Planning commission recommends rezoning most of Pleasant Places subdivision to RE-2 with GWP overlay

Anduin McElroy, the planning staff contact, summarized a rezone request (RZ2025-003) on May 27 to change eight lots totaling about 35.39 acres in the Pleasant Places subdivision from Rural Estate 4 with a Groundwater Protection overlay (RE-4 GWP) to Rural Estate 2 with the GWP overlay (RE-2 GWP), excluding the subdivision’s northernmost 4.7 acres.

The change matters because the applicant, Cody Cottrell, told the commission the replat is intended to realign his lot lines to create a larger buffer around his residence and avoid generating nonconforming parcels. McElroy said staff’s analysis finds the proposed zone remains low-density residential and is consistent with the Salcha/Badger Road area plan and regional comprehensive-plan goals cited in the staff report.

“This request is to rezone 8 lots comprising 35.39 acres, from RE-4 to RE-2,” McElroy said during the staff presentation, and he noted the Groundwater Protection Overlay would remain unchanged. McElroy explained that RE-4 requires a minimum lot size of 160,000 square feet while RE-2 requires a minimum of 80,000 square feet; the applicant said smaller RE-2 lots would avoid nonconforming status after the planned replat.

Applicant Cody Cottrell said the rezone would allow him to replat and create a larger buffer between his home and the northern lots he plans to develop as single-family residences. Cottrell told commissioners that he has already invested about $7,000 in surveying and plat work and estimated the additional homes would contribute approximately $26,000 in property tax revenue to the borough if developed.

Adjacent owner Nils Degerland, who said he and his wife were the original developers of Pleasant Places, testified in support but asked the commission to add a condition increasing front- and side-yard setbacks so that existing residents would retain larger buffers. McElroy and other commissioners explained that a borough-wide change to setbacks would require code changes rather than a condition on a single rezone; Degerland acknowledged he understood that it might need to be addressed by other processes.

Commissioner Doreen moved to recommend approval of RZ2025-003, adopting the staff report and five findings of fact; another commissioner seconded the motion. The commission approved the recommendation by roll call vote, 7–0. McElroy said the application will be scheduled for borough assembly consideration and that staff had given a positive recommendation to the commission.

No assembly decision was made at the May 27 meeting; the planning commission’s action was a recommendation only.