Riverfront commission recommends rezoning Hamilton Acres parcels to multifamily with 25-foot river setback

The Chena Riverfront Commission voted 7-0 on June 10 to recommend that borough planning staff consider rezone application RZ2025-004, submitted by Robert Hajdukovich of Upriver Estates LLC, to change several lots in the Hamilton Acres subdivision from two‑family residential to multifamily residential and to apply a 25‑foot waterway setback along the Chena River.

The recommendation, moved and seconded during a special meeting, sends the application to the borough Planning Commission for formal review; the Planning Commission has set a hearing on July 8, staff said.

Why it matters: The change would allow small multifamily buildings (the applicant proposes two structures with four dwelling units each) on riverfront parcels while formally establishing a larger setback from the river than current rules. Staff and the applicant said the overlay is intended to protect riverbank habitat and limit structural development in flood-prone areas.

Commission staff said the application is supported by the goals of the Chena Riverfront Plan and the borough comprehensive plan and that a formal staff report will be published before the Planning Commission hearing. "This does seem very supportable," said Kellen, a borough planning staff member, during the meeting.

The parcels in the application lie south of Iditarod Avenue, west and south of C Street and adjacent to the Chena River. Kellen said most parcels to the west of the proposed rezone already are developed and that the applicant’s larger undeveloped parcels form the core of the request. Planner Jimmy Dixon is assigned to the case and has worked with the applicant on the application packet.

Applicant Robert Hajdukovich described site work already completed and the constraints that shaped his design choice, including the presence of a former federal floodway and the cost and logistics of on‑site utilities. He said two buildings of four units each would provide a similar overall density to what the existing two‑family zoning allows while creating a smaller building footprint that simplifies parking, drainage and snow removal. "We would likely be built as an apartment, with the idea that after 10 years it could be converted into a condominium," Hajdukovich said, citing a state statute that he said has discouraged new condominium construction in Alaska.

Hajdukovich also described bank stabilization work he performed with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: he said roughly $80,000 was spent planting willows along the bank and that the plantings have taken root and are being monitored. Commissioners asked about erosion patterns, the ordinary high water mark used for lot boundaries, and recent hydrology work and Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) activity that updated the floodway depiction on official FEMA maps; the borough’s floodplain manager said the updated maps display the revised boundaries on the FEMA firm maps.

Commissioners and staff discussed several practical details the Planning Commission will address if the rezone proceeds: the overlay’s treatment of existing decks (two decks currently encroach into the proposed 25‑foot setback and would be grandfathered if legally established), how parking and stormwater runoff will be designed to avoid river discharge, and whether the overlay’s reference to "decks" is intended to include riverwalks or elevated walkways. Staff noted a fee waiver in the borough schedule for requests to formalize grandfathered structures submitted within a year of the rezone, intended to avoid imposing duplicate fees on affected owners.

Neighbors who spoke with the applicant during project outreach raised concerns about views and property values; Hajdukovich said he has worked with neighbors and hired an architect to design buildings that fit the neighborhood character. Commissioners expressed appreciation for the applicant’s outreach and for bank stabilization work and urged attention to green‑infrastructure options for parking and stormwater.

Votes at a glance: The commission voted to recommend the borough planning staff find RZ2025‑004 consistent with the Chena Riverfront Plan (motion text: "recommend to the borough community planning staff that RZ2025‑004 is consistent with the Chena Riverfront Plan including Goal 1 Policy 4 and Goal 5 Policy 2"). Linda Jones seconded; recorded votes were yes from Ms. Freiberg, Linda Jones, Ms. Everett, Mr. Wright, Ms. Morgan, Mr. Henze and Mr. Binkley (7‑0). The recommendation refers the application to the Planning Commission; staff confirmed the Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for July 8.

What’s next: The borough staff will publish a formal staff report before the Planning Commission hearing. The commission noted questions that remain for detailed review at the Planning Commission level, including final building footprints, stormwater design, and the precise scope of the waterway setback rules.

The Chena Riverfront Commission adjourned the special meeting at 12:56 p.m.