06/16/2024
Land Use
LAST WEEK: The Planning & Zoning Commission voted at their June 10th meeting to recommend approval for HOME zoning reform, but postponed action on Comprehensive Plan amendments pending additional edits. A portion of the discussion on the comp plan amendments appeared to uncover some deeper issues with the relationship between the planning department and the policymakers:
Planning staff and the Sponsors had apparently met earlier in the week to come up with a sort of consensus document on the proposals, but the report given by staff presented only the priorities and positions of the planning department.
In an unusual twist, the Sponsors asked during the meeting that the full range of materials from the joint meetings be shared with the Commission and the public.
Staff eventually provided the additional materials as requested, explaining: “It was the sponsors’ understanding that we were to provide for the commission a joint recommendation, and it was my understanding that we were going to provide a refined department recommendation. ... So there are differing understandings of the materials that we were to provide…I have these materials to hand out."
The Chair called a 5 minute recess to give the Commissioners time to review these materials (Substantive documents are normally sent out in advance of a meeting to provide the chance for more thorough review).
As of this writing, the referenced materials are still not publicly available on the meeting page nor in the MOA portal system.
Towards the end of the meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission chair observed: “Part of my other concern is the way we arrived here. Staff has to, you know, implement and enforce the code, and staff clearly is in opposition or not really supporting this, so I think…we have to reconcile that issue somehow.”
The public record isn’t clear on what the planning department’s motives or motivations may be for including or omitting certain materials from the packet for this meeting--it could all be one big misunderstanding. But it is always true that the conveyance (or obfuscation) of information is a way of wielding political power–In a 1989 overview of his book “Planning in the Face of Power”, John Forester observed:
“...Planners may, for example, either pinpoint key issues or bury them in data, verbiage, computer printouts, or irrelevant details…Citizens may be misled by false assurances of self-protecting agency staff, by technicians who claim to be neutral, or by established interests who deceptively claim to serve the greater good…By informing or misinforming citizens, power works through the management of comprehension, or obfuscation; of trust, or false assurance; of consent, or manipulated agreement; and of knowledge, or misrepresentation.”
In any case, the issue of how information gets conveyed seems to have caught notice throughout the Municipality. Most notably where Assembly Chair Constant commented on the issue the following evening at the June 11th Assembly meeting:
“I still have grave concerns about the planning department and the members, and our approach to working together. I have heard, and I believe records exist, that there was a collaborative effort between the planning department and the sponsors of this ordinance that was effectively hijacked at the last minute, and ignored. So when those records are presented it will be a conversation between myself and the leadership of the department–where is the bad faith coming from. Because it doesn’t sound at this point like it was driven by the members…a product that was supposed to be shared at the Planning and Zoning Commission between the planning staff and the sponsors just was ignored, and the department’s opinion was moved forward…I’m waiting to see the records because I want the truth.”
LAST WEEK: AO 2024-45, an ordinance which clarified how the Assembly sets policy and makes changes, failed in a 6-6 vote at the 6/11 Assembly meeting. This ordinance had the support of the MOA Legal department (both assembly council and the staff attorneys), but seemed a bit too confusing for both people testifying and even some of the Assembly members. Chair Constant capped the conversation with some bigger picture comments about how many of these land use regulations and processes are tightly intertwined with our other issues of homelessness, racism, and irrational barriers.
NEW: Site plan review with public hearing required for a 522 SF greenhouse in a strip mall along Tudor due to Special Limitations zoning. From the Application:
“The proposed project is a 522 SF greenhouse located east of the existing mall structure…The greenhouse will serve the Elder program already housed on the property, allowing the elders to grow native plants in an accessible environment…A greenhouse is a permitted accessory use in a B-3 district. The special limitations require the property to have a public hearing site plan review for any expansion of the existing structures or external new construction (AO 85-104).”
The property owner hired an engineering firm to submit the application–it would be interesting to see the total cost of this entire process.
NEW: Survey for the Anchorage Areawide public restrooms project: link here and interactive map here. From the project page: “When nature calls…where do you go?”
Transportation
NEW: New sound barrier fence for along Northern Lights between Rogers Park and College Village. Current bidding opportunities from the Purchasing Department include a project to add a sound barrier fence along the south side of Northern Lights. This seems like it could potentially be an issue of fairness: How was the choice made to put the fence here versus somewhere else? Why not also put one in a place where more people could benefit? (As a counterpoint: it’s not clear how effective these walls really are anyway.)
NEW: AMATS Policy Committee Meeting on June 20,2024. Highway Safety Improvement Project (HSIP) nominations, a cooperation memo, updates on the MOA long range transportation strategy and STIP, and a SMART grant to leverage new technology to support maintenance of paved non-motorized facilities. From the grant description:
“The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) proposes the implementation of the Alaska Data Bike Program, inspired by the successful Iowa Data Bike initiative. This innovative program aims to leverage data collection technology on bicycles to monitor active transportation conditions, improve maintenance, and enhance safety across Alaska's extensive active transportation facility network.”
It sounds like they will actually have a “data bike” to do the work on the city’s sidewalks and paved paths: “The Data Bike will be equipped with advanced sensors to detect surface irregularities, cameras for visual documentation, and GPS for precise location tracking.”
New Mayor
NEW: Mayor elect LaFrance discusses her priorities. Also in the ADN: “Three teams — led by prominent Anchorage residents, former legislators and community leaders — will focus on LaFrance’s three priority areas: “good government,” “safe streets and trails” and “building our future,” according to a written statement.”