Anchorage Zoning Board of Examiners and Appeals Meeting – May 20, 2026
Anchorage Zoning Board of Examiners and Appeals Meeting – May 20, 2026
The Anchorage Zoning Board of Examiners and Appeals met on May 20, 2026, as a short board (five members present, one excused) requiring unanimous votes for approval. The board considered three variance cases, approved two, denied one, and conducted an annual election of officers.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes from February 12, 2026 were approved unanimously.
- One consent agenda item (involving board member Craig Bennett) was removed due to lack of quorum; the remaining items (A, C, D) were approved without objection.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Case 2026‑0037 (Kukowski): One written public comment from Chris Spencer expressed support, stating the variance does not negatively impact the neighborhood.
- Case 2025‑0127 (Shackelford): No public comments received.
- Case 2026‑0045 (Hathcoat): A letter from the adjacent property owner (KST LLC) indicated no opposition.
Discussion Items
- Case 2026‑0037 – Patrick Kukowski (variance to legalize workshop encroaching 2 ft into rear setback): Applicant explained an original survey in 2003 indicated compliance, but a 2025 presale survey revealed a 2 ft encroachment due to historical measurement discrepancy. Staff found standard A not met and B partially met; all others met. Board voted to grant the variance 5‑0, arguing that the physical circumstances (original survey rebar) and lack of neighborhood impact satisfied the standards.
- Case 2025‑0127 – Teresa Shackelford (variance to legalize garage and eave encroaching 19.7 ft and 2.5 ft into front setback): The garage was built before purchase; applicant thought previous owner had obtained variance. Structure is essential for storing medical equipment for a disabled child. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. Board granted variance 5‑0, finding the hardship not self‑imposed since applicant did not build the garage.
- Case 2026‑0045 – Yuri Soladade/Darrell Burnt Hathcoat (variance to allow deck to encroach 5 ft into front setback): The deck is elevated (60 inches high) to manage snow accumulation. Applicant cited utility easements, subsurface obstructions, and irregular lot shape as constraints. Staff found standards A, B, and C not met. Board denied the variance 4‑1, with some members considering the placement a conscious decision during construction.
- Annual Election of Officers: The board elected Brian Bennett as parliamentarian, retained Ellen McKay as chair, and elected Jonathan Lang as vice chair.
- Board Member Comments: Members discussed concerns about shortened staff reports and the need to include nonconforming determinations in future packets. Staff noted a directive to reduce presentations to under one minute, which drew concerns about adequate findings for appeals.
Key Outcomes
- Case 2026‑0037: Variance granted (5‑0) subject to conditions on pages 4‑5 of staff report.
- Case 2025‑0127: Variance granted (5‑0) subject to conditions.
- Case 2026‑0045: Variance denied (4‑1).
- Officers: Chair McKay, Parliamentarian Bennett, Vice Chair Lang retained/elected.
- Next Steps: Staff will consider including nonconforming determinations in future packets; board members may email planning director regarding staff report length.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening and welcome to the municipality of Anchorage Zoning Board of Examiners and Appeals meeting for April 16th, 2026. Will the Secretary please call the roll? Ellen McKay? Here. Brian Bennett. Here. Craig Bennett. Here. Jason Norris. Here. Jonathan Lang. Here. Andrew Romerdale is excused. You have a quorum. Thank you. Thank you. Although we have a quorum, we are what's called a short board, which means there's only five of us. And to approve anything, to pass anything, all five of us have to agree. So because of that, when there is a short board, a five-member board or commission, a postponement is offered. And so if it's agreed to by the petitioner, they will be moved to the next regular agenda. This should occur within 30 days, which does not require renoticing the case. If the petitioner is willing to postpone but unable to attend the next available meeting within 30 days, the petitioner has a one-time option only to choose the next date certain he or she can attend at no extra fee. When a postponement is requested by the petitioner, there is a rescheduling fee, and a new public hearing date shall be determined by the planning division. This will put their case in the next available cutoff date queue as if they were submitting their case for the first time. So with that being said, there are three cases tonight to be heard, three variance cases. And the first case, case 2026-0037. The petitioner is Patrick Kukowski, and he is here. And the next case is case 2025 0127. Teresa Shackelford's here. And the last case is Yuri Soladade or their representative. Okay. And so does anyone want to postpone? They need to come up. Okay, one at a time. Patrick Kakowski. Want it to the front. And turn the mic on. And state your name for the record. Patrick Kukowski. And do you want to continue this evening or postpone? Yes, I'll continue. Okay. Thank you. And next we have Teresa Shackelfer. State your name for the record. Is the mic off? The green. Oh, there it is. Tracy Shackelford, and I'm okay to go forward. Okay.
openpublica.com