The Wasilla Planning Commission voted unanimously July 22 to deny a request to rezone Tract A, Hand Subdivision (approximately 17.06 acres at 1581 South Bayview Drive) from rural residential to multifamily zoning.

Commissioners said staff findings showed the proposed rezone would introduce an isolated multifamily district into an area otherwise surrounded by rural residential zoning and could lead to off‑site impacts such as increased traffic, noise and greater demand on city infrastructure. The commission approved resolution RS 2505, which denies the rezone application RZ 2502.

Why it matters: objectors said neighbors purchased property under a rural‑residential expectation and that introducing multifamily zoning would change the character of the area. Staff said the tract is not adjacent to any existing multifamily zoning and that the proposed change would not create a contiguous zoning pattern.

Details and discussion: a staff report read at the hearing cited Wasilla Municipal Code rezone criteria and concluded the application did not substantially comply with applicable rezone standards. The planner noted the tract totals about 17.06 acres; staff found the application would introduce multifamily zoning into an otherwise rural‑residential area and predicted off‑site impacts to nearby residents.

The owner, Andrei Prokachev (participating telephonically), described earlier site work — clearing, a road and utilities — and said he intended to subdivide the parcel into roughly 10 blocks and suggested multifamily housing could help with local housing needs. He told the commission, "Multi family homes will help with any housing shortage in Wasilla and can be a good way to ensure this land will be used in the best and most effective way."

Public comment: a nearby resident, Faithlyn Best, said the neighborhood has already experienced more cut‑through traffic and worried multifamily development would worsen congestion; she said she opposed the rezone.

Commissioners and rationale: commissioners acknowledged a local housing shortage but said property buyers purchased under existing rural‑residential zoning and the commission has an obligation to consider consistency with that expectation and existing code. One commissioner noted that the developer could still pursue housing within the current rural‑residential zoning (for example duplexes or single‑family units), but that the proposed multifamily designation would be an inconsistent land‑use change for the immediate area.

Outcome: by roll call the commission voted unanimously to adopt resolution RS 2505 and deny RZ 2502.