♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Okay. We'll call the February 9th meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to order. May we please have the roll Call August finale here, Jerry Gardner here Christian, a here, Scott here, Jeff Iran here ran deeper here Abbas's excuse have a quorum. Thank you. >> Thank you for setting businesses. Are there any? Disclosures? >> I was absent from the premier to meeting and will stand from voting on resolutions 2026 608. Through 0 11. >> And in the case of 2026, 0, 0, 1, 4, I live in the neighborhood near the subject site. >> was not part of the mailing, but I was in a group text message chain. Regarding the subject property rezoned B 3 to it. The previous all to be I can be fair and impartial. But just disclosing that was a part of that messaging, neighborhood group. I don't think there is any conflict there. And I would direct you to participate if any commissioners. >> Disagreed now would be the time to speak. Commissioner Christian. >> Just to clarify, commissioner burst disclosure. It sounds like you are a recipient of some messages but did not actively participate in any ex parte communications. Is that correct? >> I >> participated in that. I sent them ordinance. They asked what the ordinance was related to at what the SLS and so given my. Position as appraiser, I know how to just a website easier than they do. So I provide for them. >> I think I would direct commissioner Uber to participate in this motion. Anybody else. >> Hearing none. We'll move forward with disclosures. Anybody else with anything else to disclose. Seeing none. Move Maybe hear from the safer Seward Highway Project Consultants. Actually a point of order. Could a candidate can staff to say one word just? I'll be brief. You asked for one word. >> Well, a little more than OK? Go yes. Okay. So this the commission has been given a common response Matrix from the project team. >> They're here to speak to it. This is on the design study report. Case 2025, 0, 0, 8, 7, This was before the commission on October, 8th 2025. per title. Turning on covering this. serve you process the agency furnished the commission and a written statement of the reasons for its decision to proceed. And now they've also provided this comment response may checks and looks like it was pulled from. Comments received. And the text of the staff report that was for the CSS Design study report case 2025, 0, 0, 8, 7, Thank you. Thank you. >> Oh, you got a pass a button somewhere you're big. All right. Thank you. >> I am Kathryn Wood. I'm the communications lead on for Seward Highway Project. >> And just wanted to give you a >> bit of an overview of where we are and how this document fits into what has come before. And we are conducting the nepa process which dot has to complete for federally funded projects before we can move forward into design and indeed to decide if project should move forward into design. Currently we have a draft environmental assessment and a lot of supporting documents out for public review. The public comment period closes on February 27th. so the nepa process and then you need CSS process don't match up perfectly. But both have at their core, the opportunity for and desire for public comment. And that is why we are here again. And now is the time in the process when comments from anyone have the most. Potential to affect change in decision-making. So we provided, as Elizabeth mentioned, a letter, a follow-up letter on December 29th that said a lot of your all of your comments and concerns we believe were dressed in the draft. Ea. However, when we were thinking about that, we thought, you know, we didn't really make your job easy to find where those things are addressed. And that's why we put together this comment Matrix to provide some more information and to let you now where we had consider those thoughts in our draft documents to date. So right now, the kinds of comments that were looking for in this nepa process are things like did we miss any impacts? Are there any resource categories we haven't accounted for? Are there mitigation idea is that we didn't consider? And what else should be dot take into their decision-making. After the public comment period closes, we will respond to every single comment that was received during the public comment period and we will revise the documents and it's needed and they do it. He will make a final decision. On whether they will move forward. The proposed action are no action. But this project is going to be constructed in phases over time. If it moves forward. So every if it moves forward, it would be broken into multiple pieces that would be funded and designed over time. And every single one of those child projects, if you will, would come back to the planning and Zoning Commission for input before they could. Do more. that is the time at which we are going to have all the details that the CSS process is looking for. So we just wanted to give that context. if you have further comments. After looking over this matrix, we've given you we would welcome nose on the draft. Ea. >> Thank you. Any comments or questions from commission commissioner on? >> Thank you. That the chairman's what nice to see you and I part of your team again as the commission understands that these comments in the comment metrics we have before us will be included in the Nepa record understanding it's currently in so I refrained from saying administrative record. But I as commissioner would like some assurance as to what the position is on the inclusion or exclusion of these comments next. >> We had a intended to include them as comments on the draft. Ea when we submitted you that letter on the 29th, we are certainly happy to do so and respond to them in the final. My guess is that the responses that we've given the final would very likely be something similar to what you see in front of you. So if you feel that the comment you are, the response you have received isn't sufficient, then we would need additional information. >> As a quick follow-up to let the my head's at with this, we just heard from MS Wood. And if you look through the comment Matrix, there's a lot of referral back to the ongoing process in response to the questions we're asking. They're into me that shows the position that DOT recognizes the importance of the EA and responding to. Commission and departments questions and comments. I as commissioner would like to see the loop closed and for this matrix and the comments contained in it to be part of the official record for the EA and the process that's ongoing. >> I think we can commit to that. >> You and then commissioner on I believe that. conclude the question and answer period >> If you'd like to make a motion to that effect. We can. The commission can go on record and seeming people with support. You. Any other questions. >> Not seeing any. I do have a cheat sheet here, commissioner on with a suggested start of I move to provide the following comments to dot for the Safer Seward project. Dot, DOT, dot. So moved. That's all you want to move. Just You don't want to add to that. Commissioner on would state your motion? Thank March. I think our prime the pot primed the pump with my prior comments. The commission likely knows where I stand on the issue. >> Happy to enter into any discussion of commissioners want to at this point but intend support the motion stated. Thanks. I think the motion just means own to be elaborated would be my comment. But that motion was made by commissioner on seconded by Commissioner Emer. >> Anybody else wishing speak to the motion, but Mr. Thank you. I now see the plain language of the motion and I'm happy to at some clarifying taxed. Can we do that for friendly. Let me restate my motion for the record. I move to provide the following comments to dot for the Safer Seward Highway Project for Inclusion in the ongoing nepa process. Does this look good? >> But I may I give a point information or I think you're trying to say that? >> Your juror acting. You want to read your comments to duty for the state. First Seward project is to include this comment response Matrix in the record for the ongoing need Project 8. Does that make sense as you're directing them to include this comment document care. Is that correct? That was my understanding from what you're trying to send your comments earlier. >> I believe so. And so we might want to reference the 2. In the motion. It's your emotions. My interest is including the comments themselves. I think it's up to dot to determine. How they respond to them formally through the nepa process. Public input and involvement. >> And information terrify me. I think commissioner on I think we all are on the same page when it comes to what your intent is for the motion. But I think the commotion just needs a little bit more information about which comments you're referencing. And what to do slow to catch up tonight. But I think I can add. I move provides. The comments item C 2. >> If the intent is that those are planning and zoning is formal comments on the draft. Ea. That would be very helpful language. or just comments doesn't have to say form. think that's what know. That's not what you say. I think what >> we're being asked is. >> 2. Commission to recommend to DOT to include the comment in the nepa process. If we wanted to get the commissions comments and then mate take a little more work, OK? >> To be clear, as I can include the comments in response to Just the comments. >> Commissioner on, can you confirm that the motion looks correct. Does not look correct. My intent is for the comments themselves, not the responses but the comments themselves. >> To go into the record. As part of process. So there's assessment that out for public comment. I would like these comments to hit the books. For the That makes sense. Close enough. Commissioner on would you like to speak to the motion? I wouldn't appreciate the team effort and helping us get there. So thank you, Larry Commissioners and permit for the record well, I have stated my intent and interest. I would also like to call out Rowe 38 in this matrix on Page 19. You know, the commission just received this this afternoon and hard copy today. I understand there are a lot of comments levied and I appreciate dot addressing those comments responding to them. But again, we just got these. This is this afternoon. So I commissioner and scrap them scrambling to read through and see if there's anything worth, you know, question you about since we have you again here tonight. But again, comment number. 38 and a quote, there is not enough evidence in the CSS dsr to support the four-lane divided Highway concept proposed action. For the Safer sort Highway project. Pretty. Plain statement. Harkens back to the DS are that this commission reviewed our position on it, issuing the finding that we did. We're all Dot is action response to that? The common response is this for the record, the Cs Sdsr is not intended to provide complete evidence to support the proposed alternative. That is the role of environmental assessment. Please refer to the draft EA and the CAR continues. That underpins the action that I took and making this motion speaks to my intensive support. It. If the commission agrees, then we'll get to tie these 2 processes together. Okay. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Commissioner There's but I tend to support the motion. I appreciate you providing these come responses. We asked you to you did. >> I think you didn't get a lot of questions today because we didn't get to review them very much before we got here. So because got a few more than that yeah. Thank you for responding to his comments and we'll see you guys again on future Understand. >> Any further comments before we call for the vote. That motion passes. Next step case, 2026 Dash 0, 0, 3, 9, Have the staff presentation. Please. >> Mr. To be for the PC this evening Case number 2, 0, 2, 6, 0, 0, 3, 9, out school district 6 year. But I didn't prove month. Love July 22 in 6 to June 2032. The draft cip focuses on the Fed facilities was the men to meet its includes. The Fed the men project and fund in full design and planning for capital improvement projects. less construction funding for capital improvement projects. The Planning Department review and provided comment encourage to 4 to 11 news plan. I up to it. Elements of the comprehensive plan quarantine up to a couple policies. Projects listed in that draft is the cip for 2 in twins. 22 in 6 2.22 To including this proposed capital improvement project and the Fed requirement would get a consistent with the direction of development to the culture. Has done? And I up to months in the building. This by will require means up. I refuse for infrastructure and proposed designs and when proposed designs subject to lose to pass on and building to use the Planning Department recommends. That's that Clinton is one commission forward. The proposed is the cip for 22 in 6 tu. 22 or the Guidance and discussion point outlined and with recommendation of approval to create a Sunday. And includes school board. Thank you. >> Are there any questions for staff? Seeing Commissioner Polis. There's buttons. Commissioner please speak. >> Can you guys just talk about suggested finding 3 is our intent to review all improvements of school. And comment on their infrastructure needs. So are saying. So could you tell a game? Suggested finding 3? is our intent there that now we have to review all ASD projects and weigh in on whether they need bike trails, bus pads or parking. Is that what we're thinking That kind of stuff? I mean. Thank you, Published in the when you spend it out by institution. says P shall infestation have to come to PCC as so. They're just using the opportunity to rehash that spend the time I solid line in this cip will the projects feeding this? Yeah, you will have to come to the PCC for review. Any other questions for staff. Hearing none. We'll move on to the petitioners presentation. As the like to. Presents on the record. I no further comments is already mentioned in work session. But if you wish me to. >> Summarize, can do so again. >> Really up to you. This is the this is the part that gets recorded on YouTube and watched by the public, possibly so this is your chance to represent D if all that's all you want to say. It's your choice. No further comment pending your questions. Thank you. Any questions for the petitioner? Herring seeing none. >> There's no public hearing in this case. So we will go with what is the willed body? Commissioner Polis? Would you like to stay motion? >> I'm moving cases Twenty-twenty 6 dash 0, 3, 9, recommend to the Anchorage Assembly. Approval of the Anchorage School district, six-year capital improvement plan. >> That's seconded by Commissioner Commissioner. Polis. Would you like to speak your motion? Yeah. Intend to support the motion. To secure plan funded by bonds and some extra stuff. It's not impacting the current school talks that we're talking about. I agree with suggested findings want to I am not going support 3 unless someone else. Let's put that in there. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Gardner. Thanks. I just know briefly with respect to finding 3, I think I do support it. But from the land, as I understand what understand what it is saying is that? >> Buildings, fences or other projects, cip requirements views for infrastructure needs. One proposed designs are subject to municipal site plan and building safety reviews. And I I view that municipal review to be a general kind of statement, not necessarily planning and zoning commission, but that those projects are done in coordination with municipality. And I think that could cover a wide range of potential considerations to try to just ensure that there is collaboration both when required by the code and otherwise. So it out, I guess, make that finding myself. Commissioner Uber. >> On the supplemental. >> Pack of that. We were given those 4th finding anyway, look at it. That said representatives for the increase school district gave presentation to the commission unanswered questions during a work session conducted directly before the regular scheduled meeting. >> Commissioner Uber, thank you for. It. Was that you putting that finding on record. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Commissioner Christian. >> Yeah, I do support the motion. I support previous findings made by the commission. I would say that I don't necessarily support the discussion points as presented. Not necessarily because I object to the discussion points themselves, but because I believe that they are not something that we've seen before. And I won't. wouldn't feel comfortable forwarding them to the wrist to the assembly things that we are specifically recommending from this without. Additional discussion Evidence. So I would just say that I support the findings. Do not moving forward. The discussion points at this time. >> Anybody else wishing to speak before a call for the vote. call for the vote. The motion passes. On to the public read the process by which public may speak to the commission. After the staff presentation is public hearing items. The chair will ask for public testimony on the issue. Persons who wish to testify will fall time limits established in the commission rules of procedure. Petitioners, including or her representatives will receive 10 minutes. Representatives of groups. Community Council's Peaches accent or will receive 5 minutes. Individuals will receive 3 minute. When your testimony is complete. You may be asked questions by the commission. You may only testify once on any issue in this question by the Commission commission recommendations to the Anchorage Assembly are not appealable. First up. Case 2026 Dash, 0, 0, 0, 9, May we please have the staff presentation? Mr. To? Case number 2, 0, 2, 6, 0, 0, 9 only bus on >> End in several sections of title to anyone to correct inconsistencies and provide. But I'm human Taishan. Of the comprehensive plan. The ordinance is a test run amendments to the NFC title to a new one. specifically seeks to ensure Cruz your fall. You for mentioning noted table at all you from scene entitled to in correct on starts us off misspellings removal of duty defunct cross references, correct. Missed changes entitled to anyone. I do miss him. Footnotes and sure land use designation names reflect designation names and I'm Creech. 24 to use plan. And then remove duplicate definitions and introduce definitions. Introduce a definition for building a show. 2026 Dash 0, 0, 9, is part of the department. fought to ensure that title to a new one is is the accessible and easily usable by every want the planning department received several out comment from traffic engineer, private development. It will the grievous treatment and nuns. And right before we none raised in the objections. Staff recommends approval of this ordinance under condition to us. And the IRA com, I welcome your questions. Our other questions for staff. Seeing no questions for staff. We will move to the public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to testify. Please step forward. Seeing and hearing none. >> We will close the public hearing. What is the world body? Commissioner Christian, crushed Would you like to stay motion? >> Sure. I move in case 2026. Dash 0, 0, 0, 9, to recommend to the Anchorage Assembly approval of omnibus ordinance amending several sections of title. 21 to align with current practices and provide clarity for implementation of code and related matters. >> Seconded by Commissioner Police Commissioner Christian. Would you like to speak your motion? >> Yes, I intend to support this motion. I see this is a true cleanup ordinance. effect no content with entitled. 21, but only clarity Grammer and references have Reason to object or any further comments on this. >> commissioner pull us. I intend support the motion that there's no public urgency, comments in a position of the amendments. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Come for the vote. That motion passes. >> Next time a business case. 2026 Dash, 0, 0, 1, >> 4. >> May be please have the staff presentation. Yes, thank you, chair as this is a rezone as a reminder, the Planning and Zoning Commission provides a recommendation to the Anchorage Assembly for reasons. This is a rezone for a parcel from CB. 3 SL 2 CB. 3. So that's to Yak Eagle River General Business district with special invitations to just to yank your river general business district. So the effect it would be to remove the special limitations on the zoning district. The S currently in place that would be removed, include restrictions on height and the use of the property. Since the rezone is consistent with the land use designation and the comprehensive plan, it may go through the abbreviated rezoning process. Therefore, the commission has 3 criteria T use in evaluating the rezoning request. These are that the rezone is consistent with the comprehensive plan that it would not results in an objective risk to health or safety and that it does not conflict. Just municipal state or federal codes, regulations and ordinances. The department finds that all 3 of these review criteria are met. The department did not receive any comments. An objection from reviewing agencies, members of the public or community councils there for the department recommends that the commission provide an approval recommendation to that. The assembly for this reason to see our 3. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions for staff? And seeing none. We'll open the public hearing. May we please, of present? >> Petitioner's presentation. >> Good evening. I'm good evening. I'm Skyler Quinn with Q TWO Holdings LLC at the property owner. This parcel. It would help me make this presentation a little more clear if everybody could please turn to page 16 of your staff packet. So you can see here the petition site lot one, a one B. And you can also see a lot, immediately to the west of it. And this parcel is part of master site plan. We've already developed a lot one, a one, a which currently has 2 buildings on it. multifamily units. We have a 12 plex sanity team plex. Just completed as of very recently on on lot. One, a one, a. When we were going through the permitting process for that parcel, we ran into issues with this cell for the building height we really wanted all 9 foot ceilings. We have 2 three-story buildings and we want all my foot ceilings throughout the 2 buildings. And because this cell in our 12 plex, we had to do an 8 foot ceiling on the main floor and in the second floor is 9 feet. The 3rd floor is 9 feet. And then on our 18 plex, we had to do an 8 foot ceiling on the main floor, 8 foot ceiling on the second floor. And then I was able to grab an extra 6 inches on the 3rd floor. So we what we went with the the half feet on 3rd floor. That was not our choice. That was purely to abide by cell. Anyone that has The experience in this industry kind of feels the difference between 8 and a 9 foot ceiling, a 9 foot ceiling. Just few. You know, there's more volume to Just feels a lot better. And that's that's really our intent here is to try to remove Celso honor second phase on lot. One, a one B, we can do all my foot ceilings. The other thing that I think is worth noting is this whole site has already been master grated. And there's a natural s**** from the east to the West. So the far West side of lot, one, a one. A is the lowest grade point are was the lowest. Great point and the highest grade point was on the far East side of lot. One, a one B. So I do think it's worth noting that we are not starting at existing grade on LOT. One, a one. B, there's actually a cut that varies from approximately 6 feet to 9 feet along the east side of lot. 1, 1, B. So we're already starting at a lower elevation before start construction. And with that, I want to thank the moist, affable, their health through this process. They were very responsive, very helpful, answered all questions. And we agree with all their findings and I'm here to answer any questions that you have. Thanks. Any questions for the petitioner. >> hearing seeing none. You're up 7 minutes. 8 seconds for rebuttal will open the public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to testify. Please step forward. Here's thing. None. >> Invite petitioner back up. Any rebuttal, nothing else to add but still open questions at rights. Thanks. Last chance for questions before I close, the public hearing closed. What is the will of the body? Commissioner pulsar do like State your motion. I'm moving case 2026. 2026 Dash 0, 1, recommended anchors. Some of approval of the rezone to attract of land from sea. Eb. 3 SL. >> To see EB. 3 district. That's seconded by Commissioner Emerich Commissioner Polis. Would you like to because your motion? Yeah. Intend to support the motion. And I agree with the recommended findings meets the approval criteria and we didn't receive any comments or units Cesar public objecting to. Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Parenting. None call for the vote. That motion passes. Next item. Case, 2026 Dash 0, 0, 1, 5, May we please have staff presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chair Fuel. Go to Page 4 with me to fix an air that I missed at the bottom of the Page Department recommendations. It calls out Girdwood Ga as mixed residential. That is not correct. That's supposed to be cured with airport. This is a reason requests and issued by the state of Alaska Department of Transportation and public facilities. It's abbreviated rezone, says 3 criteria for approximately 43.6, 2 acres of land currently zoned GD. Our development Reserve to GA Girdwood Airport district. The Planning Commission will provide recommendations to the assembly on this rezone request through resolution. The Assembly, of course, is the decision-making body for Rezonings. The Girdwood comprehensive plan 2025. Classifies this property with a land use designation of industrial and GA is an important implementing zoning district approval of this rezoning would align the zoning district of this person with the land use classification percent prescribed by the girdwood comprehensive plan 2025, however, during review of this proposed rezone staff discovered the current zoning district of Gdr does not align with the land use designation in the Girdwood Comprehensive plan and we'll need to be updated concurrently with this reason. Attachment 3 in your packet includes all comments received by the Planning Department and their original format. State Municipal reading Agency had no objection to the rezone. The planning Department provided public know to publish, noticed, publish notice and gave notice to the COVID Board of Supervisors in accordance with the MC 21 0, 3, 2, 0, 0 H 3. One of the comments was from long range planning with the recommendation to approve the rezone, along with some minor changes to title. 21, the comments were developed after consultation among planning months, planning staff and the Planning Department has proposed people pending coach Ange to AMC. 21 0, 9, 0, 4, 0, F 8. This would broaden the purpose statement of the GA District to include this property co changes consistent with the Comprehensive plan. Disco change will be before the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 9th and one month as case 2026. 0 for 2. Other comments are either not objection or in favor of the resume. Abbreviated rezone has 3 criteria It is consistent with a comprehensive plan. That criteria is met criteria be it would not result in objective risk to health or safety. This criteria is met. Criteria. See, it does not conflict with other municipal state where federal codes, regulations and ordinances. This criteria is met with an amendment to chapter 9 of title. 21 to align with the newly adopted Kirkwood Comprehensive plan 2025, this amendment does not conflict with other state or federal code regulations and ordinances. amendment does not currently line with municipal code as stated before AMC. 21 0, 9, 0, 4, 0 f 2 other districts could airport district. That will be headed by case 2026, 0, 4, 2, currently the length the location definition reads as follows. The G 8 district consists of state of Alaska on property where the Goodwood Airport is currently located. The airport property is located north of Alyeska Highway and struggles. Great Pleasure. Creek. The airport facility itself is on the east side of Glacier Creek. But much of the airport property is either wetlands or river flood ways. The proposed coach Ange. the location to read the GA District is appropriate where the comprehensive plan designates it as implementation zone. Therefore, the department finds that the approval criteria for a reason he's met with an effective of the rezoning to include adoption of the proposed code changes in case 2026. 0 for 2 2 men, the location of the GA District until 21. The department recommends the planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a rezone from Gdr Development Reserve District to GA because airport district and refer to the Assembly for adoption by ordinance after the adoption of the Co changing case 2026. 0, 0, 4, 2, I answer any questions. The commission may have the petitioners representative aren't him is in attendance. >> Question from Commissioner Christian up. Yeah, the question for staff and it's a little bit more broadly about how girdwood zoning districts are structured more than about the specific case. But you know, doing research for today. I was kind of struck by the fact that that you get river zoning districts cleanly onto the zoning districts for the rest of the ball. But the girdwood districts don't seem too. I think even just the description of Girdwood airport district is a little bit surprising to me and that it seems mention ownership and really seems to be purpose designed for I think one specific parcel. I guess I would ask just more broadly for staff's opinion about either at some history or why that occurred with something districts are structured this way. And if if there's any sort of feeling that maybe they're so specific us To maybe that some revision or some updates could be helpful for the code. I see. curious to hear stuffs us through the Chair Commissioner Christian a Curry. What is special? >> They they like their zoning districts. They just always been different. I don't know why specifically Girdwood airport. Was his state owned. Of course luckily this. This property is state-owned. It's supposed to be used for a new avalanche control system. Hence the need to make it girdwood airport so they can have HELOC port as primary. Prince out permitted use and then they're going to come forth with a conditional use for storage of of those explosives. Back story that you want to know all this stuff. They're going away from the howitzers so they don't. And for sure there's too many wars in this world and so. Ammunition has gotten very expensive. And so now they're going to a tower system that actually releases charges. And so they can't pick these up and take them over residential areas so they can do this at the airport. Now because it would be transporting explosives over residential and over. And so they have to keep it close to the to the inlet into the highway so they can. and down the Seward Highway install charges in this in the fall and then take out in the spring. As for Girdwood Girdwood just always had a different. they like their specific zonings. I realize that you get river at something similar to us, but not not exactly. They have a couple zoning districts that we don't have an Anchorage. Also like the CEO, 5, a we don't have a 5 a and encourage. It's kind of a weird little Sony District. 2 I hope that answers your question. Probably Good special. Just go to a special and with their comprehensive plan, they don't. They want a different type of Cote. They don't really want match Anchorage. They want to be separate and different and have the Their own code. >> I I guess if I could ask one follow-up while we're in in ending title. 21 for zoning districts. I realize that staff can recommend that we not touch anything that this becomes a bigger issue. But to me, it seems sort of funny that we would name specific locations and ownership. describe thing is owning districts. I'm just wondering if that's best practice or that's typical. >> Threw the chair committee Commissioner Christian. It's not a typical and again, that's why Girdwood. If you look need some of the girdwood district space, they their location specific. Crow Creek, of course, has its own zoning districts. They're that's site specific to Crow Creek. That's why we kind of wanted to limit it. 2 location. But limited to 2 who owned it and because of their state-owned, their state-owned properties are both stayed on and both stay state-owned properties. >> It's interesting thank you. I think mainly some wants to say something. We'll see if she does or >> Can we rein it in here? Little there's there's long-term planning comments. Regarding suggestion of changes to code. May we stick to the case for now and then entitled? 21 section we can. Hawk about coach debate the specialness of it. >> I can give one point eventful. I'll just say that 2025 Girdwood comprehensive plan does have a line. It discarding future zoning districts. I was fine to trying to find the exact wording, but just just know that that the newly adopted dirt, a comprehensive plan does speak a little bit to updates to the existing zoning districts that that's all. And then was there any comment from staff on the somewhere I saw? Range comments about an option, A and option B, >> Sure Yes. That's that's what the code changes that you'll see in a month. But the March 9th meeting that's they're suggesting to change the location. That's what I read to you. Those if you look on page, okay, perfect >> Thank you to the chair. question about the corollary chase and similar instances. The commission hears. Cases that are similar. They get combined on the same night. Why is it that that's not the case tonight? Due to notification to both sides threw chair commissioner on through. >> proper notification and of G BAS basically. So we did actually go up that you want to know this, too. But we went to bus a couple weeks ago and explain that we were going to come forward with the title. 21 amendment and they were completely fine with that. We we presented to them on the 25th public notification process to make sure it meets all the criteria and there's no. No question as to how we did it properly. I mean, a quick follow-up to that. Is there any harm and holding the commission's action on this case tonight and tell we see the corollary case through the chair. So commissioner on the plan is we will hopefully >> Laurie backing up, we will reorder the March 9th meeting to where you guys will hear the case and then approve the consent agenda and you'll also reprieve the resolution for this case approve both resolutions on March 9th so they can go to the assembly at the same time. So make sense. >> All right. further questions for staff? Hearing? None. >> We will. >> Can we please have fishers presentation? Yeah, good evening. My name is Dave Winfield with art and consultants representing Alaska Department of Transportation and public facilities on this request for rezone tonight. Dot he's snow. Avalanche program operates with the goal of improving safety for highway users by reducing avalanche hazards in such susceptible area years. To further the goals of the the DOT you have identified a need for a new avalanche control facility. This rezoning of approximately 44 acres from Gdr to GA is being done to prepare the property for that future development of an avalanche control facility that would serve southcentral Alaska. This request is consistent and implements. The 2025 occurred with comprehensive plan. Page 3 Dash, 13 of the plan mentions this property. And the state's plan for a new avalanche control facility in this location. The 2025 Girdwood Comprehensive plan designates the property as industrial with implementing district being Ga Girdwood Airport district. I would agree with staff that the 3 approval criteria are met. The rezoning moves this property into the GA District. It would be a step forward towards allowing the state. To develop a new avalanche control facility which would improve public safety along the Seward Highway. This amendment does not conflict with other state federal codes, regulations or ordinances and would not result and a risk to public or safety of Girdwood residence. We appreciate your consideration and I'm available to answer any questions. Thanks. Any questions for the petitioner. >> Herring thing. None will open this up to the public. You have 8 minutes, 14 seconds for rebuttal. Anyone from the public wishing to testify, please step forward. Here and seeing none. Do you have any rebuttal? >> Where will NE? >> Questions for the petitioner. Close. The public hearing. What is the will of the body? Go ahead. Commissioner Christian, much processed question for staff. So in approving this. >> Case, we are also moving for that title. 21 amendment. These are together. >> Through through the Chair, Commissioner Christian at know the title 21 will like is that it'll come before you in one month on the March 9th meeting the resolution for this case will also come at that same date to be on the consent agenda and will reorder. The process. The thought is will reorder tonight's meeting. Kind of like you guys have done with the cip Cip. Like you'll you'll reorder it. You'll hear it and then you have the consent agenda afterwards. And then you'll can center. You have to this on the consent agenda and you'll have the resolution for the case. You hear that night. At at the same time. I know they can kind of cause a little bit of issue, but we'll try and make sure it's all. Clear as mud. Thank you. You're welcome. >> Threw the chair to Commissioner Krishna. There is an effect of clause in that written into this to ensure this does not move on without Associated Coach Ange and in addition to that, part of the reason that we'd like to take care of these folks and that's a meeting is that this is time sensitive? We are hoping to ensure dot can meet their goals for the summer. Just for the sake of public safety. So we're going to try to have that both of those resolutions completed by the end of that evening. >> Commissioner on. Thank you. The chair of question of staff about that effective clause. I'm looking on Page 6 of the draft assembly ordinance. And section 2. Has a Shelby effective upon adoption, but that is tied to changing location of the G 8 district. I was under the impression that would be hearing around tell 21 changes about for the heliport. Maybe I'm confused through through. >> The chair commissioner on if you turn to Page 4. It's a talent sized. You see a location spout 3rd, one down. So existing is that that's the GA District and what we're proposing is 2 lines below it. So it's just removing. The location description. There's a little bit more to it, but it's basically removing the location description of just the airport occurred just so that's more general, I guess, a specific. To what the GA District could be. Commissioner Gardner. >> Sorry, I wanted to I wanted to be done. But I'm looking I'm looking at the description for the grid airport district. As we've been kind of having a discussion. I'm wondering if. The intent maybe could be updated as well and that it some 10 to this district. Commissioner, Ron's point about the helipad. I think understand it references uses that are primarily aviation related. So that seems kind of checked that box. But it says it's for continuation of uses that are primarily aviation related. And wondering if it's just worth considering and that other case, if that should be revised to contemplate new uses, which it sounds like this just throwing that out there for consideration of that affects what we do tonight, necessarily. To threw the chair Commissioner Gardner. >> Really mainly for the fact that the comprehensive plan. Changed all of these into one industrial. Parent area. So they're just like children of the of an industry on so thick. They lump Ga specifically and with the industrial to kind of. Generalize it a little bit more in girdwood and not have it specific to being You know, industrial is an airport industrials, just an industrial area. None of that really answers your questions much. But the primary use of this site will be a heliport. Thank you. Since we don't have any motions of this task. What's the zoning dot is right away. And why? Don't they just make this right away? >> Zoning does not apply and the right of way to answer your first question and the second question. don't know that dot is contemplated turning the center right of way. I don't know if that would be on helpful in this case, I guess it is an option for dot to consider in the future. >> Mr. Christa, would you like to stay motion? Move in case 2026 Dash 0, 0, 1, 5, recommend to the Anchorage Assembly. Approval of the reason of one parcel. >> From Girdwood Development Reserve District to Girdwood Airport district. >> Seconded by Commissioner Garner Commissioner Krishna would be like, speak your motion. >> Yes, I do believe I intend to support this motion. I believe that zoning approval criteria, a B and C are met. I'll read some of the suggested findings. The department did not receive any comments from rating agencies are from the public objecting to the rezoning. Nor did we receive a comment from the Girdwood Board of Supervisors and we will sharing the title. 21 amendment in month so, yes, I intend to support this motion. >> Anybody else wishing to speak to the motion. Hearing none. We'll call for the vote. That motion passes. Next item of business title. 21 discussion. >> Anybody have anything to discuss further on title. 21. Chair, if may speak for just a moment. Sure. I just wanted to speak Commissioner Christmas comment on the on the U.S. about it being purely technical fixes. We have whole list Texas and proposed change changes to title 21 that we would like to bring to the commission. And we have sort of those out in 2 what we're calling 3, 3, tiers, one that you heard tonight. Excuse me, the one you her tonight be what we would call tier one fixes, which is purely technical on changes that do not include any policy changes are affect the content of title. 21, we will be bringing forward we are going to call tier 2 change probably in the next on the U.S. and those tier 2 changes are also technical at its 2 title. 21, that tweak the content a little bit. May have a little bit of policy on change and to serve a little bit more attention and debate. consideration from this. This commission and then tear 3 changes would be the larger title. 21 text changes we bring before you separately. They are considered part of our on that effort because there are a whole bunch of those as well that we will be continuing move these items through commission as we get to So you'll see probably in the next on the bus. You'll see some tier one and then a separate, separate, accurate package that would be. The best here, too. Coming through in about probably about 4 months. >> Anybody else? I I'll just add one thing on the comment on. >> On title 21 Chapter 9, the Girdwood code staff has heard this from me before and we were starting to allude to it a little bit. staff's comments about Girdwood code being special and maybe not making sense. There's always been this feel this feeling, I think within the industry and staff included or those working with tenant on the GIRDWOOD code doesn't makes sense. And it's just for girdwood. But my. Thing is that hardwood is the municipality of Anchorage. It's the municipality missed challenges job to administer the code. And I think it's the municipality's responsibility too. Given to codes that don't make sense because it's occurred. Would and just say, oh, well, that's girdwood and that could them because they're really they're they are part of the municipality. We have to hear. It needs to make sense. And so I'm just here. That's my personal opinion. I'm just curious if anybody has any other commissioners have that the take 2 weigh in. 7.39 To are still >> yeah, maybe just clarify like I think this is actually my first time going in and looking at the zoning descriptions. I think I was just a little wondering, right, but I'm just I would I would say that the we don't need to open the discussion up all the way. Why? But I would I'm just curious from staff's professional work, educational backgrounds. If there are. Basic best practices in zoning descriptions such as including location criteria or anything else that we can standardize across all the Bull Bull zoning districts on the buses. If we are getting close to an opportunity to do so. So I think that's kind of and maybe there that doesn't exist, right? just like asking a question that I don't know the answer to, but I think that's my question is like, are there criteria for how we define? At how we describe zoning districts in our city or around the country that we should be aware of Doing amendments to the sorts descriptions. It's would be my. Question that I'd be curious about. No need for an answer now. That's a big question. >> I will really quickly with an answer. It's going to be very they cancer. Of course, we are not aware of any standard practices when it comes to cent zoning. District descriptions. I think that cities tend to copy paste each other's work a lot. So I'm not when zoning code often looks very similar to another. You will find some location. descriptions in I thank Ridge Bowl title. 21, maybe not quite as specific as as the ones that you see in Girdwood. But like our I believe, has some very specific requirements. But they they aren't necessarily tied to the ownership or to specific lots. It's more. You know, they needs to be near. Major roads are time. Corners things like that. So I think standard practice would probably favor. Being a little bit more generic about it, occurred. What has been in the past. And I think we had another case come before the commission. That every zone. just a specific lot, right, like it. It can be hyper specific in encourage and that that's particular reason. It happened to be the only. In existence in that Sony District. I mean, it's that specific and incurred with that. There's only one lot that entire zone, a district in Kirkwood. So. I'm hopeful that in the future Girdwood code will move away from that. hyper specific location. Approach. But we that will also be reliant on Concord would itself and pass and the desire of that community to help us. Understand what it is that they want to see in their code because ultimately they will be in charge directing rewrite of their their zoning code based on their comp plan. don't know if that helps at all that. And general, take answer for you. If you have any questions beyond that. I guess maybe all this ad. >> If you want to get real specific to your good. See Page 3 dash 19 of the 2025. Recovery. Hence of plan. There's a table were shows the existing zoning. Land use designation and there's a column that talks about what future zoning might look like. So if you do want to see what the 2025 guarded comp plan directs for potential future changes to Zoning. District Singer died again. That's page 3 Dash 19 tables, 3 dash 4. All righty. I see nobody else trying to talk chair. >> Just one last thing. I wanted to remind the commission that the UTC sunset is potentially approaching. >> I believe here in Miami, the dates okay. So the you will be seeing the case that includes the code change language. in March and then it should go to the assembly in May. Which means that you will be seeing assuming that the assembly adopts that the coach Ange and agrees to sunset the commission, you will be UTC reviews here at PCC. So, for instance, the the school site plan reviews that were referenced in in the SD case, those usually go to U U D C They would come here instead and then again, plans in hand review of the DOT project for Safer Seward. That 65% review will come to PCC instead of I'm going to DC so you'll start to see slightly different A future sending that that the tax code changes adopted by the assembly. >> Thank you, Andy. Further comments questions. We can entertain a motion to adjourn. He's moved by Commissioner Uber. And seconded by Commissioner Christian does anybody wish to speak to no. objections. We are. ♪ >> Well, year-old man. >> Is is news. >> I can pull buildings, the move. >> With 2 means the.