>> Okay, we will call the November 3rd meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to order. And we please have the roll call. >> Andras. But now hear Jerry Gardner. Krishna here, Scott here, Jeff, Ron care, friend here. You have a Thank you. >> On our agenda, we have the minutes for October 6. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Moved by Commissioner Evers seconded by Commissioner Polis. Any discussion. On the minutes. Any objection hearing? None minutes are approved. Next items. Disclosures. Any commissioners have anything to disclose. Seeing none. We'll move on. Next thing going to ask for. Motion to reorder the agenda here. Item F 5 before the consent agenda. Moved by Commissioner Polis. Is there a second seconded by Commissioner Gruber? And discussion on that motion? Any opposed. Hearing none that motion passes and now that brings us to staff presentation and case 2025. Dash 0, 1, 2, 1, Oh, please, start. Skip the stage. We're not there yet. Staff. I bring this to the staff presentation in case 2025 Dash 0, 1, for 4. Thank you very much. In >> I will give a very presentation this evening before the planning and Zoning Commission is the online review of the cut improvement budget and 5. Yet improvement plan. Project opposed to out critical these projects located across the municipality reading areas. On the other hand, he off an adopted comprehensive this street on neighborhood including that is encourage district view neighborhood plan. Hillside District plan spent not cleared you. Met District plan and West Oak Ridge District. A lot. About 92% of the proposed projects there and support all I at least local indie 2040, land use and these on this. We the planning Department do Recomend approval of the budget and half and provided 3 such as the findings on Page 2 of the staff bucket. with tend to and the >> so the slide deck that you have in front of you has a lot of the information that I sort of verbally share just now. I'm happy to walk through the deck to detail which what each of the points are. I'm not sure if the time allows for that or not. So I would we've got commissioner decision. We have time for. >> Here are your presentation. So I would say move through it. It's official. It's possible. >> So for those of you that have slide in front of you, the first page is the budget process that we go through and it's an illustration of how. And when we start our capital budget process and the fact that we start our capital budget process, which has now been amended to start even earlier in the year, the year before those projects actually comes forward. So we gather the data and then blended into the department work. And then those recommendations come forward we start the whole process over again. Once we get through our current budget in November, that is the approved budget. carryforward do the bond, a passage on the ballot in April as well as the budget revisions that then adopt all of that conductivity into our annual process. And then we go through operate with the bond allocation of the of the year. That was approved by voters the next page is a quick summary of operating side of the House and the 2026 proposed general government operating budget. Its 656.9 million Dollar Appropriation. 175,000 $1 under the tax cap and 7 million dollars. >> More than 2025 budget. The page for is an overview of the capital summary. This is available in the capital Budget book. But this is the total roll-up of capital budget for 2026. So you'll see the 48.9 in the bond column. Stay calm, has 0 funding currently associated with it. We expect that it will remain at 0 30 million dollars on the federal side and almost 10 million dollars in other. This is a combination of private sector funding. Departmental set asides from capital or operating budget extra funding that can be set aside for these capital projects in particular, stuns me. And you'll see the development services total, 990,000. The health Department total 350,000 and it total of 1.4, 4. All of those are software capital investments and would be the items that are located in City Hall Ek downtown. The other downtown npm any and maintenance and operations and parks and Rec would be identified specifically by location. >> The next page slide 5 is a representation from last year's Capital Budget book. So you can see the difference between the summary pages when we include the state roll up versus the non state rollup and in 2025 the Capital Budget Book represented that 166 million in state funding would be coming through and that did not happen. Nor do we expect that to happen. And that is why we removed this column from the 2026 per posed going forward so that people have a visual of what is actual being funded under capital investments in the community. Slide 6 is the pie chart of the revenue that's coming in. So you'll see Bonds, state, federal and other by category and the next pie chart is the kind capital improvements that falls into all of the 90 million dollars of funding, whether that's a facility change and information technology change, parks and rec public safety or roads and transportation. This includes all of the revenue, not just the municipal dollars. Slide. 8 is the bond map which you have. >> Scene. >> And there is the capital funding. Look back. Slide 10. >> We start here with an operating budget comments and that is specific to show the original sort of construct of our revenue, which is about 30%. >> Operating was funded by the state in 1984. And at this point, our operating funding from state revenue is less than half a percent. So that drop-off is very specific to what we are able to do as a municipality on the operating side. But it also impacts our capital side. The next slide is a flat crash of our operating per capita over the last 20 years. And so this is the representation of the spend when adjusted for 20 $25. Our operating totals over time are flat. The slide 12 is the bond. >> Look back over the last 25 years. So this is the total roll up of municipal approved on since 2000 and the categories that they fall into 2025. Was a very specific transition into funding. More in the Parks Rack Library and museum column as opposed to only funding roads and transit to sort of balance out the activity within the departments, but also the deep deferred maintenance need that noticed at some of these locations that have not been funded in a very long time. And you'll see that again in the 2026 proposed project list. Within maintenance and operations. There is a fire safety panel. Capital improvement at the Performing Arts center. >> The cause that as a life safety issue is due for much-needed repairs. So that's on the 26 proposed bond. 13 is the graph of state capital budget amounts that have come through over the last 20 years. 25 plus years the change they're in. Page 14 is a total of that slide right before. And this is the call back to the state of Alaska capital funding and the community assistance and revenue sharing that the municipality received between 2005 2014 versus 2015 to 2024. >> And when we removed the port of Alaska from the funding totals, the municipality has lost about 900 million, almost a billion dollars in the last 10 years from the previous funding levels. within that 10 years before, our a road maintenance and the funding. Spent on road maintenance is significantly dropped off in the last decade. Then capital projects by department. We don't need to go into that detail unless anyone has specific questions about those items. >> But 2 Commissioner Ron's comments earlier these all hold dollar amounts and totals for each of the projects and are listed on the summary page within the Capital Budget book as well as historical information. If we need to for any. Details. When you look at slides. 22 23. Those are the major differences between when we lived in a this is what the state funds. This is what the state does not fund slide. 22 is project Management Engineering's list for the 2026 per proposed Capital Budget. Slide. 23 is Project Management Engineering's Project LIST from the 2025 Capital Budget. That includes the opportunities for the state to fund everything in that second column. But none of those things happened as part of the 2025 legislative process or the municipal budget process. reflecting that those things exist in a capital budget might make people think that they're being funded and occurring. And we have heard from the community that they do, in fact, think that and that's why there's some confusion. And then I-25 to roll up of all the meetings in associated At public hearings for the budgets. Favorable to answer any questions you may have. Any questions for staff. >> Seeing no commissioners in the Q. Does that mean we're ready for a motion? Well thank you for the great presentation. stumped everybody. My specialty. All right. A motion by Commissioner Christian. And would you like stay in motion? Sure. I'll move in case 2025, Dash 0, 1, 4, 4, to recommend to the Anchorage Assembly. Approval of proposed 2026 Capital Improvement Budget. >> And the proposed 2026 to 2031 Capital Improvement program. That's seconded by Commissioner Police Commissioner. Christian. Would you like to speak your motion? >> No, we have before us. Some draft findings of fact, is it helpful to read this out? Yeah, The committee okay. Number one, the proposed 2026 Capital improvement budget in the proposed 2026. To 2031. See, I'd be Capital improvement program provides municipal investment in areas with adopted adopted comprehensive district. A neighborhood plans helping to implement goals, objectives and action items desired important in the communities that live within those areas. Number 2, the 2026 annual CIBC AP identifies projects that improve safety quality of life rightfully improvements with a variety of projects. By contributing millions in funding to repair and upgrade multi-modal travel facilities. These projects include roadways and trails transit support, emergency medical services. New fire equipment, and making improvements to parks and trails. Number 3, supporting encourages unique quality of life through the capital investments proposed in the 2026 annual Cip Cip contributes to economic development and can encourage private investment, new housing and commercial on our prices throughout the municipality of Anchorage. >> Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Just briefly, Mister Chair. For the record a few comments. First, thank you to on the and the Department for the presentation challenging work that you've been up to the last 2 years. And and then some as commissioner and perhaps more so as a member, this community, I would like to call upon all of us to get engaged in the path forward for for Anchorage. I think what we see before us in terms of us. Yeah, BN CFP is reflective of the current state of affairs personally, this community in terms of resources we have available to us moving forward over the next year and is planning cycle are not where I would like them to be for my family for. Our neighborhoods, for our future as a community. What I travel outside, I see growth. I see healthy and vibrant communities. When I come home, I'm reminded of the things that we once had, but don't now and could in the future. So a bit of a soap box. You know, it's not this commission's purview to look revenue generation and sources their end. But I ask all of us as a community to understand the reality of what we're facing, get engaged, get involved and let's build Anchorage that we want. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak. To the motion. from a soap box. Hearing none. We'll call for the vote. That motion passes. >> Now we will move back to the consent agenda. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? Moved by Commissioner Polis seconded by Commissioner Uber. Anyone wishing to pull any items for discussion. On the consent agenda. >> Yes, I would like to pull resolution 2025, dash 29. >> Okay. We will. If there's no other items that any commissioners wish to pull, we will now vote on the remaining items that. The remaining 2 resolutions. Is there any objections? Hearing? None the consent agenda passes. All right. Now. We have. Resolution 2025 dash zeros. 2, 9, in front of U.S. Commissioner Commissioner. Would you like to? >> All right. For the purposes of discussion, I'd like to make a motion to approve resolution 2025, dash 29. And this would be the moment for any amendments to be proposed by. Commissioners if they so choose. Okay, we have a motion. And is there a second? Moved by Commissioner Krishna seconded by commissioner on. Did you Commissioner Christian? Did you wish to speak any further to the motion? >> And now that we're officially in discussion. >> I would draw the commission's attention to sections see in this resolution that has. >> recommendations for the transport of development for those, I think everyone has it in front of them. But retaining the proposal to limit driveways to 20 feet height limit slot coverage if the commission is ready to pass this as written and believes that it reflects the recommendations that we. Did not vote on but discussed at the previous. Meeting. I am. believe that I could agree with I have my own personal. Opinions on some of these items. But it's a I think that our role here is to have this probably reflect the thoughts of the commission. So open to any. Comments, amendments or if there are none. We can vote on it. I guess before anyone since nobody else has jumped in, I had flagged number. 33 >> this afternoon. perhaps being an issue for. >> Larger. >> Multifamily developments, a 20 foot maximum driveway with doesn't. Seen quite possible or night lead to having multiple driveways into a project. And so I don't remember discussing that one. When we heard the case previously. And so I wasn't sure if that was in there intentionally or contained as part of some boilerplate. But I did want to bring it up as an area of concern for me. commissioner Uber. >> I don't recall that began there either. Not opposed to taking it Commissioner Polis. >> I will 3rd that I know we discussed it, but I don't know if we made it a finding. So. I guess. Well, your bikes on. 20 foot driveway with for multifamily scene. For Volkswagen gets perfect for a larger truck or something going to a residential apartment for something that's very small for sure. Okay. I thought it almost impossible to to. Be accepted especially in like a tight corridor on it. You know that a road or something that's that's gonna be pretty hard to navigate for a lot of vehicles. Ok? So we have a motion to approve if anybody wanted to make a motion to amend. And or anybody else have anything further. They like to weigh in on. Commissioner Ron, are you making a motion? I am moving to strike item C 3 from the draft resolution. >> And that's seconded by Commissioner Uber. Any discussion? Amendment. Commissioner Polis? Yeah, I support the motion. I think that's a decision. Better left to building safety on kind of a, you know, code an individual lot basis. Thank you. >> Any >> further discussion? Any opposed to the amendment. Hearing. None. The amendment passes any further discussion on the main motion. >> Hearing none. We will vote on the main motion. >> Okay. We're just do verbal vote. Is there any opposed to the main motion? Hearing? None. The motion passes. >> Ok, now we will move on to the public hearing. I will read. >> The procedures by which the public may speak to the commission. After staff presentation is completed on public hearing items. The chair last for public testimony on the issue. >> Persons who wish to testify will follow the time limit established in the commission rules and procedures. Petitioners, including his or her representatives, will receive 10 minutes. Part of this time may be reserved for rebuttal representatives of groups. Community Council's PD is Center of will receive 5 minutes. Individuals will receive 3 minutes when your testimony is complete. You may be asked questions by the commission. You may only testify once on any issue unless question by the commission. Any party of interest wishing to appeal show first file with the planning director within 7 days of the commission's decision made on the record a written notice of intent to appeal in accordance with the MC 21. 0, 3, 0, 508, for a 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 feeling filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee and deposit in accordance with 21. 0, 3, 0, 5, 0, the notice of appeal must be filed with the planning director on a form prescribed by the municipality. If the appellant is not the applicant, the appellant notice of appeal shall include proof of service on the applicant. May we please have staff presentation on case 2025? Dash 0, 0, 2, think finale. >> This is a request for approval for public must have planned for me. Don't leak at months. Lake Park in a lake at most Edmunds Lake Park includes approximately 478.0 37 acre us across 13 par so and Sony public Land in the some park and piano. I? Joining the street. The park master plan replace the outdated 1973 Edmunds. Lake must tip line. original plan predates major region. Now developments including claim highway which bisects the park. acquisition of them. You know, Lake, can make wayside. The development of meat only come into school. The Glenn Highway Bike Trail and a significant 2000 Sikhs Land Exchange. We The Glenn Highway splits the park into it and develop in that side to the north and the primary mountainside to the South. Which is the main activity area and fixtures. Major merely and Edmonds Lake. The new plan will serve as the guiding document for park's management maintenance and development for the next 20 years with a focus on sustainability. The update is such fi directives from several plan. Key plans, key planning documents. So shes this check key go. have a comprehensive plan and months like mice, a plan, Greenbelt and recreation facility plan and area wide. The trails plan by committing to protect 2 Developing content continues. Multi-use trail system including new system for when to recreation and mountain biking and access infrastructure. Over next relationship. The multiples Easton plans can be found on pace 62 to 67. Of the right. Partial vacation includes fission and to in the summer. 2 ice skating and fat tire biking in winter. And includes over 5 miles of single-track mountain bike trails and 2.4 miles multi-use trails connecting the 2 lakes on the mountainside. Access is primarily via personal vehicles using grain highway exits. Park neighbors are include my income and to the north and west. You don't leak maybe school to the south and East residential areas and camps such as a Boy Scouts America camp going church. And the former camp called Quest today our south and east. Also in a on the Fall subdivision to the Northeast. The bar for history. Creeks, meal Edmonds and I stream that falls into the committee protected by mandate, the 100 foot setbacks and riparian zones to preserve. I'm not drums. Fish habitat and then sure water quality. Future developments. Guided by organizing Cross 5, a distinct you say and of the plan also addresses internal park access by establishing tree rolled justification. With a condition of approval being the update, documentation for right away and legal access for roads within the park. Agents and public comments are action. A testament the staff report. There were no objection to approve of departments to plan. The Pride and apartment public hearing out notice in accordance to lift the title. 21 proceed use. The Eagle River Chugiak Parks and Recreation Board of Supervisors formally approved the plan and we for resolution included in the packet. The Department recommends that the commission approved the plan subject to the following condition. And a different and a share documentation for right away legal access to the plan. And consult with the planning Department to ensure consistent with least it acreage in the park. The man lights of the park plan will be presented by the petitioners teams war. And that ends tonight for a brief presentation. And I have available for questions. Thank you. >> Are there any questions for staff from the commission? Seeing no questions. We will. Asked for the petitioners presentation. >> Good evening. Commissioners. My name is Lucy Branco. A puddle AK. I'm here representing the Eagle River Chugiak Park and recreation to present the public hearing draft for the merrily Edmonds Lake Park Master plan. This master plan establishes a 20 year vision for Park management development and conservation. It integrates recreation needs environmental protection and community values serving both as a update and integration of previous planning efforts to create one comprehensive cohesive plan for the park. To this story is. I was told us we go to the next slide. The park spans approximately 700 our 478 acres in northern Chugiak and serves as a community meeting point between encouraging the Mat-su Valley. It provides unique access to lakes trails and forests and recreation areas for residents and visitors. The community vision and core values of the park reflect 2 years of community collaboration. The plan emphasizes year-round recreation safety, accessibility, stewardship and conservation of natural and cultural resources. Mayor Lake Edmonds Lake Park is a regional family destination, providing safe year-round recreation and connectivity to the communities. It The planning process prioritize community participation. The planning team that was 5 community councils. Held multiple Citizens Advisory Committee meetings, Public Workshop and conducted an online survey that shaped the recommendations for the park master plan. The top implementation. The next please. The top implementation actions for the park focus on improving visibility and access through part there. Highway signage, expanding parking capacity, developing a park and bike hug to enhance connectivity and creating dog-friendly support, inclusive multi-use recreation. Tonight's hearing represents the final stop in the plan approval process. This plan captures a strong community vision aligns with municipal regulations and provides a clear roadmap for implementation. The planning team has reviewed the staff report and the department's recommendations for approval and have drafted language to meet the conditions of approval. He respectfully requests the commission's approval for this plan. I would like to thank all of the community members, organizations and agencies who contributed to their time and put including the Citizens Advisory Committee and the Eagle River to Yak parks and recreation staff. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. 7 minutes, 10 seconds for metal. Got question from commissioner on. >> Thank you to the Questions around engagement with other agencies on Page 5 of staff Looks like state DOT provide some input. And the statement as to chant PF that was not consulted during the plans outreach. Can you give a little more context to that? Both historically and the development plan? What it might mean the plan's contents and going forward. >> Yes, thank you for that question. the comments that were submitted by 2 OT I think are representative of any planning efforts that are to continue as a result of the plan. And I think specifically when talking about the writer weighs in and the connectivity of the trail north to the Mat-su Valley, of course, DOT would be included in any of those interagency discussions if any of the elements of the plan work to be carried forward. >> Commissioner Gardner. Thank My question is with reference the implementation table up towards pulling it on the slides that you can sign up there. And I just notice looking at that that I didn't see any that were tag specifically to the and what side I see. There's maybe one or 2 references. >> 4. Park, wider Mountain Corps. That also kind of reference and what side and I was just wondering. >> If I thought was missing something or if the thought that there should be maybe some of the inlet side, one specifically listed here or not. >> Yeah, that's a great question. There is actually a second page to that implementation table. That's just the First 10 implementation actions. 14 in total if there is on item 7 that is connecting the inlet and the mountain sides of the >> park. So that's identifying a route to connect the multi-use trail network. On this particular table. And as well as plan, a lament for which are more multi-use trails, which also looks at the future expansion of the inland side of the park was commute connections to the merrily Clinton highway interchange as well as the integration of more dog-friendly trails on the inland side as well. >> Okay. Thank you. And I guess I didn't mean it as a it was more just maybe an observation. Anything else. I'm and print a copy that we have here. The key. Has colors from the north and South. Just none of them listed there. was just struck me when looking at it. So I don't know just for consideration maybe and finalizing if there's not going to be any of those listed there, too. Clarifying some fashion. >> Yeah, I think he does have the park wide, which are the multicolored ones. So that would be 14. So plan elements. 3, 4, 6, 7, 10 14 are all considered park wide improvements. But thank you for that. question. >> Thank you. I see no further questions. Thank you. We'll now >> up to the public open the public hearing on this case, anybody from the public wishing to testify, please step forward. There's a >> And then I keep of there that you had Got it. >> And then please state your name and let us know if you're representing a group or just for yourself. >> Sure. My name is Brittany REDLINE. Ari DWI in and I'm just representing myself. Good evening. As I said, my name is pretty red line and my husband and I own property accessed by Lakefront Drive. I've reviewed the materials for tonight's meeting and was glad to see that Lake Front drive is identified in it as a public right of way that shown on pages. 23 30 up to big packet that you guys have. That acknowledgment matters because that's what we've been saying for years. But this is the first time you've seen Parks and rec acknowledge that. Our first choice has always been for the road to drain public and to be maintained by the municipality. There's a public trailhead and parking area at the end of Lake Front drive that people regularly use and it makes sense for the road that leads to it to maintain too remain part of the public system. Our community council also passed a resolution and May of this year asking Park's and rec to keep the road open and maintain for the public. Our concern has been that even though it's a public right of way, the municipality mentally maintains it. We first raised this issue in March of 2022. and have attended most of the Board of Supervisors meeting sense then trying to get clarity. The road was ship sailed back in 2007 and has deteriorated to the point that it requires equipment and resources that individual property owners simply don't have. The current plan proposes to reclassify lakefront Drive as a private access road. A change from the earlier approved draft that was presented to the community and December of 2024. that called it a primitive Park Road. I'm not sure when or why that wording changed. But it suggests that there still isn't a clear plan for how accessing maintenance will be handled moving forward. If the intent is to make the road private. That needs to come with clear answers who will maintain it? How will that excuse me? Who will be responsible for existing damage and how will that shift be communicated to the public because the public will continue to use it, especially to reach the trailhead and parking areas. And there's bound to be pushed back once they're told they can't. How does the municipality municipality plan to manage that? Before any reclassification is approved. I ask that these points be address clearly on record again, who will be responsible for maintaining lakefront drive, who will cover the costs and execution of repairs that it needs right now and how the public use be manage once the classification changes. And what steps will be taken to communicate. That change and handle any public pushback. These are basic practical questions that deserve answers before moving forward. Thank you. Thank you. >> Have you contacted Eagle River Street maintenance? We have and do they except make sense of the road now for a couple different reasons. But mostly because Eagle River Parks and rec. >> On this, that road, it's a park road and so they cannot do anything on that road unless Eagle River parks, given permission to do so. Ok, thank you. >> We need the bike on. >> said I'm not it. >> my name. And yeah, I and let us know if you're representing yourself or a group. Well, my name's will take tears. And Tom, a wide Jizan and and I guess I'm representing a group. So you guess I were a betting man that he had and that's not in this thing, but I'm probably most well known as the executive director of Chugach Mountain Bike Caper. And we. Do the volunteer maintenance construction of the trails that are existing there and those trails you know, since the previous. Master plan was from 1973, there was no. Mountain biking really happening then. So we've been working with Park's and rec for over a decade. We've brought in about a million dollars of improvements to the park and was brought to our attention and called in. You know, cooperation with the parks department that they're really needs to be a master plan for that level of development in a park rather than just doing it piecemeal. we've been very involved. I've been very involved as a stakeholder and developing this project. I also a 21 year neighbor of the park. So I'm very involved in this person community. And I am on chin, get Community Council and check your of our part to boards of supervisors. So a lot of this has been discussed a lot. the general feeling is this is a very well balanced master plan that reflects current usage of the park. So there's no major changes. What it really does acknowledge is what's happening in the park now and then it also has a plan for 20 years of improvements to keep that character. And so I know. As a long-term plan, it doesn't have every single detail worked out in it. But I urge you to recommend approval of this plant, as is with the amount of community involvement. We've had. I think it's a really good compromise. So with that, that's what I have to say. Thank you. Seeing no questions. >> I don't I I never had to hit it. But there's a but in there somewhere. I could. I could tell you when I see light, though lights on mine's Davenport. I am from Eagle River and I am not a neighbor, too. >> The >> near Lake Trail system, Edmonds, part-time taxpayer. I feel a lot of money for taxes and I read this entire plan and there's a lot of stuff in it. This is a phenomenal use of my tax money. This is 20 years of good planning of the things that I moved to Alaska for. Trails. I have sons who are in the Boy Scouts. We use the Boy Scout camp. We paddled this lake. I ride my bike there frequently. I walk my dog there. This is more than just. Fixing up some maintenance and making the place a little bit better. This is actually using pretty much the last usable land that we have an Anchorage bowl that's not being used for something that really is an attractive thing in. The money that we put into this is actually going to pay dividends as you Brett brought earlier. We need more money in this municipality and this attracts the type of people like coming by overpriced houses and pay a lot of taxes. But want to stay here because things like this, make it an attractive place like I did where this is where I decided to have my family Andres and stay here. And these are the types of things that end up, making it so the bonds pass because I'm the type person who will pay for this pond on the taste type of person whose kids will pay for the spot because they want to stay in Area, too, because they have good planning like this that has their priorities and mine and their futures in mind. It makes him. Want to stay in Anchorage. to go into Colorado Springs, Vermont. I am. I actually sat and read this entire thing coming up. This got into that the entire plan and as it's written. He's a great my money. I appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no questions. Anybody else wishing to testify. Please step forward. Seeing none. We'll close the public That's the petitioner to come back up for their 7 minutes and 10 seconds of rebuttal. >> Thank you. Commissioners. >> I >> would like to start the staff report and the recommendations that were made in the staff report regarding >> the usage of the right of ways. >> Within the park and its we had prepared some information to go along with that and response to course it. Unlike Foot drive lakefront, drive. >> They were constructed under a permit issued and 1968 by the state of Alaska to serve the parcels that were owned by the Boy Scouts of America Ministration of this permit was transferred to the municipality and the 1980's and intergovernmental use permit was issued in 2006 to the project Management and Engineering. To permit and to construct a road improvements since the initial Construction Dorset Road and Lakefront Drive have been maintained privately through the park. And their primary use has been for private property access to the Boy Scout, parcels. And 2023. The Eagle River Chugiak Parks and Recreation did perform some maintenance on portions. Of course, that road between the old Glenn and where the road tease to lakefront drive. This was to provide access to park users for the increased rail infrastructure. Along course it's road the consistent primary use for the remaining portions of Gorsuch and lakefront rise. Yeah, you can see there the map as for private access to the old Boy Scout, parcels. This is consistent with the recommendations for future development and this plan. And so no changes in the management of these road sections are anticipated. >> I'm Jeff Urbana, some the you revert to parks and recreation manager and just maybe just for clarification because I'm not sure it was quite clear this language that Lucy Red is in response to staff recommendation number one, and this this language would be included the plan to speak to that. >> That all the rebuttal. I think it speaks to the issues that Missus Redwine spoke to about. >> The history of the road in the understanding of the road. This has been somewhat of a discussion that has taken place both inside this process. But outside. There's a pretty clear history to how the roads came to be. There's a pretty clear history of how the roads have been maintained and there were recommended no recommendations in this plan. You know, like new infrastructure along lakefront drive or anything like that. That would the 2 U.S. reconsidering how we manage that roadway. So >> normally we would let you finish out your time for rebuttal and then we would take questions from the commission. So I don't know if you want to know forfeit the rest of the time or if you had anything you wanted to do. Say first. But we do have questions. >> I think we're good. I would acknowledge that there there. There is somewhat of a discussion about the issue. I think we have robot. What we need to. So yeah, we have our for the rest of our time. Okay. Question from commissioner polls. >> I'm sorry. I don't know the road. I'm not familiar with the road and you know who's on it or what? But are their private residences on the road besides the Boy Scouts and, you know, an access point you have the. >> So laser on that. >> If you're if you've ever been to the park. And you're going back to Anchorage. As you leave the park. Almost immediately before you get to the highway that goes underneath, there's a mailbox isn't theirs. And that's a that's Gorsuch wrote in and that was constructed in 1968. It's private access for the to Boy Scout properties. When it was done, it was actually under ownership of the state of Alaska in 1980, that permit transferred to the municipality. At either. And more specifically your question, though, is that the Mayor Lake and that the Edmunds Lake and there are all 3 parcels that are there used to be owned by the Boy Scouts. I don't know the exact year, but that's a like last 5 or 6 years. The Boy Scouts old, one of the private parcels to a party other than the Boy Scouts. That's where some of the confusion comes from that you have like a new property owner there and then maybe like a >> blogger established practices. And I don't know that expectation. History and everything all aligned because their houses there's just the Boy Scouts have have an on site manager. So they have a private residence there that's on the south and that Mayor and then on the on the north and on at lake is to redwine's property, which I do want to speak for them is believe they run a business out of there, but it is also their private residence, OK? So basically there's like. 3 big tracks accessing this road pretty Yeah. And actually the if you go to where the green of the Parkland is, the first large on shade green parcel. >> parcel is still owned by the Boy if you were to access the property on the east side of that and like you go through Parkland, then you go through Boy Scout land and then and then you got to private land. >> Kind of a debacle right away to buckle. >> And it's not. Yeah. And there's no dedicated right away there. I mean, the it's not even easement was a permission from divisional lands and water at the state to access those private inholdings. There was a there are some road improvements that were paid for by P money, which I think sort of emphasize is that had to go outside the normal process of Eagle River statements or Eagle River Park's and rec to get those improvements done. We don't have a history of doing anything on that road. And for majority of the time they were there, they were just we simply. You know, like I mean, we've talked about this before, you know, before in other discussions and before 2003, if we were done plowing at the boat launch, we simply went back to Eagle River and just drove right by, of course, a truck that's changed a little bit with all of the new bike infrastructure. And as a management decision may think that their will. It had slowly over time. There's a lot more bike infrastructure that crosses kind as you get closer to the old K***. But I would out once you're past that he the traffic goes to the. East into the Western, you know, towards towards it and they can towards Maryland. It's primarily related to the uses that are going on in those 2 properties. ♪ Just for to clarify, know, right away. No easements. >> Maybe like a prescriptive. It's meant there was new start. Didn't mean to talk over there. There were there was an intergovernmental use permit that was issued to pay money by parks to do the improvements. >> But that was just to perform that like to CHIP SEAL that was done in 2000, but it was signed in 2006, I believe construction was in 2007. And that was kind of like a one time. That was like a one time. >> Intergovernmental you so that they could you spend part public money to do it. I mean, it could be many needs that usually an easement to do work. >> And then is there been any discussion to provide easements? >> What they have, they have So the original access current came from DNR that went to the municipality I talked a little bit with legal and the municipal surveyor today. Just to clarify, you know, our responsibility in that case is just not restricting access. >> So the municipality does consider there to be easement an access easement there. There's they definitely have. They definitely have an entitlement for access yet. >> All right. Thank you. See no further questions. And with that, we can close the public hearing. I think right? Is the will of the body. Commissioner Gardner. Would you like to state your motion? >> Sure. Thank you. I'm moving case 2025, 0, 0, 2, 2, to approve the Mirror. Lake Edmonds Lake Park master plan subject to condition one. My guess both. Go. Yes. Alright. Condition. One that documentation for right of way in legal access to the plan and condition to to consult the planning Department to ensure consistency with listed acreage in the parking. Both conditions are found on Page 6 of the stuff back. >> That's seconded by Commissioner Uber Commissioner Garner. Would you like to speak your motion? >> Sure. Briefly. >> It looks like a a >> I found to be impressive And we heard testimony today that spoke to the balance it strikes for the various uses, mostly the limit testimony heard was in support. There's a resolution from the river to get Parks and Recreation Board of Supervisors in support. One comment from the public seeking clarity on the status of Lakefront Road. And we heard from the applicant they provide information about that, ensuring there is an access easement and that with respect to condition, want to add documentation for right of way and legal access to the plan. They have language prepared that will be added to provide some additional clarity there as well. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Commissioner Uber. >> I intend to support the for the the motion. I believe that it's a great addition to the River community and then the greater encourage community. >> Anybody else wishing to speak to the Is seeing called for the vote. That motion passes us. Next up. Case 2025 Dash 0, 1, 2, 1, May we please have the staff presentation? Thank you. Mister Chair. >> This is a rezoning request far from Cook Inlet Housing Authority to amend the up for approximately 4.3 acres of land from our for multi-family residential with special limitations. District are full multifamily residential district. Commission for the Land Use Plan classifies distract with the land use designation off. Compaq mixed residential. That's medium and trying that. possible to development. The property in question has been of so on our Florida. So. Since 1982, whether the quest is to rezone to our for this is not implementing zoning district of the land use designation. As for Chris, 24 to land use plan rezone 2 or defenders, dental district would provide a comparable option to the applicant to remove Let's to rezoning to a district consistent with the implementation objectives of that includes 24 the land-use plot. The Planning Department provided publish notice. A notice to the spectacle into Council is going to call him Twit and Kuz municipal code to 21 point or treat point o it should treat as of this writing. The department has received no public comments. Other agency called months a Dutchman tree and peace. 22 of the packet. She was comments. Comments include all comments received by the department in the original format. Statement supporting agencies have no objection to the rezone. The last Department of Transportation. Public Facilities had an advisory comment prompting access off of borrowed for any future developments. The traffic engineering department had an adviser to comment about the phone improvements required 2 Columbine quarter. That would be in the city for any future. of the parcel. The complaint addition, long-range planning, Division of Blind addicted, discussions to support the rezoning commendation not redistrict. Approval criteria. Criteria it on It just goes the comprehensive plan. This great TV on. He's met with the recommendation to rezone to our tree instead of The request, the current requested rezoning to our forward all trees on the subject parcel to a zoning district supplements to 24 to land use plan. Does the department recommends a rezone to our of Founders, Dental district, elimination of the special limitations but Equal 8, 2, dash, 1, 4, 8, Recommended result to He is in alignment with Chris. 24 to land use plan goal to infill and redevelopment needs of in development meets the housing and employment needs of residents and business is not encouraged. The proposed amendment also aligns with strategy 9 and food housing, though, the relations by eliminating special limitations, that District Heights to 3 stories and the transaction costs associated Major site Plan Review. Corrected on the footnote a result, an objective risk to health, the safety. The criteria is met. The proposed special invitations for the subject property, especially in addition, this craven, 82. That's one, for example, is that tight restrictions addict transaction costs in terms of a major site refused to pollution on any proposal went off the subject. Property, nation off these restrictions not result in object to risks to the health and safety of the neighborhood. All the municipality at Pregnancy does not conflict with other municipal state or federal court nation's and ordinances. The criteria is met. This amendment does not conflict with of those municipal state, called nation's ordinances department recommendation. The department finds that the request rezone to our for does not need approval criteria, however, are rezoning to our team needs all these approval criteria. Therefore, the department recommends the planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval rezone from our for multifamily residential district with special invitations. Act. 3 multifamily residential district and refer it to before for the adoption by ordinance. Icons of the questions of the board may have. Thank you. >> Threw the chair to the commission. I just wanted to jump in and offer a little bit of a of a sort of a higher level summary and some background on this and the decision of the department to recommend a rezone to our 3 instead of our floor. As you all know, that this is a the removal of a cells and the fact cells are no longer available as a tool, it's new to the department and to the commission. And so we found ourselves in a situation where in many cases the removal of the S L just to bring it back to the underlying zoning district, which in this case, what you would assume would be our for makes sense. You know, it's it's just the removal of some special limitations in his own, a district that are to essence in line with the comp plan, but in other cases and there are many act, many instances across U.S. and enable Eagle River where if you remove that as well then you end up in a situation where that underlying zoning district is not in line with the comprehensive plan and the intent for that area and unfortunately see have found themselves in a situation where this is. This is true for this parcel as well. And well, the project itself, it believe is in line with the goals of the comprehensive plan. The specific rezone action is not something that is supported as a implementing zone in that land use designation. So that is why the planning department came to that conclusion making that recommendation to all tonight. >> Any questions for staff Commissioner Gardner? Thanks for that additional context. I guess. And I expect the Sheryl probably speak to this as well, but just kind of procedurally is I understood, I guess the recall West was to rezone it to an are for and so is it. I don't know that I can recall seeing a case where you know, we'd be looking to recommend approve rezone to something to district other than what was requested. And so is that even. Because that something that done around the table properly. >> Threw the chair to Commissioner Gardner Yes, you as a commission may make whatever recommendation you please. And just for a little bit of context. Because it is not in line with the comp Rezone to our for like that may also require a change to the comp plan. So if you did that, make that recommendation, then. I would need to work with the applicant and the administration to try to figure out what the appropriate process that would be if it. Where to go to the assembly and the assembly where to consider I pleased that that is not something that you necessarily need to solve tonight. That would be just a recommendation to the assembly. >> I'd also just like to add. >> We are not rezoning the property tonight. Where are we making a recommendation to the assembly? The assembly will discuss the item. >> The assembly has its own legal counsels council and I seen the assembly legal counsel disagree with the municipal legal counsel over results in the past. So I I don't know. I just throw that out there. For the commission's to commissioner Thank you for that. European shunned hearing more from the department about what some of the potential conflicts. The department would like to see mice a complex. I mean, with respect our for without the assaults, for the subject parcel and it's under law use tax. >> Threw the chair to commissioner it. The planning department in general just because of the location of parcel of the project itself. And the infrastructure, the existing infrastructure in the area. we aren't necessarily seeing any potential conflicts that would be caused by a rezone to our for in that location. It is. It is strictly reading of the comp plan that is in the way of providing you with that recommendation for approval. >> Are there any other questions for staff? If not, we will move to the petitioners presentation. Good evening, commissioners and staff. My name is Tyler Robinson. >> I'm a vice president Cook Inlet Housing Authority. Just some some history on this case. We began talking to staff back in July. We purchased the property about a year ago. And once the ordinance passed that really eliminated the ability to have a special limitations and actually included kind of a streamlined, the reduced fee to process the removal of special limitations. We approached staff to do that with this parcel in the staff report. You heard the primary reasons another process requirements that are otherwise not required of. >> Residential development today. So it's like we can get out of the way that we that we don't have to do that. And then. >> And so we we proceeded. We submit application in August. We were supposed to be here October 20th. We were postponed till tonight and a week ago Friday, we discovered or we've got a phone call saying staff was actually not recommending the are for that we had led to believe was was going to happen. But they are recommending the are 3 for the reasons that. As Bab just just spoke about. What I would like to sort of just. I obviously I could be here today in front of you as a conditional use permit process which would be would have been the other avenue I might have chosen. We have advanced development plans. We close to half a million dollars on a building design. We anticipate having 2 three-story buildings and then the rest of the site developed with single story as an elder campus after a got that phone call went back to our project team on Monday and said, OK, what are the what are the implications can be live with our 3. And this this is kind of where the route is. There's 2, 2, big things that happened. And by the way, our our project as currently envisioned, we'll have a dense city about 80 units on this parcel that equates to an entity about 15 to 20 dwelling units and acre. It's not super high that actually fits squarely in and this medium density range. But as you know, even if you have a higher density zone, you can you can build to a lower density. We don't have a minimum densities in Anchorage. And so the big implications dresser twofold. One we have built elevator buildings and imagine to 24 unit elevator three-story buildings. They have the past 5 ones that we've done. And I think they're not many entities building three-story residential all elevated buildings in Anchorage. They've all come in above 35 feet, which is the height limit of our 3. So we've all come in, you know, 37, 39 for you know, it's been kind of in that range average of 37 feet. So so with our 3, I can't build the building that I've just actually designed. Number 2, the open space requirements increase doesn't sound like a ton, but but it goes up from I can remember exactly what is in our for. But it jumps to 125. Units are square feet per unit in in in our 3 doesn't sound like a lot, but it actually adds up. And and the thing about our zoning code is is when you talk about open space, you have the same open space requirement. Whether you build a studio apartment for elders as you do for a four-bedroom unit that's gonna have a lot of kids. And so what we do in our elder campuses as we build interior spaces. We've been walking past patios, front porches. None of which actually meet the strict definitions of open space, which is I I believe, really much more envision for like kids and playgrounds and those sorts of things. So so now I've got interior spaces. Design is open spaces don't count and the open space scrambling to find the open space. So what I can tell you is this. And I want you to think about this a little bit. To build. This development that I've just described. That is absolutely consistent with the comprehensive plan. I need a zoning district that according to staff, is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. So how do you reconcile that? And I believe that you as a commission, your primary rationale is to move forward, uses that implement our comprehensive plan above and beyond zoning districts. Now, if you don't agree with me. Then I'll be back here in a couple of months, probably with a conditional use permit having gone even farther out on that limb, designing a project without that entitlement, which we don't like you. No one likes to be at. And what you will primarily be doing as a conditional use permit for this use. Unless you can see some sort of impact to surrounding properties, which I'd have a hard time imagining. Is finding that our project is consistent with the comprehensive plan. That'll be primarily. What are you are you are here to do, but you'll be there with a specific site plan. We'll have project to produce elevations for you will have to go through serve that process again. That had we been told back in July or August that that was our path. We would have taken it. And you know that that's the background. I don't I don't mean to disparage most babst unit. We're at the point where we are. I don't know exactly where to tell you all to go. You could recommend are for. You can find that it actually is not inconsistent with the copy. What you're talking about is someone is looking at the coloring on a map. Rather than a range of uses and suggesting that someone could actually build higher density. And what you're also looking at isn't implementation table in the comprehensive plan that says for that color. You have to have our 3 are our 02:00AM. And what I'm suggesting to you is with that color being our for you can also have that same news. That is consistent with the comprehensive plan. you know, with at all reserve the rest of my time for rebuttal. Thank you. You have 4 minutes. We have question your question for. Question for staff. Commissioner Christian go. >> I would say maybe more than half. That's the time that this commission sees a reason request. We see it paired with a comprehensive plan amendment. Could you provide a little bit more information about? How the department evaluates whether to bring forward a comprehensive plan amendment along with the recent request. Threw the chair. >> I'll answer that Elizabeth Apple, the current planning division manager. So my can't planning the process most of the rezoning requests typically what we do is someone comes to us with the property. We look to see it. If the reason they're requesting is consistent with the comprehensive plan. If it is not, it. We discuss whether or not the department would support a comprehensive plan amendment I suppose for this property, we probably would support a comprehensive plan. Amendment is unfortunate just with the new process of removing muscles that we did not discover that earlier, that could be an option would be come back with a comprehensive plan amendment as as one option to make it consistent. So your data when the comprehensive plan for median density residential, the high-density residential and then you could rezone to our foreign say it's consistent with the comprehensive plan. Does that answer your question? I suppose, is really internal the discussion Northline Whether or not we support a comprehensive plan amendment. We looked to neighboring properties and the plans that guy development for for that area, whether or not we would support amendment. That's helpful. Thank you. I really don't want to ask this question. But was was there was the pre application meeting? For a gone because of the expedited process. Chair spinelli. Yes, that is correct. Because because because there's this new tool remove the S l's that's meant to be expedited so that so we did not have a application conference. Not going say anything more about that. And then my other question. Can staff speak to the density of the project relative to the >> designation in the comp plan. >> Shares Spinelli. I have the existing zoning might take me a quick minute to pull up the comprehensive plan. The purpose of the are 3 district. believe this. Texas also copied in the the staff report with our 3 district. purpose is for GERSTEN seized between 15 40 doling units per acre. And then if a flu. have our forward in front of me on second. that's you do want punch up. >> To the chest. So our for is family guide. With respect to the densities by the fields floated issues and civil density as living in the speaker. So I think this is a it's a fundamentally different sort of criteria to how densities defined in both of these. >> I guess my question restate it as we heard from the petitioner, I think 12 to 15 to unit per acre and what I do, my question was, is what does the comp plan? Specify as a dwelling unit per acre for? Currently with that whatever the comp plan currently Slated for. No, if it's light, brown, green, yellow. Monitored yellow. >> Yes. Chair Spinelli is so compact makes mixed residential medium. I believe if I'm looking at at table, it looked too quickly by a 15 to 48 drawing units per acre and then urban residential high, which is the next went up, which would support our for is over. 35 going units per acre. >> It's a I'm just trying to verify that will be heard from the petitioners, correct? That the dwelling unit said their project is proposing is within. What's currently in the comp plan. >> Shares tunnel. Yes, that is Thank you. >> Annie. Further questions. >> I would you like to? Come back up for your rebuttal? I mean, me open it up to the public. First. Anybody from the public wishing to testify? Sharing seeing none. Okay. Let's go for rebuttal. See how controversial a project this is. Just to clarify. Think on the on the dense and densities. A weird weird. And when it comes to the comp plan stuff, I mean, we have a 45 acre parcel here. >> Not not dedicating right away to any roads. If you if you had the public right away, knew had parcels, you're density goes up. If you have private, driveways and roads are density goes down. So it's you know, that's. >> So I say we're probably somewhere between 15 and 20 right now, but if I sort of imagine that road has a right away, it would it would go up. think just to be clear, we've we build very, very little in this town to our for densities that are held out of the compound. Just doesn't doesn't happen. That regularly is very expensive. I guess I would. I would just suggest, again, on the height thing, I've heard a couple things from staff recently. One is that they're looking at this height limit in our 3 that to get 3 stories with that interstitial space, an apparent Donna was on the on the roof. I mean, I think if you take our last 5 projects, it's pretty good proof that 35 is hard to hard to hit with the with the Florida ceiling height. So we want sit and this isn't even luxury housing out 10 foot ceilings or anything like that. I guess I would say that based again where you're at, I think will probably pursue 2 avenues. One is we would move forward potentially with are whatever your recommendation is. We're not willing to do is restart the rezoning process all over the place. One I just don't have the time to do it. I come to you one time for conditional use permit be restarting and coming to you and the assembly. And my goal is to get in for building permits in March of this year, which is again, why we started this process in July. And so I think if we come back with a conditional use permit that satisfies the sort you know, site site plan process with just just kind of wasted, you know, wasted some time. The other thing just worth noting is I do like the process of removing special limitations. The fees is $200. If we came to you for a reason to be a $10,000 fee and that doesn't include, you know, my time or we hire consultants. Just the feel alone to change. You know, the language is is pretty substantial. I'm pretty sure us up is less than that. >> You know, I think I think I'll I'll rest there. It's complicated. It's unfortunate. >> I think we get my personal opinion is we've got get hung up on philosophical and theoretical densities a lot rather than just sort of understanding what's possible to be built in Anchorage. You know, whether this is a, you know, 24 unit building inherently is different than a townhouse building. So it's one of the higher density zones. But we're sticking to those 3 stories. If this was the old days, what I would be asking you to do is just amend the special imitation, make it so I don't have to have a conditional use permit, but maybe keep your three-story height on there with that sort of explanation of 3 stories come in with 35 feet 40 feet, right? We all we all work. But now you can't amend the special invitation. So my only my only path on this choose your own adventure is. Get rid of the special limitations as accept whatever zoning or do a comp And that meant or come to you under the terms of the special limitations that were put on this parcel. In 1982. So. Thanks for your time this evening. Look for the here and which way this goes. Real quick before you leave. What do you want us to do? Would would you like us to recommend approval of our for? You know, I I don't I mean, I think that I thought about this a little bit. >> I think it's an interesting, you know, it's sort of an interesting test case. What what I would not want to have happen and what would be still a risk to me as you all can recommend that. >> I could end up at the assembly with a legal opinion that says no, don't supported. course, the assembly could go either way. Which mean that could be open to appeals that, you know, all of that kind of stuff. So I you know, sure, just for But at the same probably submit a conditional use permit application by the end of the week. Because, again, like I said before, I need to be in for permits. And in in March. Back there, Chair. Maybe it was clear to others. Okay. But that will close the public hearing. >> What is the will of the bunny? Commissioner on? Would you like to state your motion? >> Yes, thank you, Mister Chair. I move in 2025 0, 1, 2, 1, to recommend the Anchorage Assembly approval of the result of a tract of land from our 4 S l multi-family residential with special imitations District. 2 are for multifamily residential district. Seconded by commissioner Uber commissioner on would you like to speak your motion? Thank you, Mr. Get things started. Just briefly with respect to the department's interpretation, I can see the arguments that they levied where they came from. And I appreciate the explanation that they gave in the context of where we're at today with, as the petitioner said, what's our opportunity to build on this parcel and the arguments put forth and they're in. I find that conditions. One, A B and C can all be met through are for giving the argument of use and intended development for this particular parcel. In that total contact saint and support the motion as it is. And my disclaimer is the petitioner. I believe as I understood it did ask for this action from the commissioner understanding that he also has recourse through a conditional use permit moving forward. So this action to be by commission, if we approve it gives him Optionality moving forward, which I think is something that's important to move this development towards the next step. Thanks. Thank you. mean, Commissioner Gardner. Thanks actually had question for staff. Apologies that kind of get this earlier. And guess it's actually kind of 2 questions to understand how the process. >> If this goes forward as in our I would assume. You know, at least I guess historically have what we would see is the is, as you mentioned, I think amendment to the comp plan to kind of reflect that. >> It is their what with what is that potential mechanisms to kind make that happen or does that necessarily involving require kind of a? >> A restart process as well? Similar to the see up that might be filed later this week and what went forward through this proposed rezoning here. >> Threw the chair to Commissioner Gardner. That is a very good question. And it is something that I would need to work out with our legal advisers at the municipality I can and see a potential way of maybe moving this forward with a comp plan amendment. petitioner for that would be whether it be the planning Department or the applicant. Is would be up in the So honestly, I can't answer that question right now. I. would like to work with applicant to try to figure that out. If that's the recommendation of the body. Thank you. And then. >> And I guess maybe similar question in terms of Blakely difficulty for answering or are maybe not with respect to the removal of the special that Haitians. I was just kind looking to find briefly the I guess the provisions that governed kind of their move on the speedy process and my question is, is it? Clear that so the removal necessarily has to be. Both of the special limitations or is there is there potentially mechanism to just remove? The one for the public hearing and see up process and leave the height limitation place without having to go through this whole process. >> If I understand your question correctly, I believe that the intent of that process is to remove the entire cell because special limitations are no longer a tool that is available to either the planning Department or the Planning and Zoning Commission. So if we were to only remove part of an S l. I'm not sure exactly if that would meet the intent of The coach Ange that removes them so that it's also something I would need to work with legal department on. I think. Thanks. Appreciate those comments. And I guess. >> as a finding that I would add. I mean, I I'm interested. I think we all are interested in figuring out a way to get this done. Most efficiently. It seems like a great development that the city would be rim to miss out on either at all or in a timely fashion. So it seems like maybe going are for. Best potential roof and hopefully we can find a way to kind of have a parallel comp plan that goes comp Plan amendment that goes along with that without slowing things down too much. And I also would be interested to know recognizing that the intent is to remove cells. But if the comp plan amendment can't be done timely, if Sl removal process might still contemplate. You know, something is better than nothing. And maybe you're moving one and allowing this to proceed in efficient manner without having to do a rezone at all think it may be worth looking into. Threw the chair me. One thing to can the commission might consider is that if are going move this forward as a recommendation to the assembly. >> And you, too, to sire a comp plan amendment as part of that, that may be making that finding our a part of the the motion might be something you should consider. thanks. I think. >> That was kind of the intent of my finding. I'll just be kind of explicit. I think it would be helpful will be. I guess, careful the high how I phrase this exactly. But I think it would be a supportable rezone if it were also paired with a comp plan amendment. I would recommend exploring ways to do that efficiently Commissioner Uber. >> Can we just amend the original? Motion to include Plan Amendment. >> We probably could me personally, I'm inclined to support the original motion. Anybody else wishing to amend our years because the motion >> Just a point of information. Threw the chair for Commissioner question. >> the >> commission, I you can approve comprehensive plan amendment because it's just reason before you and there's a to Lisa Everett code processor comp plan amendment. However, you could as part of your motion recommend that the amendment be made or if you want to say that the planning the municipality should make a comprehensive plan amendment. You could you could address it that way. You could say the petitioner should make it. However you want to France it to you could. In summary you could it recommend a comprehensive plan amendment be made. you can't. There's no like case too decide upon that it would take some further follow-up action in a separate case to still come before you. that makes any sense today meant my wording was just incorrect. And no one more point of information you could say come forward with a separate case for a comprehensive plan amendment. Just so it's it's clear that you don't have the action now to decide upon their request that you could requests that come forward in a future case. Couldn't we also? Recommend approval to the assembly to rezone it to our for and ignore the comprehensive plan. I just want to throw that out. There is possibility. >> Chair was that and the question for staff. >> Yeah, I I the south of the can the nod. It looked like a yes to me. I will say the commission chair Spinelli the commission may make whatever recommendation to the assembly that you would like. You. You still must use the review criteria in code Cecily to address review criteria and that requires the reason to be consistent with the comprehensive plan. So I suppose you cannot ignore it, but you can make whatever recommendation that you want. Using those review criteria. Sure, Christian, a alright. Just >> move a salon. I suppose. This might be a separate recommendation. But if it's amendment to. >> This current recommendation, that's also fine. I would like to can I make another motion? >> think you can make a motion to amend the current motion, but I you can't have a new motion. While old motions on the table. >> Commissioner, what commissioner on be open to an amendment? >> I believe it's within in commissioners purview at this point. And Robert's rules to amend the main motion. So if you would like to do so, get on the table and we can discuss. I think to keep things >> clear. I'm not going to make a motion now, but I might choose to make a separate motion later. Commissioner on. I think, I'm happy to walk back through some of my thinking in support of my mean motion. Appreciate the discussion by commissioners and >> question response from the department's with respect to create real one. Department found that the criteria would be met with a reason to our 3 instead of our for. I believe in my interpretation of the comp plans, intense with respect to the context of this parcel and the proposed development or at least what we've heard about it. Weirton numbers around units per Acre CRM Our M 15 to 40 and you are high. So that's equivalent to our for as 35 plus, I see some overlap between those 2. And it's that overlap is still well above what we're hearing from the petitioner in terms of proposed development for this property. We've been reminded tonight that there are no minimum densities. There's just a cap. And so I'm not too caught up in this maximum that are for would allow given the intended development for this property. As we've heard tonight. I think items one BN one, see Kerry as no objective risk to health or safety might be a stretch. But it's a further delay or keeping this development from happening. Would be arrests, too. I think what this community is facing right and item C does not conflict with municipal state or federal code regulations and ordinances again. What can we What can we build here? Allowing this to happen in the way that I think we need to is where I'm at with it. I think our for with no amendment at this time. Is a recommendation to the assembly and it's the Assembly's purview responsibility to test terms of legal merit against the If they find otherwise they can rule otherwise. But I'm at the point of supporting my motion acid But if commissioners us, that's keeping things gone. Commissioner Christian. Yes, just to be very clear, I fully intend to support the motion. >> And I only interested in >> wondering whether recommendation. From us to concurrently. Bring forward a comprehensive plan amendment has efficacy here. Which maybe not a question for the commission, but maybe a question for staff. >> So recommend recommendation update comprehensive plan to support This rezone. would add a factor of time to this entire process because it would need to go to to you, 2 peas, EC and go through the process. So as a body may always recommend that the Planning Department bring forward that as as a potential. Change to the comp plan. But it does I'm certain teen and time as well. >> Commissioner just going to add that I plan to support the. Motion has >> Okay, I would. I also plan to support the motion. I will just say that we've seen the comp plan map. >> B? Completely accurate maybe just not kind of supporting what comp plan says it supports along the bar previous and previous cases. So. I'm kind of limping this one in there as I don't think the comp plan map is gospel and we need to look at what the plan says. What the proposed projects proposing doesn't meet the goals. I think everyone agrees it does. And so therefore, I'm ready. I'm willing to support. Anybody else. Commissioner Gardner. I mean, I fully support the motion as well. As I mentioned. I think just another make is that I do think that. >> The particular criteria we're looking at here. Are slightly different from what? That's how I would consider it. If if it's just a straight rezoning and that this is coming in under the removal of special limitations and and I think from that perspective as well, it helps support the criteria that identified here. in that. In that we're not really we're not really looking to kind of change the rezone entirely. think I think it's just different training for how we're looking at it. Commissioner polls. Yeah, I intend to support the motion to for the same reasons. All the other commissioners mentioned, I think for intended the. >> Moved the needle here on providing more housing opportunities across Anchorage. This is pretty important situation, too. Get right. And I agree commissioner spent all his note that it's just a color on the map. Also get it. But we're moving the right direction. I think. But that will call for the vote. >> Motion passes. So. Moves us through the agenda. Unless there are any. Anyone wishing to discuss anything regarding title 21 or any other commissioner comments. Commissioner Ron, are you in the queue? I am. Thank you, Mr. Just briefly curious about an update on the targeted review of goals strategies. >> We had a flurry of activity and that's there's been a focus on feel the things just curious moving forward if it will resurface or what the plan is there. >> Threw the chair to commissioner There was a flurry of activity and the last time we promise something to you We understood that the request was for us to draft up. It's a the first draft of that that change to that update to the comp plan. So we are in the process doing that and it will take us a little while to. Sort that all out and get it into a cuddly out and everything. So it will be a little bit longer before you see any think that we are actively working on it. Commissioner Christian. >> Yes, another staff. I understand the process has been started at the assembly level, too. Sunset the Urban Design Commission. Could you share any information you have about that and how that might change this commission's roles responsibilities? >> Threw the chair to Commissioner Krishna, thank you for that question. >> they UTC the center is still a little bit up there. The the assembly still does have to vote on whether to sunset at that commission. But if they did than the cases that udc now years would be split up between the appropriate boards and commissions to hear those cases. So you would hear. Probably about half of the cases that Udc hears now and maybe. A few of them. I co to EPA. So currently working with the administration on what that might look like. And would be happy to those. Proposed changes with the assembly. If you interested, that's an informational item. >> Sure, I think whenever there's update be good to hear that. And then see if there's any additional training we would need fulfill this additional roles. Thank you. Commissioner, on. >> Thank In case anybody missed as Bab was recognized today, by the But what if we see a as a woman of achievement so MS personal. Thank you for the work that you do for our community and your team does and preparing for these meetings and keeping our commission on the up and up look forward to continuing to work with you and saying what we can all do together. Thank you. >> Threw the chair to Commissioner thank you. Thanks. And one thing that I didn't have the opportunity to say today at event was that I wouldn't be here and I wouldn't be able to it to the work that I do without the support of my staff. Obviously. So very, very lucky to have such a great group of people at the planning Department. And I also appreciate working with you all and the work that you do here as well. So thank you all. >> All right. I think that looks, R****. Everybody's had something to say. So. Entertain a motion to adjourn. Moved by Commissioner seconded by Commissioner Garner. Any opposed hearing merger.