Anchorage Assembly delays final vote on Girdwood comprehensive plan after hours of testimony

The Anchorage Assembly postponed a final vote on the Girdwood comprehensive plan Tuesday after a marathon public hearing that drew dozens of residents, planners and stakeholders.

The hearing, on ordinance AO 2024-114 and its S version, opened with a staff overview and more than two dozen speakers from Girdwood and Anchorage who gave mostly opposing views about two recently proposed changes that would allow new low-intensity residential development near Virgin Creek and allow mixed-use development on about 72 acres north of the Girdwood airport (frequently called “the mitten” or “Enchanted Forest”).

Why it matters: The plan is intended to guide land-use, recreation and housing decisions in the Girdwood valley for years. Opponents said the contested changes would remove irreplaceable old-growth forest and fragment a core trail network; supporters said the amendments create limited new housing opportunities close to services and utilities.

Dozens of residents testified. Gabrielle Markle, who identified herself as born and raised in Girdwood, urged the Assembly to “maintain the mitten as open space and not make it mixed use.” Seth Anderson, who said he is working with Pomeroy Lodging and the Heritage Land Bank on a housing and outdoor recreation concept, asked the Assembly to “support an amendment that would keep the Mitten area’s land use category to accommodate housing,” and described a proposal that would include “mixed density housing, compact cluster housing, new trails, space for a Nordic ski center, parking areas for access to existing trails, restrictions on short term rentals, and programs to ensure that the homes would be owned by people that live and work in Girdwood.”

Several long-time residents and community organizations testified in favor of keeping the mitten and the Virgin Creek/west Timberline areas designated as open space. Amanda Tuttle, who described herself as an “old Girdwood business owner and landowner,” told the Assembly she believed the amendment “is not legally compliant” with existing conveyances and local plans. Julie Raymond Decobian and other speakers said the community process that produced the plan should be honored. Christine Bonnell, a former municipal long-range planning manager, supported the S version crafted by the Girdwood planning team and said the plan “projects and supports the right amount of development focused in the areas where it needs to be.”

Assembly action and votes: The Assembly first adopted a staff-and-sponsor technical amendment (Johnson/Salt Amendment 1) that planners and Imagine Girdwood supported; that amendment passed unanimously, 11–0. After debate on a separate and more controversial amendment related to the Virgin Creek/Timberline area (Amendment 3), Assemblymember Rivera moved — and the Assembly approved — a motion to postpone further action until the March 18 meeting so members could review materials and hold a work session. The motion to postpone carried 10–1. The chair announced a planning work session will be scheduled about 1:15 p.m. on March 6 to provide additional briefing.

Clarifying context and limits: Multiple public speakers cited an estimate that Pomeroy’s concept could include about 365 residential units; other testimony noted that the draft plan already designates roughly 500 acres elsewhere in the valley for residential or mixed use. At least one speaker (a Heritage Land Bank commissioner) noted the HLB and other land-owners are part of the larger feasibility and ownership discussions. Planning staff told the Assembly the Virgin Creek strip could yield only a limited number of lots because of topography and rights-of-way; they also said the S version already incorporated many of the Planning & Zoning Commission’s earlier recommendations.

What’s next: The Assembly will resume the item where it left off — starting with the outstanding amendments — at its March 18 meeting. Members and staff said they will hold a work session on March 6 to walk through the contested changes, show updated maps, and let Planning, the Heritage Land Bank, Imagine Girdwood and other stakeholders present updated analyses.

The Assembly’s delay leaves the community’s adopted S version and the planning department’s later suggested changes in circulation; members said the extra time is intended to let them see the latest technical studies and give residents one more opportunity to present focused evidence about trails, wetlands, old-growth forest, infrastructure and housing capacity.