Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Anchorage Assembly postpones developer extension after residents demand relocation talks
Summary
After hours of testimony from South Park Estates residents who said eviction offers were inadequate, the Anchorage Assembly voted 7–3 to postpone action on a four-year extension for a developer’s Raspberry Townhomes project until May 12 and asked the Housing Committee to convene for further discussion.
The Anchorage Assembly on April 22 postponed action on an ordinance that would extend the development period for a Heritage Landbank parcel — the site of the proposed Raspberry Townhomes — after residents of nearby South Park Estates told the body the developer’s relocation offers were insufficient.
Developer Sean Devonhim told the assembly he sought a four‑year extension to the parcel’s reversion clause to allow the construction of 58 townhomes and said financing was in place with a planned groundbreaking in early May. "We plan to break ground May 7th in 2 weeks," he said, urging the assembly to approve the extension so the project could proceed.
But residents who said they live at South Park Estates opposed immediate approval. Corey Hill, speaking on behalf of the South Park Homeowners Association, asked the assembly to table the extension until the developer reached a "fair relocation agreement with the remaining residents." Hill said families had invested in their manufactured homes and that eviction notices and rent increases were already displacing households.
Multiple residents gave detailed testimony about the cost and consequences of losing their homes. One speaker said the park had 66 owner‑occupied homes in 2020 and that only about 35 remain; another said the true cost to move a manufactured home was about $40,000, far higher than the $6,000 relocation offer they reported receiving from the owner. Residents also described fire, longstanding infrastructure problems and a contamination issue that they said required cleanup.
The developer responded on the record, saying his team had negotiated individual agreements with roughly 40% of tenants and describing three assistance tracks: notice and scheduling, in‑kind help (labor and coordination), and financial assistance. He said the owner had committed up to $534,000 for tenant assistance and that tenants who moved their homes would be offered "$9,000 plus three months of free rent," which he said could total more than $19,000 when combined with moving help and free rent at the destination park.
Assembly members spent substantial time debating whether to address the extension tonight or pause to let residents and the developer negotiate and to allow additional briefings. Supporters of postponement said the public good required more information and time to consider the link between municipal subsidy and displacement; opponents said delaying could jeopardize financing and new housing production.
The assembly voted 7–3 to postpone the ordinance to the May 12 meeting and asked the chairs of the Housing and Homelessness Committee to host a special meeting before that date to brief members and facilitate further discussion.
What’s next: The ordinance will return to the assembly on May 12; the Housing Committee chairs agreed to schedule a special briefing to allow members, tenants and the developer to exchange information and explore relocation options.
