e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e for e e e for e e e e e e e e e e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Music] a [Music] oh [Music] [Applause] [Music] sh [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] n [Music] [Music] he [Music] [Music] n [Music] [Music] a [Music] a [Music] w [Music] [Music] h n [Music] [Music] la [Music] [Music] a a [Music] a [Music] oh [Music] a [Music] a [Music] a e e the uh June 3D meeting of the Planning and Zoning commission to order can I please have the roll call Andre Spinelli here Jared Gardner here Rica Krishna here Jim Winchester here Scott pulus here Jeff Ron here Brandy Eber here Daniel George here Greg strike here you have a quorum thank you is there a motion to approve the minutes from Monday May 20th meeting it's moved by commissioner Krishna seconded by commissioner strike is there any Corrections or objections to the minutes hearing none minutes are approved any disclosures from the commission thing none um we will move on to the consent agenda is there a motion to approve the consent agenda moved by commissioner strike second in by commissioner Winchester is anybody wishing to pull anything for discussion any objections to the consent agenda hearing none consent agenda is approved we now move to the public hearings I will start or maybe let's back up is there a motion to combine case 224-6163 it's mooved by commissioner strike seconded by commissioner Ron any discussion any objection hearing none that motion passes Now read the procedures by which the public may speak to the commission at its meeting after the staff presentation is completed on public hearing items the chair will ask for public testimony on the issue persons who wish to testify will follow the time limits established in commission rules of procedure a the petitioners including his or her Representatives will receive 10 minutes part of this time may be reserved for rebuttal be representatives of groups Community councils PT Etc will receive five minutes and individuals will receive three minutes when your testimony is complete you may be asked questions by the commission you may only testify once on any issue unless questioned by the commission any party of Interest wishing to appeal shall first file with the planning director within seven days of the commission's decision made on the record a written notice of intent to appeal in accordance with AMC 21350 a4a commission recommendations to the Anchorage assembly are not appealable following approval of the written findings of fact and decision any party of Interest May within 20 days file an appeal by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee and deposit in accordance with 21035 the notice of appeal must be filed with the planning director on the form prescribed by the municip it if the appellant is not the applicant the appellant's notice of appeal shall include proof of service on the applicant now we will move on to case 20 24-4 6 can we please have staff's presentation thank you Mr chair this is an amendment to a deao conditional use permit for an existing telecommunication faity AT&T and Mass are proposing to install a new 30 kwatt standby generator at an existing telecommunication facility located at 18540 whirl Way Road the existing 65 ft monopole Tower was installed in 2011 after acquiring the required administrative site plan under old code case 2011- 044 notice of zoning action 2011 0266 49-0 the installation of this standby generator will create reliable consistent and safe telec Communication Service to the community that uses the site the standby generator will be operated solely during planned and unplanned power service disruptions the generator will also run periodically for service testing approximately four times per year construction is planned for this summer once all the permits have been acquired the site will take access off an existing driveway from whirl Way Road a pre-application Conference was held on March 28th 2023 in accordance with AMC 21380 C2 a community meeting was held online on February 14th 2024 in accordance with 21383 134 public hearing notices were mailed on May 8th 2024 as of this writing no responses have been received from the public the eag River Valley Community Council did not provide comments Municipal reviewing agencies have no objection to this amendment for a 30 kilowatt standby generator their comments are attached and can be found starting on page 43 of your staff packet the Planning and Zoning commission may approve a conditional use application if in the Judgment of the commission all the following nine criteria have been met in all material matters planning staff has found that eight of the nine standards have been met and that standard four may be met the proposed standby gener generator will be located within the existing 30x30 leased area however the projected or actual noise level of the standby generator during power aages or testing has not been determined therefore noise analysis may be required to identify noise mitigation measures to surround in Residential Properties therefore staff recommends approval of this amendment to a deao conditional use subject to conditions 1 through three found on page six of your staff packet the applicant also provided a lay on the table um PowerPoint that does show the 65 DB of what the generator will run it's about the seventh page in um and they are here to answer any questions that the commission may have commissioner strike yes thank you and through the chair just a quick question is this generator replacing an existing generator you use the term new generator through the chair commissioner strike this is a new generator there is not one currently at this site thank you commissioner Ron thank you to the chair thank you staff for that quick presentation question about the noise uh requirements could you refresh the commission as to what they are um through the chair commissioner Ron if you turn to the very back of your packet Pages 70 and 71 mainly 70 this is a residential district AB buding another residential property so at the property line decb between 7:00 a.m. and 10: p.m. are not supposed to be above 60 between 10 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. they're not supposed to be above 50 also the closest properties to the north so property line to the north closest property line is 115 ft closest property line to the east is 79 ft closest residence structure to the north is 140 ft and closest structure to the east is 120 ft the structure to the east is there's a pretty dense canopy of existing vegetation that's there and will still exist there um Whirl Away does separate these two properties to the north is the petitioner here you like to step forward and provide presentation oh you got to um push the button down below there you go right oh oh you had it on turn it push the button again there will be a light on the microphone like this but you got to push the button down below oh there you go hang on it's my first time hi my name is Alexis gich I represent AT&T and and um so yes we would like to install a generator there is no generator right now at the site and we would like to have a backup power so it the site is accessible uh for 911 calls um 247 because this site curing a first net uh and first net is for First Responders police fire and emergency calls um so this site is an existing telecommunication facility and operates on man 247 365 days a year to provide Wireless telecommunication the standby generator will be operated Solly during planned or unplanned power service disruptions planed service dates or unplanned power adages the generator will also be around periodically for service testing approximately four times per year it also will generally R for half an hour on Tuesday morning to confirm operability uh like Paul said the construction plan for summer 2024 uh the underlying land is owned by managed owned and managed by Municipality of Anchorage uh encourage Water and Wastewater utility whereas the tower is owned by AT&T as its facility the ground Le area is controlled by AT&T through the Le with Municipality of Anchorage water um do you guys have any questions for me I see no commissioner pus um I think we all agree that a 911 call center is pretty important um basically what I've seen in the noise level stuff is the generator will probably offer or run about 5 DB above you know the the loud operating sounds um do you guys have you thought about any mitigation if somebody does complain what you could do to Bring the Noise volume down a little bit like a big tall fence or have you guys thought about that at all do you know can uh my construction manager Nicholas bras answer this question thank you pleasey state your name please uh my name is Nicholas propolis um I'm a construction manager for mtec who is who AT&T uses for our construction program up here um yes we can install a silencer if somebody has has a complaint that's we do that sort of stuff all the time it's not a big deal so they can reach out to um the tower owner and the tower owner reaches out to to AT&T and then they call us and we go fix it basically it's how it shakes down so yeah um commissioner George uh thank you through the chair um I want to Echo my colleague commissioner Po's uh comment I I believe this is critical infrastructure I think having 911 service and reliable Communications is critically important um I guess I I had a little too much time on my hand so I I pulled the uh technical specifications since you provided the uh the model of the the generator it's not particularly large I mean uh it's something I would expect to see on a on a home maybe even around the area but um I noticed that the 65 DB um number appears to be with a sound cover installed not just a weather cover so I just wanted to confirm with you that you are in fact going to um install this with with the sound cover option yes that's pretty much a standard package that we buy with these it's it's all inclusive we we install these all over the place so it's it's our standard unit it comes with that sure okay just to reassure folks thank you yep um Mr Hatcher through the chair like commissioner George said that's 65 DB at the unit so now you're talking you know 70 ft away to the next closest property or or uh 115 79 or 115 ft away and so if it's if it's still creating that 60 or more than 60 or more than 50 DB that's when we that's when we'd have to look at mitig other mitigation processes through the chair just to clarify and and expand upon that yes thank you for pointing that out the unit itself and uh I believe if I interpret the way the code is written the 60 DB and 50 D limits are at the receiving property line so we've got quite a distance for uh attenuation and just dissipation of sound so um there's a a high probability that this will not exceed uh the zoning requirements thank you any other questions I see no more questions thank you thank you thank you we will now open this public hearing this hearing to public testimony is anyone from the public wishing to speak on this matter seeing none um petitioner you have eight minutes for rebuttal if you'd like to use that time I think I'm good thank you okay any final questions from the commission we will close the public hearing what is the will of the body have a motion by commissioner Krishna seconded by commissioner strike commissioner Krishna would you like to State your motion sure I move in case 202 24-4 6 to approve an amendment to a deao conditional use of an existing telecommunication facility for the addition of a standby generator subject to the conditions shown on page six of the staff report would you like to speak to your motion sure I believe the conditions of approval are met um or eight of them are the final one will be met with the um passage of the department recommendation number two which requires the uh petitioner to Monitor and mitigate noise levels originating from the standby generator as needed to ensure noise levels remain within the maximum set forth by uh amc5 D uh. 70.8 um and I'd also like to add that no public comments were received in opposition anyone else wishing to speak to the motion seeing none will oh commissioner strike just want to go further on the findings that there were 134 public hearing notices sent out and nothing received back okay we will call for the vote Miss Eber how do you vote yes thank you that motion passes okay we will move on to the combined cases 2024-25 78 we please have the staff presentation thank you Mr chair um I'll start with uh case 61 the area master plan and development master plan um there's the G2 uh packet number one which contain contains a resolution from the gwood Board of Supervisors and then there's the G2 packet number two that has a public comment um I wanted to begin with just uh the definition of area master plan uh an area master plan is intended to facilitate the planed development of large tracks of land under unified uh ownership or control the area master plan shall establish the general arrange rangement of land uses circulation and infrastructure systems for the identified uh development areas and then the definition of a development master plan um a development master plan is intended to shape and manage future growth of a site and provide certainty to the community by stating a clearly articulated vision for the character layout design of the development of the site so in the grst uh 2 District you have to have first an area master plan and then a development master plan um the resort has an area master plan and with this application they're applying for modifications and they're also applying for uh approval of a uh phase one uh development master plan approval um I think that it might be helpful uh to the commission um to uh turn to page uh 28 of your packet on page 28 um you'll see um a print out of one page from the Girdwood area plan this is the land use plan map in the Girdwood area plan and the uh purple uh color is the resort um land use designation and what what we've done here is just to label um track a b c d A1 uh V and the track a expansion area um because um I'm going to quickly launch into referring to tracks A and B and uh the track day expansion area and um those aren't you know commonly understood where they are but you you now will be able to see where they are um so uh alasa Resort is requesting modifications to the alasa resort area master plan for increases in the allowable amount of residential and Commercial development within tract a which is where the hotel is and tract B which is where the lower parking lot is the resort is also proposing new community uses along with residential development um on the um track day expansion area that Glacier Creek Village um as well as uh track B um in addition to modifications to the area master plan the resort is also seeking uh development master plan approval uh which is required priority development the resort is requesting approval of the first of four phases of their uh of a development master plan to allow construction to begin next summer uh alasa Resort plans to build a variety of new housing um around the existing Hotel the resort plans to expand the commercial space in the hotel and to develop mixed use um a mixed use building with commercial retail on the lower level and residential units above um as well as several Resort amenities including a Convention Center building and a ski School the area master plan modifications will add several Community uses that were not previously envisioned in the area master plan um they are a non-commercial Community use Nordic Ski Hut um a new building for the little uh little bears Playhouse preschool and a recreational center the recreational center will have a covered NHL size ice rink a fitness center and an aquatic center these new facilities are intended for the public to use um the area master plan modifications allow greater development um intensities for both residential and Commercial uses on tracks A and B um that's the hotel um where the hotel is and that lower parking lot as the track B um so around the hotel as well as residential development and a community use uh Ski Hut on the track day expansion area near glacial Creek Glacier Creek um the hotel and the ski mountain um will uh be connected um to the track day expansion area via the pulse G to improve access to skiing and reduce the need for vehicles um you know driving um State and Municipal reviewing agencies have no objection um to the area master plan modifications and this phase one development ma development master plan uh the reviewing agency comments are uh enclosed in your uh packets 1,148 public hearing notices were mailed um on May 8th um the Girdwood Board of Supervisors provid provided uh a resolution um and also uh one public comment was received um the planning department finds that uh the approval criteria for area master plan um are met and I'm going to go through these in a little bit of detail so for um uh approval Criterion a um the umu a proposed modification to the alasa resort area master plan uh conformed to the Girdwood code and to the 1995 um Girdwood area plan land use plan map uh both tracks A and B are identified as Resort in the land use plan map uh both tracks A and B are also zon grst 2 District so uh what does the Girdwood chapter 9 code say um the uh grst district is this is the um new base Resort uh District um it says in in the code that this district is the alasa resort ski slopes the alasa Prince Hotel and adjoining parking lot the undeveloped area between the original um base Mount original Mountain base area and the alasa prince hotel and an undeveloped area lying north of the prince hotel across moose Meadows Creek the latter area is suitable for future base development the intent of this district is to maintain and expand the current development for Alpine skiing and tourism um now um the next part of my report um I just read to you um what the Girdwood area plan says about what is the meaning of this Resort designation that that uh that you find on the L use plan map um these are areas that are substantially developed with facilities and services that have a primary relationship to major commercial recreational resource and that are expected to remain so for the duration of the plan the vacant area are best suited for Resort use the expansion area of track to a so I'm turning back to my my staff report um the expansion area track day is also shown as Resort in the Girdwood area plan and is zoned grst to so the track day expansion area is both designated for a resort in the gwood area plan and is zoned grst to new base uh Resort District um the grst 2 District allows both residential and commercial uses um approval Criterion b um this so the next approval Criterion um this has to do with streets roads Transportation elements uh the area master plan modification conforms to the Girdwood area plan and the official streets and highways plan the application includes an updated trip generation summary completed by Kenny engineering which compared the current area master plan with the proposed modifications for new residential commercial and Community use development on tracks A and B um the Municipal Traffic uh engineer and um state DOT accepted the updated trip generation summary and do not recommend any changes um the uh private development the municipal private Development Division um uh that deals with uh um you know road construction and drainage um also do not recommend any changes to arlberg Avenue uh approval Criterion c um no adverse uh fiscal impacts are anticipated from the proposed modifications to the area master plan the proposed increases in the number of housing units and commercial space are considered benefits to the community as a whole um the new housing will help Girdwood which is experiencing housing scarcity uh the resort is proposing a variety of housing types from small Workforce housing units to single family homes um the new commercial space will generate uh more commercial activity uh the cost of any public improvements related to the development uh will be borne by The Resort uh approval Criterion D is met gwood is likely to experience significant Community benefits from the area master plan modifications these include 25% more housing units and commercial space around the resort furthermore the resort proposes the addition of the little bears Playhouse uh preschool and a new recreational center including a Aquatic Center and a covered ice rink um the uh new preschool will help uh with the long waiting list for childcare in Girdwood also Girdwood doesn't currently have um uh publicly available fitness center pool or ice rink approval Criterion e uh has to do with compatibility um approval of uh these area master plan modifications is necessary for the for the development master plan uh the area around the hotel is Zone grst 2 and intended for res Resort style development the development intensities are uh compatible with the surrounding area which is all existing Resort there are no residential Neighbors in the immediate vicinity the nearest a development residential development is on um verba way which is um approximately 2,300 uh feet away the uh expansion of uh tract a uh proposed for single family residential development um is a low intensity um use um short-term rentals uh will be prohibited um by uh with this application and um local residents will have first option to purchase um a portion of these homes uh the new uh neighborhood is designed to work with the recently adopted Girdwood uh Trails plan for the proposed uh trails in the area the resort uh proposes uh public use Ski Hut near the Nordic ski trails uh the aerial pulse Gondola will help reduce traffic uh vehicle vehicular traffic as well approval Criterion f um a um preliminary drainage analysis conducted by Triad engineering is uh provided with this application the private Development Division the municipality will evaluate drainage is part of the master grading and drainage plan with the forthcoming uh land use permit application uh traffic engineering department the Municipal Traffic engineer and Dot have no objections um with any of the proposed development other public improvements such as the extension of utilities will be provided by The Resort um the next section of the report uh is has to do with uh um a section of the gwood code uh entitled um with the heading um use area and use District boundaries to be established during the master plan process um so the explanation here is um in Girdwood there are some undeveloped areas of the community with um undefined zoning District boundaries the master plan process is the opportunity to refine these zoning boundaries um this application for area master plan modification describes four phases of uh development in the uh fourth phase of development um alas Resort intends to construct um single family homes in a community use Nordic Ski Hut in the track a expansion area um the existing grst uh to zoning boundary um in the track day expansion area has an irregular shape and needs to be refined um the GST zoning boundary in tract in the tract a expansion area is wavy it's not based on any survey in accordance with this section of code uh phase 4 uh development master plan would have to refine um the precise Zone boundary of the grst to two District the boundary um is required to create uh a more efficient logical land use uh pattern and uh uh it's you cannot reduce the open space District so it it's not about gaining more Resort development losing any open space that's not um that would be prohibited also the Planning and Zoning commission reviews all development master plans so this all comes um each phase of of development master plan comes before the commission and a public hearing I think the last section of the the staff report is um the uh phase one development master plan and the planning department finds that the approval criteria is met and in Criterion a the proposed phase one development master plan conforms to the principles of the 1995 um G gwood area plan um the architecture of the proposed buildings enhance the mountain resort character and blend well with uh Girdwood natur environment uh the site plan shows several uh new residential commercial mixed use and Community use buildings uh as well as pedestrian connections between the buildings the landscape plan improves the aesthetic quality of the buildings um includes native plants such as um Spruce Birch Hemlock Alder uh Juniper and fern um let's see here the development master plan shows new residential mix use commercial and Community use buildings on track a phase one will complete 80 Hotel condom minum units above uh 15,500 ft of commercial space the commercial space at the hotel will be expanded by 3,400 ft² um a 12,500 ft² uh conference center um and a 9,500 foot ski school base camp building will also be built on track B uh Phase 1 will construct 50 Workforce housing units um 6,50 uh squ ft² of commercial space 27,600 ft of recreational um for the recreational center and 27,600 ft uh uh for the ice rink and uh there'll be a 9,400 foot um preschool daycare um approval Criterion B uh the the development of phase one will construct internal driveways uh that access arlberg Avenue uh arlberg is a collector Street uh Criterion C this is privately owned land um D the proposed residential mixed use buildings will add a total of 130 housing units on tracks A and B the housing units will be in the form of Workforce housing and condo hotel units um Criterion e uh the nearest residential areas are uh approximately a half mile uh from any of the proposed development um Criterion F the site plan shows on-site uh traffic circulation and driveways onto arlberg uh arlbergs built a municipal standard um gwood also has the gler Valley Transit it's a free bus service with a bus stop on track b um the last approval Criterion is G um the phase one development master plan proposes eight design Alternatives that deviate from um the specific uh uh standards um the Girdwood code the petitioner requesting these design Alternatives in accordance with the development master plan procedure and um uh these design Alternatives result in a high quality development and in integrated site plan uh the eight design Alternatives proposed by The Resort are equivalent to or exceed the general applicable uh development standards so in summation uh the department recommends uh approval of the proposed modifications to the alas resort area master plan subject to uh recording a notice zoning action um this is on page 13 of the packet and um the department recommends approval of the development m plan phase one on uh tracks A and B subject to conditions 1 through three on page 13 as well that concludes my uh presentation and oh I'm sorry U that's the the first case um turning now to uh the second case which is the commercial tracks plat uh this is really brief uh so this is a request um so I'm turning into packet G3 um I guess the first thing to point out is that um there is a a Girdwood Board of Supervisors uh resolution um dealing with this commercial tracks plat and I'm holding it up over my head to show you what to look for it's G3 uh summary packet one so what is this this is a request for amendments to the commercial track fragment lot site plan for alasa Resort the purpose of this application is update the fragment lot site plan to accommodate all of this new development um this allows commercial tracks um or this section of code allows commercial tracks to divide into fragment Lots in order to facilitate construction of uh commercial developments requiring multiple phases of construction so it's like a finance tool they can Finance uh buildings separately with each phase of development or with each building um it's a like a banking type of thing um that does conclude my presentation and I'd be happy to uh answer questions the applicant has also brought um their design team um to uh field questions as well thank you commissioner strike thank you and through the chair thank you for the presentation on Criterion e you mentioned short-term rentals will be prohibited how is that going to be codified or how how is that going to be enforced what what what process will there be in place uh thank you for the question uh can you direct that to to the applicant good thank you commissioner Garder thank you for the presentation um my question relates to the comments we received from the G excuse me Girdwood Board of Supervisors and if I'm reading it correctly it looks like there are some planned amendments or uh changes to the comprehensive plan that will include um a change in the designation for um at least some of this area that's currently listed as resort to open space and I was wondering if you could speak briefly to your knowledge as to you know what what that actual status is and to what extent that um changes kind of how how you're thinking about the criteria here and in particular or maybe in addition um what effect that might have on future development phases I see for example that the criteria for the development master planning um does look to the the plan and you know when they get to phase four what effect that might have that change of designation um uh through the chair Mr Gardner thank you for the question so the second part of your question says um you know uh how does uh any proposed changes to the Girdwood area plans uh land use plan map uh how would that affect uh um you know this development um so uh if the area master plan modification are approved tonight then that will be the guiding um you know that would be the guiding document um for uh a development going forward um uh the commission as I said will review each phase of the development master plan and could take that into account um you know and the latest version the Girdwood area plan because all of this you know the area master plan I think they're proposing about 10 or 15 years to like build it out you know um but uh the first part of your question um does that make sense the the second part um I think so yes in other words that that whatever we would if this is approved this evening the area master plan that would effectively be the primary guiding document in over the land use plan map to the extent that there's a discrepancy between the two of them that that's correct okay thank you and then the first part of uh your question um was uh you know I think there's a pretty uh simple answer to that um uh so the first was uh question um uh is you know where is uh uh where is the um uh proposed uh changes to the Girdwood area plan where's that at um uh application has been made um uh for adoption of uh you know an update to the gwood area plan um uh that is being processed uh to the Planning and Zoning commission it'll be coming before the Planning and Zoning commission um that is the proposed Girdwood area plan um uh you know it uh it hasn't been uh reviewed um and the planning zoning commission hasn't U made a recommendation on that to the assembly um The Next Step uh would be for it to go before the assembly for adoption um so it has been submitted but it hasn't received uh the first of uh two required public hearings um and uh you know we just I can't speculate on uh it'll be uh uh approved in the for that it was submitted or if if if uh changes uh will be made or if it'll be adopted at all or any of that um the other thing I would say is that um you know since 1995 and um our current um uh Girdwood area plan um is the adopted policy of the municipality that is current and that's um been that way for many years um and uh also um even if the uh the update uh the gwood area plan um were to be adopted and its current form showing uh the conversion of the resort designation to open space um if that were to I'll be adopted that way the the existing zoning is still grst to um and it takes a rezone to change it to a different zoning District so um while uh if the plan were to change the resort designation to open space the zoning governs it's still gst2 uh that's the zoning district and the regulations uh you know the the land you the law that it follows or the code that it follows is the existing zoning map um thank you thank you um commissioner pus I'm just a little murky on the phasing so there's I've heard phase one and phase four um is did I miss a a phasing map or anything in there is that on a certain page and I'm asking because I'm wondering at what phase is um is at Meadow Creek is proposed to be in I think I heard it was phase four but we're only approving phase one so I'm all over the board yeah uh thank you for the qu through the chair Mr pulus thank you for the question uh page 22 of your packet um show a summary um of uh the different phases uh of development uh so just so that we're all on the same page because I've been talking for quite a while you have a first o sorry the gst2 district requires you to have an area master plan first and that's sort of like your big picture and then um prior to development you have to have a development master plan so uh with this you know application ales Resort is proposing um you know uh to update the uh ales resort area master plan the area master plan and uh they're proposing uh they're asking for your approval of uh phase one development master plan they'll have to come back with a um you know development master plan for each additional phase they just haven't designed all those buildings out um you know to the detail uh that they could bring before you uh right now and uh the phase four is that uh expansion area towards GLA Glacier Creek so we wouldn't be approving like the actual site plan for that today okay thank you any further questions for staff okay we will invite up you will receive 20 minutes okay check uh hello my name is William Lori and I am the development manager for aliaska Resort and pomoy lodging um so thank you to the commission and the Planning and Zoning staff assigned to this case um really appreciate um it's a large package so thank you for reviewing it also thank you to the Gerber Board of Supervisors for uh working with us through this and uh reviewing it as well and their General support for the project um I have a short presentation for you tonight um but uh hopefully we'll have some time for Q&A after um we are requesting a modification to the alesco resort area master plan and the development master plan for phase one of that development uh also revisions to the commercial track plat associated with the development um so this process started during covid-19 and uh it was really due to everyone's ability to work remotely um if you had the option to work in Girdwood versus an urban city I think a lot of people would choose Girdwood because of the trails Recreation the mountain um so we wanted to take advantage of this opportunity and um we started looking at the previous area master plan that was completed we engaged SE group who completed that previous plan and started the whole process with them again so that is the current alasa area master plan and just for reference that is the hotel right there in the pond um and day lodge section over here but essentially what we did with SE group was um you know look at what was lacking in this area master plan there's a lot of great aspects to it um but there's a lot of issues in Girdwood uh regarding topography Wetlands uh Avalanche risk um there's tons of things to consider on top of that we wanted to create some Community amenities um to improve the area master plan within this which weren't proposed in this um so we identified three areas that were most feasible for development and again that is the resort right there that would be the new um Nordic Spa so this is tra a this is tra B current overflow parking and this is that track I section um which we're proposing as an expanded area to tract a um and arguably these are some of the most developable lands within Girdwood right now um so throughout this process as well you know as much as this was benefit to the resort we also realized we could immensely benefit the community of Girdwood um by including a lot of those amenities and we started to engage with the community individuals groups councils uh there's a lot of groups in Girdwood and we we talked to a lot of people about this and that was to establish what was really needed there so we established these alesca development objectives that pretty well guided our development and um you know a lot of these are similar to what you might see in a comp plan more housing more commercial space Community amenities Workforce housing um and being a resort Community you know increasing the amount of trails within the area but these really guided our development so after working through this General plan with SE group uh we brought on Skylab architecture to really get in the Weeds on planning um get to that area master plan um new area master plan as well as a development master plan which just requires more design and we've come up with this site plan here um so I'll go in more detail on all of these development areas but essentially you're looking at uh the hotel right here so this would be tract a this is tract B and that is the expanded uh Glacier graer Glacier Creek Village um so this is Ali Esa Village and this is Moose Meadows Village um but they're all connected in one way um through Trails through roads through paths so looking at the alasa Village area area um essentially what you're looking at here is a pedestrian oriented uh Village similar to what you might see in um lower 48 ski Villages or Canadian ski Villages um most of this is focused on a pedestrian walkway through this section and then these larger buildings are um condos with ground floor retail this is the conference center here uh a modest Hotel extension and then the base camp building which will house our new ski school and then to this up area and north of the development will be new parking areas and that will be to replace uh what's being taken on the current overflow parking on track B this is really meant to be a community oriented area um these are the existing staff housing buildings just for reference um and that is the chapel but these buildings within this section um so the larger buildings and these smaller ones are all Workforce housing and not just for Resort employees but also for businesses of Girdwood um on top of that you know as we were going through this process and research um we there's there's going to be a kind of a diverse array of units within this because what we realized is although you know the summer or winter lify wants to come in for one season families also want to move to Girdwood so you'll get everything from a dorm style up to a town home and that's an effort to you know bring up people who want to uh come up here with a family a spouse adult dog um offering all those units really allows us to attract um great Labor up to Girdwood um on top of that in this area we have the Little Bears Daycare over in this section and then this large building over here would be the covered uh ice rink and uh Aquatic Center and fitness center and we've signed an Loi with a very reputable 501c3 to be the operator and partner on this project for us um hope we can announce that soon um also within these kind of more dense buildings here there will be ground floor retail as well uh the last section is this uh Glacier Creek Village which um I just wanted to provide a little bit more context to So within the land use map this you know area was defined as grs2 um Resort use and per the code that um Francis was talking about you know we're we're allowed to Define that those lines through the development master plan process and that's with um consideration of things like topography Wetlands uh streams um so as you can see there are wetlands to the South here Wetlands to the north um you have quite a bit of toppo um on this Edge part here but overall like this General site is quite flat moving up to the um upper parts of the valley and then also you want to consider um Trails so you have a trail that essentially hugs the bluff of Glacier Creek there as well as stumpies Trail which goes through this section of wetlands um so what we designed with our Architects and what we considered with the newly adopted Trails plan um especially with the current proposed Trail was to change the area of this um essentially a blob and um let it be defined by the Topo by The Trails um and all the consider considerations to be made and what we've done here here is essentially create um a squiggle and um so this would be that existing Trail in the Upper Valley this is the one that crosses and then this is the proposed uh Forest Loop um through the grid Trails plan and what we landed on with this area um is essentially a lower density um Trails oriented community and what you see down in this area are essentially uh smaller cluster homes um so if you're familiar with um the Cordova and 11th development in Anchorage um essentially smaller homes tiny homes we're calling them attainable housing um but something that's not currently available in Girdwood and we're looking to establish a program it's very um it's occurred a lot in different Resort towns but something that would allow for people who have lived there work there for so long and been priced out of the market an opportunity for priority buying um it's been successfully done in a lot of places uh in the lower 48 in Canada and we're proposing something of that program uh here as well and then as you move into the Upper Valley you'd be looking at more conventional single family homes um this is the small Nordic ski facility and additional parking area and this line here that you see would essentially be the uh pulse Gondola lift so that's a horizontal Gondola that would connect this area back to the ales Village uh essentially making this whole area ski and ski out uh becoming very common in urban areas to reduce the need for cars and increase connectivity so if you're in alasa village and you want to get to the Nork ski trails hop on that and vice versa if you want to go ski at aliaska um this is a a general and sorry just to actually touch on the question that was asked there um we we plan to um manage the um HOA of this and restrict airbnbs or short-term rentals just in this neighborhood um so that's an effort to just increase uh the probability that people are actually living in these units um and we could also do that through restrictive covenants but that's strictly in the glacier Creek uh Village area and then this is General phasing plan so this would actually Encompass our first development master plan uh it would essentially be uh condo one the conference center the small extension and the ski school building and then also the um expanded parking area and then on this side the first phase of Workforce housing uh the daycare and the rec center and the associated infrastructure with the ski Village and then as you move you you kind of build out another Condo building additional Workforce housing and lastly uh the final Condo building and the last phase Workforce housing um and then after that would be the fourth phase Glacier Creek and then this is essentially the the development master plan so what I just discussed that first phase um really what you're looking at here and here's some renderings so this would be condo one um with the ground floor retail Conference Center uh base camp ski school and hotel extension and that's the tram in the back with the resort um this would be coming from the parking lot um going uh right beside condo one there this is the new Conference Center and this is really in an effort to attract larger and more consistent events to Girdwood um because it's the first hotel we've ever encountered that had a lack of conference space and this is uh another view of condo one so this would be looking out into the valley uh and this looks toward uh the Tramway with the base camp building on the left and uh Hotel extension on the right and then this is the uh moose Meadows track B area so this is the first phase of Workforce housing you can see the ground floor retail in the spot and the rec center uh in the back here uh this is again that Workforce housing from another view and this is the uh covered open air ice rink um again it rains a lot in Girdwood get a lot of inclimate weather there so providing uh both a winter and summer opportunity for covered Recreation um bodess very well um there's also the window that would go into the rec center in the back there in the pool um and there'd essentially be locker rooms for the um ice rink in the lower level and then a view of uh little bears facility the new daycare with the rec center and Workforce housing in the back and that is the mountain um and then on the less exciting side of things the uh revisions to the commercial track plot so this is what the uh frag lot plan currently looks like and this is what we're proposing and that's just to accommodate the development um in the sites that we've currently defined so um yeah this um you know we we've put a lot of planning into this uh we think this is a really great development we've really been listening to Girdwood and what they've been asking for um over the years and I think that really shows in this development it shows what Girdwood needs um in terms of housing amenities commercial space um and yeah we're we're very excited to get started so um thank you for the consideration and I'd like to leave the rest of the time for a bottle or a Q&A question from commissioner strike thank you through the chair and thank you for your presentation um occupancy in the hotel higher in the winter lower in the summer vice versa pretty steady um I would say uh I uh I won't speak for I'm not the hotel manager but from my general understanding of the resort which I'm not heavily involved in the occupancy of the hotel uh we're more occupied during cruise ship season um but it is uh especially with all the snow we've been getting this year in comparison to the lower 48 which we hope will continue um it was quite High during the winter as well and that's been my experience cruise ship season summertime you're packed you can't get in winter time weekends three-day weekends so you know Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday typically busy and so my concern is as we develop this new housing area that the resort owns this housing until then it's sold as condos and so forth your the predecessor company that ran this Resort they came forth and presented a plan that incorporated time share and they were going to take their condos that they were going to be building and they had an area and they were going to put a time share which of course is short-term rentals one week at a time Etc so I'm just trying to ascertain that these units that you're building will not be used by the hotel for overflow great OPP great question so um there are 78 units proposed in that first phase um so roughly 60 of those units will be condo hotels so they'll be restricted in a way that um when they're not being used by the owners um they will fall into the stock of the hotel rooms and there's a couple different models I mean every it's very common in every Resort Market condo hotels um if you look at Whistler for instance uh they actually have two different types of condo hotels which uh one allows for um unlimited use by an owner one restricts you to 28 days during the winter 28 days during the summer otherwise it falls into the hotel stock so we uh plan on making uh a majority of units within the condo buildings condo hotels versus strict condos which means we would be able to add additional room stock when we most need it so 60 out of what what was the number 70 78 rough roughly that amount um it's not you know required that we Define it at this point but that's that's idea six out of eight um you know more than three4 of the new space that's going out there to the community is really taken up by the hotel which in its very intent is to control those units especially in the summertime if you're building a new Convention Center to attract more people yeah when in It season that you're already full I I'm trying to I'm trying to ascertain yes a community benefit but are we seeing that much of a community benefit if the hotel the resort is commandeering so to speak this much well the the 43 units that are located on track B Workforce housing would be strictly Workforce housing which would be for Girdwood businesses um that can go to anyone from working at the school to working at the daycare um to working at the new recreation center to you know your cook at Jack Sprat or at um you know any restaurant in town so and what we proposed in the area master plan Amendment um is 180 work force housing units within that throughout the three phases um so just I mean as the the condos uh get built there's also a phase of Workforce housing that's getting built and you know there's a benefit to tourism creating more rooms um creating condo units um both condo hotel um as an investment opportunity and then strict condo as a Housing Opportunity but then also on the other side with that phase one um you know we're building out Workforce housing units and that continues in every phase um and then also the uh first phase will include that Little Bears Daycare which is you know desperately needed in Girdwood um and then the rec center because the only um pool or fitness center that has been used um since the hotel's uh construction uh I mean that that is the fitness center currently um which you know needs to accommodate um Girdwood and the larger population that comes in there during the winter and the summer and uh also an ice rink would just be great as well but again that Workforce hous housing that isn't codified it is is still owned and controlled by the resort and you control who will occupy those the workplace housing correct you you'll be the landlord yes so will that be protected by Covenant by um um the homeowners association that you referred to earlier concerning the um um not no short-term rentals how will that be controlled I mean we will control those as rental units just as we do our 95 current staff housing units I mean us as a resort we could fill that those 43 units right now if we wanted to um but there is a greater need for Workforce housing in Girdwood um that's been established through so many um I mean Girdwood literally established the gwood housing and economic committee to go after this this problem and and um you know we're trying to get ahead of this because benefits to gwood also benefit the resort um and know we we just wanted to do this um but we we plan on maintaining those as rental units in perpetuity and uh we will work directly with the businesses um that need those units for their staff and that's what I wanted to hear you go on the record for that stipulation because if something changes down the road we can come back to this testimony sure or or the public can come back to this testimony at that point thank you very much thanks commissioner Krishna sure I have a a two-part question but the first part is if you could provide a little bit more information about um any terms for that rental housing I know uh I think you had either state it or we had seen it in our packet that they'd be prioritizing Uh current Girdwood residents could you speak about um any stipulations you'd have on that rental housing and how um if you've determined any you know rental figures or things like that um I'm also curious about more specificity on the condo tell um you had mentioned a couple of models I wonder if you've settled on one for the um limitations on the occupancy yeah thank you for the question um we have not settled on the model yet um we're still working on that um in terms of the workforce housing you're referring to the the track B um or the glacier Creek um kind of I know you talked about the the priority um units um more information on any of the work for would be helpful yeah um I mean those uh just to Echo what um I I said to commissioner strike uh we we plan on working directly with Girdwood businesses to rent the rental units directly to those businesses um and in terms of pricing right now um we we've said this in the other um the Gerber Bo supervisors meetings as well as uh when I presented uh to the the Gerber housing and economic committee um these will likely be some of the most if not the most affordable rental units in Girdwood um it's tough to tell we're still um you know a year out from let's say construction start and then two and a half years from that first phase really finishing um so the associated construction cost financing associated with that as well um will essentially dictate that but based on our current modeling um we we would likely see those being the most affordable units but I can't make a promise on what that'll be just one more question uh about the glacier creek site um and regarding the gwood Board of Supervisors letter could you tell us uh if Glacier Creek were to be um open space instead of a developable how would that affect the um housing unit numbers um we would have to um I mean this whole plan all four phases were essentially underwritten as one project it works as one project because um you know there's this immense uh there's a lot of public benefit you know Workforce housing is isn't the largest Money Maker um neither is is donating land that we could have built condos on um to build community amenities uh there's a lot of upfront cost sunk costs within those first few phases so a lot of what is um realized in terms of financial benefit doesn't come until the later phase phases so um we haven't dealt with um you know what the alternative would be if Glacier Creek wasn't approved um but um it would change things thank you I had a question I think kind of regarding the glacier Creek and the selling to residents only can can you explain how that would work cuz I've heard this idea talked about before and seems to somewhat conflict with some of the fair housing rules federal government has so I was just curious a little bit more about how that works yeah and it's um I mean it's it's very common in Resort markets because Resort markets often have this case that Girdwood has and that is Extreme housing prices and uh a lot of people who have been priced out of the market it's it's common everywhere just about every established Resort Market has um a public private partnership that establishes um you know this opportunity for people who qualify for a program to be given the opportunity um for priority purchasing within this program and that could be an allotted amount of units within that development um so that is the plan and essentially this could act as a lottery system when you qualify for the program that is the furthest phase out that is um you know in best case scenario roughly five to seven years out from started construction um so we haven't obviously established that there would be a lot of legal um uh Hoops to jump through um but uh we are a luxury resort and a very remote Town we're good at figuring things out um we have a lot of time to do it as well and there's a lot of precedent from other Resort towns in the lower 48 and in Canada to set a program like this um we want people who have been living there um to be able to have the opportunity to buy and I think it's very supported by a lot of people who um you know have essentially been priced out of the market um who or who do not have housing stability um because their rentals become short-term rentals um so yeah there's there's a long process to go through for that but we have a lot of time to plan it commissioner strike I I would just remind you you also have a lot of folks that work there that don't live there because they commute because they can't find a place to live correct yet you're you're designating a residency in that Girdwood Community as a priority so you're disenfranchising anybody who commutes well I mean we haven't sorry I know you haven't figured it out but I'm just saying there's a there's there's a couple sides of this that create the possible legal entanglement you had that I believe the commissioner here was was was pointing to but please think about the folks that commute that want to live there but can't absolutely and I think um again again a lot to figure out there but if you've been working for a business in Girdwood for 10 years and have been priced to the market and therefore you have to live in uh with your or Anchorage um you know if you've been an employee at a business in Girdwood um it's not to say that's the establishment of the program but I could see that as a way that that works okay I see no further questions you have 7 minutes for Bal you you can wait till we'll do public t first thank you okay we will open this hearing to public testimony anybody wishing to speak on this matter please step forward state your name for the record and please let us know if you're uh speaking on behalf of a group or as an individual um good evening I'm Joan low I live in Girdwood and I am the President of the board of little bears Playhouse preschool and Early Learning Center pomoy lodging has generously offered little bears a 99-year land lease for a dollar a year for a 1 acre frag lot where we will build our new child care center our nonprofit organization is very grateful for the opportunity to to build a safer larger building which will have ample capacity to meet the child care needs of the Girdwood Workforce as you have seen in William's presentation our lot is close to to the two current alasa Resort employee housing buildings and Our Lady of the Snows Chapel please approve the modifications to the alasa resort area master plan and the requests for the alasa resort development master plan and in particular please at least approve the Moose Meadows development so that the Girdwood Workforce childcare project can proceed on schedule to build this much-needed Community Asset thank you thank you I see no questions okay anybody else wishing to speak please step forward good evening my name is Brian Bernett and I appreciate being able to address this commission today as an Engaged Community member I'm speaking as an individual today I have long-standing roots in Girdwood I been involved in Girdwood Trails committee Girdwood Nordic Ski Club land use committee and lately is the newest member of Girdwood Board of Supervisors I'm here today to speak in support of two of the three developments detailed in the master plan presented today both elesa Village and moose Meadows projects are in land pomoy owns outright and are entirely consistent with current and future Community planning documents however the proposed development in public land in public land hlb Land north of the Girdwood airport will conflict with the new Girdwood comprehensive plan public land should be used for public good this parcel of land has been identified by the community be to be designated as open space this third phase of development glacer Creek Village conflicts with glacer Creek Village in expansion area a conflicts with the Girdwood comprehensive plan the current Municipality of Anchorage comprehensive plan has four top tier elements as you guys all know as this commission all knows excuse me the 1995 Girdwood area plan is the oldest of these four documents in 2017 the Girdwood Board of Supervisors formed the area Plan update committee to get the process going most recently imagine Girdwood was formed to complete the Girdwood comprehensive plan imagine Girdwood exe executed extensive Community engagement including four CommunityWide Town Halls to seek feedback and inform public presenting updates at local community meetings and holding over 50 publicly noticed regular monthly meetings imagine Girdwood published a revised draft on April 24th 2024 the Girdwood Board of Supervisors resolved that the Girdwood comprehensive plan revised draft reflects extensive Community engagement and supported the submission of the plan as a su as a substantial Amendment to the Municipality of Anchorage comprehensive plan by a vote of four to o and a subsequent recommendation of support from the Girdwood Land Community by a vote of 27 to0 this draft of the Girdwood Community uh of the Girdwood community plan comprehensive plan which is Creek Village and the Girdwood comprehensive plan I respectfully request that this commission withholds approval of glacer Creek Village as a resident of Girdwood I thank you for your time I have a question from commissioner Krishna just a clarification were you was your testimony on behalf of the gwood Board of Supervisors or as an individual no ma'am I I hope I was uh um clear that I was as a an Engaged Community member all right thank you while the chair logs back in I'll maybe just ask another question could you provide a little bit more information about why that site was uh designated as open space in the plan draft which this commission has not seen um the uh as the the Girdwood community plan went excuse me as the comprehensive plan went forward the community was present was uh presented with two maps um that detailed the valley one of the maps had um the that Land north of the airport designated as open space another had it designated as mixed use the community voted for open space north of the airport did you reach out to the res can you just tell us a little bit about this comprehensive plan were you part of the comprehens the new comprehensive plan process there was probably about 400 of us in Girdwood that were involved in the in the comprehensive plan I attended imagine Girdwood meetings I did not sit as an officer on imagine Girdwood and I guess I'm just kind of wondering at what point our what was the reasoning behind taking space that's Zone GS2 gst2 or whatever it is and then turn changing it to open space and the some of it had to do with um The Heritage landbank commissioned a group back in 2007 to explore Recreation ational possibilities in the Upper Valley of Girdwood and um we started developing Trails plans up in in that part and that's how the 5K Loop was was built additional Trails have been proposed in that land since 2013 and I know that the Girdwood Nordic Ski Club has spent considerable money designing Trails for that particular part of land and trails have been approved in the trails plan Mr Lowry um uh pointed out the trails that have been approved in the in the trails plan which is part of the comprehensive plan thank you I see no further questions anybody else wishing to speak please step forward hi uh my name is Mike sorry uh my name is Mike Edington I'm a co-chair of gbos um and also uh chair of the imagin Goodwood group and I've been involved in these processes for quite a long while I can probably answer many of your questions I'm not speaking on behalf of gbos i as an individual I will speak six minutes is enough for me so I'll speakers individual probably more than enough um so first of all I'd like to to uh say that the um there are many items here um in general I'm in agreement with um with the recommendations and the and the uh and the style of development uh in this plan in the area master plan um and the development master plan um there are a couple of questions that come up um but before then I just want to deal with the positives um the housing goals overall for the project I think are very welcome they do follow um a lot of the needs of gwood the needs of gwood isn't just housing it's occupied housing uh we've had much housing a lot of housing built recently at a higher rate actually than the municipality as a whole higher rate even than uh Matsu Valley and almost all of those housing units have been purchased by people who are not residents in the valley they're either second homes or Runners uh full-time uh airbnbs I think approximately one out of the last 18 multif family development is actually occupied um so I appreciate the goals and uh later if there are questions I can address how Resort communities at least address the questions about fair housing um so overall it's good um I also support the uh the design variants which are or the design variations which are described in the development master plan there are two issues though um one is a small issue um in the area master plan there's discussion about the traffic analysis and I think there's a I wouldn't say disingenuous but there's a slightly misleading statement in there that it represents a net reduction in traffic that is true compared to a plan which was never implemented and probably was never going to be implemented uh the actual numbers show an increase of about 800 Vehicles now during uh Peak use um with and not the 75 reduction it implies so that's a you know probably more than a doubling of traffic I still think that's within the capacity of the roads but it is quite a significant increase um from a perspective of somebody who's been working on the long-term plan for gwood for many years um it's understandable a little disappointing to see so much housing and Commercial development at the extreme end of the valley um this is something that really many of these facilities should be in the middle of the valley um there are a number of reasons why that hasn't happened I think it's welcome overall there may have been better Alternatives in the past however this is still okay um I was hoping we would hear a little bit more about the recreation center um as the uh uh as the um representative from Little Bears said earlier uh little bears is privately funded development is privately funded while the land has been um donated effectively uh or lease has been donated at low cost all the development costs and the and the construction is being funded privately uh the same is going to happen for the recreation center we've been told for a while that we um we would hear who the partner was it's uh you know we have to kind of as a as a board being responsible we have to look at we could look at the pictures and listen to the promises but we also have to uh have to sort of take a judgment of whether it's realistic whether it's likely to happen um maybe in rebuttal we will we will hear that the uh the partner for the recreation center has been chosen um now let's go on to the uh the issues around the comprehensive plan and the glacier Creek development um comprehensive plan the what the gwood area plan has been discussed was adopted in 1995 so almost 30 years ago um what I heard from the planning um representative planning staff me member earlier is the approval of the area master PL and will effectively lock in that 1995 plan um that's not my reading of code um there's a section which uh if I think it's 21093 E5 which describes the effect of an area master plan and that still says that it's subject to uh agreement with other plans other adopted plans so when it comes to Future actions in phase four I do believe there will still be a conflict that has to be resolved however if the if the uh description of uh planning staff fronts I believe um is correct then what approval tonight will do is lock in decisions made 30 years ago for at least you know the next 10 years I see a data between uh 2032 and 2035 for phase 4 so if that interpretation is correct and a decision to approve the AA master plan means that uh the 95 plan is taken even though it will have been superseded by you know a future date um then effectively uh this the developments in you know the next eight or 10 years from now will be dependent on a plan that's 40 years old and ignoring the dozen or so years of work on other plans in the meantime so just briefly good with Comprehensive plan we started in 2017 it started uh at full speed in 2019 there's been a very wide uh Community engagement I believe Brian said 400 people we calculated over 900 people have been involved in total including a survey which is approximately half the population of our community um that's actively involved um the resort has been very involved in this as well uh they are very aware of the uh of the changes that were proposed the details of the um land use map were discussed over a year ago and have come up through multiple revisions we're now in a situation where um The Proposal is being tied to the 95 plan and you're literally going to be having a public Hearing in less than 50 days on a replacement a replacement that we've been working on for you know seven or eight years uh and this particular part of it been very public for over a year so um the result we're aware of these changes the timing is perhaps very coincidental that it's just a few weeks before the hearing on the comprehensive Plan update and my comments I'm happy to take questions if there are any commissioner Krishna has a question I I suppose I'll ask the question that we directed to the previous uh testifier which was could you since we haven't seen the plan yet could you tell us a little bit about why um is it uh as you stated some of the Trails um could you tell us a little bit more about why Glacier Creek was designated open space and what the process was that took uh the plan to that conclusion happy to um there's more history than just the last year or two on this that particular area first of all the 95 year uh the 1995 plan uh expected a very large resort development uh the community did be approximately three times the size it is now and the resort to be you know at least three times the size it is now um and a lot of the a lot of the planning and land use designations were along those lines so a lot of land was allocated to Future Resort development which just has not happened um so part of the process of rewriting the plan is to rather than look at the expect from 30 years ago to actually be realistic about what what the situation is today and what the situation is likely to be in the future um so that's one of the reasons there's been uh there's some changes in land use uh that the particular area that's currently zoned grsd 2 um that the glacia creek Villages planned for um was subject to a a very i' say contentious and detailed discussions about uh some potential Trail development about six years ago and the arguments basically came down to how large Trail should be how much uh how much they should affect the natural environment as to whether they should be extremely small Trails or you know four or eightt wide Trails uh at no point was the commun the community was arguing about the size of the trails there there was no support whatsoever for large housing development in that area um so you know this this has been going on for about six or seven years this General argument specifically when it comes to the way that the land use maps were developed uh we had a workshop over a year ago in April last year a CommunityWide Workshop uh where we went through the process of a land use mapping and uh many groups came up with uh with General ideas and everyone was presented with a map um they were made aware of the existing maps and they presented with some potential maps and people went through the process of allocating land use and saying how they wanted land use there was uh most of the um proposals that came out of that were to expand the amount of open space in that area we then had uh two specific proposals draft proposals which came out last October there was extensive public comment I think we've got uh many hundreds of public comments uh on those draft Maps they were then fed into the final draft map which was released uh in February and we then had another 200 or so 150 public comments on those maps and that resulted in the final draft and and the submission which is in front of Planning and Zoning for a public hearing in five six weeks so there's been very widespread um uh public involvement in this process and mostly it's because again it's an area which already has a lot of recreational use um and is seen as a as an area which has sort of intrinsic intrinsic value in his Natural State I suppose I might just ask a follow-up which is this seems to be a place where two of goodwood's top priorities might be in con conflict right I think um I I suppose I won't ask you to um we do have written comments here from G boss and I um you've outlined the process which it took to arrive at those decisions so I won't ask you to um you know speak off the cuff about them but I think I'll point out that you know if the I would wonder if G boss has had any conversations about whether you know if 30 units or 50 units or something were to be reduced through this change in designation to open space is that something that would you know uh create other issues right or would um contribute other goals of the plan so I I suppose I'll just ask if you have any opinions about that because what we have here in front of us is obviously something that the community has uh asked for in in many ways as well which is Workforce housing indeed so uh yeah I have many opinions and there was quite a robust debate about this particular issue as to whether the whether the uh the promise of housing of the style we would like you know s should supersede the extensive Community engagement in how we want land use to go in the future um I guess one of my thoughts is um there's an absolute necessity for uh attainable housing within the community um and that's true for you know to maintain a healthy and thriving Community it's also true for employers it's absolutely you know from a purely cynical point of view um if the resort was only interested in itself and nothing else and I don't believe that's the case but if it was they also have a need for housing as well uh there are there's other land which the resort owns it may not be quite as easy to develop as that but that is not land they currently own this is speculative it's land which is currently public um so there are many steps which would have to be done before they could get to a point of actually doing this development so I would just say that um you know given the fact that there are these two things happening more or less simultaneously especially given a 30 or 40-year time scale I think a six week six weeks is not an it's not an unreasonable request if the uh body were to do so to perhaps delay the discussion until you've actually had a chance to look at both issues thank you commissioner George has a question good evening Mr Edington thank you for being here before us Mr George um you have quite a length history with the gwood Board of Supervisors working on the the trails plan which this body adopted just a few months ago um I'm just I'm referencing back to the petitioner's prop um presentation that was on PowerPoint for everyone earlier and I'm looking at the um the glacier Creek proposed development that has some Trails within it yes and given your familiarity with the trails plan and uh the process that has been undertaken for the Girdwood master plan which is coming forward uh that we have not yet had the chance to review staffs night had a chance to provide analysis to us um you know from my perspective I see trails and housing in in this what is brought before us um can you I don't I don't really know how to ask the question but um since there is Trails there are trails that are proposed to be incorporated into this development how do they comport with um the proposed trails that have already been put forward by the community are they significantly reduced are they um somewhat similar do you think that they would be perhaps adequate for this area is it possible to have two uses in this this large tract your perspective I think would be very valuable thank you thank you great question um I'm sorry apologize I'll move it up a little um I'm not sure I think the there are two schools of thought here um but I think the I think the prevailing thought the prevailing opinion I have heard uh throughout the community is that the trails in that particular area are relatively close um to the occupied areas of the valley um but have a undisturbed quality they are it really is like being in sort of almost Wilderness you're not you're not aware apart from the occasional uh aircraft you're not really aware of the fact you're close to development at all and that quality would definitely be changed by this plan now I think the the fact that there is uh some Nordic Trail and some trails in included in the plan I think is admirable um I think in general the opinion would be that it would change the character of that area very significantly um and I think again in general I think that would not be that would not generally comport with what the community would like for that area given that is one of the few areas within a short distance of uh of the main housing main you know housing and occupied area that sort of has that quality to it and again there are there are other areas and this is there are other areas of land that both the resort currently own um or could potentially acquire and this is not currently Resort land this is not private land this is public land so I think those things together uh imply that it would be very difficult uh to to sort of um have both uses running simultaneously and of course I think the other problem is um the as as the uh as the plan has it at the moment there is an area of Fairly highdensity lowcost housing um and then there's an area of I think you know 3/4 of an acre to an acre um housing throughout the majority of that area I believe much of which is not intended to be on sewer so it'll probably be septic systems and therefore large lots and lowdensity housing and weirdly I think the community in general would support that lower density housing less than it would support higher density housing even though there is this inherent conflict but also the lower density housing is literally in a smaller area sorry the higher density housing is in a smaller physical area but there's a there is I I think I'd go back to um commissioner kishan's point there is fundamentally a tension between two things the community wants um and I think that it is a fair question to ask of is this the only place um in this area of land which is said is not currently owned by The Resort but is a is publicly owned is that the only place where this can be done because if the need is as great as everybody says including the resort there are other options see no further questions anybody else wishing to speak on this matter please step forward state your name and if you're speaking on behalf of a group or yourself hi good evening I'll be speaking on behalf of myself uh good evening Commissioners my name is Crystal hul and I'm here to testify as a parent and resident of Girdwood I would like to cover a little bit of information about the history of little Bear's Playhouse the existing building and the massive appreciation we have to pomai lodging for providing a building site with within the mo Meadow subdivision which is part of phase one to give you some history the current building utilized by little bears was built in the 1960s by volunteers of the Girdwood Community Club this building was used for a variety of social activities and meetings in the 1970s when the municipality unified the building became the property of the municipality in 1982 little Bear's Playhouse started operating their child care operations this year marks 42 years operating out of the existing building the need for a new site for little bears was identified as the 1995 Girdwood area plan it was again mentioned in the South Town site master plan in 2008 it was again noted within the 2014 Master Plan update in 2011 there was an attempt to condemn the building when it was realized there was no other place for our community's childrens to receive care an agreement was reached to shovel the roof after 3 Ines of snow to avoid roof roof collapse parents are required to sign a waiver regarding the roof to attend I cannot speak I can speak with firsthand direct information that other other sites were reviewed and explored for instance sced with South Town site due to title 21 requirements and plot notes this area without substantial variances would require a $5 million road to be built prior to starting a building pad these constraints made the site very virtually financially impossible there is also um active shifting of California Creek which is at a higher elevation and causing water to flow within the areas of South Town site this flooding issue and concern was essentially the final reason the site was abandoned as an option for little bears Palmer has always been very open to helping little bears Playhouse initially they had offered a site on track C which we would have need to build our own bus turnaround and but ran into Bedrock while while digging test holes it was estimated that our site Improvement would cost 1.5 million for that site at last we were offered a site within the me moose Meadow subdivision on track B most of the site is flat and 3/4 of an acre 3/4 of it is gravel this site is a huge step forward to building this deeply needed Community Asset in my appreciation cannot be overstated I am so thankful to be included in the resorts master plan amendments and really see the value this development is bringing to the community thank you thank you anybody else wishing to speak please step forward yes thank you I'm uh Scott Thomas I'm with Kenny engineering and I'm working with uh William pom and uh I just want to uh let you know that I appreciate Mr edging excuse me okay um you're part of the petitioners group oh yeah so um you can speak in the rebuttal time anybody else wishing to speak good evening my name is Lee Ellis and I'm a resident of Girdwood um I have been before this board I have been before the assembly and I have been arguing for affordable housing in this community for a long time um just like my neighbors I am certainly always concerned about impacts on our Recreation I am concerned about development in the Valley traffic and all these kind of things but we have been imploring this city to help us with affordable housing for a long time and I feel like the result Resort has finally listened now there are things I don't love there are things I do love but currently in Girdwood they just did a homeless count this last winter and we had 46 individuals if I remember that number correctly who are homeless by a per capita basis Girdwood has more homeless than Anchorage which is hard to believe we have got to address Workforce housing and every development we have S seen go into this community has not a addressed it this is our opportunity this is our opportunity to build Recreation for our families this is an opportunity to provide daycare this is an opportunity to provide housing for people who want to make a home in Girdwood and again I love the area that they are proposing for the fourth develop or the fourth phase I love skiing out there my dogs love skiing out there and it would be an absolute heartbreak to see that area go away but it's a lot lot harder to drive past a parking lot full of people who are living in cars every day and that has got to matter and we've got to do something about that I absolutely believe that this Resort seeing the concern about recreational opportunities and trails will work with us to develop more trails in that Valley because they're going to bring more people in the valley and they're going to want more places to cross country ski and ski Jor and do all those wonderful things this group has worked with this community like nobody else has ever done in the past and I think that requires a lot of respect from this community and I have not seen that before in my 12 Years of Living in Girdwood so I am very supportive of this project again I really look forward to our members of gboss working and making sure that this project makes sense for our community I look forward to finding new Transportation options so that we can alleviate any traffic concerns but these are not problems we cannot overcome housing has to come and it has to come now thank you thank you anybody else wishing to testify please step forward last call hi good evening um my name is tler Schmidt I'm a full-time resident in Girdwood been renting there for the the last 16 years uh I'm here to request my support for uh the modifications that they have uh presented in the master plan here um for the project of alesca development um The Proposal that I've seen that uh um I've been looking over and seeing this evening um as well um represents a significant opportunity for our community um offering numerous benefits that align with its shared Vision our shared Vision um some sustainable growth and some improved quality life for many of us out there um firstly the uh Pro proposed development uh promise is to create that daycare and that's huge um I don't have kids but I know many that do and it's a huge need in our community um we've experienced that Surge and demand for housing uh mainly for the yearr round residents which uh myself with renting for 16 years moving from place to place I see the uh the glacier City Village phase for uh providing a range of those housings uh to ensure that families young professionals like myself and um can begin to find places there to live um this uh it's a crucial for for us uh to have a diversifying Community I see that um with what they're offering secondly um I see that they're including some like plenty green spaces Rec recreational areas with the rec center um places connecting us in with the existing Trails um even adding some additionals connectors to those so um I feel those amenities won't only beautiy our community but also provide some more vital spaces for relaxation and Recreations for for many of us um lastly I do collaborate at the approach taken by the uh by Pomo and alasco Resort I've seen them over the last several years um immensely engage with the community there um holding several Town Halls asking Community asking folks workers small workers employees um and their willingness to incorporate that stuff and has uh to reflect our community needs has been a huge uh getting gaining my support so in conclusion I I I whole hardly support this Land Development and I presents a balanced and thoughtful approach to growth addressing our housing needs enhancing our quality and promoting sustainability and economic Prosperity so I urge you guys to make this and approve this project and help our community thank you thank you anybody else wishing to testify please step forward someone's phone's here somebody's phone's up here it's a Kenny engineering phone maybe or a crystal H phone any final commit questions from the commissioner oh we do have some phone testimony we'll move to the phone testimony can you speak up yeah no I did oh volume hello is this um Max uh cubits yes speaking hi Max um this is the Planning and Zoning commission calling for public testimony in case 2024-the Max uh could you try repeating that uh Max we weren't able to hear you could you try that again yes as as an individual uh one last time please as an individual as an individual uh thank you uh you have three minutes um to speak thank you thank you I hope you can hear me um my name is Max cubitz I'm a resident of Anchorage uh I learned to ski in snowboard on Mount alasa my youth still ski there to this day um I'd like to testify tonight in support of this development uh I'm the co-owner of Turan Ceramics a close knit Community Pottery Studio in South Edition Anchorage with the mission of bringing Pottery to everyone in our community Through classes memberships kids summer camps and events we've had an amazing uh Community built of talented artists enthusiastic hobbyists knowledgeable instructors curious students through the past two years um and all these people connect through through our studio we think that gwood is a community that appreciat appes things that we appreciate Community collaboration learning coming together through ART uh we would love an opportunity to bring Community focused poy Studio to Girdwood and think that the proposed developments and discussion tonight create that opportunity for Alaskan businesses like ours uh thanks for your time tonight um thank you Max um I misspoke uh you actually have six minutes uh to testify did you want to use uh more time um I think I would additionally say as someone who who has spent much time in gwood I would um you know I I Echo a lot of the sentiments from tonight I think um addressing some of the housing issues I just H you know have to be at the Forefront of of kind of any development and I think this group has done a fantastic job of of keeping that discussion at the core um and I am excited to see um this development go through and uh spend more time in Girdwood thank you no questions uh thank you Max I'm going to hang up now thank you have a great night you too hi you rich Justina please leave me a message um I'll try dialing uh one more time hello hi um is this uh Justina Phillips this is uh this is the Planning and Zoning commission calling for public testimony in case 2024 d61 are you testifying as an individual or representing a group as an individual cool um you'll have six minutes to testify you may begin thank you great um I'd like to add I'm a Girdwood resident um a board member of Little Bear Playhouse and the chair of the building committee for the new child uh new childcare facility and Early Learning Center that will be located on alasa Resorts track B um on its own frag lot which is outlined in the packet that you have here um just would like to um Echo previous testimonies by Crystal and Joan um that our humble nonprofit little bears Playhouse is extremely grateful for this site and the opportunity to address our local Child Care crisis um our ability to move forward on the construction of this project hinges on the approval of phase one of this development I'm stating my support and appreciation for inclusion of this amendment to the existing master plan and the revised frag lot which will bring a vital resource to our community um and uh we hope that uh we can continue our work on this much needed facility thank you that's see no no questions thank you uh thank you Justina um have a good night any further questions from the commission oh we will move to the rebuttal first um I appre apprciate all the the questions and comments uh from everyone um start the clock um yeah uh I mean we we have really engaged the community on this um and I think you know a a lot of people appreciate many of the phases a lot of people appreciate all of the phases some not so much on the fourth phase um but we spent a lot of time planning that as well and what came up um know meeting after meeting uh developments that were proposed within Girdwood was this lack of housing um it's always asked for um and especially something that is attainable something that is not offered in Girdwood currently um that tract of land there represents um if not the most it it is likely the most developable tract maybe with the exception of track B which is already pretty well graded in gravel um but that area it's close to utilities it's close to current infrastructure um the other tracks uh they simply aren't as developable um and wouldn't result in the same product that we are proposing out there um that can be attested to um by Grant Matthews who uh is responsible for the Civil projects in most of uh projects in Girdwood yeah I'll give him a a couple minutes to speak as well thanks for uh yeah my name is Grant Matthews I'm with tried engineering and as Willam mentioned uh we do a lot of uh private development work in Girdwood um Girdwood is just a very challenging place to build um you have Wetlands streams topography Avalanche risks um the glacier Creek area is relatively flat and has um a lot of uh developable space so I think there's been uh you know a lot of discussions about the uh the comp plan and and how that's going through the process and the fact is like we we amend comp plans quite often um when a private developer comes with a great idea um and I know when the comp plan started uh you know pomoy wasn't here proposing uh a bunch of housing but here they are um and I think they've done a really good job incorporating Trails you know breaking that up with uh with open space um and protecting the natural environment too I don't know if anyone's been to the Nordic spa or walked the winter creek trail behind it but you really can get that preserved feel of the Wilderness there with development nearby um and that area is zoned grst to it's zoned for uh mixed use development so it's uphill of uh of sewer so you could get gravity sewer to work um and that that provides for a denser development than you otherwise would um and yeah I think commissioner Krishna you know hit the nail on the head that the open space and um housing are are at odds uh but this area is really a great spot for for housing and someone is here proposing to build housing um happy to talk more about that if there's any other questions we do have a question from commissioner strike thank you and to the chair um in listening to earlier testimony there does appear to be a direct conflict with the current not the current but the proposed new comprehensive plan that's being developed and so obviously we want to see that comprehensive plan what the board has come up with and see if that conflict exists and so forth but how do we get you in alignment with the um Girdwood board and this new comprehensive plan because there seems to be a disconnect what what appears what appears to be coming out is in direct conflict with what you're proposing how do we get the two minds together if that in fact is a conflict yeah William could maybe speak to that too I mean there's been a lot of Outreach I know and you've heard a lot of community support for this plan um I think you know even even if that comp plan moves forward it the the area is still zoned uh for Resort development um so it's uh I mean even if it gets put as open space on the map that doesn't change its underlying zoning um and like I said here is a you know uh a developer here to to build housing and that's what gwood really needs so I think I think there is obviously a you know debate within the community and some people testified here tonight in support of of uh the development and some testified against it but uh I think that it would provide a community uh benefit and and it's a very uh developable part of the valley I I guess my concern is I I don't want it to appear like it's a cram down to the folks that have been working upwards of 400 folks or whatever working on the comprehensive plan that we're hearing overwhelmingly um are against the glacier Creek Village and its purpose and again we're we're going off of um is is this a race notice type of situation we got there before they did we're not going to see the comprehensive plan and I guess this is the question to the staff until July July 15th is what I was H told but can we um back up for a minute I'm going to cancel the commissioner's questions for right now I want the petitioner to finish out you have 3 minutes and 50 seconds remaining so I want to give you the opportunity to use or forfeit that time then we'll move into questions yeah I'll continue to use it um and also kind of talk about this a little more um that gwood comprehensive plan plan was being developed without the knowledge of our project um and done with the knowledge of um you know that area being developed for for trails and I think similar to a lot of Resort markets um Trails interact with housing all over the place there needs to be a balance between housing and Trails um because every developable area in Girdwood will interact with an existing Trail or a proposed Trail they will be in everyone's backyard Within any developable area that is being proposed in the new comp plan so you know what we've proposed here and what we did with Skylab architecture is design a neighborhood with the um Bill Spencer he is the person who designed that trail we looked at several iterations that he had designed and we worked um you know within those iterations so finding a balance between housing and nature it is just natural in a Resort Market it's what we've done it's what we'll continue to do and as we work through this process you know as that area shifts with the development master planning process we will continue to work with the trails committee with the Girdwood Board of Supervisors but this is um this is an area to provide housing for you know the current generation of Girdwood but also the future generation of Girdwood to raise families to live in um you know the the 1995 comp plan contemplated 10,000 people living there um and there's a reason why it hasn't increased to that size and because there's really been no development um what we're proposing here would be the first you know large scale residential development in addition to our other three phases so um you know I think there's a perfect opportunity um for recreation to work with housing similar to what is all around the resort right now there are Trails all around uh alasca all around tra a tract B um and you know this is this is that opportunity so it it um needs to happen in a place like this because trails are prominent but housing is needed so um yes we are providing that opportunity and willing to work with the community to provide something that's truly needed and um you know something that's obviously very much wanted and used and um yeah I I you know thank you to the commission uh I guess I'll I'll leave it there all righty uh question from commissioner Winchester uh thank you hey in our in our packet we were provided the village of aliaska community meeting summary and in there there was a question about the total area of the master plan and in the answer it said that we'd be looking at adding approximately 70 additional acres for the glacier Creek of which 27 approximately would be considered for developable area so why the difference between 27 and 70 is it topographical is Trail so um the actual uh area is uh several hundred acres large um and because we wanted to stay under the so and that and that 70 roughly acres has increased to 90 uh 94.3 acres and the reason why 27.4 acres is designated as developable is because that is the area within the um land use plan that is allowed to be developed so the rest of that area would be dedicated to open space um would be dedicated to Trails um and there we would have no plans in developing that um and that 90 um 4.3 acres is within that 25% threshold that allows it to be a modification to the um area master plan so um 27.4 Acres of developable area and even at that um you know we're we're proposing um homes in there but we're not planning on just going and and clear cutting everything similar to what we did with our our Nordic Spa we had a very comprehensive tree survey done um I mean if you've been through the forest Loop in there we pretty much try and preserve every single tree that is within that we plan to do the same thing within this neighborhood um that's to have you know a nature immersed neighborhood that has Trails integrated into it any further questions from the commission seeing none um thank you um also if you have any questions about traffic I have Scott here from Kenny engine engineering but I looked to my my engineer okay and he had a he's good okay thank you thank you I sit down now do I sit down yeah until we change our mind okay now any final questions before I close the public hearing oh commissioner pth I have a question for staff um currently the map on page 28 the land use plan you know the a expand area is that currently Resort or are we expanding it Resort because I'm confused as whether it's you know what's the what's the controlling zoning Resort or Recreation Reserve currently uh through the chair Mr pulus um this is uh the Girdwood area plan as adopted um page map 11 um within the plan and um you know the hotels on track a the lower parking lots on track B you know there's other development and those other tracks um this where it's written a expansion area uh that's tracked I um it's yeah it's tracked ey and it's several hundred acres um it would need to be uh subdivided um to create a developable uh track for the this and uh that's what the this area master plan is calling the the um track day expansion area and that's so it the designation I'm sorry the designation is Resort and the zoning is grst 2 that was your question I'm sorry and that's where meal Creek would go is in that a expand area Glacier Creek Creek Village yeah okay sorry all right thank you apologize I actually thought of one more question for you so we heard public testimony about this the area the contentious area and it's currently public land I'm slightly familiar with the RFP for disposal of the hlb land but I think the commission if you could explain who holds the land where the line is just a little bit more information for the commission I think that they might benefit from just a little explanation on that there we go um so this uh this was uh started before my time but uh you know I I know where we currently are with it um so this is uh Heritage land bank land and uh we submitted an RFP in partnership with another group um eventually that RFP or partnership uh when we won the RFP for the rights to um pursue that land for uh development agreement with the hlb um we bifurcated it when we split Partnerships with that group and that is the project known as Holton Hills um so we essentially separated where Glacier Creek separates the tract of land um and we pursued that half they pursued their project so we don't have any relation with the project um and yes we would have to go through the um hlb disposal of that land um and we're in the process of that right now but it has not been finalized um we did get permission from the hlb to pursue these um uh these uh zoning designations or Amendment to the uh master plan to include that area um so I I could pull up a map and show you um the area if you wanted to see that as well I don't if anybody nobody seems to need that so thanks yeah thank you commissioner strike so so through this whole process of looking at this land and looking at the changes you were not in coordination with the Girdwood Board of Supervisors or on the master plan the comprehensive plan so this these were two acts that were happening independently the two part you you two parties never spoke in the last year about this no we we did um and I think that that process was started a long time before um our process um and that area I think with regards to the trails plan that was proposed as well and approved um would would have wanted to see that whole area designated as open space to include those trails um and what we've proposed here includes both trails and housing um but we we did have the opportunity to um coordinate with gboss several times on this and that through the public meeting that through just you know individual um individual um engagement with them and through this um you know meeting with the gwood Board of Supervisors our official community meeting um you know initially we actually did receive a resolution of support for the whole project and that was a three to two vote so we did initially receive a a resolution of support which we are extremely excited about a day later there was a reconsideration where we lost two to three so I think there is a you know uh they know that our intentions are good they know that that Development Area um you know really meets what's needed in Girdwood um but it's sometimes tough to see change uh in development and um you know we realize that the area is is wanted for open space uh by a large amount of the community but there's also a large amount of the community that needs this for housing I mean and I see the I see the advantage I I I I've probably been down to Girdwood more than anybody in this room and and live down there but it and I see the need but what I'm having a concern with and trying to come to grasp with with with the separation between the Girdwood Board of Supervisors their program your development plan something's missing they're not talking to each other in relationship to this particular piece of land now when this land was conjoined with your previous partner it got struck down but now you bifurcated the agreement you split the parties you split the sheet so to speak you're taking this piece of land and going to run it through independently and the Girdwood board has approved this they haven't even seen it um can can I just respond to this let's hear I you I don't know that you asked the question I I want to just say ask on the record that the comprehensive plan has not come before this body we will have a public hearing on this plan that we're speaking about and he did mention that the vote was two to three so I I don't want to spend too much time belaboring this but I'll let you finish but and we will see this plan in July and I agree but again our approval is approving based on the previous 1995 comprehensive plan I I just want to get the questions out this is time for question not discussion the two parties aren't talking I don't see any I don't see the you know you you mentioned the two to three vote and so forth but um we I'm still seeing a direct conflict and we've got a new comprehensive plan and so my reluctance in moving forward is I I'm inclined to say I want to see a postponement until after we see the the comprehensive plan commissioner strike that's that's not a question okay we we'll have a put a motion on the table and then you can we'll have a discussion and that's the appropriate time to start making those comments thank you and I I I'm not sure where I am right now you're good I think I see no more questions in the queue if there's any more questions but if we want to discuss we can move on but any final final call for questions I I could just do a quick reply to commissioner strike about some of that it or not okay and it's it's really really Qui let's make it brief um it it's just we we are in a development timeline here to start um and getting things approved and I think um you know that what's been proposed by the the comp plan is is great but uh you know what we're working with right now is the the current plan um what's there um and we do see a good opportunity to work with them together here but there's no guaranteed timeline for that proposed comp plan as well um that still has to go through your commission uh the assembly um and we're not certain as to where that goes so waiting on that could it could be more time um and gwin needs housing uh now with our um Workforce housing and future housing but thank you that's all thank you we good all right we are going to close the public hearing [Applause] what is the will of the body commissioner Ron would you like to State your motion yes thank you Mr chair I move in case 202 24- 0061 to approve the modifications to the alasco resort area master plan subject to the conditions shown on page 13 of the staff report that is seconded by commissioner Krishna would you like to speak to your motion uh thank you Mr chair fellow commissioner um I do intend to support the motion I concur with uh staff's findings in terms of uh conformance and meeting of the criteria as laid out in applicable code um I appreciate that staff started with definitions of both area master plan and development master plan um orienting the commission on what it is we're here to hear about and I'd like to call out in that definitional criteria of an area master plan um the element of providing for land use compatibility and development responding to site specific environmental constraints and opportunities um as a commissioner of uh this board I'd like to commend the applicant for the efforts that they have made um to design with a context sensitive approach to the environment um not often do um we see uh proposed developments that look to avoid and perhaps will achieve the full avoidance of things like wetlands in in their approach um would also like to acknowledge the interactions that the applicant has had with the community we did hear an awful lot about um where uh some elements of the community stood with respect to Glacier Creek uh for the record would like to acknowledge that choss was not unanimous in uh their resolution what that means I'm not quite sure other than the fact that they were not unanimous uh for those reasons and a few other I that I haven't stated um I do intend to support and we'll we'll stop talking now thanks commissioner Krishna sure I'll I'll add that I agree with commissioner Ron's findings I'd also like to add that we've had a high level of public testimony here a lot of folks in attendance and we've heard some extremely moving testimony about uh both the need for housing and the need for a new child care center both of which would um be included in this plan um and for those reasons I also intend to support this motion commissioner Gardner thank you um I apologize I probably maybe should have raised this earlier but I have a question for staff um and it relates to the effect the question I asked originally about the the effect of an approved area master plan and I think some of the testimony we heard earlier um cited a provision in code um which is 21930 E5 and um I guess that person's interpretation of it maybe conflicted a little bit with the answer that that I received and I was wondering if you could clarify I guess first if that is the section of code that would govern kind of the relationship between the area master plan and any um development plan requests and if so there's language in that section that says an approved area master plan creates a presumption that design density uses and sight layout set forth in the plan are acceptable to the municipality and to the extent you you have a sense I'm curious of how the planning department would interpret um that and what types of things they would look for that might kind of affect that presumption when it comes time to evaluating and development um um request uh thank you for the the question I'd be happy to clarify in a moment I'll uh try and look up the citation that you just uh listed that Mr Edington uh cited um it seemed to me that um with regard to uh what would take president uh the plan U I'm sorry the gwood area plan um presumably or the um uh area master plan the adop you know the approved area master plan by the commission um so what would happen if you play this out it's pretty simple um you know some time in the future um the resort would submit um development master plan phase four that would come before the commission and the approval criteria would be the first one on page seven of your packet um you can read uh development master plan approval criteria and uh a reads um so this is the first approval criteria for approving and development master plan says the development master plan substantially conforms to the principles and objectives the Girdwood area plan and any approved um neighborhood District or um areas plan um and the um general purpose of this chapter is stated in section 2109 um 010 so in that what I read from code here is the first approval criteria it says that the Girdwood area plan would be part of the as Mr Edgington pointed out and then it also says in the area area plan um you know I think I take that to be the area master plan um so they would both uh have to be weighed thank you for that clarification well since we're asking questions of staff can I do we have um hlbs opinion on this uh through the chair to the commission um Dave Whitfield planing Department uh with us tonight is uh Tiffany Briggs director of Heritage land bank Tiffany would you like to speak to phase four and the hlb parcel Tiffany Briggs um through the chair sh can you repeat specifically what you want me to speak yeah I guess there's been a comprehensive plan apparently it was voted on on a 3 to2 vote so five people in gird would got in a room and voted on this thing I don't I I guess my questions are was hlb consulted did hlb vote on this plan it's hlb land I I somewhat have concerns about setting out comprehensive plans on hlbs land and I'm just curious what hb's thoughts are on the The Plan before us and the petitioner plan on the what is currently hlb land thank you for the question through the chair my understanding is the vote that we're talking about was for the um gboss resolution of support and we were not um at that discussion um we had an RFP out um Paul maroy was um awarded we currently have a letter of intent with them um we're working toward development um we are supportive of this um being mixed use development as it currently is in the um current plan thank you okay commissioner Gardner thank you just I guess a finding that I'll add as a followup to my question to staff I think for me the the approval criteria are are pretty clearly met um as it currently applies and I it's obvious a lot of work went into this um and I think in many ways it meets a lot of really important needs for Girdwood the one bit that just it felt a little odd to be approving um this where the first approval criteria for the um um modification of the area master plan approval does point to or maybe not the first um you know conformance to the Girdwood area plan and knowing that that the plan that we have not yet seen granted but that in very near future the plan might really conflict strongly with the the proposed uses in this plan just felt odd to me and I didn't really know what to do with it and I think commissioner strike spoke earlier about kind of the first to the post um and I really know how to think about that but it is it does meet the criteria as it's currently set forth in the plan and I think I do plan to support the motion and part of what makes me um feel better about resolving that tension is the fact that one we do get to to phase four however many years down the road that is there will be a public process um to review the development master plan associated with that um the approval criteria does notwithstanding the area master plan allow for consideration of what the current situation looks like the current input from the public looks like at that time and additionally it sounded like some of the changes for or the the thinking that drove the change in the land use designation for that area for the expansion along Glacier Creek was partly a reflection of the fact that back in 1995 the thought was that the resort would be much larger than it is now and it was an effort to kind of align with what things look like now but but that is in the process of changing and so I think considerations may look different in five or seven years or whatever it is that we get to that phase for and there'll be an opportunity to to look at that go through the evaluation process at that time anyone else wishing to speak to the motion I I also intend to support the motion and I will say that the land owner of the the controversial piece of land also intend seems to be in support of the plan and and that carries a lot of weight with me commissioner George uh thank you through the chair I um the previous two Commissioners I guess I'll I'll kind of tack on both of those I do intend to support the motion um you know I I grew up in this area uh I was I was a resident of gwood when the 1995 1994 plan was was put in place um there was a lot of talk about what it would look like in the future and that just never came to pass and so I know that attitudes about uh what the resort was capable of delivering on you know within the community with promises over the years um maybe made some people feel um not like engaging in the process but I am actually quite impressed with what has been brought forward here as someone who grew up in the community and I see how in-depth this proposal is I see that it actually has been before the community I see there has been input uh I want to actually document that here um but I also want to touch upon the point um one about you know this land Heritage land bank land is is all of our land as someone who lived in Girdwood we thought of as kind of you know our future land and so um while it may be the municipality is the the hope is that it has a future use Beyond being locked up in the government like all of the uh federal and state uses around us um and it looks like that process is being followed now it's it's interesting to watch this this partial be disposed of um so seamlessly after watching three years of another parcel nearby from heritage landbank go through a rather arduous process of hundreds of very passionate individuals sharing their opinions on housing and Girdwood and I don't see any of them for the most part engaging in this process here tonight so maybe that's a testament to pomoy I don't know um maybe it's fatigue from the argument or maybe they're just saving their powder for the uh the assembly but uh uh to also touch upon the the question of which master plan will govern when phase four comes before the eventual Commission of comprised of members that that probably aren't here tonight and uh I would say you know it seems to be that the resolution that we've come up with here is that there will be a weighing of the fact that this is being approved under the existing master plan which is the right of the individual bringing the application before the commission you know you you should be judged according to the code AS exists not some code that might exist in the future and then also we may have a different Girdwood master plan and uh a future commission will have to weigh those and so perhaps that's just Caveat Emptor um for a developer but I don't know it's not the kind of resolution I would want to give to someone who's really investing in our community to that degree so um you know I have to say that we have a code and we have a plan that's in place now and um until it's changed until it's adopted by the assembly and and finalized um we have to follow it so um with all that I appreciate the Indulgence of the committee and um the commission excuse me and uh I intend to support thank you I see no one else in the queue we'll call for the vote Miss Miss Eber how do you vote yes thank you that motion passes now we will have a second motion on that case uh commissioner pus would you like to State your motion yes I move in case 2024 61 to approve the development master plan for alasa subdivision prints Edition tracks A and B subject to the conditions shown on page 13 the staff report that is seconded by commissioner Garner would you like to speak to the motion yeah just real quick um I think uh it's supports the area and development master plan and the department recommendations resolve all requirements put forth by the reviewing agencies so I intend to support it anyone else wishing to speak to the motion seeing none call for the vote Miss Heber how do you vote yes thank you thank you okay we will be moving on to case S1 12778 looking for a motion we are ready for a motion commissioner pus would you like to State your motion there we go I move in case S1 12778 to approve the amendment to commercial trag fragment lot site plan for 24 months subject to the conditions shown on pages four and five of the staff report that's seconded by commissioner Winchester commissioner pulse would you like to speak to the motion not really help me Jim nobody has nothing I through the chair to the commission uh Dave Whitfield planning department again I I would ask for some findings in this and I I recognize that uh this might be a simple um issue to to deal with tonight but uh I do find findings to be very important so please um give us some findings well I intend to support the motion I don't think we heard any disagreement or Community push back on this proposal and I will disate for the record that there will be future public hearings on the comprehensive plan the future plans for Girdwood as well as the lovely process of hlb disposal or anything never to come to fruition on that and and as we if you paid attention to Holton Hills it can be lengthy and there's plenty of room for engagement commissioner Gardner I'll just note as well we did receive a resolution of support from the Girdwood Board of Supervisors um in this case that um was passed approved unanimously call for the vote Miss Eber yes thank you that motion passes all right we will move on to that concludes the public hearings thank you we'll move on to commissioner's comments uh commissioner Krishna did you want to did you have a com did you have a comment I would ask uh my comment I guess is a question which is u would either the chair or um a member of Staff please uh provide us with some information about what to expect at next week's meeting and how Commissioners might best prepare uh through the chair to the commission um unfortunately I'm not prepared to answer that question tonight um what I would um like to do or like to propose in this particular case is to bring this back to uh the planning director bring it up to longrange planning who's overseeing um the the project I believe you're referring to uh the home initiative and provide you a written response uh via email uh this week um if that would be appropriate sure and I'll I'll just add to that I did have some conversation or some email and a conversation with long range and for the commissions benefit what what we're expecting to see is is the assembly and the planning staff have been working together planning staff is expecting to put out a memo with new recommendations revised recommendations and i' I've urged them to get those to us as soon as possible I kind of brought up some of the things I put in my statements in the last hearing and I I said well I would like to know should Commissioners be providing what what maybe an example of what they're thinking are things they want to see as conditions rather than doing it the night of the meeting and they they staff kind of urged against that but they did say that their proposed recommendations might address some of the things that were stated in the last meeting so I that's the update I I pushed them to do it as soon as possible uh but I was only I I was promised this week so I'm not sure when that'll come out but that's what we know thus far chair spelly can I uh respond to that sure um I very appreciate uh your suggestions uh certainly it's our um desire to get you uh a memo get you responses uh as quickly as possible and uh I believe as you have already heard from staff uh we will do that um as soon as possible this week with respect to uh Commissioners providing suggestions to staff that would be incorporated in that memo my suggestion would be uh that the Commissioners hold on to those suggestions and uh you know during the the meeting bring those uh those suggestions up and incorporate them into their findings uh rather than staff taking those and and trying to um speak for the commission uh in that in that memo that would be my suggestion yeah and and I'll just add that for the commission you know there the assembly's going to hear this thing on July 20 or June 25th and so if we don't move something forward with our recommendations then we we just we basically forfeit our voice and so I would urge everybody if you feel strong about one thing or another or just have it maybe prepared so that it's not as sloppy the night of but that that would just be my my recommendation or comment Ron uh thank you Mr chair I appreciate your last commentary um about ensuring that our voice is heard but would also like to remind the commission that abstaining is a form of making your voice heard as well so um would like to caution all Commissioners to make sure that we have what we individually need in order to to act on something one way or another this is true commissioner Krishna sure I guess my uh uh request to staff would be that even a little bit of guidance about um nomenclature would be helpful I think we've already used the words findings amendments and recommendations and I think uh little bit of guidance as to the um format in which anyone of those things that we're doing would take and how we would properly phrase one of those next week I think is something that we will need or else we'll make a huge muddle of it thank you thank you for the the comment and and certainly we will do our best Dave I think you can answer this one on the fly so findings any one of us can just make a finding and say whatever we wanted but if we have proposed recommendations that the commission votes on that's actually been voted on by the commission so I think can we just get a little clarification around that sure and I I can do that on the fly so thank you I appreciate that uh findings uh for those well I think most of you know what findings are findings are the reasons why you're making the decisions that you're making um they are uh very important in the case of an appeal uh and that's why I urge the commission tonight to establish findings in all of these cases uh as simple as it might might be um what I think Mr spelli and miss miss Krishna are suggesting are amendments and so um there is a a very uh clear distinction between the two one is a reason for you doing what you're doing or making the decision that you're making and the other is you actually amending uh the proposal in front of you is that clear is that yeah and in this in this instance the the Amendments or suggested the s like suggested changes are in the form of Staff recommendations at the end kind of well you have the ability to amend the staff recommendations uh remember in this particular case the home initiative you are recommending to the assembly uh what should go forward and so you have the ability as the commission to make amendments to staff's recommendations yeah and and I guess that's what I'm kind of urging the commission to do I would prefer rather than to abstain wholeheartedly I think it would be more constructive if we sent a message that said like you know I don't want to Outlaw green houses but I do want to Outlaw Pink Houses that's my recommendation a moment making an amendment does not necessarily mean that you agree with the motion or the what's been put forth it can also mean that if it goes before the assembly you want the amendment to be incorporated into it you can still vote no to the motion but push for an amendment in the event that it goes forward that you get a little bit better so having an amendment in there doesn't mean that you're agreeing with it it means that you're trying to make it more pable in the event it gets passed or for consideration by the assembly yes no is still an option yes hey I think any further comments will entertain a motion to adjourn That's all folks e