Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Standards Landscaping topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners back ordinance to ease some perimeter-landscaping rules for three- and four-plexes
Summary
The commission voted to recommend an ordinance amending perimeter landscaping standards so 3- and 4-unit lots would be exempt from the full L2 site-perimeter landscaping requirement while remaining subject to tree requirements; staff said the change aims to treat three- and four-plexes like single-family homes.
The Anchorage Planning and Zoning Commission on July 6 voted to recommend that the Assembly adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 21.070 (development design standards) to adjust perimeter landscaping requirements for three- and four‑unit residential lots.
Luke Bertram of Long Range Planning presented the ordinance, saying it would exempt 3- and 4-family lots from the full site-perimeter L2 landscaping requirement for permit completion but would not remove the tree requirement found elsewhere in code. "This would functionally just be exempting those lots from needing this additional landscaping work," Bertram said, while noting the change does not exempt the lots from providing required trees per the code subsection identified in the staff report.
Commissioners raised detailed questions. Commissioner McKee pressed staff on how the proposed language differs from existing L1/L2 requirements and whether the municipal code section that requires one tree per lot (referred to in discussion as AMC 20.04) would still apply; staff and a planner explained that AMC 20.04 (site tree requirement) provides a limited tree obligation and that the proposed change was intended to give three- and fourplexes the same review clarity and exemptions currently extended to single-family homes.
Commissioner Abaza asked why staff deleted language referencing lots "not being developed as part of a subdivision." Staff said the provision confused permit reviewers and that removing it clarifies applicability for infill and redevelopment cases.
Commissioner Polis moved to recommend Assembly approval; Commissioner Abaza seconded. Commissioners expressed support, citing staff findings and the absence of public opposition. The motion passed and the commission's recommendation will be forwarded to the Assembly.
Action and next steps: The commission forwarded the recommended ordinance to the Assembly; staff said they will double-check code cross-references to ensure the intended exemptions are clear in the final ordinance language.
