right away acquisitions and no relocations. He question from Commissioner Krishna. >> Yeah, I'm curious if you can speak a little bit too access to Brayden Drive and some of the frontage road access, which I've always found to be one of the hardest things about this intersection. I didn't see much discussion of it in this pack it. But I did see a question from one of the planning workshops. >> Brayton drive. I believe that's on the east side of the Seward Highway and I'm sorry the yeah. The Seward highway. So the project as a whole will be looking at access management. So you know where sometimes we we look at consolidating approaches are relocating them onto smaller streets. Things like that. An important part about this project is required egress for. Urgency, services. So coming out of the neighborhood, they're on the east just south of Tudor Road. There is an access that leaves the neighborhood. So if we were looking at any access control modifications, we would, of course, check with emergency services. First may be a potential could be a gate that goes across the Currently we would have to make sure that there was still reasonable access for the residents of that neighborhood. So, you know, we're not that far yet in our analysis, but I can just say overall, the project is looking at how to looking access management because we can reduce conflict points between vehicles and other vehicles and non motorized users and so on. So we always look at opportunities to improve safety with these projects. But but we do plan to keep that frontage road and on both sides and provide access up to 2 to road. Thank You're Question from. >> Commissioner McKee. >> Hello had several questions for you, but it might be too soon at 35% design, which should be. if that's spot. so my first question was it mentions that there's adjacent bike and pedestrian facilities that don't have continued connectivity. And I think it like the path at. O ahead, this written down. At the 36 intersection and then it picks up again on the West side of the frontage road coming out. So does this interchange plan to provide pathway connectivity from 36 to tutors? >> Yeah, thank you for the question. So this specific project, well, we are going to reconstruct the northbound and southbound on and off ramps north of Tudor Road. The constructing new shared use path ways more of a network pedestrian access between to turn. 36. We'll be under the scope of the 36 interchange project. >> My next question was all right. The pedestrian bicycle infrastructure and the interchange. it the No. But for limited space, so does what's the proposed tougher that you're with this project? >> So currently on the bridge because, you know, we know bridges are expensive. So we typically don't put. A large buffer bridges to reduce costs. However, on this project, we're looking at having a ferrier protected, shared use pathway between vehicle lanes and then there will be so it would be vehicle lane shoulder some sort of protection, likely a concrete barrier and then most likely a 10 foot shared use Pathway Page shared use pathway and then pedestrian railing. On the other side of that. Thank you. Yeah. And then off of the bridge, we would look at maintaining some sort of separation between >> shoulder and the shared use pathway mostly to accommodate snow storage. in addition for safety and get that separation because it is a 45 mile per hour roadway. So likely would have. 5 to 10 foot separation. I would say. >> And then the other question I had Kindness, Street Shaquille Street both operate failing level of service during peak periods. >> Those are also areas we see high crash cluster densities. This project proposes to alleviate that. Can Justin, does it also expect that if there's better flow through this interchange that you would see better level of service on those side streets. And is that expected to address some of the crash particular, the pedestrian fatalities that are occurring. >> the project limits extend from onto the road from Old Seward to McKenna Street. So we're doing a safety and crash analysis of existing crashes and safety within that entire corridor. And part of that is looking at potential solutions at Shell, a coffin McKenna Street because we know because of the previous there have been fatalities over at McInnes and then just throughout the corridor. So whether this project does include construction or improvements. Specific to MacInnis, for example, has yet to be seen. But as part of the safety analysis, we will be go looking closely the issues and then how we would solve the issues and making recommendations and then we'll have to decide whether or not those specific product problem or problems will be solved by this project. The interchange project itself or if DOT would spin off another project to additional design funding and then go through a project development process and build it under us and are separate funding. But the point is we want to identify the problem and then hopefully saw it as part of this project. But perhaps it might get solved under a separate project. Thank you. >> The other another person I had it and it might similar to this is that you're looking at it in the traffic and safety analysis, but maybe is not within the scope of this project. Was it mentions in the report that there's a a high incidence of mid-block crossings near stops. With that potentially be within the scope of this project or is that more aligned with the traffic and safety analysis? >> over in that same area. Mcginnis show a There are a lot of mid-block crossings. There is a bus stop on both sides of the road there without any sort of mid-block crossing. So that presents, you know, a large challenge for non motorized users to get from the bus stop to cross the street to the neighborhood. There's also a fire station that mugginess. So the solutions that we're looking at for mugginess and show a cough is restricting access in certain directions. So that currently right now as you depart northbound out of shell, a cough, you can go left that could pose a that that that it has an increased increased crash risk associated with that going across lanes that many vehicles. So we're looking at Centralisation right out left in and a write-in only and a shell a cough. And then at that location that would potentially lend itself to a safe operation for a mid-block crossing. For example. And again, as we're looking at signals Ation looking at the different signal warrants. It doesn't actually meet the signal warrants for the crash history and for traffic, however, because there's the fire station there and due to those past safety issues, we think we There's some flexibility in those Warren staff to justify a signal. So that is one thing we're looking closely at their which would accommodate pedestrian crossings. But either way, we're looking really closely and would like to propose some sort of mid-block crossing at shell a cough and or McInnes because of bus stops in need and crash history. notice that, you know, there's >> for pedestrian I think it so think it. There was another one outside of the data. The data set. So does the is the project team feeling like that? The proposed some of the other mitigation that they're looking at in the corridor would be. Specific to helping reduce the likelihood of a pedestrian strike. >> So, you know, as I mentioned before, we think that those solutions are worth investigating to reduce past pedestrian strikes in there. >> near >> Shell a cough and McInnes. They they saw the particular crashes that we have seen the crash types that we've seen in the circumstances that we've seen for non motorized users. There. In addition over back at the interchange, we are looking at potentially so we're looking to improve pedestrian facilities. They're longitude along tutor. But then also crossing tutor, cleaning up those crossings, reducing crossing distances, potentially having to stage crossings across tutor where a pedestrian can cross and then stop at a refuge in the middle and then be able to. Across with another pedestrian looking closely at all of these things in our early 35% stage. >> And then to the pedestrian fatalities. Kerr primarily and like peak traffic volumes. was it like Justin doesn't say what the primary cause of the pedestrian strikes were in this report. I don't have that specific information. I'm happy to follow up with you on But I will say a lot of >> crash patterns that we're seeing around in this general area. Men town aren't exclusive to heavily congested times in particular. Those times can actually result in slower moving traffic. A lot the crashes were seeing happen at night in low lighting situations. When there's less traffic, these roads can a lot easier to speed because you're not seeing any sort of figuratively, fictional elements such as other vehicles. So it can seem a lot the easier or more tempting for vehicles to drive faster. And that's when we can see those more severe crashes at the higher speed times when that when the road is emptier. >> And then this might be a little bit too soon. And the project development, with the proposed alternative, is there expected crash percentage production that's been determined yet? >> So we're still working on our traffic and safety report. And that sort of information will be included in that. So we don't have that prediction yet because we we've selected the interchange form or or or we have our side. We have a recommended interchange form, which is the type diamond. But we haven't narrowed down, you know, the exact number lanes that are needed and the exact Jan entry of the whole thing. So we wouldn't be able to at this point be able to determine crash reduction percentage because we don't have that information yet. And then my last question. >> I noticed that there are several different alternatives are evaluated. And one of the things that seem to eliminate some of the other configurations was the ability for freight to through movement in the event that they're oversized. But the report says that they also intend to elevate the bridge structure. So our does the DOT still expect to see a large volume of heavy truck traffic meeting to go over the structure versus being able to travel underneath that once the bridge elevated. >> So we would expect to see less vehicles needing to go up and over the interchange. get off of off-ramp, go cross tutor and then back onto the on-ramp >> to get back on the highway because as part of this project, we are raising the bridge to current design standards for overhead clearance on the highway. However, there still are quite a bit of permanent loads every year that need to go up and over interchanges throughout Anchorage ball in the state. So we're working closely the dot weights and measures to get that data. They don't specifically have data at each interchange. How many over height vehicles are permitted, but we are making sure whatever design we have can accommodate, though those ramp to ramp movements. And that's it, especially important because of the frontage roads as well. Commissioner Mills. >> I noticed that you have stakeholders identified in this workbook and you've identified that there's a lot you're using to track concerns. Have you received any specific concerns or requests for many of the stakeholders like I don't think I saw that identified here just yet. Yeah. Thank you for the question. >> I would say the number one concern we have from stakeholders is non motorized safety you know, there are narrow facilities on the bridge and within the project corridor. >> There are it's a 45 mile per hour roadway. So that's yeah, I would say is the number one concern and more specifically at McInnes. We've had a lot of folks bring up the safety concerns and previous crash history. Fernando Torres McInnes especially related to the bus stops. >> I see no further questions. >> There a motion from the commission to accept the context, Sensitive Solutions, Transportation project. Moved by Commissioner McKee seconded by Commissioner Polis Commissioner McKee. Would you like to speak your motion? >> Sure. I tend to vote in favor of the motion. I think at this point in time for 35% level design, the department and the project team is considered a significant number of the country to STA crashes. They are considering freight movement and utilizing the data that's available. An existing they're dressing pedestrian their dressing They're addressing downstream traffic considerations. I think that at this point in time they've evaluated the project with the data that's available. I like that. They're addressing an improving pedestrian buffers in particular, having them be protected on the bridge structure. think that is significant benefit to public safety, even though it presents additional cost to the to the project and the overall structure design. So I think that they've waited about several issues that the community is brought up. And think that at this point, the report's very comprehensive and well done. >> Commissioner Christian. >> I agree. And I just want to thank the project team and staff. I thought that of the many context, sensitive solutions reports we've had over the years. I thought this one very easy to follow and really clearly engaged with concerns from stakeholders and the existing conditions found in the spreads. happy to support this motion. >> Anybody else wishing to speak the motion. And seeing none. We'll call for the vote. That motion passes. I read the procedure by which the public may speak to the commission. And meetings. After staff presentation is completed on public hearing items. The chair will ask the public. That's for public testimony on the issue. Persons who wish to testify will follow the time limits established in the commission rules. Of procedure. Petitioners, including his or her representatives, will receive 10 minutes. Part of this time may be reserved for rebuttal representatives of groups Community Council's PTA, Zeke Center and will receive 5 minutes individuals. 3 minutes when your testimony is complete, you may be asked questions by the commission. You may only testified once on any issue unless question by the commission. Commission recommendations to the Anchorage Assembly are not appealable. >> First case, 2026 Dash, 0, 0, 2, 3, May we please have the staff presentation? Thank you. Chair page 7 of your packet has a map showing that petition site. Their property owner is requesting to rezone 4 parcels containing approximately 10 acres from. >> She acts you river be 3 with special invitations to IQ River. Rc rural commercial. That you river comprehensive plan update. Identifies the property is commercial and the implementing zoning district for this area is to. Rural commercial district that the property owners requesting. be 3 SL that's existing is from 1985. It commercial uses restricts building heights. and it's based on old zoning code to could be pretty confusing for the property owner and businesses. This is improvement sort of the House keeping. Matter to rezone it to the commercial district that sir, called for in that checking River comprehensive plan. Update and eliminating the existing special that Haitians from that mid 80's. >> the planning Department finds that the 3 see the 3 approval criteria for this type of rezone are met and recommending approval a draft assembly ordinance is on. Page 6 of your packet and you can see the old special invitations on page 15 of your packet. I'd be happy to answer questions. Thank you. Are there any questions for staff? Commissioner McKee? >> I have a so in the current. Zoning, the building height restriction is 35 feet. If they remove special designation, what would be the new allowed building height? >> I thank you for that question. The chapter 10 table dimensional standards says that that building high in RC District. His remains 35 feet. Any other questions for staff? >> hearing seeing We will invite the petitioner. The petition are present. you'll need to the press a button. Thank you. >> Good evening and thank you, commissioners. My name is Joyce O'Connor and I am the owner of the property and I thank you for considering my request to change the zoning from special limitations. Be 3 to the to the AQI. Go River, rural Approved. It is part of a comprehensive plan. And I thank you for your support. >> Thank you. Are there any questions for the petitioner? Hearing? Seeing none. You have 9 minutes and 34 seconds saved for rebuttal. If you All Anyone from the public wishing to testify, please step forward. >> Going once going twice. You like to use your 9 minutes. 34 seconds. Are you good? >> All righty. I'm gonna go ahead and close the public hearing. What is the will of the body? Commissioner Polis would you like to stay motion? Yes, I intense part motion. Michael, first, give us the on it. I'm moving case 2026 testers there to 3 recommend to the Anchorage Assembly, approval of the rezone. >> 4 parcels of land from sea. Eb. 3 SL District, 2 CEO RC District. Thank you. That is seconded by Commissioner Gardner Commissioner Post. Would you like to speak your motion? Yes. Thank you. Intense motion. I agree with department recommendations proposed rezone meets all 3 approval criteria is detailed in the findings note notification requirements are followed and we've heard no public opposition. An agency reviewers have no objections to the result. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. >> hearing and seeing none. We'll call for the vote. That motion path. >> Next, we will move to case 2026 Dash 0, 0, 4, 1, May we please have the staff presentation? Thank you, If you could, please look at your packet pages, 7, 8, you can see a map and associated limits for this specific case. >> This is a rezone request initiated by the owner to amend the zoning map for 2 tracts from our 5 low density residential district mixed residential district, the Planning and Zoning Commission would provide recommendations to You on on in Greece on the quest. The assembly, the decision-making body for Rezonings. There was an Associated Subdivision that was that was a late for lost to which a vote for this of divide. This these 2 parcels in 20 The department received 9 public comments against a rezoning. The Department nor reviewing agency Coleman to the position. loop comes also receive notice and did not comment. The department finds that he's on a quest means all prove a crack to front of review rezone and therefore recommends the planning and zoning Commission provided approval. recommendation for the rezone 2 are 2 of them to the assembly. available for questions. And wasn't. Data is here tonight as well. Are there any questions for staff? Commissioner Christian a >> thank you. I just want to confirm 2 things that I saw when I was looking at the 2040 land use plan map. The first was that these parcels appear to be within >> a map area called areas designated for medium growth. And the second is that these 2 parcels also appear to be within what was shown in the 2040 land use plan map to beat that transit supportive quarter designations. Could you just confirm that? have those both correct. >> To the chair. Commissioner Christian is correct. These the spa. So these buses have doesn't need come back next. Density a medium as well as trying support development to that includes 24 to land use plan. >> All >> Seeing no more questions for invite the petitioner. >> To come forward. >> Hello, my name is key. So of You Ve. I am the petitioners representative. Thank you for your time. This is an abbreviated rezoned implement the comprehensive plan. The 2040 land use plan has designated the site is compact a mixed residential medium since it was published review. The public comments submitted prior to this meeting would like to address them briefly commenter state. The increase density in this area will make the road overcrowded increased congestion on narrow streets. Maybe. More into the mic right now. Commenters state, the increase density in this area will make the neighborhood overcrowded and increased congestion on on narrow streets. Obviously increase density is the point. We need more homes, affordable ones, if possible. I do not believe this neighborhood will be overcrowded. I have driven down the streets many times and wall that they are more narrow than streets in newer subdivisions. They are in good condition and our and 25 feet fought want 20 feet wide at the most narrow point on Street. Private development has reviewed this site many times and has not requested any improvements to Zurich or O'Brien streets as they are up to departmental standards. Frankly, these streets are in similar if not better condition than my own neighborhood. Commenters also state concern for their water supply. There is no evidence that additional wells in this area would affect anyone's water supply. And it's not a concern raised by any of the reviewing departments. There is an associated unrecorded plot for this site. No final plan has been submitted and either planning. Neither the planning cases dependent on the other. However, if that approved plan replant were to be completed, it would subdivided lots into 20 lots each roughly 7500 square feet in size. And if the site were to keep its current are 5 zoning, each of those lots would be able to develop up to 3 homes per lot. Unless the board has any questions. I'll remember time for rebuttal. >> There are questions for the petitioner. >> I see no questions. You have 8 minutes. 3 seconds for rebuttal. >> All Will open the public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to testify, please step forward. >> mean, state your name, let us know if you're representing a group or speaking as an individual. >> Ok, thank you. My name is repaired. A bear. I'm speaking on behalf of the Zion Court homeowners Association. H.O.A. for Homeowners Association supports orderly compatible development and request municipality did deny the rezone unless the applicant clearly justifies. Why are it's needed and how nearby homeowners will be protected from added impacts. If the case moves forward, request specific mitigation measures tied to traffic parking drainage noise, construction, safety and neighborhood compatibility. Why this matters to us. This case would rezone about 5.2, 3 acres from our 5 to our 02:00AM. Our 5 intended for lower density single into family residential areas. Well are allows broader mix of housing types and higher density. The same site was also the subject of a 2025 planning case, which you discussed earlier to subdivide the property into 22. Lots. So the key question is whether the rezone now enables a more intensive development pattern. The neighbors previously expected. Also, will the exemptions previously granted with the original or the prior planning case still be in place? So are top concerns are neighborhood compact ability? What is the possible increase in building intensity mass and height compatibility? What is the possible increase in building intensity mass and height while privacy impacts lighting and overall fit next to existing homes be taken into account. Compatibility under Anchorage land use rules includes traffic parking buffering, drainage lighting, dust and noise. Regarding traffic parking in circulation. More units can mean more resident vehicles, guest delivery service vehicles and construction traffic. Our main concerns are spill over into nearby streets. Winter driving hazards, blocking sightlines an overflow parking affecting nearby homeowners. Regarding neighborhood safety. We're concerned about pedestrian safety driveway in intersection, visibility winter access conditions, emergency vehicle access and the possibility that overflow parking where construction activity could reduce the safe use of nearby residential streets. This is especially important in an established neighborhood use by children. Walker's pets and residents navigating snow and ice conditions. Construction disruption in noise is a concern. Noise, truck traffic does to work or parking vibration might on streets and long construction periods can directly affect nearby homeowners. Long-term concerns include dumpster noise, snow removal, mechanical equipment, and hire evening activity. Regarding drainage vegetation. Air-quality in neighborhood environment. Our H.O.A. would like to know how runoff grating snow storage, just idling vehicles and tree removal will be handled as well as a visual screening will be provided to help preserve the existing residential environment. Will the development have covenants to help maintain a consistent neighborhood appearance? Infrastructure strain parking utilities, drainage snow storage, refuse access an emergency exits, be adequate for the development enabled by the rezone. These are some suggestions you We request if the municipality considers approval clear explanation of what can be built now versus under our 02:00AM traffic impact in circulation review pedestrian emergency access protections, no overflow construction or resident parking on nearby H.O.A. streets. Safe driveway placement, sideline review and winter access planning, strong setbacks, fencing in landscape buffering near existing homes protection against runoff onto neighborhood neighboring property. Limited construction hours. Truck routing dust, suppression and onsite worker parking shielded lighting and privacy conscious site. Design confirmation of utility drainage snow storage refuse an emergency access capacity and lower intensity building transition along edges near existing homes. So in summary, our H.O.A. supports orderly incompatible development. However, before this rezoning moves forward, the municipality should clearly explain why the change is necessary and ensure imports book protections related to traffic safety parking construction impacts drainage infrastructure, privacy and neighborhood character. Thank you. >> Question I have a question from Commissioner Christian a that I was not sure. 2 questions. Could you describe where the H.O.A. that you represent is in relation to the site? Yes, Zion Court neighborhood. We are east. Of the development site off of O'Brien. So cross O'Brien to the east. So between O'Brien and like Otis between 74th. Thank you. And I at just would like to clarify some of the point you brought up that would mitigate the impacts that you see that this development might bring. >> Could you enumerate just a few of what you believe would be your top priorities if commission were to consider any additional conditions of approval. >> A lot of it would be access to the new development and and how that effects our neighborhood. O'brien Street is even though it is wide enough. If you were to have several driveways added along that in the winter time, that street becomes very narrow. That is a major concern this winter. We side 2 police cars coming one at each other down the street and they couldn't pass each other with the snow load and then the next day the road got plowed back. So I mean, so, you know, if you and driveways along there, that's going to traffic noise just I know if development goes in, we can't expect trees again in that space. But some sort of landscape designed to keep a pleasant. Just and how intense is the new zoning like, you know, increase density. What does that mean prior to this? We thought there would be too. 22 units, I believe in there. So is this going to cause how many more units are going to be in and what kind of access into? You know, we were told like driveways coming out. Is there going to be maybe now one roadway in roadway in the Middle? What does that? What does the new design look like? Thank No further questions. And I am sure that either the petitioners, representative or staff can answer your question about density further along in this >> Thank you for your time. Thank you. >> See no further questions. Anybody else wishing testify. Please step forward. State. Your name for the record and let us know if you're testifying on behalf yourself or a group. Your name and then let us know if you're representing yourself or a group. My name is Andy Carroll and I'm just represent myself. I live on CIRCA been there for 30 plus years. >> I mean, she made. Pretty much all the arguments that we have. Speaking to the mike, please now on the one being echoing anyway. My concern is the roads are narrow. You're going to add 20 more houses. If you're going to go with 4. Plex is duplexes. You're adding a lot of traffic. They're our children in the neighborhood. I mean, I haven't heard any comprehensive plan of anything except for they're going to rezone it and sell the lots. And people are going to build what they want. That's all I've heard. I've not heard anything about. Sewers coming in water coming in. Pushing 74 through. I mean, we're just all of a sudden we get this notice that there's going to be a change and now they're going to pack even more people into this. lot. So that's part of our concerns. My wife and I. That's all I got. I she laid it out pretty good. So I appreciate. Anybody else wishing to test. I see no questions for you. Are you finished? >> Thank you. Anybody else wishing testify, please step forward. >> My name is Linda Arden. I'm speaking for myself and my husband. Our 02:00AM lots. Down. Lower road. Petersburg Dancy our 10,000 to 14,000 Square feet versus the vacant lots that are seeking this. Our to Amazon between O'Brien and lots between O'Brien, are only. 7,435 Square Feet. Between. 2022 2024. changes were made. To our to zoning requirements allowing for more d*** city and more density is not always advisable. The complete Alpine Village subdivision. Which is Basel 70. Second to. Lore was originally zoned as our 5 for single-family residences. Only. of these small lot sizes throughout the subdivision reflect realistically these lot sizes do not comfort, really allow for both defiantly units, their undersized compared. 2. They are lot on lower road Petersberg and Nancy, in addition to the subdivisions, lot's been small all streets within the Alpine village said to be isn't are extremely narrow. Currently, the streets are barely able to accommodate snow removal under our 5 zoning if extreme lots where rezone to be our to 5 multifamily units, it would create further constriction to the roadway due to the current ease Mont. Zurich Street. longer available for smell placement. The portion of vacant land say seems are exchanged, needs to continue zone are 5 for additional reasons. It name change. The estimated number of vehicles within the subdivision would increase from a potencial 40 new vehicles. 20 family. Single-family. Lots by 2 cars. Put a lot parts to 160. In addition, visitors to these various family units would have to park on a very narrow Zurich street, thereby increasing vehicle congestion in case emergency would cause trouble for. Emergency responders trying to navigate their vehicles on a crowded street. In the summertime. Zurich barely allows 2 vehicles to pass each other and the winter time with the heavy smoke season. Currently one car has to wait for another vehicle to pass. >> Their time is up. Yes, I realize that that's pocket. Thank you. I see no questions. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Anybody else wishing to testify, please step forward. Hello, physically Ben and I live on Burn Can you state your name again? I'm Ben and I was just speaking for myself and my wife. We live on a that been hand. Yep, in hand. Thank Ahead. >> I live Bern Street just street blows I've been the neighborhood for about 13 years and just use those roads as for like dog walking and going out for walks every night and just kind of one of have since on how lot of people are out here. Just kind of say they're concerned. And the plans for these lots. I live on 74th. And so if that was pushed through, you know how they're trying to redistrict or rezone it, it might just put a different impact on how the value of lot is. How the cars driving through. There's a lot going on. So haven't thought this out as well as everyone else here. I just want tell my 2 sons on and say not really looking forward to being a lot more people in the area. It being with a more quiet Israeli lot better for the neighborhood. that's all I have a second allocate my time. Some bills that need >> No, you cannot transfer your time. and if you're finished, I see no questions. No, I don't have much of appreciation. All right. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify, please step forward. >> Hi, I'm Gloria, Carol, testifying for myself. Basement. To reiterate what everybody's saying when this is a really we live on. This are excited. It's an old neighborhood, narrow streets, no sidewalks, no lights, no fire hydrants. And adding. Maybe 80 or more vehicles to that road would be a disaster, especially in the winter time. >> Thank you for your testimony. Anybody else wishing to testify, please step forward. >> My name is Donald speaking for myself. My household. I live on Zurich argue that you the least impacted directly by this. But I have observed that traffic does have issues trying to go 2 ways in the summer. Has to go one enter. If there's another snowfall like this last winter creates a blind corner which on the road to lore multiple near miss accidents. Last winter. When was I see, I saw several vehicles slide directly into the intersection. your crease, the traffic, but that. Let's say 60 cars, I don't see how it's going to. Benefit anybody. The infrastructure. This isn't there to support it. >> Thank you. question from Commissioner McKee yes. >> Hi. Could just have a little bit of a difficulty hearing you. You said that you have seen vehicle slide into an intersection which intersection was that. >> Zurich and Lore, thank you. In the winter, Even with temps. ending. Didn't go anywhere that day. That week. There's one thing else forgot to mention, I do up there extensively in all seasons. Both and Iran have blind hills. So no matter which do for access, there's going to be an issue. Eventually somebody is going to get hit. needs to be more safety measures before you put in. 60 lots. >> Anybody else wishing to testify. Please step forward. >> Hello, my name is and where at the time testifying for myself, I move on Street and have for 28 years. We are on a well as are many of the houses in our neighborhood. And I'm wondering if there's been a hydrologic study addressing if the aquifer can support the much higher demand on the water table. If this new development to the new level of zoning would affect our water pressure, the quality of the water, the availability of the water. I'm also wondering if there's been a trafficker infrastructure study addressing some of the concerns that other people have raised about increased traffic. Thank you. >> Anybody else wishing to testify, please step forward. My name is Patricia Anderson. I live on the corner of burning the 74th. I do have an extensive comment that I did put online so you can see. But all I said there. But I understood that 3 criteria and had to be met. To make look to have the Planning Department staff. Asked to be have this recommended. And past was that it had to be consistent with comprehensive plan be it would not result in an objective risk to health and safety and see it does not conflict with other municipal state or federal codes, regulations or ordinances. I want to go back to number be or letter B, you would not result in objective Health and safety. The proposed rezoning does not change prescribed usage patterns, resist residential for these parcels. Well, bring them into compliance with thank reach 20, 40 land use plan the there are no objective risk to municipal health or safety in this pallet. He would conduct. The additional reviews of any development plans. So that's what it says under that. Section So I believe that we are at risk. And if the residents are considered part of the municipality. This adds excess cars traffic, too few streets. What would be an objective risk if not this excess. I would like to have that defined. So I guess I would staff. What is the objective risk? What would make them say? There is? Objective risk to municipal health and safety. I consider all of us in Alpine Village and on the other side on O'Brien to be part of the municipality. Thank you. Thank you. >> Your questions are noted. So we we will follow up with staff at the appropriate time. I said your questions were noted so we will be following it myself or other commissioners will ask these questions of staff and if they're not addressed. >> The other question, do you all go and read all the comments that are then I know there were like 9 of them. I think that were submitted. I got confused by why the why the written You have to have him in the Friday before 01:00PM and I misunderstood. If that meant the online ones. >> The reason why is so that they can be put in the packet to be delivered to the commissioners so they can read them before tonight's meeting. >> And that's including the online any written on. >> If they're received in time and then other. Comments come as additions. If that came in late. Okay. That we get on the night All right. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify, please step forward. And seeing none will call the petitioner up. For rebuttal. >> it's Kate. So s e U V E. >> I will. >> Just top seems we quiet today. Yeah, we can't control the volume. So you going to have to. Talking to that night. Apologies. >> Okay. So essay you Ve all try to address the questions. Well, first, as I court, the H.O.A. that is located. Northeast of the. Say. So if you go to Page 7, you'll see Zion court. There's a street there. That's where Ion H.O.A. is. It is owned. which is under the R 4 zoning. far. One point, oh, so you could have 36 to 48. Well, in units and they're if they wanted right now, they have 18 units. Lower down is another are too m Zone district. Therefore, lots there that touch this site there across O'Brien Street. 2 of those lots have 4 plex is on them. >> One lot has to be come on. And one has just single-family home just because. >> 4. >> Welling units are allowed doesn't mean that someone will build 4 dwelling units. For driveway access and for how many units I think most of the other questions were like, what's going to have happen to the site right now because there is an improved preliminary plat. But a final plat hasn't spent submitted. There are 2 options if this rezoning is. Approved either it will be developed as 20 lots or will be developed as the 2 lots that currently exist. It was developed as the 20 lots. Those are 7500 square feet. They could put 4 dwelling units on those lots. If the individual friars who bought them wanted to. But like I said in the current are 5 zoning district. Someone could put 3 homes on each of those lots and the neighboring lots for the rest of the R 5 district. Driveway access. If the final plat was completed, their wood, which is as an approved, Larry Platt, there would be 20 driveways just like every other lot has driveway. If the site was developed as it is with 2 lots. They would obviously be. >> One driveway or one in and out, depending on how it's developed. If it was multifamily or not. >> The current reason Missouri is narrow is because the other side of the right away was never. Dedicated. And with the approved plan or a place. The other side, the roadway is dedicated to at some point that could be widened right now. It cannot be widened because it is only 30 feet wide of dedicated right of way. Did the commission have any questions for me? I guess I have some questions. Can you? Name off the conditions. The plot. >> So just so everybody knows there's I'm hearing that there's up Platt approved on this property to subdivide this property. The public seems to know about it and everybody else knows about it. But we don't see it in our packet. Answer a lot of questions to see that. But since we don't see that would just ask the questions. >> I have not reviewed the conditions lately. >> I believe that. >> Well, studies would were required. They obviously had to dedicate road right of way to Zurich and O'Brien as well as 74th. >> Well, studies card is that? To say that they're not proposing to extend public water sewer. >> There is no public water that is close by. There is public sewers. They would be extending public sewer, supposedly, but the lots would be on wells, like all the surrounding lots. >> In by close by, we're talking. Close enough. Closer like Otis. >> So they wanted to. >> Have that expense that could extend water. But it wasn't deemed necessary by any of the reviewing departments. And just say We're looking at a rezone. So, yes, this is and this a not necessarily. And pertinent information other than the public has asked the question. Yes, was an abbreviated rezone implements the calm a plan. I just want to work through some of the stuff. Absent. So at least I can understand what we're doing and then the road with And you said you don't remember your conditions, the plant, but typically when you plant property. It sounds like we're creating 7500 square foot. Lots in what I believe and staff can jump in here would be a class, a district which would require roads with pedestrian facilities. Typically. >> I'm not. You know. That's my understanding. So I'm just curious if any roads were required to be built because that's the main thing we heard from the public was. >> The roads are too skinny. They don't sound like they need municipal standards for this area. >> And >> I'm just curious what kind of road improvements were required at this? >> Plus, no road improvements required. private development decided that no Group Inc were required and that it met their standards. Both roads are supposed to be 24 strip. Hey, that's the standards are cut its smallest point I measured was 20 feet. But private Ellen did say that that was those roads do not need any improvements. >> does that cause or are we in a class B area or a class? A? To the chair like to interrupt and say that did take a brief look at the. >> Some of factions that was associated with the blood in case. believe there was a that means that was granted to the development thing. What Kate saying is correct in the sense that was nothings, stipulating. But with the dust of late for that element of road. But with respect to notes of Bradley Manning's. But I think that looking a postal can give us a better understanding. I if there is a variance granted the net, the mystery salt like I get it now. >> I that was the start something that I was grappling with understanding. The day of canvas. Along could weigh yeah, I think the there's the matter of the reason. But just for anybody's reference, flooding would resolution 25, 0, 1, 1, We can bring up. Some of those of it would be helpful. But >> there are specifics in that resolution about there would have to be right away. Dedication. It looks like on both O'Brien Street in Zurich and right away. Free 74th Street. What are you referring to believe this? The flooding approved. variance from and c 21. 0, 5, 0, see. Improvement requires buy-in area for class. A district, fun condition recording a plant within 16 months of approval. Any proof time extensions. So they are there. It looks like they're 8 conditions of approval. I recommend looking to see and that is Planning Board resolution 2025, 0, 1, 1, Thank you. I guess that kind of explains to me. But how the situation we're in. And I so. The subdivision real quick and just finish my things that I had. The subdivision proposes to have create possibly 20 lot that would use private wells. >> And >> municipal sewer. There was a recent change to or at least there's proposed change to the Rick win when a well studies required was a well study required as part of the plan, I think usually their work. >> Acquired >> comment on the summary of action. I don't remember. was actually included. >> If I win Daniel kind of foster So just in the resolution Section G the planning board approves a plan for 6 months, subject falling conditions, condition for to submit plans day to test an engineering reports to the onsite water and wastewater section that the possible locations will meet all code required separations and be that there's adequate and safe. Potable water freeze proposed lot and neighboring lots per 15. 55, 90. We'll go to Commissioner McKee has questions. >> So I think some of my questions. Thank you, Ben answered. So looking at the map on Page 7. Zurich Street looks like the parcels that are in question the right of way kind of goes into Zurich Street that would have to be vacated and turned over to the city so that they road could be built. I went online. I measured the road. The road is 20 feet wide. There is no ditches. There's no drainage accommodation. You're a plan to clear a lot. The size is going to add a considerable amount of runoff to the road. >> What's the plan to mitigate that? >> so >> the >> preliminary plot. That was approved. We had to dedicate the rest so you Caesar kit kinds cut in half by this loss. This is an old lots that rose never dedicated per this site. So part of the Clinton reply is that we dedicate 30 feet to the existing dedicated 30 feet, which basically that becomes a regular size municipal road. >> So then are you responsible for upgrading the road? No, that was not a condition of the plot. So technically the lots could be developed and leave the road. And in current to its 18 to 20 feet wide. >> There's no drainage its just a basic pavement. Overlay doesn't have curb gutter. It doesn't have a sidewalk. It doesn't have know that the singer area where is happening, sidewalks, okay. And then my other question is just and this may be as to staff, so are can have one to 30 dwellings per acre, which is essentially one dwelling per 1452 square feet. With the R 5. It's one dwelling per lot. What is the minimum lot size? >> To for a nod to them. For single from do that the minimum lot size of square feet. For almost a family. That is the maximum density of 4 plex, a total 6,000 square feet. >> are there restrictions that they couldn't put? wings on an acre in this? Rizo. >> If the subdivision goes to and they have 20 locks that those 7,500 square feet, they could feasibly put one to 4 residential units on each lot. And that would not be an issue with planning. But if such a and what it will too and associated if the plot were to go to up to meet conditions that have been set up a separate apartments and if again, have to go to that would be other reviews that would be conducted. That would on suppose questions to the specific departments that the jurisdictional with these questions. >> With the developer be required to do a traffic impact, analysis and assess the traffic and safety and whether additional other improvements are needed. >> To for the purposes of this rezone that rocking the boat food typically does. Ms Cook discretion of studies to see give that out any massive changes in traffic patterns have provided no comments in a position to the city's own. So to that end, I believe preliminary study has been conducted. 2 words ethics of this specific Nothing that's come up. That would cause concern. >> And if I can win, this is Daniel kind of again, long-range planning. We've heard a lot tonight about concerns about the street. And I know we've all seen that anchors right street. There's an issue with the street, you know, getting around. It doesn't feel safe. So in the last year, so we've had a contractor working on a right of way management study to look at where we actually history problems of what it means to have a street problem and a lot of times the issue is not in the land use. It's not next to what's happening in the private properties. What happening in the street? I think that's where the problem This the issues that increased recently has just has not a great approach for dealing with that directly because if you want to deal with that, you know, here's the example. If you're if you have a problem, an area that's red, the best way to address it is there in the red knot in the green, right? So the green is the private property in the red is the street. So part of the right way, management strategies is looking at. How does how do we as a city manager rights away issues in right away with people leaving public their own private property in the right way. That's impeding others moving right issues with snow clearing that sort of thing. And the solution is that we just have to do a better job of managing our right of way. But we have to do within the right away. So that studies coming out later this year. It's based on a lot of data. We've with conservative analysis all over the city showing that yet people do leave their private property in the street, impeach others. But in many cases. doesn't result in being necessarily as big the problems. It feels like necessarily but even where it is, it already is. We have tools to address that in the right way. Management studies about addressing those directly. Right? Management is 100% effective. It's a little bit uncomfortable to be a little bit different because it means it's a it's a maybe a little bit more difficult to use the public street to store private property, but it is 100% effective. So that's kind of where things are in terms of letting what happens on private property happen and then managing public space, which is the street towards kind of the shared values that every Hass so that's the right way. Management strategies coming out probably later this year. I mean, we're in just the final stages. It's based on a lot of data. We've gathered around the city looking at refuse others are really bad problem here. And if you go out, you count what's actually happening on the street. There really aren't that many people storing cars in the street. And sometimes it's really it's an issue of we just need to get the street plowed, right? It doesn't really matter what's happening in the private side land. So the right-wing management strategies coming and off. It's it's really found that the issue isn't really a matter of parking supplies. Just now party's plan, private property. But of parking management or space on public property in the street. So that's sort where things are going to cause. We've had these problems for years, right? Even when we had other ways to manage it on private property, we just have to manage the rights of way. But fortunately, that plan is coming together in in it. There's some pretty clear tools for addressing that and effectively with a ticker. >> So I guess didn't have a We would want that. Okay. got a question from Commissioner trust that she's in the And just asked staff to take what you just said. Maybe one step further and tell the folks in the crowd if >> after this. What we've heard is that there will be new right-of-way dedicated as part of this. No, no, that would be the preliminary plan that's already approved, that it's already going to be dedicated. That plan goes through. This is a rezone. >> And it is so that that there is right of way that is. Dedicated fort and improve preliminary plat. Yes, which is beyond The residents on the street have experience. Could you maybe just take this a little bit further and maybe let attendees here know how they might advocate for street improvements. >> In the right of way. Which sounds like maybe it's getting close to some of the concerns here. Yeah. Thank Didn't cover fostering long-term planning this is, you know, our skates. But in long a lot of work on the transportation stuff in the right stuff. >> So one thing we really want to provide in the meetings, provide the tools for when people's and Everett say, look, we really do have a problem here is so that we can go out and assess and say, okay, there's a problem and then provide the tools that the neighbor wants to address that problem, right? So say say the subdivision goes in the road gets why done? Because now there's right away available. It gets approved to a new standard in the still an issue right in the street design for some reason doesn't meet everybody's needs. Then the tools will be there to say, well, there's a number of things you can do. You could maybe do alternate sites, free parking. You could you know, permit parking special for residents. Only that sort of thing. There are tools to address that. But that would come after sort of the promise been identified and we're still working through the process of that because we really want to if people come together, they say this is an observant issue and it's a measurable indefinable issue providing the solutions that solves the issue and solve the issue directly. And really precisely so. Does that kind of speak to that to go back down the rabbit? I I think we're good go back to Commissioner Mckeeva. Sorry cutting off last >> And maybe this is outside the purview of this discussion. But I appreciate your map that you put up on the board that shows that there's a road problem. There's a housing problem. Maybe we need to look at putting in the road infrastructure before we build houses because otherwise we're kind of creating a problem for the residences in which they can't get through their road. They don't have adequate drainage. So your kind of putting in a e, you know, sometimes it can take a really long time before road improvement happens. And you create a situation where you have a residential area. That's now living with the problem where maybe a fire can't get in ambulance. Can't get in because there are cars parked on the street and their snow and we aren't mitigating that with a road. That's 18 to 20 feet wide. That was kind of why I asked. Is there a plan by the end, the way to improve and develop this road if planning is also approved? So to repeat, the question, is there a plan from the M a way to improve this road? >> I think for that. Let's see if I can pull something else over recommend everybody just be aware. Unfamiliar with away PM. Any Project Center reporting dashboard. This is sort of an overview of all the projects planned, right? So there's a lot of need in Anchorage. I think people for before we have a pretty big we have a billion dollars, a backlog streets. We need to get fixed up. But great tool done a great job on this. I I me want to see so this is the area. It does look like there is a project plan for service. Real tells rid of Excuse me, rehabilitation, pedestrian safety improvements. So these come together, I think through Community Council's through there's bigger process. This is in the planning Department is a PM in the process capital project process. But in terms of which projects are planned for the municipality to build. I would start here and and, you know, talk me and and talk to renounce about how we do that. And but there's a lot of need across Anchorage and there's only so much so many resources to go around. But start here. I think if you Google and the way PM, any project Center Dash Board Project Dashboard, you'll get to this page contact what we've got to send you a link. Commissioner Gardner. Thanks. Just a quick question for staff an apologist. I think may have covered this before want to make sure I have it clear in my head since I think it hurt a couple different things. >> Under the proposed zone, if with the with the place that goes through 20 make sure have the comparison, right? So you can have for units in each of those lots under under the current zoning. What's the maximum that you can see with the Re Platt? If it's finalized? >> To the show, if it remains in our 5, then just to second. You would be able to have a duplex essentially to given the in the current sizes in the U.S. and subdivision, you'll be able to have. So you would be able to have a single family or one. You look at them into a unit in each of these parcels with a need to use this entry into clicks. Max, if you want to push that to duplex plus need to do which is functioning traveling to need 13,000 square feet. But a lot. >> 13 or 30. Toting 1, 3, the second question for the petitioner. When the planning board approved the preliminary plat and the variance. Was. Did they know rezoned are too No, this is a development within. okay. Any other questions for staff are the petitioner. I see none. I would ask. >> That if anyone is thinking about voting, no, that they voice their concerns or questions. Now. Commissioner McKee. To that end. >> You know, in preparation of this meeting Google Earth and measured the adjacent lots in the adjacent number of. Buildings on those parcels so often. Zion and O'Brien. There's a 14,500 and screen. 72 square-foot lot, 4 plex on it or to condos. There's a 9,000 square-foot lot that has a 4 plex on it. There's 24,240 square-foot lot that had 10 units on it. with a another 5,200 square-foot lot with 2 units in directly behind those those units that we're all together in parallel. There was multiple cars parked in a vacant lot. So if that vacant lot where available not sure where those cars would park. And then across the streets, I also went and looked at adjacent properties in the vicinity, you know, preserve the character of an area. So across the street at Lake Otis and 72nd, there are several lots. They're they're all 8,000 square feet. Each with only 2 units on them. I have significant concerns that the streets are only 18 to 20 feet wide that there is no area. There's nothing to address the drainage. I live in an area. With significantly wider streets with sidewalks and snow is a huge concern. We have culls parking in the street fire trucks have not been able to get through on occasion and have had to have cars removed to create that Two-way traffic. Not even an issue. It's not happening. But I think when you can't get emergency vehicles through, that becomes a bigger and more significant issue. If there's a multi dwelling that's on fire. So I ice, I understand that encourage has a housing problem. I understand rezoning so that multiple family dwellings can be constructed is a huge asset to the community. It helps keep costs of housing more affordable, but I think that the character of this area is in alignment the R 5. Adding that it currently has. doesn't allow condos and apartments that the character of this area is predominantly single family. The lot sizes are, you know, am I am I went and looked and said, you know what, what's in this area compare? Excuse me what she she? >> I'm the chair, the meeting and I'm ready to close public hearing. Thank you for your question, too. The commission, but weaken the will be time for that. When there's a motion table. Thank you to the chair. If I could just interject for like 2 minutes. >> Given the miserable about it is too process of zone of the 3 conditions we met. All 3 are meant substantially. In every single capacity. It is gone. with the current land use plan this proposed rezoning mixed. Medium residential sort of situation. >> That also Precautionary for red flags that have been booked up that have popped up 2 other. Other concerned about once and again, they're not also none not neither of these these owns nothing in this and doesn't add up to Keishon is contention with any of the state on municipal That's it. Thank you. And we will. >> Close the public hearing the time that time for rebuttal was given. The questions were asked and answers. And now we will close the public hearing. And what is the will of the bunny? Commissioner Christian, would you like to stay motion? >> Yes, I move in case 2026 Dash 0, 0, 4, 1, to recommend to the Anchorage Assembly approval of the rezone that of 2 tracts of land from our 5 low density residential district to our mixed residential district. >> That's seconded by Commissioner Gardner Commissioner would you like to speak to the motion? Could member of the crowd, please to not ask me to ask you to leave. >> Yes, I do intend to support this motion and I will make a few findings of fact. There are 3 conditions of approval. It's consistent with the comprehensive plan. It would not result in objective risk safety and does not conflict with other municipal state or federal codes, regulations or ordinances. I will make a few findings that fall within that. In addition to implementing the Anchorage 2040, land use Plan land use classification of compact mixed residential medium. I will also know that. These parcels are noted. 2 other times in the land use plan map and various plans at naps found within the plan. One is as area medium growth. And the second is in 8 transit support of corridor designation. I take these not These I'll add is a comment. Maybe not a finding that in my mind that is hearing from the comprehensive plan. 3 separate times that this is an appropriate area and parcel for higher density. And that is not an opinion me or the commission. That's something that we as volunteers and the citizens using the comprehensive plan to guide our decisions here tonight are beholden to. I understand the comments about traffic I think that given what we've heard tonight about the well studies about private developments, comments about traffic engineering's comments. I don't believe that it's this commission's My personal role, too, overrule opinions of any of those departments or to second guess them. And so those will be my comments and findings. And the recent which I would use to say that I support this motion and I welcome further comments from the commission. >> Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion Commissioner Gardner. Thank I intend to support the motion as well. I to. >> Comments Commissioner Christian made large capture my thoughts. I just had a couple of. Additional I guess findings. One is a finding with respect to the second approval criteria resulting objective risk to health and safety. I mean, I I I the comments from the folks that have spoken and I I fully understand their concerns. Appreciate them. I do feel like I am the role that we're in here tonight in particular sensor implementing the comprehensive plan and providing a rezone not specific development. Feel like it gets a little bit of the cart before the horse for what we're doing this evening. There are. Additional approvals with respect to any development only take place. And as we heard earlier this evening as well, an increase in size the right away. And I would urge everyone to work through the options that were identified by Mr. Ma kind of foster earlier to push for improvements on that street if or as needed, depending on how any development takes place, which again, we don't know exactly what that will look like. I also just wanted to know that there is the property is adjacent to an existing heart. 02:00AM in the southeast corner. Jason, to in our ozone and diagonal to be 3 zone in the North East as well. So this is kind of a transitional property to the are 5 on the West side. And as you get closer to Lake oldest on the east side. I think that's comments. Thank you, Commissioner McKee. >> I don't feel that condition be. That that criterion has been how to quickly addressed that, adding this volume. Potential dwellings before the street capacity is increased to accommodate. I think it does present a potential risk to safety. Commissioner I think. >> With my position I would like to echo the first 2 comments from Commissioner Krishna. I think our scope is, you know, surely aligned with. >> Reviewing the zoning and we can't comment on proposed development or what size. >> The proposed development would be aside from what falls within the zoning requirements. And when it comes to parking. You know, well, those things are going to have to be exhausted when we have a potential development and that's not going to be within our role to review. So I would. Motion that. To approve. >> Any commissioner pull us? I intend to support the motion. feel the pain in the room, but as as the rest, the commissioner stated, this is basically, you know, a big land use map was made. Switch this to medium density 4 years ago. And this is a rezone to match that planning map. It's not a rezone too. Compare traffic rates or any of stuff. We don't have that information. We don't know how the development will go. Our job is to, you know, make sure it meets the criteria and we understand the parking the drainage. All that is of the building permitting purview. So the individual lots will get evaluated by that. As far as what the public can do, I think contacting assembly members stuff like that and trying to get up road projects on the books is probably a good move at this point. >> Ok, I will speak to the motion. I I have trouble with this. This property clearly belongs as our to him. In my mind, there's nothing you can say about traffic or trees are anything that doesn't make me think that this property should be rezoned our to him. However, my hesitation is that there was a plot previously approved 4 our 5 property with variances granted. To allow the road in storm drain improvements that might typically maybe have been required. Variances granted to not do those So that's my trouble here. Planning and Zoning Commission does not approve variances. What we do is we recommend. Approval or denial to the assembly. And so the next step for this, assuming it passes tonight is that it will go to the Anchorage Assembly will be another public hearing and the Anchorage Assembly has all the tools in their tool belt to deal. With the concerned George concerns by concerns. Other commissioners concerns assuming it passes tonight. And so I plan to support the motion. Even though I do have concerns put my concerns on the record. I think Directly into Commissioner Mckees concerns about safety. And Putting my faith in the assembly that they what whatever they choose to do, they will be able to handle the concerns. And so I intend to support. Call for the vote. The motion passes. Okay. Moving on 2. Case, 2026 Dash, 0, 0, 3, 4, May please have the staff presentation? Thank you, Mr. Chair Dame can foster long as planning. Also Lippert room We took one of these cases all be talking about book look away. And if there's any I miss. kcp see cases 2026 34 22 6.35 Both have to do with the B 3 zoning district. There's an inching one because it came to us from the assembly initially or it was one proposal came to the somebody and then we added on another proposal to sort of rounded out a little bit. So we'll explore that. Go back in time to last summer. And some of the Rivera introduced 2026. 63, I believe it was an ordinance to modify the table of uses to make self storage a conditional as opposed to permitted use in order to, you know, make better use of space. Encourage housing development, that sort of thing. There's a lot of discussion about this last year. I think the assembly disgusted. It may be 2 meetings. Ultimately that said to refer back to the Planning Department planning Zoning Commission. And here we are. Just a quick overview of the be 3 District B, 3 zoning. It's kind of all over the bull. >> It's pretty flexible to the loved or hated, but it it does a lot for Anchorage and it's been around for a long time. Overall. There are about it within the Boulder, 2,908 Parcells, I believe. And that's about 2,301 acres. So as you can see, threes usually pretty well situated. Usually, you know, in areas with good transportation, central parts of the cities and the older parts of the city. But you can find it pretty much all over the place. And it does have a pretty wide mix of uses and sort of so history is I guess you could say. Here's of course, Spenard Road. So many of our corridors where traditionally be 3 came to 3. A lot of the northern Lights corridor is as well. Just in terms of uses in be 3. This is, you know, just pulling from the So just this is looking at the number of parcels with this use condo fee simple that can actually be self storage residential condos rating commercial caught. I think that could be a number of things you can see there's a pretty wide variety of uses in be 3, lot of miscellaneous parking in be 3 lot of vacant land office retail warehouse restaurant out of service garage, basically all sorts of stuff. But you have mixed use of residential use of commercial, give some industrial. So it's a pretty big next. A big discussion last year at the assembly. Talk about the 3 was how much housing gets built and B, 3, it does does see a fair amount of housing, you know, not as much as say are one or 2 a or any of those. That's where most of the housing gets built. But be 3 does see a lot of housing, especially since 2014 when when the coach Ange so you can see that a lot of senior housing has gotten built in B, 3 and B, sell since 2014 and a lot of garden apartments have been built since that time. And this is just showing sort an overview. And so, you know, as you're going through this, it's one thing to say, let's limit uses and B, 3 to encourage housing or because because of the and more efficient land use. So we got some questions about this. And so we just wanted to sort of explore what happens in be 3 and also what happens in the uses. Right? So so Stuart has been a big discussion or the use of social urges, been in pick discussion anchors for the past couple years. But I think in many times, many places what self storage is what it looks like from the outside might be really different. What is in the inside so just looking at what could be considered self storage or maybe consider warehousing or maybe consider cottage industry. But these next few slides are really just thinking about. There are lot of things in Anchorage that look like this and function and really different So this is just a sort of that some industrial area off 82nd. It's I one zoning. But if you look, there's a really interesting mix of businesses in this area. They're sort of fitness. There's specialized. There's like a fencing group. They're people doing specialized detailing specialize, builds so it doesn't fit maybe to our traditional idea of what is warehousing or traditional industrial right but this is also the kind of stuff that sometimes happens. It self storage as well. This is just sort of looking at the the tower outside of that area. You can see really interesting mix of cool businesses there. And it says something about. I think when businesses are starting to start out, maybe start your house and then they want a smaller space, but they don't want all sort of a fully built retail space or for industry This these are kind of interest a sort interesting transitional area there. Here's probably what many of us think of as in terms of self storage. But again, in some of these, we might see some of the same types of activities. So, of course, zoning is always starts are trying to think about what the activity is and regulating based on that. And so those are our uses. Our but when it comes to self storage cottage industry and warehousing sometimes the Lions got a little blurry sorry. This is all so I one zoning this B, 3 zoning. So here we are an example of a self storage in be 3. But really know what happens inside of the says it may be it is somebody starting a business, maybe somebody to storing stuff it's not to particular. Once we permit as self storage of something else, we we don't really go back and do another zoning review unless something changes and then, of course, there's a lot of discussion about people building housing that starts to sort of look like self storage or looks like a garage house or a shop house, which is what I think one of the sponsors called the shouts. So that's where the term came from. This is a development upon boundary a few years ago. And it was just really interesting from a planning perspective to see that we've seen storage be a really attractive use in many ways, sort of online use many ways. But with that, we'll see housing responding right? And so one of the concerns that come out of these discussions with people living in those storage, you know, the self storage units, are they? Is there a way to that? We can make sure that they're safe, right? We don't want people using a structure that's not really built for habitation for habitation. So some of those on the decisions and then this one, I really like, which I think, you know, I believe to try plex the tree mailboxes. This could be the shop house, try Plex or something. So, you know, somebody built this and this be 3 zoning. So this is just an interesting mix of housing in this other type of usage. Kind of the evolving form of Anchorage so not to get too into, but just so it's on the slide just to see the definition of self storage college graphs warehouse a wholesale cell, which meant and personal services repair and rental. Some of for these things could end up in something that looks like self storage or warehousing. So really the point of putting this in here is just to say it's kind of complicated. And so lot of these discussions and maybe that's why this was introduced last summer. And still sort of talking about almost a year later but with that approach a little bit more context for the case again, member back in 2023, everybody's talking about car washes and so we're going to make our rushes. A lot of those are in be 3. And then in 2024, you had to self storage to man cave. She sheds business space garage, condos, and then, you know, this, of course, sort of a rose out of that environment. And here we are now trying to figure out what exactly to do with it. And one other thing I think is just worth mentioning and, you know, some I'm sure many of you will know this Lebanon. I will, but just in terms of when somebody looking to build something, looks at a property just because it's hard to do. One thing doesn't mean they're automatically going to go to the next thing. So I think there's a lot discussion about that. Like if they would get less of stores will get more housing built. Be 3 but I think all we would add is that it might be the more complicated than that. There's sort of 2 totally different classes of investments. The type estate developer who built a multi-family probably won't so stories necessarily or maybe they will. But it just seems like a kind of different set of asset class, different sets of risk. You know, multifamily. Maybe the demand is more steady can get some tax benefits, maybe get appreciation of property but really high upfront capital costs really happening cost got to figure it can operate manage it. Different financing. So, Stuart, little bit lower capital costs easier to manage. You know, so so as you could probably just to a month to month, lease immediately do to a 12 month lease. There isn't all that the law as much between tenants landlords, but maybe there's more competition might be less popular. So the point of this is just to emphasize that different asset classes probably have different sets of investors. I'm sure you know, exceptions to that rule. But just to think about just because we're not building something. We're not getting one thing. It doesn't mean we're automatically going to get the other thing. So timeline again, spring 2025 assembly and introduce and discuss 2025. 63 in the summer the assembly referred to as plane department and to you the commission. And then in autumn, we had a few more discussions. The sponsors expanded policy guidance and that's how we ended up with 2 proposals out of this. One is sort of the stick proposal. That's the one that limits to the uses. So it limits so stores to conditional use storage yard. And I believe a large parking garage to his conditional use. So doesn't It just makes unconditional. And then the care it is expanding the uses and B, 3 and simple. Find the definition of mixed use. And so this is trying to maybe Schiff things away from self storage in these larger uses that don't have a lot employment associated traditionally in in those key areas will be 3 is and then also trying to expand the possibilities of the flexibility to are the options. And B, 3 comments. General, those sports are no objections. Letter from we did have one comment stating that making larger parking lots of Conditions could affect development or make it a little bit different. Difficult to develop first bus that this. A lot of these are policy calls that came from the assembly and it's really assembly saying for these key areas of Our policy direction is to favor some uses over others, not necessarily prohibit them but encourage things to go toward sometimes uses and not others and now the specifics of each case review amendment 2026. 34 is reviewing minutes to 2020. I 63 it updates the purpose be 3, 0 supervise that and it limits self storage storage yards, less parking lots and then PC case 2026. 35 expands uses in be 3 and supplies. The definition makes a mixed use it allows all forms of housing, aiming for shop houses with that, it cleans up the definition mixed use, which was a little bit sort of unwieldy. It was unclear like, is it? It was only to find is a mixed use dwelling. So then cycles they're mixed reviews is within the dwelling. So we clean that up. And, you know, as we're reading it tonight, think baby to be cleaned up a little bit more. But this is really just a simple fight. So there weren't any snow foods there. And then a little lot size, be 3 and allow for multiple structures on a lot and I'll say one more thing and then see if Lucas, anything that I missed in the packet. I think when I prepared that employee was using maybe the wrong tool to standards. So you'll see that the actual setbacks are different. So look at the code for the setbacks and B, 3 there actually 10 in the front. then on the side, it's 5 plus one foot for each feet. 5 feet in height exceeding 35 feet. In the one we showed, it shows us just 5. That wasn't it a change we contemplated? I don't think this wooden market so we don't want to sneaking that are in or anything. So these are the ones that exist and that's not our line. Text that I don't look mister, the one that. Sorry about that. My my cousin I do not have anything to add at this time, but I am available for questions as well. Thank you. Question from Commissioner Krishna. Questions. >> so >> I think my it first question. I feel like the chair is going to cut me off it's, you know, both this and the following ordinance in my mind are trying to do something much bigger than how their titled, which is really fundamentally realigning what the B, 3 district is meant to do. I'm happy like can find our discussion and my questions really to the text this ordinance. But I do feel like the intent is much larger and there's a much bigger discussion to be had here about why the higher density residential district maybe aren't functioning in the way that they're intended and why we are. You know, looking at really expanding or are pushing RB 3 district in a way that it maybe wasn't written many years ago, but into a place that is going to be maybe the most appealing district for residential development or at least new residential construction. So. First question, like, is there time pressure to just pass this now and to look at this very in a limited fashion. Second question. We've spent 10 years or more talking about the pressure on our dust, real lands. And I'm curious about that. You know, as we push. Uses out of 3 and into industrial zones. Feels like that's a different set of pressure that we've talked a lot about. My 3rd question is parking lot and parking structure are defined separately in code. But for some reason combined in the use table and I'm wondering about on combining those because I think that they ate Dewan intend to do very different things. >> To the chair, is there time pressure to pass this now? Well, 25 63 sponsored by member Rivera. So there was some interest in. Remember, they're getting Harris getting it to him before he left the body. I guess time is kind of taking on that since he's turned out, I believe. The second also sort of spearheaded by or encouraged by member Brawley. So I think There is sponsor of air and then Brawley and villains sort of sign on to it. I guess I don't know if I could answer what their intent would be or if they would be interested in looking those those bigger questions. I think you're right. I mean, we've had our 3, 8, are for 10 years and nothing's been built on them. And there was a lot of hope about what happened there. But nobody is really chosen to go into that. We've only had one or 2 reasons. And some were pretty much guided by the That's one thing about the 3 is a lot of it exists already. And so that hurdle of having to rezone into it is that much easier versus in our 3 or where you have to go through. Not only the reason process, but then you're you're dealing with an untested zone. To me. I think that is a an area that's fertile for discussion. I don't think I could speak to the intent of the sponsors, but that seems like a part recommendation like maybe look at the end of this of little bit bigger like what is the priority here? In terms of pressure on industrial lands. Yeah. That is something still at something where we have with the industrial land study. I think it was 2012 or maybe a bit after that, which really focused on don't, you know, don't let your duster lands because you need is for all sorts of production. That could probably be updated. I mean, the economy is change. Will probably significantly since then. And honestly, we don't we don't have a great. Updated set of data that we still refer to that. And if results come through, we generally say we probably shouldn't be losing industrial land at the expense of other one. I mean, there's an interim trade up to industrial and residential, for example, but in many cases we posted, don't we do want to lose? I want I-2 but our guidance and that is old. And then there's other this other interesting question of, you know, what is what an industry traditionally mean? These are some of these warehouses where people starting businesses are actually doing, you know, a truck fabrication that is kind of industrial to. And that can also happen to be 3. So I don't have a great answer. It seems like maybe that's another thing that could be considered recommended. And then finally parking parking structure from the technical perspective, I think and doing those here would be a little bit complicated. We could take it under advisement. It may be under the aunt of us too, which is focused some of those slightly more complex, but not really substantial change. We could potentially included in there. >> the reason I said parking lot and parking structure is because in my mind and the way I have seen parking structures used at fundamentally as a density to all right. It's both structure that is much more dense than a parking lot and meant to support other density. And so the idea of treating them that same is a little bit funny to me when we have actually define them separately and code and we could break them out. But that is that's my comment. There. >> Commissioner McKee. >> I thank you and maybe this is just to help me understand like how owning things work. But like? As looking at the table for the housing that's been built since 2014 and that it does have the under 810 that were built and B, 3 and be 3 F l. And approximately 2,835 units built in other zone classifications. And in particular are 3. Our 02:00AM and our for do we not feel that there's enough available develop that bowl land to me? The anticipated demand. you know, I understand that like where we're building senior housing, there's a need for senior housing. It could be built in those be 3 if we adopt this. But could it do we not? Feel that there's enough available space in our for its not located appropriately to meet that demand. >> To the chair, I I think that. There's just a lot of be 3 and a lot of be 3 and really accessible areas. I mean, remember when we were doing our for update, comment from. Cook Inlet, Housing was don't focus on our for just make it. Let's build a little bit taller and B 3, because that is where we find most the land that's available and, you know our forward not too. And they do have other sort of special rules as you get to higher, for example, in our 02:00AM when you go above 5 for units, you start getting it. You need a larger lot size in there. Different rules that apply. So I think part of it is the complexity but also. I think there's just there's a lot of 3 available and also in what the plan imagine forgetting to our forestry. There's not as much this morning are potential up. So it's to that but in general, it does seem in this is sort of just for institutional builders. It seems a little bit easier to build a B 3 for smaller scale. It seems a little bit easier to build. Unlike threes or fours are 2 times. But I'd like to do any. I'm sure there are others on the commission probably know more about this because of that. I do. But. >> And then my other question and it may be ties to other commissioners question about parking. If you currently owned an undeveloped, be 3. Would you be grandfathered or would you then have to go through this special process of a conditional use permit to be allowed to build? Let's say a large parking structure. >> the chair, the nonconformities only apply to if you have the use existence. So if you currently have a lot or you have a structure than you would have to go through the permit process to change it. But if you had a vacant lot, you would and you know, I can see it. Commissioner Christian saying and some of this is, you know, bigger policy direction to. And I think it's one of those things where the code is imagining that. Storage for storing vehicles stories space for storing vehicles, a space that can be used for other uses. But maybe the reality is that sometimes, you know, that in a structure that enables a different So terms of not confirm his only applies if the use already exist. Commissioner Mills. >> listening to you speak about, you know, the soft industrial uses in. Be 3 It's kind of connecting some dots and it's making me a little bit concerned. There's that. Pretty significant shortage of industrial space in Anchorage for commercial users. And I'm going to recognize to start with industrial land undeveloped industrial property year separate and there's a separate problem, which is the cost of construction and the fact that it's so expensive to develop that that's significant problem. But my fear is, is that if this proceeds then those soft industrial uses that are kind of merging into a B 3 building. That's going to be more difficult. And that's going exacerbate that problem. Are you tracking with my logic? Is that? What you understand as well? You threw the chair. I mean, that. It seems to me like a good discussion to have here because we don't have good data on that. >> And we don't even really know what's happening in self storage, necessarily. Also when you say industrial, it's like will what do we actually need by industry? I think about things like a factory producing widgets are ever That might not even be. And actually Tom Davis from our office, he said when he did the industrial and study, he was amazed. They were amazed to variety and interesting scale of the district to be going on. Acreage and in these little places that nobody really thought about so I think we just don't really have the data. And then in terms are we talking about encroaching in industrial zoning or the use is encroaching into Beatrice Pace because the you know, the land use map as a certain amount, industrial zoning and industrial zoning allows a certain number of uses. Same with be 3. So guess what? Another question on top of that is how many of the uses that serve the same purpose is industrial, which is probably source of production for serving the area community can actually have a and B 3 CE. They need to be protected they should be and courage to go in industrial. Honestly, the same thing came up with cell. Stuart is self storage appropriate as an industrial use or is it more important appropriate as sort of a commercial retail use like in a B 3 first? I don't think we have a good answer. I think it's that's kind of the big question. Yeah, and that a lot of the season kind of grappling And I think, you know, when I read this pocket >> to prep, I was thinking self storage like a lot of what we see that somebody would go put their personal belongings pay their monthly fee. >> But looking at the pictures, those are commercial. Space is that somebody operating a business out of which I sees it differently. So I guess. Partly I just need to understand the scope of who this applies to them. >> Threw the chair. So just a place to the use and what happens in that use after say, you know, somebody comes in as I want to build self storage. Yeah. Right now it's be 3 has to go through conditional use may be there and I won not its permitted use, but what they do with it. What happens within that? From the zoning perspective, we don't really look at that in future than it would be land use of there's some sort of violation and somebody was like creating a smell or like noise or something like that. So this is just looking at that specific use. But we don't exactly know what happens after that. Were you able to look back at any of the garage? >> Condominium projects to find out what they permitted under as a zoning use. And because I know as developer, I was kind of shocked when the municipality decided one day that draws condominiums were going to be called some storage. And I think the main reason the municipality. Did that was because they wanted made a special. There's a special ordinance. 4 self storage to have 50 foot of queuing in front of defense and there was another special rule about having and this is not so store just as this is a residential triplex on beat. 3 lot. Look as an example. But who will answer take this down until you but but I guess what my question is. Kind of following up on last question is when. If if we're seeing lots of businesses run out of the spaces, are we sure self storage as really how we want to define these condom, these garage condos spaces. mean, there's really popular old one on Potter that used to have an after-hours gambling So there's all kinds of different uses for these things. I think That's sort of the limitation of our code. Is that the code? Is it is looking at. This is a very specific type of activities. And then us attaching those associated regulations executing out front and it's not looking at it in terms of. What are the actual impacts that happened from the site? Because, you know, so you could have something like this and people only come once a month to drop off their stuff. If if you put a bunch of trees around a mine and even know it's there versus what you're talking about, where people are playing cards in there and making a bunch of noise. Maybe I mean that. That is a really difficult thing to try to regulate without just maybe regulating site by site. Again, I I don't think we have a good answer for that. Were we're sort of. Struggling with we need to. We need more refined tools, but we just have a pretty dole sort of hammer to deal with it. And then my other question is. Because I agree with Commissioner Mills about. squeezing the industrial land by taking away some of the soft industrial stuff. That's going to be 3. But how hard can you explain the conditional use process for us? Just so understand because you're not actually taking it away or just making it a little bit more difficult. So the condition conditional use process requires the planning zoning commission to review the case. And then you can basically put on all sorts of conditions. There's pretty. Pretty wide range of conditions you could put on. You could say when something could operate, what it could look like. You know how big it could be that sort of thing so. I think that that is a pretty big difference than even like a site plan at Ministry of Site Plan Review in terms of the soft costs, somebody feels going through that process. So what what's the cost of the conditional use application? In terms of permit fees? Yeah. All right. So the conditional use permit is the fees for that dependent on the area of the. >> Site. But the conditional use >> but in this instance. >> 4. >> Project. That is 1.7, 5 acres or less. That is not single family residential be $4,720 for 1.7, 6 to 5 acres. would be $7,080. 5 point here, one to 40 acres is $10,385. And 40 points here. One acres or larger would be $16,520. Thank you. Those are my questions and the other. Questions before we go to the public hearing. Commissioner >> Yeah, I'm I just ask you to, I'm sure will. We might hear about the public hearing, I just ask you to address the concerns about parking on separate lots for business uses. We have a comment about that because that is my largest concern is. That we don't meet the intent of this ordinance. And instead we just add a lot of cost and barriers to business development, which we also really need town. >> Yeah, I could dress. And now I I The thinking there is that say you have a business and then several like you want to build lot more. The structure, 50 space, no larger. So you would have wonder if this past you would have to do go through the condition is process the thinking there is that the policy direction is to encourage uses that have more employees or are more sort of. People center are been centered, sort of something like that. I know the kind of point is that, well, that's attached to like another sort of activity centered use so that this doesn't really understand that a person is owning only understands it sort of parcel by parcel. So that's the sort of policy direction there is. It's only looking at the way it's structured. It does. can see that the way that code is structured, it would. He fix that problem lot, 50 lots, 50 are larger. And larger were separate and then they could be to put out which potentially I mean, can we get the recognition he won? So Commissioner Polis? sure a question what is the definition of an auto oriented retail business? >> Seems like any business that has a driveway. Funnily enough. I believe a car wash. He's also yeah. >> And Sony. So to the chair we're looking 21. 0, 5, And there's the vehicles equipment category. And in that we have vehicle parts and supplies. Vehicle I think I misspoke. I believe car wash falls under vehicle service leaf vehicle service and repair. So the definition of that is an establishment gauge. The major repair and maintenance automobiles motorcycles trucks, vans just put it over here. Actually. prepare. And if I may interject, we do not have an explicit definition of automobile oriented in cold. However, we do have uses that are. Automobile oriented within their definitions. So it's a bit more granular within our cold. Okay, I get more questions backing up. Are we done here with the? We don't Commissioner Polis is the short answer. Commissioner Christian. >> Yeah, I seem to recall that a couple of years ago we had a similar discussion about making parking lots of structures conditional in the downtown district. And I'm I'm wondering, I don't remember why why that didn't go through. But it didn't. It's not a conditional use and the downtown district and psychics, I'm struggling a little bit with us making it conditional everywhere. But the downtown districts, which should be our most dense and transit accessible and walkable commercial district you know, making it much harder to have parking lot supporting a business somewhere, you know, out in South Anchorage. So do you remember what happened with that and give me sort lessons that came from that. >> Yet through the chair and just for reference to downtown code sort of own many title. 21. And so it has its own use table and we have to do that a few years ago. And initially we did have it. But I think some people on the working group just weren't comfortable with it. Maybe with drivers. We thought, downtown, it's supposed to be, you know, so pedestrian oriented and drive-thrus are sort of go against that. But it wasn't at that time. I think people are comfortable doing it. Commissioner McKee. >> Hi, I'm sorry. I'm just I'm confused a little bit and maybe a commissioner can explain this means in newer to the planning and zoning portion of it. But like be 3 is so I look all these. Classifications up so that I can try to understand what we're doing. But B, 3 says its intensive commercial, no oriented businesses along major teary ul's are supposed to be high vehicle access and high-density commercial activity. So that then to me sounds like. Multi-story business facilities with large parking garages would be what you would put in a be 3 or you know, large storage facilities that are very much catering to vehicles. And then there's a statement in here in the discussion that says. >> You know, that there people then build. Garage, condos, man cave. She sheds. Car washes, but the car wash to me seems like an appropriate thing to building to be 3. So I guess I'm a little bit. Confused what it is that. assembly members that put forth this this. Action. Are trying to achieve because it seems like it's directly in contradiction with be 3 as intended 4. >> threw the chair in 20 in case. 26 0, 3, 4, review of 2025. 63. >> One of the changes is update their changing that purpose statement to remove some of that language. And it is it's a significant policy change. At least in the purpose of B 3. I just like to make the comment my read on this is that. >> It was born out of a response to. Some news articles and a feeling that there was a lot of garage condos going on in high visibility, be 3 areas. I mean, I could say that one of them was by project along with another project because I built several garage condo type projects. I built residential tried plex in the be 3 that looks like a shop house that attractive. But they and it felt to me like it was a lot was happening. And I was also I had previously done garage projects in industrial zoned areas and then to be doing one in a B 3, didn't it felt kind of weird to do want him to be 3 right on Lake Otis. So I don't think that the assembly was, you know. Off base when they proposed it. But then fizzled out. Didn't go anywhere. So I think the job. That we're being asked to do as the planning and Zoning Commission is to weigh in. And say what we think this is like our chance to. Kind of push in the direction that we see fit and send that recommendation to the assembly. Is that? that be fair? I think that's exactly what the intent plus and referring it back. I so I guess let me just say the sense we're not in a contentious rezone with a bunch of public. I think we can be a little more free in our. Comments. But if we're going to start saying things, we should wait for the motion so that they are on the record. >> So I like perceiving this is that they want to make it. So that you have to get a conditional use permit. It to build the type of things that would normally be built be 3 in favor of encouraging. >> Barge scale residential development, which doesn't really align with the definition of a B 03:00AM. I in Ter putting that correctly? >> And maybe Daniel can speak to this. But I think next case changes to goes be 3. But Daniel. >> Kind of looking at them together like they seem like they're kind of a tandem thing. >> Yeah, they are intended to run together. So this is changing the purpose of the 3 and its changing what's traditionally been allowed be 3 serve to line with that purpose. And it's say would limit those uses. But it doesn't limit any of the other uses that are currently permitted. So that's kind of the other thing, too is I think when this was being discussed, there's a lot of discussion as if Alby 3 had was so storage and housing. But there's a whole other range of things. And 3 and it does seem that, you know what gets built and b, 3, a lot of depend on what people are willing invest and build it. So a key piece is changing the purpose statement so that it's all consistent. >> So if you built a large scale senior housing, so have a lot of questions. always have a lot of questions. If you built a large scale senior housing, which we do need, which this is asking to make that easier to do. That might very well need a parking garage. It would actually make quite a lot of sense to build a parking garage for seniors to have easy access to building. This seems like it would make that in contradiction. They'd have to get a conditional use permit to provide the parking garage for the largest senior housing that they just built. >> To the chair, only if he's on a separate lot. So on the same line, he would It's the separate lot piece that. Okay. Thank you. It's stand-alone Sarah primaries. Okay. Thank you. I do have. One question that slightly relevance, maybe irrelevant. That's the definition of mixed use that you flashed up on the screen and said you're messing with its troubled me for years because doesn't allow Arrow has some limited amount of use, isn't it? And so I've often thought, well, maybe if I build a house and I call one of the bedrooms home office, the not be mixed use. And I've been I've never really pushed to find Just can you elaborate on what you've come up with? >> So, yeah, this existing code to says mixed use dwelling is a use. And so that's kind of odd. If you're doing a mixed use development because then to permanent, you're technically permitting the dwelling. And it's this is like really pedantic. But you're just hurting the dwelling, not the whole development. So that was the first step saying let's call this a mixed use development and Adam excused welling and then we win and a little bit more. And so to clarify that a little bit, because there was this weird situation said a mixed use dwelling it is like what, 2 or more originally set excuse dwellings in the same building at that. It was sort of. But Holland, your son is a little bit circular. So. That was what this intent was. Just to make it clear that if you do a mixed use development, it's it's something that has one residential unit and some of the stuff in it previous. I think every kind of knew that. But it was was a very clear and cold. So that's trying to get to that to just say. Let's start by cleaning that up. So it's a little bit clear, but there could even better improvements of this. Like the definition. It could just development. Where there's a residential use and a non-resident use or something like Commissioner, both just a quick easy. When you flash a table where we change some numbers like the side yard and stuff like that. Are we approving that? If we send us to the assembly or are we only approving the other stuff and not that table mix-up. Now to the chair it so this everything that's on that's not underlined. It's just my type O that's an air. So doing you would be approving is everything that's underlined in Highland. It. So this other stuff it would just pass through anyway because it's not underlined are changed. But this is just. should I mean, you can discuss changing that if you wanted, but that. If we had intended to change that, we have to put his underlings. And then If the commission. Chose to postpone these items. With their the woods. >> Would staff be willing to do some sort of? session on it? Absolutely can set that up and you can also give us direction, say could you looking to X, Y and Z year answer the following. Questions are trying to and the answers. We should. We should get going. Next. We will open the public hearing. Is anyone from the public? Wanting to come forward and testify? Please state your name. Let us know if you're representing yourself or a group. >> Good evening. My name is look, we didn't you lost key. I'm the land-use planner at Dow. And I'm here tonight to recommend that the Planning and Zoning Commission removed requirement for a conditional use permit for parking structures or surface parking over 50 parking spaces. If you look at 10 21, this is a commercial use and it's meant for vehicle parking. That's not more than 72 hours. Consecutive hours. Vehicle storage is either considered self storage when it's part of a self storage. or a storage yard, if it's an independent. Facility for the storage of vehicles or other equipment. So those are 2 very different uses. With respect to parking. This resolution does not appear to fully consider the need for flexible tools to provide adequate parking across Anchorage, for example, the downtown code that would that you guys talked about. I was part of that working group at the time old code required a conditional use permit for parking structures when we worked as a group to look at the rewrite for downtown code, there was discussion that there is a need for parking. And so that parking structure should be permitted by right? Because conditional use permits. They do ads a fair amount of time. They add risk to a project and they certainly at cost. The other thing that it doesn't take into consideration. Our other adopted plans such as the Spin, our Corder Plan, which talks about having district or shared parking. And so I know there's been work towards having a district parking within spin are, but that doesn't exist. So businesses can work together to have shared parking. A good example of this is the windmill parking lot across from Chilkoot Charlie's. It currently supports several surrounding businesses and it was slated to also support the redevelopment of the LA Max. Another consideration, our campus like settings like the Alaska native Medical campus. That is all almost all be 3. It has multiple properties and land is premium there. So over time there may be a need to put a parking structure on a separate property and now they would need to go through a conditional use permit process. There's also examples of developments where you use multiple properties where you're building will be on property and maybe your parking is on that property as well as adjacent properties. Some examples of that are up until a few years ago. The Beartooth Theater was on 4 separate properties then also the Spenard Road House is currently on 2 separate properties and those have parking as a principal use. So know I'm talking about a lot of different uses, it applies to everything. So the same would apply for doing residential housing within the B 3. If you found the certain types of scenarios. So I would just ask for your consideration to not have that become a conditional use permit. Question. We heard from staff that. The fees for conditional use could be 4, 7 10,000. Let's say that's what they said. >> What would you estimate? >> Affirmed like Dow might charge for 7 or $10,000 conditional use. >> depending on the complexity, a conditional use permit can be anywhere from $20,000. For more. Thank You're welcome. Any other questions? I think you. >> Anybody else wishing to testify, please step forward. >> I do not see anybody. If we. If any commissioners were thinking they wanted to postpone. >> Maybe doing it before. I close the public hearing. Might be a good idea. commission. >> This might be sort of comment and question. I think I am. I hope this isn't too far off the rails, but I I'm not sure I can, Sir Portis has written. I think if I were asked right now, I think I would probably. Not support that conditional use and parking lots. I. It's hard to know without data on how many properties this might So I think that was put out there that I could see myself either moving forward with some amendments or moving to a work session. The one of the only times I've felt this way, but I would just say those are that's what I would put out there. And I would ask if any other commissioners have felt strongly about either one of those options moving forward today or work session. >> Informal poll. >> Rather than just making the motion. And taking the vote. I think everybody just waiting in. I mean, we could go into committee of the whole. Then we can really talk loosely. But >> I think if we had everybody weigh in with their thoughts really quickly, we could get to the bottom as Commissioner Gardner. Informally. >> Not committing to anything. I would be interested in some in in in particular some additional information about potential effects. It was really interesting to see the data on houses. Housing is built be 3. And I think without having great, if you have something comparable the uses that were planning to push conditional use and Ben potentially locations as well in the context of the concern about pushing over into industrial areas would be really interesting and I think could be helpful to have a discussion with some of that additional information on hand. Commissioner pull Earth. Why is >> Gonna say that? You know, I think the intent of this case basically a policy change to prevent so storage and storage lots and just all the stuff we're talking about from impacting be threes ability develop residential development in the overall goal of what we're trying to do. I think that's a good thing. However, I don't know if I could support getting rid of parking lots and parking structures. Those seem pretty important in the be 3 districts. So that's kind of where my head's that. >> sounds like the motion might be appropriate. Commissioner Christian. >> I would make a motion to postpone this case and to direct staff to schedule a work session my preference would be to do it for both this and the subsequent case since I see that there, I believe they're connected in both go to the larger intent and goals of the be 3 district. And that way we can request more information on you know, multiple topics. I see some not. so I will go ahead and make the motion to postpone both case 2026 Dash, 0, 0, 3, 5, 0, 0, 3, 4, and our staff to schedule a work session. Since we are currently in the middle of a public hearing on case. >> And the first case, I think we should handle the cases separately. But I think the intent And yet the intent is to keep the public hearing open, correct? Yes. And did you want to testify on this case before we make a motion to postpone? gets would call it testimony. So before we do this, you can go ahead and state your name for the record and testify. You say whatever you want. And since will likely postpone and continue the public hearing. You. If there's substance, if there's so substance, changes, you'll be able to testify. >> My name is Linda Arden. I'd like to point out that you have. A spell problem in your motion to postpone direct is not spelled correctly. That's Thank you. >> Okay. The motion by Commissioner is seconded by Commissioner Gardner. Commissioner Christian, would you like to speak your motion? >> I believe already made my intent clear. I think I would welcome. >> Direction from the commission on additional information that they would find helpful at a work session. For my part, I will start with maybe some overall guidance that I would request on The goals of the be 3 district. In general and the uses that we'd like to support within the district I'll start there. >> Commissioner Mills. >> I think just one comment to this one thing that would be beneficial for the work session would further clarification or definition about who the conditional use applies to because the be 3 is. Its intent is for like commercial use. So like it. Commercial industrial use being restricted for says like a residential self storage. Just. A little bit more clarity as to who. Who and which types of uses are going to be conditional and which ones aren't. And I just >> add on to that. I don't is no such thing as really a residential so storage liked. You store your residential good. So I know what you meant by that. But in code, I don't think there's a residential self storage versus commercial sub storage vs. Hazardous waste and the building code definitely. To find those differences. But I don't want to belabor it, but maybe some. Expanded definition of when you. Rise to the level of call a flying as a self storage vs traditional. Commercial space of warehouse space. And that could be one of those. Boxes where the further you dig into the details, the harder it gets us all. But it would be good to talk about work session. Commissioner pull us. >> I think I'd like my easy first question answered How many uses are going to fall under auto oriented. Retail uses. It seems like everything to me so that I smart phone. >> Okay. Here and >> hearing seeing Nolan the speak to the motion will call for the vote. >> The motion passes. Next. >> Maybe some guidance for staff. We haven't. Even began case 2026. 0, 0, 3, 5, If the intense should. This will be a question for the commission. Would you like to hear start with the staff rec and our staff presentation for 2026 to 0, 0, 3, 5, Or do we want to just postpone? Commissioner Christian? >> I would like to hear staff's presentation. I think that will let us make a from decision on what the >> to the chairs, the same presentation. But we'd be left to provide again if you like. Or it could to spread quick overview of differences of that one. Okay. Again, Daniel kind of foster long-range planning here with a look or tram. Also long-range planning. I think. The main difference is so. 2026, 34 was the stick. 20 say 6.35 Is care. It allows forms of housing so townhouses, single family, all sorts of stuff simple as the definition of mixed use. And eliminates lot sizes and restrictions on the number of structures and B, 3. So this a permissive. That really easy. The question is. >> Do we? >> Open the public hearing on this one. That will be in same spot if we choose to postpone this case. I'm going to go ahead open the public hearing. Anybody from the public wishing to testify. Seeing no what is the will of the recommending that if we are choosing to postpone, we to it now with the public hearing still open. That motion is made by Commissioner Krishna seconded by Commissioner Gardner Commissioner Christian. Do you have anything to add? >> I would just add that I think we've heard from staff that these 2 these 2 cases are linked. And so I think it would benefit us to have a work session on them together. So I would direct staff to have a joint work session on these 2 cases. You know, and I think my comment and question on this is going to be maybe a little bit familiar, too. The commission that heard me during the transit supportive development overlay conversation, which is that, you know, I at first glance. Have a question about both trying to support higher density non motorized access to commercial corridors while allowing single-family dwelling units in places that they weren't before. And I know that that might just be a a larger theoretical discussion about how we best create housing, whether it's by trying straight at higher density residential development or by allowing the full spectrum of housing. So look forward to hearing the thought behind that. >> Any other commissioners wishing to add any. Direction for staff. In preparation for. session. Sure. Can I I can read back what I listed here. I don't that's probably do with in this another I can do at the end. If you'd like >> Go ahead. So so far I have overall guidance on the goals, a B, 3 district. General new says that the distrust support numbers and locations of use is made. That would be have been made conditional use by the previous ordinance. Further clarification, the definition about what the conditions applies to. But the difference is between self so storage commercial space warehouse space info about pressure on industrial Definition or explanation of how many use things fall under auto retail uses and looking at the question of transport transit corridors, a line single family aiming straight higher density around the whole spectrum housing. Anything else? I think you got it. But if not, we'll let you know what the work session. Let's call for the vote. The motion passes. Next on the head. Gender is titled 21 discussion. Are there any in total? 21 discussions aside from. >> What we do or do not do with B 3. Commission Mister McKenna Fosdick. I'll just mention that we're working with the assembly legislator services. They're doing the civic and their project to get more public information out in the lobby. So the first thing is we put just a list of some of the zoning reforms have gone through in the past couple years. So that's out there tomorrow night. Also, we a sort of open houses more of table in here. We're having catch people coming and going. So we'll be talking a lot about all the zoning change have been going on and to talking with people have material. So she you know, anybody was interesting that please encourage them to come. That's tomorrow night. So the civic anchor will be just in the library in atrium for couple weeks or months tomorrow night. Yeah, we'll just be tabling out there and we'll just have a bunch information hoping to catch people coming lot of time talk. Treating. Any anything else from the commission. Any commissioner comments? Here and seeing and we entertain a motion to adjourn. Moved by Commissioner Gardner seconded by the key. Any objection hearing? None. richer. ♪ ♪ and ♪