OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Urban Design Commission Final Meeting: May 14, 2026 – Variance Decision and Sunset Ceremony

Assembly & Committee Meetings — Thursday, May 14, 2026
BodyAnchorage, Alaska
SessionAssembly & Committee Meetings
DateThursday, May 14, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:33:44
Transcript — Verbatim
0:06

Good evening.

0:08

It's 6 30 p.m.

0:09

May 13th, 2026, and the meeting of the Urban Design Commission will now come to order.

0:15

May we please have a roll call?

0:17

Yes.

0:18

Here.

0:18

Allison Lenning.

0:23

Here.

0:24

Julia Foland.

0:26

Here.

0:26

Alexander Danalo.

0:28

Here.

0:28

Trevor Strait.

0:29

Here.

0:30

James Collis.

0:32

Here.

0:33

Monica Sullivan is excused.

0:35

You have a quorum.

0:36

Thank you.

0:38

Thank you.

0:40

May we get a motion to approve the minutes from April 29th, 2026.

0:57

It's been moved by Commissioner Foland.

1:00

It's been seconded by Commissioner Strait.

1:02

Are there any corrections to the minutes?

1:09

Are there any objections to the minutes being approved?

1:16

Hearing none, the minutes are approved.

1:20

We'll now move on to the special order of business.

1:23

Are there any disclosures this evening?

1:30

This is uh Commissioner Collis.

1:32

I was not present at the last meeting, so I won't be able to vote for the minutes.

1:37

Okay, thank you.

1:46

Um may we have a motion to approve the consent agenda.

1:59

It's been moved by Commissioner Strait and seconded by Commissioner Nanalo.

2:04

Um would anyone like to pull an item from the consent agenda for discussion or corrections.

2:12

Hearing none, the consent agenda is approved.

2:19

We don't have any unfinished business or items on the regular agenda this evening.

2:23

Therefore, we will move on to the public hearings and I will read the public process.

2:30

The Urban Design Commission meets the second and fourth Wednesday of each month except holidays at regular meetings.

2:36

If the Urban Design Commission fails to complete its agenda for its regular meetings, the commission carries over the remainder of the agenda to the following meeting date.

2:44

The procedure by which the public may speak to the Urban Design Commission at a meeting is one after the staff presentation is completed on public hearing items, the chair will ask for public testimony on the issue.

2:58

Two persons who wish to testify will follow the time limits established in the Urban Design Commission rules of procedure.

3:07

Petitioners, including all his, her representatives, will have 10 minutes.

3:12

Rebuttal by the petitioner may be allowed when time has been reserved.

3:18

Representatives of groups, community councils, PTAs, etc.

3:22

will have five minutes, and individuals will have three minutes.03.050.4a commission recommendations to the Anchorage Assembly are not appealable.

4:01

Following approval of the written findings of fact and decision, any party of interest may within 20 days file an appeal by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee and deposit in accordance with section 2103050.

4:17

The notice of appeal must be filed with the planning director on a form prescribed by the municipality.

4:24

If the appellant is not the applicant, the appellant's notice of appeal shall include proof of service on the applicant.

4:36

With respect to case 2026 0052, the petitioner is requesting for design variants from AMC 2107 080E for relief from landscaping standards on the west and south property boundaries.

4:55

May we please have staff's presentation.

4:58

Thank you, Madam Chair.

5:00

Just for some context information that's not contained in the staff report, I wanted to provide the commissioners with some information.

5:07

If this property owner was not seeking or needing this variance, they are permitted by right to build the proposed 36 additional units.

5:29

So there would not have been there would be no entitlement if they were not seeking this variance.

5:33

So just so you can separate those two parts, knowing some of the comments that were submitted late and late on the table.

5:39

With that, the petitioner is requesting a variance for relief from Anchorage Municipal Code 2107080E, required landscaping standards on the west and south property boundaries.

5:51

The applicant is requesting modifications to the required L2 buffer landscaping standards, lack of the L2 buffer along the north half of the West property line, and a reduction in the required width of the L2 buffer along the south half of the West property line and the south property line less than 10 feet with a six-foot screening fence.

6:10

These adjustments are necessary to maintain existing access along the north half of the west property line to accommodate the layout of the proposed new buildings, resident parking areas, and required fire fire apparatus turnarounds.

6:22

Despite the reduced buffer width along the south half of the West property line and south property line, the applicant will still provide the full number of required trees and shrubs along both the south half of the West property line and the south property line.

6:36

In order for the Urban Design Commission to approve the variants, the application must state with particularity the relief sought and must specify the facts or circumstances that are alleged to show that the application substantially meets the following eight standards.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Land Use Planning█████████████████████████████████████████████45%
Community Engagement████████████████16%
Procedural█████████████13%
Environmental Protection█████████████13%
Engineering And Infrastructure████████████12%
Public Safety█1%
Summary of Proceedings

Anchorage Urban Design Commission Meeting – May 14, 2026

The Urban Design Commission held its final meeting, conducting a public hearing on a landscape variance request for 3640 West Diamond Boulevard, approving the west boundary variance and denying the south boundary variance. The meeting concluded with farewell remarks and a mayoral proclamation recognizing the commissioners' service.

Consent Calendar

  • Minutes from the April 29, 2026 meeting were approved unanimously.
  • The consent agenda was approved without discussion.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Kyle Peterson (individual, adjacent homeowner at 3600 Mirror Circle): Testified against the south variance, citing years of snow storage, runoff, and drainage damage to his property, including $17,000 in French drain installation. He stated the existing storm drain is inadequate and the proposal would aggravate existing problems.
  • Wes Skinner (representative, Diamond Boulevard Baptist Church, east neighbor): Described his property's drainage management and stated the adjacent property's pavement and snow storage have contributed to water issues on the south side. He noted that a utility trench on the northeast corner of the subject site removed vegetation, which is not addressed in the plan.
  • Elizabeth Vasquez (president, Sand Lake Community Council): Read a resolution opposing the southern variance, citing poor neighbor history (snow removal, runoff), lack of existing buffer, and inadequate notice. The council supports development but requests a 30-day notice and a transition R2F zone to buffer R1 homes. She focused concerns on the south border.
  • Paul Kershak (testified by phone, individual, 3601 Mirror Circle, directly south): Opposed the southern variance, detailing years of runoff damage, a retaining wall, and landscaping costs. He stated the lack of buffer and poor snow management have caused water seepage into his foundation and urged that drainage issues be resolved before adding units.

Discussion Items

  • Staff Presentation: Staff explained the variance request: relief from AMC 21.07.080E for L2 buffer landscaping standards on the west and south property boundaries. The applicant, under new ownership (purchased 4 months ago), proposes to demolish 4 of the existing 44 units and build 36 new units (total 76). The west side abuts commercial B3 zoning with a platted 30-foot screening easement; the south side abuts R1 residential. Staff found standards A, B, C, D partially met, E, F, G met, and recommended denial of the variance. They suggested the commission consider separating the two boundary variances.
  • Applicant's Presentation (Kate Sauve, petitioner representative): Argued the variance is needed due to existing access drive (west) and parking (south) constraints. Full trees/shrubs will be provided despite reduced width, and a 6-foot decorative fence is proposed. The petitioner is willing to remove 2 parking spots to meet the south landscape width if required. Snow removal will be off-site.
  • Commission Discussion: Commissioners questioned design details, drainage, snow storage, fire access, and building footprints. Staff clarified that the R3 zoning permits up to 98 units; only the landscape variance is under review. The church (east) abuts R3 so no landscape buffer is required there. Commissioners expressed concern about the south buffer, noting historical drainage issues and the need for on-site retention.

Key Outcomes

  • West Property Boundary Variance (approved 6-0): Motion by Commissioner Nanalo, seconded by Foland. The commission found the eight standards substantially met for the west boundary, citing the adjacent commercial use and existing 30-foot screening easement. Conditions from the staff report (pages 5-6) were attached.
  • South Property Boundary Variance (denied 0-6): Motion by Commissioner Strait, seconded by Nanalo. The commission found standards A, B, C, and D not met for the south boundary due to the reduced buffer's failure to adequately separate R3 multifamily from R1 single-family uses, and the historical water/drainage problems. No commissioner voted in favor.
  • Adjournment and Ceremony: The commission received farewell comments from members and staff, and a mayoral proclamation recognizing their service. The meeting adjourned at 8:03 p.m. A special meeting will be held to approve the minutes from this session.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening. It's 6 30 p.m. May 13th, 2026, and the meeting of the Urban Design Commission will now come to order. May we please have a roll call? Yes. Here. Allison Lenning. Here. Julia Foland. Here. Alexander Danalo. Here. Trevor Strait. Here. James Collis. Here. Monica Sullivan is excused. You have a quorum. Thank you. Thank you. May we get a motion to approve the minutes from April 29th, 2026. It's been moved by Commissioner Foland. It's been seconded by Commissioner Strait. Are there any corrections to the minutes? Are there any objections to the minutes being approved? Hearing none, the minutes are approved. We'll now move on to the special order of business. Are there any disclosures this evening? This is uh Commissioner Collis. I was not present at the last meeting, so I won't be able to vote for the minutes. Okay, thank you. Um may we have a motion to approve the consent agenda. It's been moved by Commissioner Strait and seconded by Commissioner Nanalo. Um would anyone like to pull an item from the consent agenda for discussion or corrections. Hearing none, the consent agenda is approved. We don't have any unfinished business or items on the regular agenda this evening. Therefore, we will move on to the public hearings and I will read the public process. The Urban Design Commission meets the second and fourth Wednesday of each month except holidays at regular meetings. If the Urban Design Commission fails to complete its agenda for its regular meetings, the commission carries over the remainder of the agenda to the following meeting date. The procedure by which the public may speak to the Urban Design Commission at a meeting is one after the staff presentation is completed on public hearing items, the chair will ask for public testimony on the issue. Two persons who wish to testify will follow the time limits established in the Urban Design Commission rules of procedure. Petitioners, including all his, her representatives, will have 10 minutes. Rebuttal by the petitioner may be allowed when time has been reserved. Representatives of groups, community councils, PTAs, etc. will have five minutes, and individuals will have three minutes.03.050.4a commission recommendations to the Anchorage Assembly are not appealable. Following approval of the written findings of fact and decision, any party of interest may within 20 days file an appeal by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee and deposit in accordance with section 2103050. 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's notice of appeal shall include proof of service on the applicant. With respect to case 2026 0052, the petitioner is requesting for design variants from AMC 2107 080E for relief from landscaping standards on the west and south property boundaries. May we please have staff's presentation.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com