Community and Economic Development Committee Meeting

Economic Development Committee meeting of the Anchorage Assembly to order. My name is Scott Myers. I will be chairing this meeting today as member Martinez is out of state. Um, we'll go ahead and see if there's any members online. Yeah.

Okay, then, uh, it is— today is Thursday, November 6th, 2025. We're noticed from 9:00 a.m. until 10:30. I don't know that we will make it all the way to 10:30 today since it's going to be a quick meeting, so we'll go ahead and get started with regular reports. Planning, Development, and Public Works, who wants to start it? Mr. Chairman, I'll do that.

This is Lance Wilbur, Director of Community Planning, Development, and Public Works. A few items on the staffing side of the planning, community development, planning, and public works. We've got a couple key vacancies right now, but we're actively getting them filled. And so Courtney Peterson is the manager of that team, so she's been actively recruiting, filling those positions. I just— my next item is attended the Employee of the Year event last week, last— I think it was last last week, and I'm really proud of our GIS team.

They were successful in winning our Work Group of the Year support. For those of you who work with Mike Knapp and the folks over at the GEIC, our GIS team, they are a mighty army of pullers. They do a lot of work for the port, for public safety, for pretty much everyone in this building. I'm really proud of that team right there. Second— third item is B, there is a regular— it's an annual or biannual meeting of all of the folks that handle code enforcement inside the municipality, not just in this building, but in this building, development services, the health department, fire department, and others.

And then at a meeting last week, got together and just talked about where the successes were, some of the things that they wanted to improve on, and took away some ideas from them. It was really good to see that.

Greg and I and the Public Works Director from Planning, Development, Public Works, or in Development Services, we have a monthly meeting with the home builders. And for the last couple of meetings, they've shared with us really some of the improvements that Greg and Melissa have done on their side, particularly in their response or customer service, and just continue to— yes, and I'm really proud of both of them, and I really appreciate those compliments coming from the home builders. For this room, we have talked to our contractor. We are scheduling to replace all of this equipment the first week in December. So, Mr. Chairman, I'll be working with, uh, your staff and team.

We might need to find another location if you have a December meeting. We'll keep you apprised. We're going to tear this stuff out, and then the vendor is supposed to be here the first week of December to install everything. Should only take a couple days, but it's IT, so I expect it'll take a week. Mr. Wilbur, not to interrupt, but I just wanted to note for the record that Member Johnson and Member Martinez did join us online.

All right. And Member Brawley is there as well. Last item while they're not present, I just want to put a shout out to Member Brawley and Member Baldwin-Day. I attended their budget sort of learning session that they had last Tuesday, not this week, but week ago. I think they did a very good job giving a 101 overview for folks that don't know much about the budget.

And their intention was to inform and educate folks and then sort of let them know where our priorities are. I just think they just did a great job. I wanted this group to know and let them know that I think they did a great job. I'll let the directors go on from that point. Perfect.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I can do Public Works. Mr. Colhase has been out. I think he's upstairs catching up on some other things. On maintenance and operations, We are looking— I think the forecast shows we're going to get some snowfall this afternoon and tomorrow.

And frankly, the best snowfall is a nice little 4 to 6-inch snowfall the first time we get. Allows our operators to sort of set the track and get things going. They're ready to go with the equipment that they have. They have been also filling in the random potholes. So if you people see them, keep giving them a call.

And then again, we're continuing to improve our fleet, so we appreciate you sending these up on that. On the PM&E side, not much happening recently. We've been closing down a lot of, uh, construction projects, a lot of winter shutdown, um, for projects like that. What, what they do this time of year is they take time in the next month or two to go back and look at all of the bid tabs that we received, and we use that information to reevaluate the cost of our construction projects when we go into next construction season. So That's something that they'd be doing right now.

On the traffic engineering side, the piece there is Mr. Koy has been active to recruit and hire a Vision Zero coordinator. He's had a— I think he's got a candidate right now. He's going to be doing interviews this week. And he too on the paint side shop and doing some winter shutdown work. And I think in the M&L traffic side, they've had a little bit of support to the Emergency Operations Center in support of the folks from Western Alaska that are coming in and around the Egan Center, not only for traffic control but also in support of some of those off-site facilities relating to water and washing here.

So anyway, and setting up the temporary shelter for the pets across the street here, our team has been helping them as well. So I think that is a very quick wrap-up of public works. Mr. Coley.

Okay, are there any member questions, uh, from the folks online?

Okay, Mr. Sule. Okay, thanks, Mr. Chair. Craig Sule, Development Services. Uh, quick staffing update.

Uh, we just onboarded our, uh, a new, uh, structural plan reviewer, so we're now fully staffed in structural plan review. It's the first time we've been fully staffed in that department for the division for, uh, 2 years, so it's good to have that done.

Very cool. That leaves 3 additional vacancies. We'll be onboarding a new code abatement officer and a new permit tech next month, so that'll leave us just with 1 vacancy. So, uh, good going into the next year. Um, I was going to bring up our dewatering efforts.

If you guys aren't aware, Traditionally, excavation dewatering has been going into the sanitary sewer. That's no longer going to be allowed by AWU. It has to go somewhere, so Development Services is working with Watershed Management to develop a permit and a path for them to be able to put excavation water into our storm drain system. So maybe can you give a synopsis of what that means for folks who are on the development. Sure, so for deep utilities, trenching in for deep utilities, it's not uncommon to hit groundwater.

You have to pump that water out so you can actually get down into the trench and make the connections and whatnot. Traditionally, that's gone into sanitary. The reason AWU is— well, AWU is doing what they can to maintain their permit with the EPA discharging the Cook Inlet, and so this is one of the steps they're taking is to disallow dewatering into the sanitary now. So it has to go somewhere, so we were going to be accepting it into the municipal storm sewer system, which, which will require a new permit type, um, inspection and coordination with DEC. We're working on that. Um, let's see, our building board meeting is tonight to discuss our— well, first I should mention our Code committees have wrapped up, uh, for the Title 23 update.

I'd like to give a big thank you to Daniel King for taking that on and largely spearheading, however, overseeing the code committees. Those have wrapped, so we are taking our summary of changes to the building board tonight. Um, depending on the outcome of that, we'll be, uh, assembling our list of major changes for the assembly. So you guys know what, what you'll be looking at coming up. But we hope to have it to the assembly in December, so for adoption, so then we can go over to 2026 with the updated Title 23.

Daniel's here to answer any questions you might have on those, on specifics. And also, Daniel just got back from the ICC conference in Cleveland, and I thought you might be interested to hear what some of the other jurisdictions are struggling down there and, um, certainly has some, some I would like to talk about. And I just want to note for the record that member Baldwin Bay joined us at, uh, 9:08. Thanks, take it away. Daniel King, Development Services.

Yeah, the building board meeting is tonight. Uh, this was 10 separate committees that we set up with over 70 representatives from contractors, engineers, architects, uh, being a part of these meetings. Um, and we updated 13 chapters of Title 23. Um, and so it was a big effort for, for everybody. It was great.

So we're really excited for going to the Planning Board and discussing it tonight. On the ICC code hearings, this is for updating the IBC, all of the different building codes for the 2027 code cycle. And there are discussions on different changes that people are proposing. These come from contractors, engineers, architects, interested parties. We had representatives from the theater community coming in wanting to make changes to the code for theaters, you know, and so everybody can come in and make recommendations for amendments, and then it gets discussed and the committee votes on whether it should go to vote.

One of the ones that was interesting was a discussion on fourplexes getting added—fourplexes and triplexes getting added to the residential.

Residential code. I know that we locally have amended to allow triplexes. I think we're one of the only jurisdictions that's done that. And this was a discussion on allowing triplexes and fourplexes into the residential code. And interestingly, the National Home Builders Association was against it because there is so much that has to get added into the residential code to address fire concerns, and they, they didn't want that to go into the residential code.

It's supposed to be prescriptive and simple. That was a big one. And reducing rise and run requirements on staircases as well to save $500 on new builds if you can have more options. And there was a large discussion on, is the $500 savings worth the safety risks that get associated with higher, higher tread runs? So large discussions, uh, it was really very interesting.

And then great stuff on tiny homes as well, trying to make it easier to build tiny homes. Uh, so yeah, we were really excited. We had 6 representatives from, uh, the municipality down for this conference. 4 Were with the fire department, and then myself and one of our structural inspectors went. Perfect.

So, uh, Member Brawley has a question.

Yeah, thank you, and sorry I can't be there in person today. Um, I—. First, it's really interesting what you just shared about the 3 and 4-plexes, that we are one of the few who have done that. So I'm happy to hear that. Hopefully others do it.

And then I also understand the complexities of 4-plex. My question is a process one. So you mentioned this will come to the assembly in December, and then you mentioned the building board. I'm curious, what's the building board's role in this? And is it like planning and zoning where it's required to go to them?

And I'm not, I'm not proposing to change this. I'm just curious, you know, what is their role in these kind of code reviews? Thanks.

So the building board typically co-chairs with members of the municipality for all of these committees. They are They're the representatives for appeals cases, but they're also the representatives for when we want to make code changes, similar to PCC, to make recommendations to the assembly. The building board makes their recommendation to accept this or make modifications to it. Um, yeah, so all of them are representatives. They're going to— they all were co-chairs on each of the committees that we set up, and so now we'll be getting together to discuss them, and the chairs of the committees will then discuss the significant changes for everyone else on the building board, and then they'll make their recommendation to move them forward.

Okay, thanks. And then just to dig in a little bit, is— so is it required in code that that happens, or is that really the practice?

I don't think it's required in code, it's the practice. Okay, thanks.

Member Bolden. Yeah, thanks. I'm curious if there was any conversation about single stair at the conference. There is no discussion at this conference for single stair. Last year at the conference, there was discussion, and it was moved forward, um, to, to propose and vote on for the 2027 code cycle.

Um, on single stair, we have moved forward a code amendment locally for allowing single stair. I believe it's up to 4 stories instead of 2 stories where it's limited now for residential apartments. Um, And that was discussed at the Building Code and the Fire Code committees. And so they, they came to an agreement on what those requirements would be. There's still a lot to be done to make sure that they are safe for, for the occupants and for the firefighters that have to go work on these buildings when incidents happen.

But that is being moved forward now. So you'll see that when we put up the significant changes, that'll be one of them. One caveat to that is That is our local amendments that we are proposing, and if adopted, we still will be going to the state fire marshal to get an exception, because the state fire marshal has not accepted this for the state. So this would have to be a specific exception for the Building Safety Service Area only. This would not be allowed to be done in Eagle River, Chugiak, Girdwood, because those are handled by the state fire marshal.

The building safety service area is handled by our review department. Thank you. Just for the chair, I thought it was pretty interesting. Daniel, I also mentioned that there was a lot of discussion down at the conference about using non-permitted foundations for ADUs and tiny homes. So I just— I find interesting that, you know, a lot of other jurisdictions struggling with housing crises and trying to find ways, you know, to increase housing stock, and they're kind of circling around the same questions that we are.

Actually, related to that, were there any— was there anything that you heard in particular that piqued your interest as far as, you know, changes or adjustments that other jurisdictions are making with respect to tiny homes and other sorts of like relocatable dwelling units? Anything that you took away that you would want to share that was kind of like interesting or innovative or something you had maybe considered looking at? One thing, it's not related to tiny homes or movable dwelling units specifically, Specifically, that discussion was specific for tiny homes, which would be 400 square feet or less. One of the challenges there is, is it going to be regulated by motor vehicles, or is it going to be regulated by the building code, and who designs the chassis and makes sure that they are safe? And so there is a whole bunch going into that.

One thing that I did think was interesting that I'd like the department to look into is a third-party approval process for manufacturing construction in Alaska. To allow this sort of construction to happen and not have to go through the, the regular hurdles for a stick-built construction of getting inspections on every single one. They get handled by a third-party inspector in this shop, which is a little more controlled, and are handled by a random audit process. We have something similar for the truss manufacturer out in Chuuya, where, you know, we are allowed to have a random audit of their shop and go out and make sure things are being built correctly. And it's It's not something that is in code, but there are ASTM standards that can be put in place to make those requirements available to people.

And so we could come up with an approval process for manufacturers. You could get manufactured housing happening through the winter in factories and in warehouses, and then they get certified and get stamps. Those are happening in other states. So would that require— would that require sort of an internal process or UL, or would that require action on the part of the assembly, or both? Give me just a second.

Can I ask all the folks that are on the phone to mute if they could? We're getting some feedback from somebody. Go ahead, sorry. Uh, for now I believe it's only going to require— I believe it's going to be both. I believe we're going to have to come up with a process that goes into place, and it may require a code modification to clarify what that is.

We could always put it in through an interim policy because it's not in code, but ultimately it would be best to be enshrined in code. Okay, well, I'm very interested in tracking that. Thanks. Any other questions?

Uh, Mr. Sulek? That's it for me, Public Services. Okay, we'll move on to Planning. Thank you, Chair. Planning Director, um, first of all, overall, um, the planning department is pretty well staffed.

Um, we do have a couple of open positions, um, and we have lost our front desk person to development services. Um, so we will be looking at that position and potentially reevaluating that position to see if there might be another way to fill that need because as we continuously lose, um, people at the, at that particular spot. Um, so we need try to cover the front desk with another method of covering that, that need. Uh, we are also looking into working with, uh, Development Services, PM&D, Traffic, and others to, um, look into to 2103-100, which is the requirement, um, for improvements, um, for subdivisions. And it requires dedications and improvements, um, that, um, are based on a rational nexus.

And it's not very clear in the code exactly what that rational nexus is. So we'll be working with Development Services to try to establish a define a threshold of reasonableness for requiring improvements and developments. Regarding the divisions themselves, I probably hand it off to Long Range to— for update from Long Range Planning. Current planning and zoning land use review are starting to slow down a little bit with the season. Zoning and Land Use review is a little short-staffed at the moment, um, but they are still meeting their review timelines pretty, pretty well.

Um, AMATS is having a TAC meeting today, a Technical Advisory Committee meeting today, and then a Policy Committee meeting next week. Um, they will be discussing the sewer-to-land PEO and comments from the staff on the PEL itself. And then they'll also be discussing the Seward Highway O'Malley Road to Duncan Boulevard project, the purpose and need.

Exploration, that project. So those— that would be an interesting conversation with DOT and CNST. Daniel McCannaplox for Long Range Planning. Monday night, the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the CIP/CIB, and they expressed interest in the future looking at how the CIP connects with the ladies' plans and comprehensive plans. So that's something they're interested in for next year.

Coming years. Uh, the assemblies, you all know the McDowell Parks rezoning went through, uh, earlier this week. That was the first use of this muni-led rezoning tool. So that's a tool we created earlier this year that you all adopted, and it's great to see us using that. Um, we have another one of those, um, with actually two more of those in getting rid of the old rezoning, old zones that still exist in around town that were supposed to go away in 2014, like D2 zoning or D4 zoning, or in some cases some TR zoning.

We're looking at making some changes to the land use plan map along Tudor to sort of update that to what a lot of our institutional partners need. We've— I guess I'll introduce— we have Michael and Luke, two of our new senior planners. If you see them, say hello. They're doing a lot of great work. Some of the stuff we'll be talking about later, they've been working on.

We're— so we have the Legacy Rezones Project, we have the Parks Rezones Project that we'll be talking about a little bit later today. We've been working on the shop house or the There was a big ordinance AO-2025-63 that's kind of gone back and forth. We've been working on that. I think we've come up with a good solution for how to deal with people who want to have maybe a bigger garage or, or meet that need for bigger storage needs, um, in the zoning code. Uh, we're working on some another AO for agricultural uses and food production.

I know Member Martinez had brought some stuff forward on that. We're trying to consolidate all that together. Uh, we got an omnibus AO that you'll see in the next coming months. It's a lot of that's just little pieces of cleanup, connecting links, fixing things. Um, we've also just in general been looking at home occupations, accessory commercial uses, and mixed use throughout some of the processes we've done the last couple months.

People said we, we're interested in mixed use, we're interested in a little more flexibility, and, and try to sort of more mixed use in different places. That, um, makes sense. Yeah. So another tool, um, that We established earlier this year was an abbreviated rezone process to remove special limitations, or SLs. Basically, you can do that, and as long as it is consistent with the comprehensive plan, it's much easier to move that special limitation to revert back to underlying zoning.

So as we've gone through that process, we've discovered there are a lot of properties with SLs where if you remove the SL, it's no longer, or maybe never was, consistent with the land use plan map. So that's an issue, right? So we just had a case recently where it was an R4 SL and they wanted to go to R4, but unfortunately when we looked at it, the plan said this should just be R3, even though it makes sense to have R4 and we could see that, but just the way the plan is set up, it's a little bit restricted in that. Um, Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend that that be rezoned as R4. So we went through and we looked at some more, and there are a number of those across the municipality.

For example, there's an R3 SL property down on Hillside where if you move the SL you would just have R-3 on hillside in the area that's designated for R-6 or R-7. So we've been looking at that, and that is either that SLs were being used as a tool to maybe put the zone in a place that wasn't quite appropriate, or the land use plan was not designating to what the actual needs were for that area. So we've been looking at that. Luke's been doing some great work on that. I think we found 119 instances of that in the whole, and 21 in Chugiak/Eagle River.

So we're sort of fixing the system, correcting the system, but there's— it's interesting bumps along the way. And we are working still on the weapons management plan update and eventually the streets and highways update for next year, but we have funding for that. Thank you. Member Brolin. Yeah, thanks for the updates and thanks for the updates on the Shouse ordinance.

I'll follow up with you guys separately, but my question is, I know there's been this ongoing conversation about updating the comprehensive plan. So I just want to flag that I think I know we can't really get into that today, but that is a perpetual issue that I think just needs to get resolved at some point, and I know not for lack of trying. But then my question kind of related to that, I'm just wondering, and maybe this is a written update, but what is the status of our various kind of planned development or planned updates? And I don't mean park planning, things like that. I just mean neighborhood plans, district plans.

I know Midtown is still out there. I think it's just It feels like we have kind of a number of those projects kind of slowly churning through, but then just wondering kind of how we circle back to implementation. So that's my bigger question, but more specifically, if you can give an update on specifically neighborhood district and any comprehensive plan updates and what the timeline is on those. Thanks.

Through the chair, this is Daniel McKenna Foster. Thank you. So yeah, the Midtown plan. So now that we're kind of fully staffed up in long range, at least more than we have been, so Luke is working on that. We're meeting with the Midtown Steering Committee later this— later today actually.

So basically we sort of clarified some things, gotten a few pieces that weren't in there, getting that all together and bringing that back to the Steering Committee to have them look at it, and then we're hoping to bring that back out and get that moving again. So that is moving. Also, Michael is working on updating some of the hazards mitigation information in a lot of those plans. So I think in the next few months the Assembly will be seeing it. It'll look It does look like a lot of amendments to a lot of plans, but really it's just updating hazard mitigation information.

And other than that, we're working on finalizing the RFP for the Chugiak/Eagle River Comprehensive Plan. So that's a little bit bigger than the neighborhood or district plan. But I think for now, those are the main smaller plans that we're working on. And we are—. And through the chair to Member Brawley, we are in the process still of updating the comprehensive plan, the 2020 and 2040 plans.

Are regarding the housing. So it's the housing update, targeted update to those plans. Um, we have taken some proposed changes to PCC, and they requested that we, um, take those changes and create a draft of the, um, the updated plan itself. And, um, so we're currently working on creating that draft, and we'll be taking making it back to PCC for their review, probably in a couple months. January, February.

January, February.

Any other questions?

No, thanks very much. And I guess my request would be, I know you guys have been doing a really good job of communicating on individual projects. I think it might be helpful to elevate kind of here's the planning updates that are happening. Thanks.

Okay, so, okay, we'll move on to real estate. Miss Briggs. Good morning, Tiffany Briggs, real estate department. Um, quick update from us. We, um, HOV has extended the comment period by a few days for our 2026 work plan.

Uh, the new comment period deadline is November 21st. Um, we will be doing a public hearing at our HLVAC meeting of December 18th. Uh, we would then be prepared to do a presentation at, um, CEDC in January if that is, um, the wish of the committee. Yeah. Okay, go ahead and mark that.

And then, um, I think that is the major update from us.

Next, we will move on to ACEA. Mr. Robbins. Thank you, Chair. So, Mike Robbins, Executive Director, Anchorage Community Development Authority. First, I just want to echo what Mr. Wilbur said about all of the work that's being done in planning and building services.

We've gotten more positive feedback from the builders and the people, the developers that we're talking to about planning and building services and the things going on in the Elmore facility, I think, than I've seen in 5 years. It's been really good, actually. So I just want to say that they are doing a job. I also just want to update on the Denali RV Resort. There'll be an RFQ coming out for that.

They're actually in the final stages and will go to our attorney tomorrow, the next day, for approval. That should come out the next week or 10 days. Also, the Fireweed Housing Project, the lots that we got via the assembly almost 2 years ago now, uh, we've nicknamed that Fireweed Flats. We have an RFI that will be coming out out in the next week or 10 days. They're just finishing the final draft of that as well for a housing project there.

An update on the micro units, if you haven't heard, the grand opening or the ribbon cutting of the micro unit recovery project. First of all, which I just can't believe the levers that you guys have been pulling to make that project happen. It's been outstanding dealing with Visser Construction. He's also amazed how easy and great you guys have been to work with. It's just really, really positive.

I think it's very positive for your department.

And even Lance, who's now cut locks off, he solved the other side. Thank you all for your help on that. We couldn't have done it without you guys. But they're, uh, they, you know, they.

It's, you know, a work stoppage. They encountered some water when they were digging utilities. Things that would normally take months or, you know, would stop a project, we were able to work together and it took a day and a half and the project was back on track. So the grand opening is December 15th. There'll be a ribbon cutting.

We'll be sending out, you know, invites, but mark your calendars now. I think it's going to be sometime around 10 AM, but I'm not certain. I think we're going to try to beat the news cycle that day, so it'll be early in the morning. But it's moving along and we were able to go from 24 to 32 units, as you know, and the units look great. I was at 2 community councils last night and making updates and reports and the community is very excited about these as well.

It's been very positive feedback. I think that we've done a good job as just sort of all working together to make sure that the right message is getting out as to what the program is. But it's been very positive. Today, later on this afternoon, we'll be announcing the— I think I talked about last month about the Park It Forward program, which is a new downtown grant program that we put together. We had 21 applicants for those grants, everything from lighting up the front of the, of a building with Christmas lights to wayfinding to reconstructing— lots of really good projects and ideas.

So they'll be announcing those grant awardees today, and we'll be awarding that $150,000 to help make downtown a cooler place to be. We've been working closely with, now for about 3 months, with Shugiac Electric to electrify the top— or I shouldn't say electrify, but to put solar on top of the garages downtown. They came to us, and there's a— as you know, they've been working with with other departments in the municipality to try and find areas or buildings that we could use to put solar panels on to help feed back into the grid. And we identified the garages that people for some reason don't like to park on the roof, so it's a great place to put solar panels. That project's moving ahead pretty fast.

And then our ARNI program that we started, I don't know, last year, it's the Anchorage Neighborhood Redevelopment Initiative. We've begun making offers on property. I think we've made offers on 3 properties now in Mountain View, and we're moving that program ahead. Our board approved some funding for that even though we didn't get the grant, the federal grant that we'd applied for. So we're moving forward to buy properties and clean them and make those things happen as well.

I think that's about it. Any questions for Member Baldwin-Deck? Yeah, with the Anchorage Neighborhood Redevelopment Project, is that— are those primarily properties that have already been— I mean, if the building needs to be demolished, are those properties that have already been scraped? Are they properties that you acquire and then demo the building? Like, what's—.

How does that look? So, so far, the 3 that we've made offers on haven't been scraped, and they would need to be. But we have— we are looking at— John is in the process of really evaluating all of the not only abandoned but vacant properties as well. So properties that might not have a building on them at all. So both.

Any other questions? Okay, let's move on to unfinished business. Continue discussion regarding AO 2023-136S. This is going to be third-party plan review system, and I think Member Brawley is going to take it or had some comments. Yeah, I'll just be brief.

I think the main point was to hear from staff, but just to bring it back, we talked about this last month. This is something that sunsets in our code. So if, if we do not take any action by December 31st of this year, then it would go back to only allowing residential third-party review. So it wouldn't get rid of the system that was there before, but it would undo the things that were done in that ordinance. So, so I've said before, my intent is to bring forward an ordinance that I think at this point just extends it for another year.

But the question that folks had was for the department, right? You know, what is your recommendation? We had the report last month on the kind of how it's been working or not working so far. So I think we wanted to hear from them and just have some questions before, before any proposed legislation moves forward. Thanks.

For the development services to the chair, Miss Brawley. Yeah, we're on board with extending it for another year and we will be writing the AM for that. There was a question on who's going to bring it forward. We'll work with you on that, but we'll go ahead and write the AM and circulate it around.

Okay, did you have anything else you wanted to say, Anna? No, I think I just remember we didn't have enough time to get into this much last time, but I think if Greg, if you and your team could just elaborate on— I know you said there were some issues with it, but kind of why you're recommending that 1-year extension.

Sure, um, Daniel, I have something to add. But essentially, um, since we were understaffed in our structural plan review, um, we were unable to complete the required audits. So, uh, we just simply didn't have the data either way to say that it was effective or not. So now that we're fully staffed, though, we intend to be able to do our required 10% audits. Um, so it's based on the fact that we simply didn't have the data, we're wants to extend it for another year, um, and, and possibly beyond.

Uh, Daniel, anything to add to that? Yeah, Daniel King with Development Services. Um, in considering the recommendations that you were asking for, uh, on, on what was in the code, some of the recommendations or, or reflection on what was added to the code was adding that the approved list was very beneficial because that gives some tools to the department for if someone is a bad reviewer are not acting correctly, we can remove them from the approved list, and that allows us a process to work with them on making improvements. Another thing that was great was adding the mandatory 10%. While we weren't able to complete it while understaffed, having the language in there as a required 10% is really beneficial because it, it allows us to push forward, whereas there was a lot more pushback when it was an allowed audit on things, um, had more pushback from the public saying that we don't have to do these audits, whereas now there is the requirement to do them.

And I think it's a big benefit to do it, which allows us to hold the reviewers accountable for the work that they're putting out, um, where before there was not that accountability available to us. Now we have it available. So those are a couple benefits, was adding the approved list making requirement, um, and adding the 10% audit is going to be very helpful for us to see how this process is working and help control the, the quality of the work that comes out. So that's part of why our recommendation is going to be to, to allow it to go another year as it's written, so we can not only see the better data but also make that recommendation of keeping some of these elements that you put into the code.

Okay, that answer your question, Anna? Yeah, thanks. So members can just expect to see this, um, I think introduction on the 18th, but if we don't make that, then certainly December 2nd, and I'm hoping we take action by the 16th. Thanks.

Yes, Anna, are you, um, are you planning to hold a work session on that?

I think we can. I know a lot of discussion kind of happened when this first passed, so that I think we did have a work session back then. But yeah, I'm happy to get that scheduled when the thing's introduced, or we could bring it back to this committee too. Okay, yeah, I'm thinking there may be other members who have more extensive questions than we might want to handle on the dais.

Sure, yeah, I can get that requested.

Okay, thank you, Member Raleigh. Uh, we will go to new business. Uh, Parks Rezone Planning Case. Mr. Foster. Mr.

Chair, if I could, I'm going to try sharing.

It's not— oh, perfect. Um, okay, yeah, Dan Foster, Long Range Planning. So we've been working on implementing, um, the part of the comp plan that's been on our books for about 10 years. So the 2040 plan directed us to conduct a housekeeping rezone of dedicated parks to PR districts, so T-zone, SPLI. So we looked at that and we didn't just do only dedicated parks, pretty much anything in Anchorage that is owned by Parks and Rec and is a park and the community recognizes as a park, and we're proposing to rezone it to the Parks and Rec PR designation.

Now this is Very early in the case, these are for reference, these are cases, let's see, PCC-2025-0131 and PCC-2025-0146. So right now it's an agency review and we do encourage any agency or anybody to give us comment about this because this is rezoning a lot of parcels. I think Luke has identified something like 8,000 acres of land, right, to be rezoned. And so this on the screen here.

You'll see that this is one of the swipe maps that shows what the zoning is now on the left and what it's going to be converted to parks and rec zone on the right. So a lot of it is— and this question came up the other night— is some of it is residential land. Well, so we want— we really want residential development. Why are we rezoning this to parks and rec land? A lot of this is in areas that it has a stream in it or it's wetland or it's undevelopable.

We did take out the HLB land. We talked with HLB ahead of time. But there might be other parcels that people say, you know what, I think we actually don't want that to be part we don't want to designate as R2F, we want to keep it as R2F or R1. There are some here and there, you know, maybe some of these lots as R5 or these, but those are choices that we encourage policymakers to look into and give us guidance on. And so we are in that initial phase, and then we will be posting this map.

And this is one of the swipe maps, so you can see on the left is current zoning, and on the— if you sort of slide it over, you'll see where all the zoning would be So, you know, all— basically all Bicentennial North, which right now is PLI, going to Parks and Rec. So PLI is a similar zone that's usually used for civic purposes and public purposes, but it allows a lot wider range of uses. So Parks and Rec is really about— the Parks and Recreation Zone is really about basically parks and recreation uses. You can have some small things there, maybe a farmer's market, a few other things, but you can't have like some of these big institutional facilities. Another aspect of this is some small changes to the Comprehensive Plan so that we're making sure that the zoning aligns with the Comprehensive Plan designation, the Land Use Plan designation, or the Land Use Plan designation allows us to rezone to it.

Here's an example. Let me see if I can find— swipe on to the next one. So here's one in Spinard where currently the top— these top 2 parcels are designated for residential use, but those are park. The bottom parcel is designated for park use, but that's residential. So the switch would be sort of flipping those, right?

So the bottom parcel would be redesignated in the future to residential low or residential medium, and the top two would be designated to residential, uh, to parks recreation. So that's why there are two cases here. One is the rezone and the other is changes. Um, Luke's done a great job on this. We are going to be putting this, um, swipe map out for the public.

And so we're always trying to keep improving ways people can access information, and we're very open to any sort of comments, especially from policymakers that think, you know, my neighborhood, I think it's more appropriate. But this is the time to do it. So, love to take any questions. Yeah, is, um, does Parks and Recreation, does that designation allow for like botanical gardens or community gardens? Let me see, I believe this— it, it definitely allows community garden is, is a permitted use.

Public park, private. Now let's see, botanical gardens.

Botanical gardens are a site plan review use in Parks and Rec and a site plan review use in POI, so yes.

Are there any other questions?

Okay, we will move on. I want to skip Committee and Legislative Budget Priorities until Member Martinez is back and we can address that. So if there's nothing else, we'll go to audience participation. Any member questions?

No members of the audience. Okay, then I will adjourn this meeting at 9:43 and we can move on to Thursday.

I did. Yeah, I did. I was like, ah! I figured. I'm curious.

Also, I don't think you.