# General plan documents — anchorage-alaska Assembled by OpenPublica from the documents it serves for this government. Each section below is a separate publication by the government; page anchors (``) refer to pages of that section's own source PDF, linked in its heading. **Contains 1 document.** OpenPublica has pinned these slots for this government: area_plan_chugiak_eagle_river, area_plan_girdwood_appendix, area_plan_girdwood_community_attitudes, area_plan_girdwood_current_land_use, area_plan_girdwood_implementation, area_plan_girdwood_introduction, area_plan_girdwood_land_use_plan, area_plan_girdwood_location_history, area_plan_girdwood_natural_environment, area_plan_girdwood_population_employment, area_plan_girdwood_public_facilities, area_plan_girdwood_transportation, area_plan_turnagain_arm, general_plan_existing_conditions, general_plan_implementation, general_plan_introduction, general_plan_overview, guiding_principles, land_use. That is what we have looked for, not a statement that the government publishes nothing else — a plan element absent here may simply not have been reviewed yet. Last reviewed 2026-08-23. --- ## Land Use — Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan (Full Document, with AO 2023-21) - Source: https://www.muni.org/Departments/OCPD/Planning/Publications/SiteAssets/Pages/default/2040%20LUP%20Unlocked%202026.pdf - Pages: 122 - Covers: land_use - **Transcription findings were recorded for this document;** check figures against the source. # Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan A Supplement to Anchorage 2020 - Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan <
> Adopted September 26, 2017 Assembly Ordinance 2017-116 Amended by AO 2023-021 This publication was released by the Municipality of Anchorage Planning Department for the purpose of public information. It was printed in Anchorage, Alaska, by Service Business Printing at a cost of $22.00. Municipality of Anchorage Planning Department Long-Range Planning Division PO Box 99519-6650 Anchorage, AK 99519-6650 https://www.muni.org/planning # Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan ## A Supplement to Anchorage 2020–Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan Adopted September 26, 2017 Anchorage Assembly Ordinance 2017-116 Municipality of Anchorage Planning Department Municipality of Anchorage – Planning Department September 2017 Dear Citizens of Anchorage: We are excited to present the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan (2040 LUP)*, developed on a foundation of inclusiveness and commitment to improving our community as the best place in America to *Live, Work, and Play*. The Anchorage Bowl has urbanized and evolved since we adopted *Anchorage 2020—Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan* in 2001. New challenges demand that Anchorage become more resilient and better prepared for mid-21st century realities, including lower oil production revenues and state spending, as well as fostering new opportunities for economic development and resilience. The *2040 LUP* recognizes these community changes and sets the stage for future growth, development, and sustainability. Additionally, many Anchorage neighborhoods have adopted plans or are working on plans. These include East and West Anchorage, Downtown, Government Hill, Fairview, Hillside, the UMED District, Mountain View, South Addition, and Spenard. The *2040 LUP* incorporates analysis of Anchorage demographics and projected growth, current and future economic changes, current land uses, and future land capacity. These required elements of our Comprehensive Plan inform the policies and strategies contained within the plan. To ensure efficient and equitable growth within our limited geographic area, Anchorage must maximize land use efficiencies while protecting and enhancing valued neighborhood characteristics and natural resources. The *2040 LUP* recommends strategies for compatible infill and redevelopment, housing and neighborhoods, commercial centers and corridors, open space and greenbelts, transportation, and coordinated and focused public investments. New policies provide structure and guidance for targeted areas of economic development and revitalization. The development of this community-based plan engaged many partners and the public. Thank you to those who gave time and great thought to make this *2040 LUP* what it is. Our team is gratified at the level of interest and feedback during the public comment periods for the community discussion draft and the public hearing draft plan. We want to demonstrate to you that Anchorage is open for investment and new ideas! Sincerely, Hal H. Hart, AICP Planning Director # Acknowledgements Thank you to all the individuals and organizations who have participated in creating the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan*, by attending a meeting, providing a written letter, responding to a questionnaire, spreading the word, or in any other way working on this plan to help make Anchorage’s future brighter. Additional thanks to the boards and commissions, focus groups, community and business organizations, and agency and utility representatives who have provided input and shared their expertise along the way. ### Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) Ethan Berkowitz, Mayor ### Assembly Dick Traini, Chair Forrest Dunbar, Vice-Chair Christopher Constant Eric Croft Amy Demboski Fred Dyson Suzanne LaFrance Pete Petersen Felix Rivera Tim Steele John Weddleton ### Planning and Zoning Commission Tyler Robinson, Chair Jon Spring, Vice-Chair Danielle Bailey Mitzi Barker Brian Looney Andre Spinelli Brandon Spoerhase Gregory Strike Brandon Walker ### Cartographics, Design, and Land Analyses and Forecasting AMATS Growth Allocation Model Team Lisa Ameen, Contractor Jeff Anderson, MOA PM&E/Land Records/GIS Barrett Studio Architects Collin Hodges, MOA Public Transportation Amber Jackson, MOA OECD, Geographic Information and Data Center Michael Knapp, Blue Skies Solutions, LLC Terry Lamberson, MOA PM&E/Land Records/GIS Tina Miller, MOA OECD, Geographic Information and Data Center Cassondra Newman, AmeriCorps VISTA Intern from Mayor’s Office Jennifer Novy, MOA PM&E/Land Records/GIS Scott Norton, HDR Alaska, Inc. Bill Reid, PNW Economics, LLC John St. Clair, MOA OECD, Geographic Information and Data Center ### Office of Economic and Community Development (OECD) Christopher Schutte, Director ### Planning Department Team Hal Hart, AICP, Director Carol Wong, Long-Range Planning Manager Kristine Bunnell Jon Cecil, AICP Tom Davis, AICP Susan Perry Jody Seitz Reneé Stewart Thede Tobish # Table of Contents ### Section 1 **VISION** Goals, Forecasts, and Policies for Growth | | | | |---|---|---| | **1.1.** | **Guiding Anchorage's Growth** | **1** | | | Plan Objectives | 1 | | | Relationship to Other Plans | 2 | | | Map 1-1. Area-Specific Plans – Anchorage Bowl | 5 | | | Relationship to the Zoning Map and Other Actions | 6 | | | Public Engagement in Making the Plan | 7 | | **1.2.** | **Forecasting Growth** | **8** | | | Anchorage 2040 Growth Forecast | 8 | | | Land Capacity for Housing and Employment | 10 | | | Growth Capacity of *2040 LUP* | 12 | | **1.3.** | **Anchorage's Growth Strategy** | **15** | | | Map 1-2. Areas of Growth and Change by 2040 | 27 | ### Section 2 **PLAN** Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Map | | | | |---|---|---| | **2.1.** | **Creating Great Places** | **29** | | | Land Use Designations (Introduction) | 29 | | | Relationship to Land Use Designations in Area-specific Plans | 31 | | | Map 2-1. Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Map | 31 | | | Shared Infill Design Principles | 34 | | **2.2.** | **Land Use Designations** | **36** | | | Neighborhoods | 36 | | | Centers | 42 | | | Corridors | 48 | | | Open Spaces | 50 | | | Facilities and Institutions | 52 | | | Industrial Areas | 57 | | | | | |---|---|---| | | **Preface** | v | | | | | |---|---|---| | 2.3. | **Growth-supporting Features** | 60 | | | Transit-supportive Development | 61 | | | Greenway-supported Development | 64 | | | Traditional Neighborhood Design | 65 | | | Residential Mixed-use Development | 67 | | | Other Map Features | | | | | | | |---|---|---|---| | **Section 3** | | | | | **ACTION** | 3.1. | **Implementation Tools** | 69 | | Strategies and | 3.2. | **Essential Strategies** | 71 | | Actions to | | Strategy 1: Phasing of Growth and Investment | 71 | | Achieve the Plan | | Strategy 2: Reinvestment Focus Areas | 71 | | | | Strategy 3: Infrastructure Financing and Provision | 72 | | | | Strategy 4: Financial and Taxation Incentives | 74 | | | | Strategy 5: Development Permitting Assistance | 75 | | | | Strategy 6: Targeted Area Rezonings | 75 | | | | Strategy 7: New Zoning Districts/Overlay Zones | 77 | | | | Strategy 8: Preservation and Re-use of Older Buildings | 77 | | | | Strategy 9: Infill Housing Development Regulations | 77 | | | | Strategy 10: Traded Sectors Industrial Site Availability and Readiness | 78 | | | | Strategy 11: Special Study Areas/Small-area Implementation Plan | 78 | | | | Strategy 12: Systematic Monitoring and Amendment of this Plan | 79 | | | 3.3. | **Actions Checklist** | 80 | | | | Actions Checklist Table (Figure 3-5) | 82 | | | | Map 3-1. Actions Map | 94 | | | | Near-term Work Flow Priorities (Figure 3-7) | 95 | **Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Map (Inside Back Cover)** # Table of Figures | Preface and Section 1 Figures | | | :--- | :--- | | **i-i** | How to Use the 2040 LUP when Considering Conditional Uses and Rezonings | ix | | **1-1** | How the 2040 Land Use Plan Relates to Other Plans and to Zoning | 4 | | **1-2** | Vision, Plan, and Action | 6 | | **1-3** | 2040 LUP Public Process Timeline | 7 | | **1-4** | Population Growth Forecasts | 8 | | **1-5** | Employment Growth Forecasts | 8 | | **1-6** | Land Policy Implications | 9 | | **1-7** | Housing Need and Land Capacity | 11 | | **1-8** | Commercial and Industrial Land Needs as Compared to Vacant Buildable Land | 11 | | **1-9** | Anchorage Industrial Traded Sector Land Need to 2040 | 12 | | **1-10** | Housing Need and land Capacity for Housing under 2040 LUP | 12 | | **1-11** | Commercial and Industrial land Demand and Supply under 2040 LUP | 13 | | **1-12** | Data Contributing to this Plan | 13 | | **1-13** | Areas Researched as Potential Buildable Lands and Reserves for the 2040 LUP | 14 | | **1-14** | Goals, Policies, and Strategies | 15 | ## Section 2 Figures | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **2-1** | Types of Places | 29 | | **2-2** | Floor Area Ratio | 30 | | **2-3** | Calculating Gross Versus Net Residential Density | 30 | | **2-4** | Crosswalk between Bowl-wide and Area-specific Land Use Designations | 31-33 | | **2-5** | Neighborhood Housing Types | 41 | | **2-6** | Centers — Built Scale and Form | 44 | | **2-7** | Downtown Seismic Hazards and Historic Preservation | 46 | | **2-8** | Parking Lot Redevelopment | 47 | | **2-9** | Turnagain Bog Area | 57 | | **2-10** | Street Typologies and Land Use | 65 | | **2-11** | Potential Future Connections: Seward-to-Glenn Highway and Knik Arm Crossing | 67 | | **2-12** | Potential Future Connections: UMED Northern Access | 67 | ## Section 3 Figures | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **3-1** | Central Spenard Reinvestment Focus Area | 73 | | **3-2** | 2040 LUP and Zoning District Cross-Reference | 76 | | **3-3** | Key to Time Frames and Responsible Agencies in Actions Checklist | 80 | | **3-4** | Key to Plans and Studies and Funding Needs in Actions Checklist | 81 | | **3-5** | Actions Checklist | 82-93 | | **3-6** | Actions Map Inset | 94 | | **3-7** | Optimal Work Flow of the Near-term Actions from the Actions Checklist | 96 | # Supporting Information <
> **Appendices on Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Web Page:** **Search "Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan"** **Appendices are informational only. They document the data, comments, and process that shaped the plan.** Appendix A. Map Folio / Planning Atlas Appendix B. Future Growth Report Appendix C. Anchorage Traded Sectors Analysis Appendix D. Public Involvement Process Appendix E. Public Comments Compilation Appendix F. Comment Issue-Response Appendix G. Research Documentation **Interactive Zoom-in Maps on Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Web Page:** Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Map Area-Specific Plans Map Areas of Growth and Change Map Actions Map Supporting Information Maps (Appendix A Map Folio contains full set of maps, not all are interactive) Existing Housing Stock Inventory Existing Residential Density, in Dwellings per Acre Existing Land Use Inventory, by Economic Sector Parks and Open Space Natural Assets Existing Zoning Districts # Overview ## What is this document? The Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan (2040 LUP) supplements the Municipality’s Comprehensive Plan for the Anchorage Bowl. *Anchorage 2020–Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan* serves as the framework for the 2040 LUP. Building on this framework, the 2040 LUP incorporates the adopted neighborhood and district plans, public facility plans, and recent analyses regarding population, housing, commercial, and industrial needs over the next 25 years. The 2040 LUP features a land use plan map, which recommends the future land development pattern. It shows where land uses may occur within the Anchorage Bowl to accommodate anticipated growth. It also includes strategies to carry out the plan and manage growth. Adopted by the Assembly on September 26, 2017, the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* is now a part of the Municipality’s Comprehensive Plan. ## How is this document organized? Section 1 - Vision provides an account of the considerations in developing this plan, including: (1) relevant policies from *Anchorage 2020–Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan*; (2) introduction of new goals and policies to address emerging land use issues; (3) adopted neighborhood and area-specific plans; (4) changing demographics, population, employment forecasts, and their needs; and (5) comments and ideas heard from the public and agency stakeholders during the public outreach process conducted for the 2040 LUP. Also included is the “Areas of Growth and Change by 2040 Map,” which illustrates areas where: little growth is expected; moderate growth may occur; and significant growth will likely occur due to available vacant or redevelopable lands, existing or planned infrastructure improvements and services, and the neighborhoods which desire new housing, jobs, and growth. Section 2 - Plan describes the 2040 Land Use Plan Map (LUPM) and defines the different land use categories on it. The LUPM will serve as a reference to the public, investors, developers, and public officials in making decisions regarding future land use and infrastructure. This section also introduces four “Growth-supporting Features”: (1) Transit-supportive Development, (2) Greenway-supported Development, (3) Residential Mixed-use Development, and (4) Traditional Neighborhood Design. These four features are intended to provide an area-specific focus and intent and are gaining private and public support because of their potential ability to increase long-term property values. Section 3 - Action identifies strategies and actions to achieve the Plan. These actions will be needed if Anchorage is to grow and foster the housing, employment, and recreation and open space needed to meet the forecast population and employment growth demands over the next 25 years. Given the reality of diminishing state operating and capital funding and the importance of maintaining existing infrastructure investments, a cornerstone to implementing the 2040 LUP is the coordination and focusing of public funding on new infrastructure improvements and services to those areas best able to accept new growth. The 2040 LUP Actions Checklist, Figure 3-4, identifies time frames of Now, 1-3 years, 4-6 years, 7-10 years, and Ongoing for the actions that guide future municipal work programs and capital improvement projects, allocation of funding and resources, and the identification of core responsible agencies and potential new partnerships. ## Where can more information about the 2040 LUP be found? The 2040 LUP web site contains information and links to the following: * Land Use Plan Map: various sizes for printing and interactive viewing. * Map Folio: atlas of mapped information that informed the 2040 LUP. * Area-specific Plans Map: hyperlinks to adopted neighborhood and district plans. * Growth Forecast Report: updated housing, commercial, and industrial land assessments. * Public Involvement Plan. * Public and Agency Stakeholder Comments. * Other Appendices. (continued next page...) Using the 2040 LUP in Discretionary Land Use Decisions Figure i-i. below illustrates the steps for using the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* when determining: * Which land use designation applies to a parcel; and * Which zoning districts, conditional uses, public facilities, or subdivision designs could be appropriate for the parcel. Section 1 of the *2040 LUP* explains the Plan’s relationship to Anchorage’s Title 21 zoning ordinance, and states that discretionary actions, such as rezonings, will be consistent with the *2040 LUP*. (See also Title 21 Section 21.01.080D.4.) Section 2 presents each land use designation with a corresponding set of zoning districts which may be appropriate to implement it, depending on location. It states that the most intense corresponding zoning district is not necessarily or automatically the most appropriate (Section 2.1, page 29, Zoning Districts). The proposed zoning must be consistent with the Plan including the information found in steps 1 to 6 below. Figure i-i. is a general illustration, and may not reflect all the steps needed in some cases. It does not supersede any part of the *2040 LUP*. Fig. i-i. Steps for Determining the Land Use Designation and Appropriate Future Zoning for a Site <
> # Section 1: Vision ## Goals, Forecasts, and Policies for Growth <
> This page is intentionally left blank. # 1.1 Guiding Anchorage’s Growth Where will new residents settle over the next two decades? Where will people work, shop, and play? Will there be enough room to grow? How will Anchorage look? Will growth support strong neighborhoods, and preserve natural assets? Will Anchorage be an attractive place to live? Section 1 of this plan outlines the land use framework for answering these questions. The *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* (2040 LUP) is a visual guide for growth and development in the Anchorage Bowl over the next 25 years aligned with the vision and goals of the *Anchorage 2020—Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan* (*Anchorage 2020*). *Anchorage 2020*, adopted in 2001, set a new direction for growth and development. Its policies anticipated the evolution of Anchorage toward reinvestment in existing business districts and neighborhoods with new patterns of infill and redevelopment. *Anchorage 2020* envisioned a more compact and efficient land use pattern in and around mixed-use centers, while preserving lower-intensity uses elsewhere, such as established neighborhoods and natural open spaces. The 2040 LUP is a targeted amendment to the land use element of *Anchorage 2020*. It updates the forecasts for growth and land needs through the year 2040 and provides a map with more specific guidance for future uses throughout the Bowl. Accompanying the map are policies and strategies to achieve that growth in response to today’s challenges. The 2040 LUP is a part of the *Comprehensive Plan* and carries the same weight and authority. ## Economic Challenges With one-third of Alaska’s population and nearly half of its jobs in a 100-square-mile area, the Anchorage Bowl is the urban center of an emerging metropolitan region. Anchorage hosts many of the region’s cultural attractions, businesses, and services and is the hub for air, road, maritime, and rail transportation, which help drive the local and statewide economy. Despite the current economic downturn, Anchorage’s longer-term vital signs remain positive. This plan prepares for a brighter future, economic success, and the forecast growth through 2040. Although Anchorage can do little to affect the price of oil, there is a lot it can do with its land use policies. For example, land use strategies can reduce the cost of housing and alleviate the workforce housing deficit. Strategies are also needed to ensure there will be a predictable land supply for key industries and other economic anchors. Land use strategies can also attract reinvestment into city centers and revitalize older neighborhoods. Attracting and retaining a skilled workforce is essential to a resilient, growing economy. This Plan recognizes that talent is mobile and seeks a high-quality place and lifestyle. Anchorage’s natural assets are attractive, but creating and improving the types of places where people will want to live, work, and play is also important. ## Plan Objectives The *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* visualizes and guides the future pattern of development and distribution of land uses across the Anchorage Bowl. It shows where different land uses, intensities of use, and urban form characteristics are planned to occur by 2040. This is the blueprint for how Anchorage will accommodate economic growth and meet the forecast employment and housing needs of current and future residents. However, its land use categories are more than just a strategy for absorbing growth. They represent the kinds of places that will define Anchorage as a great city in which to live: its neighborhoods, commercial centers, industrial employment areas, institutional campuses, public facilities, streets, parks, and natural open spaces. The core purpose of the 2040 LUP is to manage land uses to improve the quality of life for all residents during times of change. This Land Use Plan is the first step toward an update of *Anchorage 2020*. It supplements *Anchorage 2020* and provides a baseline from which land use decisions can proceed, by: * Providing greater land use predictability and clearer policy direction. * Coordinating recommended land uses from various adopted area-specific plans. * Clarifying the framework for making zoning and development decisions. * Aligning land use regulations and public investments in transportation, utilities, and other infrastructure. ### Relationship to Other Plans Since the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* guides how land is to be used throughout the Anchorage Bowl, it has an important relationship to policies contained in the other elements of the *Comprehensive Plan*, including functional plans and area-specific plans. The goals and policies of these plans have shaped the *2040 LUP*. Figure 1-1 on page 4 illustrates the relationship between the *2040 LUP* and other elements of *Anchorage 2020*. #### Functional Plans Functional plans provide specific policy direction for transportation and infrastructure. Examples of functional plans include: * Metropolitan Transportation Plan[^p16-1] * Anchorage Bike and Pedestrian Plans * Anchorage Bowl Park, Natural Resource, and Recreation Facility Plan * Utility Corridor Plan * Anchorage Wetlands Management Plan These plans focus on their respective functions and establish priorities for infrastructure improvements, natural resource management, and levels of service. The goals, objectives, and infrastructure priorities of functional plans are developed in compliance with the overall *Comprehensive Plan*, including the *2040 LUP*. ### Anchorage 2020—Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan Guidance <
> To develop *Anchorage 2020*, the Municipality involved a broad cross section of stakeholders. While some of the particulars have changed and new challenges have arisen, the core goals and principles that emerged from those meetings are as relevant today as when first incorporated into the Plan. Subsequent area-specific and other plans have reconfirmed and elaborated on these goals. The *2040 LUP* builds on the following goals abridged from *Anchorage 2020* and other adopted elements of the Comprehensive Plan: **Future Growth.** Take a forward-looking approach to community growth and redevelopment, embodied in the *Anchorage 2020* Land Use Concept Plan and Land Use Policy Map, by pursuing innovative ways to accommodate and encourage growth in population, housing, and employment. **Building Community.** Build on existing commercial districts and neighborhood strengths through reinvestment. **Diverse, Healthy Economy.** Capitalize on Anchorage's unique strengths and its regional, statewide, and global position, as well as its key economic sectors and well-paying jobs. **Economic Viability with Placemaking.** Strive to create a built environment comprising great places, streets, and spaces that together generate a positive city image, support lasting economic viability, attract new residents and workforce talent, and promote affordable development. **Compact Development.** Use infill and redevelopment with a more compact land use pattern that supports efficient use of land, <
> Anchorage 2020 Land Use Policy Map sets the preferred growth concept within which 2040 LUP provides more specific, updated guidance. [^p16-1]: The *Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)* and the Transportation Improvements Program (TIP) are adopted by Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions, or AMATS. ### Anchorage 2020—Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan Guidance, continued lowers the cost of public services and utilities, improves the performance of transportation networks, and preserves open space. **Natural Open Spaces and Wildlife.** Preserve and enhance the network of natural open spaces that provides Anchorage's scenery, ecological functions such as water drainage and re-charge, diversity of fish and wildlife habitats, and recreational opportunities. **Strong, Resilient Community.** Manage future growth and development to minimize risks to life safety and property from natural hazards and disasters. **Balance of Commercial and Industrial Land.** Preserve a balanced supply of commercial and industrial land that is compatible with surrounding uses and has access to transportation networks. **Housing.** Provide a diverse supply of quality housing that meets the needs and preferences of city residents, for all income levels, in safe and livable neighborhoods. **Neighborhood Identity and Vitality.** Encourage distinctive neighborhoods that are responsive to the diverse needs of residents in urban, suburban, and rural settings, with amenities and infrastructure to absorb growth, such as good access to schools, recreation, natural areas, and services. **Compatible Development.** Promote development that respects the scale and character of existing neighborhoods, contributes to neighborhoods of lasting value and vitality, and is supported by investment in local amenities and services. **Harmony with Natural Setting.** Develop in harmony with the natural setting and capitalize on retaining Anchorage's advantage as an attractive place to live and work which is mindful of critical environmental lands, its northern climate, and natural hazards. **Community Facilities.** Provide a well-planned mix of public, utility, and institutional facilities that coordinate with private-sector development to meet the health, educational, civic, cultural, recreational, utility, governmental, and public safety needs of all citizens, businesses, and neighborhoods. **Mobility and Access.** Develop an efficient transportation system that is based on land use, moves people and goods safely with minimal impact on surrounding uses and the community, and maximizes choices among various modes of travel including walking, bicycling, and public transit. **Walkable Community.** Develop a community that allows for living, working, shopping, and recreation within convenient travel distances, in a pedestrian-oriented development pattern that supports healthy, active lifestyles. The 2040 LUP also coordinates other facility and operational plans. This includes water and wastewater facilities, public transit, and municipal and state roadway improvements. The *Comprehensive Plan*, including the 2040 LUP, helps other agencies understand long-term city goals and the way their work shapes the Plan, even if the agencies must focus on short-term needs that are out of step with the long-term Plan. For example, the long-term vision for public transit in the *Comprehensive Plan* is to build a high frequency transit network operating along many street corridors. In the short term, however, Public Transportation must focus its operations planning on a fewer number of high-frequency routes where most of its riders are. Eventually, transit operations should merge with the long-range vision. But it will take years to build the infrastructure and housing to support extending the high-frequency network to all areas envisioned in the *Comprehensive Plan*. The 2040 LUP assumes that over time, infrastructure improvements identified in the functional plans, including the *Metropolitan Transportation Plan*, will be constructed. As these improvements come on line, the areas served can be fully developed as envisioned under the 2040 LUP. ### Neighborhood and District Plans *Anchorage 2020* called for neighborhood and district plans to accomplish *Comprehensive Plan* policies, and respond to area-specific issues. <
> More than 12 neighborhood, district, and other area-specific plans have been adopted in the Anchorage Bowl. The *Area-specific Plans Map* on the next page depicts the current adopted plans. These plans provide tailored land use designations and development guidance that is too detailed for planning at the citywide scale. Potential investors, new development projects, and public investments within these areas should refer to these area-specific plans for more in-depth policy direction and area-specific development guidelines. The *2040 LUP* provides a citywide land use policy framework and layout plan that incorporates the land use designations provided by each of the area-specific plans. ### Where 2040 Plan Recommendations Differ from Adopted Area-specific Plans The Municipality’s *Comprehensive Plan* is the sum of its area-wide comprehensive plans, district-level and neighborhood plans, and its many functional plans. Because they have been adopted during different time periods, existing conditions, and trends, there can be inconsistencies between these *Comprehensive Plan* elements. For example, in some locations, the *2040 LUP* recommends different uses or intensities of use from those adopted in area-specific plans. These areas are shown with a green outline on **Map 1-2, Areas of Growth and Change**, on page 27. These changes are recommended from the following analyses and public outreach process for the *2040 LUP*: * Updated studies linking Anchorage’s land supply and its housing capacity. * Updated forecasts for population growth and housing and employment needs. * Updated or improved information about existing and anticipated uses. * Emerging issues and public input during the *2040 LUP* public involvement process. * Citywide land use issues that became evident but have not been addressed by individual area-specific plans. Where the *2040 Land Use Plan’s* land use designations differ from those found in the applicable area-specific plan, AMC Title 21 Land Use Regulations provides guidance on resolving these situations. It states that, where comprehensive plan elements conflict, the most recently adopted shall govern. This principle will apply when one plan element, such as the *2040 LUP*, lists a different land use designation than another plan element, such as a neighborhood or district plan. The *2040 LUP* governs if it was adopted more recently than the neighborhood or district plan. When a new neighborhood or district plan is adopted after the *2040 LUP*, it is expected that these plans will be consistent with the overall policy framework and goals of the *Anchorage 2020–Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan* and the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan*. This approach provides consistency on Bowl-wide issues, such [^p18-2]: The Transportation Improvements Program (TIP) is adopted by Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions, or AMATS as growth and employment needs, and in the implementation of these two overarching *Comprehensive Plan* elements. To determine the land use designation for a specific parcel within the Anchorage Bowl, users should reference **Map 1-1, Area-specific Plans**, as a reference point for making decisions on land use and zoning. ### Area-specific Plan Updates Some area-specific plans will be updated and new plans adopted in the future. When adopted, these plans will amend the *Comprehensive Plan* and may refine the 2040 Land Use Plan Map. To that end, the *Area-specific Plans* map at right should be updated as new plans are approved. New and updated plans are expected to maintain or increase housing and employment capacity and help achieve the citywide goals, policies, and growth strategies. Proposed departures from the 2040 LUP should be evaluated using the guidance of *Comprehensive Plan* goals and policies for land use, transportation, infrastructure, allocation of future growth, and impacts to other parts of the community. See Section 3.2 Strategy 12 for further guidance on updates and amendments to the *Comprehensive Plan*. <
> Search online with "Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan" to go to the zoom-in interactive version of this map. <
> Relationship to the Zoning Map and Other Implementation Actions The *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan*, along with other elements of the *Comprehensive Plan*, provides policy direction for future land use decisions, such as rezonings, changes to development regulations, public facility site selections, and infrastructure investments. Future actions like these will implement the *Comprehensive Plan*. The *2040 LUP* by itself does not alter existing zoning or change the land use regulations that apply to a parcel of land. The rights of property owners to use land as zoned at the time of this Plan's adoption remain unaffected. Many recommendations of the *2040 LUP* that could lead to rezonings will take years to implement. While the *2040 LUP* recommends future land uses and a range of potential intensities of use, it is zoning that sets the rules for the use of property, lot size, setbacks, building heights, and other site attributes. These land use regulations (Title 21 of the Anchorage Municipal Code) apply as *zoning districts* delineated on the municipal Zoning Map. Changes to the Zoning Map (rezonings) or to Title 21 land use regulations are separate public processes that include community input. Amendments to Title 21, the Zoning Map, and other discretionary municipal actions will be consistent with the *2040 LUP* and other *Comprehensive Plan* policies. Section 3 provides more detail regarding the strategies and actions to carry out the *2040 LUP*. Figure 1-2. Vision, Plan, and Action <
> ### Public Engagement in Making the Plan This Plan is based on extensive input and consultation with many stakeholders. Its guiding public involvement principles and process were posted online (Appendix D, *Public Involvement Process*). The public process that produced this Plan involved a variety of public meetings, open houses, workshops, and expert focus groups. It included more than 150 consultations with more than 110 organizations: community councils, stakeholder groups, public agencies, businesses and organizations, landowners, industry experts, and residents. More than 500 pages of comments were received and posted online (Appendix E, *Public Comments*). The Planning Department goal was to make sure that all stakeholders knew that, despite any differences, the community’s thoughts and ideas were always heard and considered. A *Comment Issue-Response Summary* (Appendix F) documented each issue raised, the team’s response, and the Planning and Zoning Commission’s recommendation. #### Fig. 1-3. 2040 LUP Public Process Timeline <
> ### A Broad Project Team The *2040 LUP* was created by a multi-departmental team with significant contributions by private-sector consulting firms. It was also shaped by a broader group of agencies, utilities, topical and area-specific experts, and knowledgeable citizens. To ensure the Plan is feasible to carry out, municipal, state, and federal agencies, local utilities, and developers were consulted and invited to comment at each stage of the process. ### Public Process Timeline As Figure 1-3 indicates, this Plan was grounded in *Anchorage 2020*, Neighborhood and District Plans, and updated forecasts of housing, commercial, and industrial land needs. Development of the *2040 LUP* began in July 2015. Initial consultations with a range of stakeholders made evident a high level of public interest in their city’s future. These conversations shaped the February 2016 Community Discussion Draft. <
> Regional Workshops A three-month public-review period followed. Meetings, workshops, and consultations yielded thousands of comments, helping to transform the plan into the September 2016 Public Hearing Draft. After taking in comments and testimony, the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) deliberated over the course of 13 meetings. PZC concluded its deliberations in early June 2017, recommending approval of the Plan with changes. The PZC Recommended Draft was forwarded to the Anchorage Assembly in August 2017 for public hearing and action. ## 1.2 Forecasting Growth A land use plan and growth forecast cannot precisely predict 25 years into the future, nor can it influence macro-economic factors, such as the price of oil or its production volumes. The Plan can determine how Anchorage provides space for and guides development toward scenarios in which the Municipality attracts talent, investment, and economic growth as the hub for commercial and industrial growth in Alaska. The *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* is designed to accommodate a healthy yet moderate forecast average annual population growth rate of 0.8 percent, and an employment growth rate of 0.9 percent, between 2015 and 2040. It balances the needs of the residential, commercial, and industrial land markets, and anticipates sustained, equitable, and orderly growth beyond 2040. Section 1.2 summarizes the forecast for population, households, and employment growth in the Anchorage Bowl in the context of surrounding communities; compares the future demand for housing and employment sites with Anchorage’s land supply; and explains how the *2040 LUP* performs to reconcile gaps in the land market between demand and supply. ### Anchorage 2040 Growth Forecast Over the next 25 years, the Anchorage Bowl is forecast to add as many as 47,000 people and 21,000 households. This represents the Anchorage Bowl’s share of the metropolitan region’s projected growth through 2040. <
> This expected growth represents an average annual population growth rate of 0.8%, adding 64,000 residents in the Municipality overall. This would yield a population of 362,000 in the Municipality by 2040. The majority of the additional residents (47,000 more people) would live in the Anchorage Bowl. The continued role of Anchorage as Alaska’s commerce and industry hub is forecast to drive an average annual employment growth rate of up to 0.9%, adding 44,000 jobs, yielding total employment of 220,280 in the Municipality by 2040. The *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* considers this growth scenario as its baseline forecast for land planning. It also considers several lower and higher scenarios for growth given economic uncertainty. Figures 1-4 and 1-5 show that the baseline forecast for population and employment <
> is only one of several growth scenarios. It is at the upper end of a range of “most likely” growth scenarios. The Plan provides capacity to perform well under any of the most likely growth scenarios shaded in Figures 1-4 and 1-5. When considering future land needs in Anchorage, particularly in the middle of economic uncertainty, the Municipality can either plan for lower expectations of growth, or it can plan for a higher volume and types of growth it sees as preferable or optimal. The biggest risk faced by Anchorage as it plans for growth is to expect too little, plan for less, but then realize unexpected higher growth. That scenario would make current land capacity shortages and housing prices worse. Alternatively, planning for desired growth and ensuring adequate land capacity does not worsen current shortage and cost problems. If growth falls short of projections, higher planned capacity will likely improve current availability problems, including high land costs, as Figure 1-6 illustrates. Accordingly, the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* considers a primary Base Case growth scenario for land needs planning that is modest compared to historical growth, especially in the nearer term, and yet anticipates a return to normal growth rates after the current economic challenges subside. Challenges do remain, some of which municipal land use policy can measurably address and improve: * Housing choice availability at different affordability levels and types. ### Figure 1-6. Land Policy Implications | | Overestimate Demand Plan Smaller Supply | Overestimate Demand Plan Larger Supply | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Forecast High Growth** | **Capacity:** Uncertain
**Deficit:** Uncertain
**Price Inflation:** Uncertain | **Capacity:** Sufficient
**Deficit:** Alleviated
**Price Inflation:** Lower | | **Forecast Low Growth** | **Capacity:** Shortage
**Deficit:** Worsened
**Price Inflation:** Higher | **Capacity:** Uncertain
**Deficit:** Uncertain
**Price Inflation:** Uncertain | <
> * Diversification of the Anchorage economy with emphasis on sustainable, family-wage jobs. * Greater availability and diversity of commercial goods and services. The *2040 LUP* seeks to improve capacity and types of housing to alleviate costs. It seeks to balance the need to retain and even add industrial land and site availability—given the high-value business investment and higher-wage jobs in key industrial sectors—with needed commercial goods and services offerings in the Anchorage Bowl. ### Growing within the Regional Context The *2040 LUP* accommodates the Anchorage Bowl’s share of growth forecast in the metropolitan region. It coordinates with the anticipated share of additional population and jobs to go to other parts of the region, including Chugiak-Eagle River, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER), and Turnagain Arm communities within the Municipality, and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB). (See sidebar with regional map inset on page 14.) Chugiak-Eagle River is the Municipality’s second largest settlement area, and includes most of the remaining vacant land reserves in the Municipality. The *Chugiak-Eagle River Comprehensive Plan* accommodates additional population, residences, and businesses, while preserving open space and neighborhood character. It envisions new neighborhoods developing in phases, bringing streets and water and wastewater services to development areas of the Powder Reserve and other land reserves further north. The *2040 LUP* recognizes the Chugiak-Eagle River Plan’s anticipated population growth at a somewhat higher rate than the rest of the Municipality. The *Chugiak-Eagle River Comprehensive Plan* designates substantial land reserves for future single-family housing, as well as areas suited for more compact development. When developed, these areas will help meet the demand for this housing type within the Municipality. For these reasons, Chugiak-Eagle River is expected to accommodate 15 percent of the Municipality’s population by 2040. The *2040 LUP* growth forecast accounts for a Knik Arm Crossing (KAC) to the MSB that may become operational within the latter part of the 2040 planning horizon. It accounts for growth and movement of some housing and jobs into MSB as a result of a KAC. The likelihood and/or time frame of the Knik Arm Crossing has become uncertain. The Knik Arm Crossing was removed from consideration in the *2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan*. If a KAC does not become operational within the 2040 time frame, then the Anchorage Bowl and Chugiak-Eagle River could be expected to accommodate a somewhat greater share of regional growth than in the *2040 LUP* baseline forecast. Either way, the KAC is expected to have only a moderate effect on overall jobs and housing demand in the Bowl, as it would most likely come later in the 2040 planning horizon. Who Are We Planning For? The 2040 LUP provides for the people who live and work in Anchorage today, and for those who will make up Anchorage in 2040. This includes children and newcomers who will arrive for education, family, job, and quality-of-life opportunities. While it is difficult to predict the specific community composition in age, income, and household structures, recent Anchorage trends provide a general picture of the future population, including: * Accelerated growth in aging households and smaller households with fewer children. * Continued evolution into one of the most racially and ethnically diverse communities in the U.S. * Diverse households and income levels that need more affordable housing options and more transportation choices. * Talented professionals from all fields that are attracted to Anchorage's unique setting. * A growing number of multigenerational families and less transient population. Over the next 25 years, more people will be in “starter home,” moderate income, or downsizing households. As a result, people will be looking for smaller, more urban residences with walkable neighborhood amenities nearby. ## Land Capacity for Housing and Employment While Anchorage’s population is diverse, it is a “community of place,” where all people and activities share the same land space bounded by Cook Inlet, the Chugach Mountains, and military lands. Land with residences on it—whether a big apartment building or a small house—is called residential. Land used for activities like offices, shops, restaurants, warehouses, or factories is called non-residential. Land that is awaiting development may be called vacant, particularly if it has been untouched by development. Land that has previously been developed but could see new uses of greater intensity, including potentially taller buildings, is called redevelopable. Land that is reserved or serves as outdoor recreation area is called open space. How land uses relate to one another is often a source of considerable conflict, particularly as those uses change over time and the supply of vacant land becomes more constrained. Development capacity is an estimate of the amount of new residential or non-residential development (homes, apartments, stores, factories, etc.) that could occur in a space under current zoning and development patterns. It can be compared to how much demand for development is likely from the population and employment growth forecasts. This provides a basis for evaluating changes in land use. Capacity is influenced by market, zoning, and site characteristics and available infrastructure. ### Housing Space Needs As Figure 1-7 illustrates, the Anchorage Bowl has an identified need for 21,000 new residential units to meet the base case forecast population growth through 2040. For a comparison, this is roughly the amount of housing existing today in all of Northeast Anchorage including Russian Jack Park, Northeast, and Scenic Foothills Community Councils. The 21,000 new households translates into a need for an average net gain of 840 housing units per year in the Anchorage Bowl, nearly triple the net gain of recent years. The Bowl no longer has a vacant land tract the size of Northeast available for new housing. Its existing residential zoned vacant buildable land capacity is estimated to be 9,700 more housing units, assuming historically attained housing construction densities were to continue. Commercially zoned lands provide some additional housing capacity but do not close the deficit. Based on historical yields per acre, Anchorage's non-residential vacant lands would provide capacity for an additional 700 housing units, bringing the total vacant land capacity estimate to 10,400 additional units. The expected average housing yield is so low because under current conditions most commercial properties do not develop with housing. Redevelopment of existing residential lots will also play a role. Recent historical redevelopment rates and the characteristics of lots which redeveloped from 2000 to 2015 indicate a redevelopment capacity of 2,500 additional dwellings, based on current zoning and development trends. Figure 1-7 illustrates that, including redevelopable lands and buildable vacant lands, the Anchorage Bowl as currently zoned has a total capacity shortfall <
> (deficit) of 7,900 housing units by 2040 under the moderate, baseline growth forecast. ### Space Needs for Employment The *2040 LUP* also has the challenge of addressing the need to provide both adequate industrial land and commercial land for future employment and business growth in Anchorage. Commercial development includes office and institutional uses, retail goods and services, and hospitality services (e.g., restaurants and hotels). Figure 1-8 summarizes that, through 2040, Anchorage is estimated to need 630 acres for industrial development. At the same time, Anchorage is estimated to also need 740 acres for commercial development, under current zoning and a continuation of historical development patterns. Traditional industrial uses include manufacturing and production, warehousing and distribution, and repair enterprises. Examples of non-traditional industrial space users include warehousing for commercial or retail uses, or self-storage facilities. If Anchorage continues to grow according to traditional development patterns and densities—which include lower-intensity uses and encroachment by commercial uses into industrial zoned lands—then a shortage of both commercial and industrial land and sites for future business expansion will be a certainty. Figure 1-8 illustrates the shortfall. ### Space Needs for Industrial Traded Sectors The Municipality of Anchorage identified its essential, core industrial sectors which are the foundation of other industry and employment in the local economy. These industrial “Traded Sectors” use industrial land and pay significantly higher wages than do other sectors because they export goods and services both domestically and internationally. They also purchase significant volumes of goods and services from other local businesses in Anchorage, driving other local commerce and employment. Traded Sectors were identified as: * Various Manufacturing Businesses * Power Generation <
> Fig. 1-9. Anchorage Industrial Traded Sector Land Need to 2040 <
> * Non-Metal Mineral Mining * Air & Water Transportation * Professional & Technical Services The 2040 LUP prioritizes these Traded Sectors and their site and land needs to preserve and grow fundamental industries in the local economy. Figure 1-9 illustrates that an estimated 384 acres of industrial land will be required by these types of businesses by 2040, representing approximately 60 percent of all industrial land demand in Anchorage. Strategies are established in the 2040 LUP to ensure adequate land capacity for these essential businesses to grow in the necessary locations, particularly in the Anchorage Bowl, and with the necessary infrastructure and utilities that they specifically require. ### Growth Capacity of 2040 LUP The 2040 LUP relieves the housing capacity shortfall for most but not all housing types, as Figure 1-10 shows. It does so by reclassifying some lands to allow more housing than under current zoning. It focuses more housing production in commercial mixed-use centers. It would also increase housing capacity by resulting in changes that would allow and encourage more compact infill housing development. For example, the near-term implementation Actions include allowing and encouraging property owners to build accessory dwellings (aka, "grandmother apartments"). The 2040 LUP housing capacity estimate for "Compact Housing Types" in Figure 1-10 includes 1,000 new accessory units in the Bowl by 2040. In general, Figure 1-10 also reflects an adjustment of single-family housing demand over time toward more compact housing and multifamily types, as single-family lots become more scarce. Redevelopable lands also play a larger role under the 2040 LUP to alleviate part of the housing capacity shortfall. The 2040 LUP would increase forecast redevelopment to nearly 9,100 housing units. This is a redevelopment rate of 40 percent of all new housing capacity shown in Figure 1-10. More information regarding housing capacity and needs by housing type is provided in Appendix B. ### 2040 LUP Employment Capacity The 2040 LUP satisfies the commercial land demand by encouraging more efficient use of Figure 1-10. Housing Need and Land Capacity for Housing under 2040 LUP By Housing Type. Anchorage Bowl, 2015-2040. <
> Source: Housing Capacity Analysis of 2016 Public Hearing Draft 2040 LUP. Building icons from Creative Commons. Figure 1-11. Commercial and Industrial Land Demand and Supply under 2040 LUP In Acres. Anchorage Bowl, 2015-2040. <
> business-zoned land, through (a) more compact forms of development and (b) redevelopment. Development is forecast to fit 10 to 20 percent more building floor area per site on average, through implementing 2040 LUP policies, strategies, and actions in designated commercial Centers and Corridors. Figure 1-11 shows the resulting 120-acre reduction in both commercial and industrial land needed to fulfill the employment demand. Redevelopment under the 2040 LUP is forecast to account for more than one-fourth of future development capacity. The 2040 LUP provides policies, strategies, and actions that will serve to retain and protect industrial family-wage jobs, while facilitating greater intensity of commercial uses. Industrial factories and warehouse facilities cannot build and operate in multistory structures like office and commercial mixed-uses can do. The 2040 LUP endeavors to alleviate as much of the industrial land supply deficit as possible. It consolidates and stabilizes the industrial land base, by adding acreage in a few promising areas such as non-aviation use Airport-owned lands. It does reclassify some less-promising industrial zoned lands to non-industrial commercial use, such as in parts of south C Street with poor soils that are trending toward commercial. Implementation Actions in Section 3 will result in greater protection of the remaining industrial areas from displacement by commercial uses. The 2040 LUP also makes progress in using remaining industrial lands more efficiently. It encourages redevelopment through “brownfields” strategies, and encourages use of industrial land by higher-value industrial “Traded Sectors.” More information regarding growth forecasts and land capacity is provided in Appendix B. Fig. 1-12. Data Contributing to This Plan To understand Anchorage’s future land needs, the 2040 LUP incorporated recent studies of land demand and supply and updates to population, housing and employment forecasts: <
> # Community Expansion—Other Options Researched The amount of land available for residential, commercial, and industrial development in the Bowl is finite. Land exchanges or surplusing of military land, construction of a causeway to Fire Island, development in Chugiak-Eagle River, or a Knik Arm Crossing to Point MacKenzie in the Mat-Su Borough could increase the supply of land. However, all of these options remain highly speculative, expensive, and largely outside of local municipal control. Each option was considered based on an extensive number of consultations with stakeholders, and review of studies and reports. Lands of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER), Fire Island, the Chugiak-Eagle River area, and Point MacKenzie were investigated and analyzed to determine whether these land options could become available by 2040. JBER actively uses most of its lands for operations and training and is not expected to change in the foreseeable future. Construction of a causeway to Fire Island is unlikely because of a host of factors. Chugiak-Eagle River reserve lands of Eklutna, Inc., could potentially be developed during the plan horizon but each reserve area requires significant expansion of the urban road networks and utility infrastructure. The *Chugiak-Eagle River Comprehensive Plan* and the *Anchorage 2040 LUP* reflect the likely timing and extent of development. Only Powder Reserve and at most Eklutna 770 Tract are likely to be developed at urban residential densities by 2040. The State of Alaska has stopped planning studies and eliminated funding for construction of the Knik Arm Crossing project. The Knik Arm Crossing was removed from consideration in the *2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan*. Notwithstanding these near term actions, the *2040 LUP* assumes that a Knik Arm Crossing to Point MacKenzie could potentially be constructed during the latter part of the planning time horizon. However, land analyses indicate that it would yield only a modest reduction in land demand in the Anchorage Bowl, while leaving greater effects on Chugiak-Eagle River and eastern Mat-Su Borough including Wasilla and Palmer. <
> ## 1.3 Anchorage’s Growth Strategy The Goals of this section supplement and build on the goals of *Anchorage 2020* with updated land use-specific guidance for future growth. **Goals** set broad direction for the *2040 Land Use Plan*, consistent with the community vision. They identify a desired future condition that the Plan attempts to achieve over time. The discussion of each Goal is followed by a list of *Policies* giving more detail and guidance for decision makers. **Policies** are statements of principles or guidelines that direct decisions and actions toward achieving the Goals, without specifying which tools to use (a job for Strategies and Actions). Policies are generally open ended as to time frame; they provide ongoing guidance. For each Goal, related *Anchorage 2020* policies are listed first, and then new *2040 LUP* policies are provided that fill gaps and update the municipal land use policy guidance. The *2040 LUP* policies work in conjunction with *Anchorage 2020* policies and carry the same authority. The Policies direct the **Strategies** and **Actions** that appear in Section 3. **Strategies** are pathways, or mechanisms, to implement the Policies and often operate over a long term, as a means for accomplishing stated goals. They provide details for ways to achieve the Goals of the Plan. **Actions** are specific measures to carry out the Policies and Strategies to achieve the Goals. Section 3 further defines Strategies and Actions. ### Figure 1-14. Goals, Policies, Strategies, and Actions <
> Goal, Policy, Strategy, and Action numbers above correspond to the Goals, Policies, Strategies, and Near-term Actions as listed in this Plan. # Goal 1 Plan for Growth and Livability Anchorage achieves residential and commercial growth, which improves community resiliency and citizens' quality of life as it supports their vision for the future expressed in the Comprehensive Plan. The *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* reflects Anchorage's vision to meet the challenges and opportunities for growth. It provides a blueprint and strategy for how Anchorage should grow in the future to the benefit of all. This Plan focuses on where and how development should occur to accommodate Anchorage's share of growth forecast for the region and meet its current and future housing and employment needs. Mixed-use, walkable centers will absorb much growth, while infill development is encouraged along multi-modal travel corridors. The *2040 LUP* extends the city's network of parks, open spaces, and greenways that provide access to nature and preserve natural resources. It identifies and supports the valued characteristics of the Bowl's rural, suburban, and urban neighborhoods. Great neighborhoods and shared spaces in areas of growth will provide the features and infrastructure to retain and attract people, skilled workforce, and reinvestment for Anchorage. The *2040 LUP* coordinates changes in land use, transportation, and other infrastructure to improve the quality of life for all residents. It also prioritizes areas for industrial "traded sectors," like manufacturing, and "anchor institutions," such as the universities. Goals 2 to 11 elaborate on these aspects. The Goals are organized in a progression of topics, not by order of importance. This Plan acknowledges and addresses conflicts between uses. The *2040 LUP* alone may not resolve all competing concerns, such as those around the international airport. However, it suggests a framework for making decisions to meet the objectives on page 1 of this Plan. To express a broadly supported vision for the future, the Municipality will continue to follow inclusive community involvement principles in its planning processes. A broad spectrum of the public will have an informed role in determining the future of its community. During the public process for the *2040 LUP*, new issues and concerns emerged beyond those reflected in *Anchorage 2020*. These included community resiliency in relation to natural hazards and other disasters, energy efficiency, urban agriculture and food security, economic uncertainties, climate changes, and other shocks and stresses. This Plan acknowledges these concerns. Community resiliency is infused throughout the Goals, Policies, Strategies, and Actions of this Plan. Resiliency includes minimizing residents' exposure to risks from natural or man-made hazards. It also supports municipal initiatives that increase energy efficiency, public safety, and lasting economic development, pending a future revision to the *Comprehensive Plan*. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies:** 1, 2, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96, 97, and 98. **2040 LUP Policies:** LUP 1.1. Use the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan* in concert with area-specific plans as a framework to guide decisions on future development patterns, land uses, and allocation of growth. LUP 1.2. Employ land use and development strategies for the Anchorage Bowl to accommodate the forecast number of additional residents, households, and jobs through 2040. (Supersedes *Anchorage 2020*: Policy 3) LUP 1.3. Coordinate area-specific plans and updates so that collectively these maintain or improve Anchorage's capacity to accommodate housing, employment needs, and achieve its goals for growth. LUP 1.4. Use the *2040 LUP* and area-specific plans in conjunction with other elements of the *Comprehensive Plan* to determine appropriate zoning in the Bowl, and evaluate proposed changes to land use regulations. (Supersedes *Anchorage 2020*: Policy 4). **LUP 1.5.** Align Anchorage’s land use, transportation, and infrastructure planning, design guidelines, and investments. Account for existing infrastructure and transportation system capacity and planned facility investments when determining areas of growth. Link capital improvement priorities with the elements of the *Comprehensive Plan*, including the *2040 LUP* and area-specific plans. **LUP 1.6.** Ensure that municipal incentives, investments, and other land use decisions guide growth in housing, employment, and other uses to minimize risks to life safety and property in hazardous areas. **LUP 1.7.** Pursue strategies and actions to acquire additional lands within the Municipality and facilitate land assembly by the Municipality to create parcels large enough to be economically feasible for development. **LUP 1.8.** Engage Anchorage residents, businesses, and property owners in a predictable and transparent process leading to the adoption of plans that guide growth. Engage affected communities when making long-term land use decisions, with particular attention to communities that are historically underrepresented. ### Goal 2 Infill and Redevelopment Infill and redevelopment meet the housing and employment needs of residents and businesses in Anchorage. The *2040 LUP* fosters better use of existing lands and already in-place infrastructure as the primary way to meet projected population and employment growth demands. This is facilitated by a city infill and redevelopment strategy that encourages reinvesting in existing business districts and neighborhoods that can support compact urban living with a high quality of life. Infill and redevelopment can include compact housing, adaptive reuse of older structures, new commercial or residential buildings on former vacant or underused lots, or complete redevelopment of properties. It seeks a compatible mix of uses on the same site or between properties that can use the same parking facilities at different times of day. Infill development and redevelopment allow more residents to live closer to places of employment and in-town amenities. It reduces the traffic congestion impacts of growth, and reinvests in local businesses and commercial districts. Achieving compact infill and redevelopment requires that the Municipality: 1. Identify the most appropriate areas that can absorb more intensive use and compact housing; 2. Ensure that infrastructure can serve identified sites, and that public amenities are available nearby; and 3. Support redevelopment and infill projects that can catalyze additional development. In communities where infill development strategies have been successful, coordinated public-sector investments in infrastructure and public-private partnerships on catalyst sites provided critical support to the market for more compact forms of development. Successful communities also leverage walkable urban development patterns (e.g., a street-block grid, sidewalks, or alleys), remove barriers to compact development compatible with such areas, and incorporate flexibility in development requirements. One such barrier is the amount of space used by parking lots. Parking can take up more than half of a property, raise its development costs by double-digit percentages, and surround each establishment with “dead space” that precludes an interactive pedestrian environment. Shared parking and reduced parking literally creates “free land.” Less parking also lowers the costs of development and housing. Keys to lower parking demand include: public transportation, bicycle facilities, continuous pedestrian connections, expanded on-street and district parking, and a built environment evolving toward pedestrian-oriented patterns of building and site development. Once considered only "amenities," these are essential infrastructure for Anchorage to realize its potential to grow through more efficient use of land. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies:** 17. **2040 LUP Policies:** **LUP 2.1.** Identify and invest in areas best positioned to absorb growth meeting housing and employment needs. **LUP 2.2.** Coordinate redevelopment incentives and public infrastructure investments with development entitlements to enhance walkability and quality of life, and encourage the market to add new residences, shops, and workplaces. **LUP 2.3.** Remove barriers to desired infill development and incorporate flexibility in development requirements to promote adaptive reuse of older buildings and compact infill/redevelopment, including that which reflects traditional urban neighborhood design contexts. LUP Policies 1.5, 3.1, 4.2, 5.2, 5.3, 7.1, 7.2, and 9.3 are also integral to this Goal. ### Goal 3 Centers and Corridors Mixed-use, walkable commercial centers and corridors thrive within their neighborhood context, offer housing affordable to a range of incomes, and enable business growth. The 2040 LUP strives for a majority of new jobs and housing to locate in specific areas best able to absorb and capitalize on that growth, especially in and around existing commercial centers. Centers anchor the city's infill and redevelopment strategy for accommodating growth. These are the commercial districts that have been serving Anchorage and its neighborhoods for decades. They range from neighborhood-scale centers to city centers like Downtown. Most business districts historically developed at low densities, with large surface parking lots. Filling in these areas more intensely will make the most efficient use of Anchorage's commercial lands and public infrastructure. By encouraging business and housing growth in urban centers, this Plan makes it possible for more people to live near or more easily access job opportunities, social activities, and services for everyday needs. Focusing on centers: * Accommodates forecast growth in a strategic and predictable way; * Strengthens existing businesses and business districts; * Provides greater return on existing and new public infrastructure investments; * Improves walking, biking, and transit access to jobs, services, and activities; and * Preserves open space, industrial use areas, and quieter neighborhoods elsewhere. Centers vary in size, location, mix of uses, scale, urban form, and intensity. Each center's uses and scale should fit the surrounding neighborhoods it serves. Centers have close ties to their surrounding neighborhoods. They serve as places where the community comes together for basic needs, shopping, work, or events. They also help to connect different neighborhoods together. The Municipality will work with residents, businesses, agencies, and institutions to assist each commercial center to evolve and thrive, but will focus in the nearer term on centers where the most growth is expected. Corridors are the connectors between centers, employment hubs, and neighborhoods. Corridors should contain a mix of uses. Many of Anchorage's existing corridors are automobile dependent; however, this Goal encourages their evolution into mixed use, pedestrian-oriented, and transit-friendly environments. Strategic public infrastructure investments are integral to centers and corridors. This includes making the street and pedestrian improvements called for in the city’s transportation plans (e.g., the MTP, OS&HP, and Bike and Pedestrian Plans). “Placemaking,” or reinventing public spaces as the heart of a mixed-use center or main street corridor, is also an important investment. This place-based strategy for creating and improving quality places to live, work, and play can influence the attraction and retention of skilled workers, businesses, and investment. Placemaking is discussed further under Goal 5. Related Anchorage 2020 Policies: 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, and 25. 2040 LUP Policies: LUP 3.1. Target and coordinate investment in the built environment and green infrastructure in and around centers and corridors that are most able to absorb housing and employment growth. LUP 3.2. Promote the development of main street, transit-oriented, and mixed-use corridors that help meet the city’s needs for retail, services, jobs, and housing; and that support these uses and adjoining neighborhoods with access to multiple modes of travel and attractive pedestrian environments. LUP Policies 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, and 8.3 are also integral to this Goal. ### Goal 4 Neighborhood Housing Anchorage’s neighborhoods provide a range of places to live, meeting the housing needs of residents at all income levels, household sizes, interests, ages, abilities, and races and ethnicities. Anchorage residents need affordable places to live. Housing of all types is essential to provide a range of housing opportunities. But this has become harder to find, even as housing preferences are changing with the population. Over the last 100 years, Anchorage has met a variety of challenges to become a city with great neighborhoods and modern residential construction practices. This has provided a high quality of life for residents—overcoming a subarctic climate with poor soils, remote location, constrained land and labor markets, high construction costs, conflicting or unclear regulations, and boom/bust economic cycles. However, many of these challenges have intensified as demand grows for more choices of housing types. Millennials, downsizing seniors, and a more diverse population desire smaller homes and compact housing, located in walkable neighborhoods near services, jobs, entertainment, parks and trails, and with less driving and yard maintenance. Anchorage has relatively few walkable neighborhoods that meet this growing need. Because demand overwhelms supply, only a small number of people who would like to live in these kinds of places can afford to do so. With the cost of housing rising in general, more people are finding it harder to afford a house on a standard-sized lot. These challenges affect the quality of life of residents and the ability of businesses to attract and retain qualified workers. In response, this Plan advances a number of approaches. Housing is included as a key land use in the Policies, Strategies, and Actions to achieve the infill/redevelopment and growth in mixed-use centers (Goals 2 and 3). The Plan also identifies where and how existing residential neighborhoods can absorb housing. In areas of anticipated growth, it uses the infill and redevelopment strategies to coordinate infrastructure investments. It recommends allowing and encouraging more “compact” types of housing choices, including small-lot “cottage” homes, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), attached dwellings (duplex/ triplex/townhomes), small multifamily buildings, forms of cohousing or shared courtyard homes, and mixed-use housing in commercial developments. Vacant lots or other spaces for infill vary in size. Large mixed-use and multifamily developments will be important; however, most buildable sites are small. Small infill residential projects are a big part of the housing strategy. Smaller-scale housing can be designed and situated to fit with existing neighborhood character. Smaller or compact housing can contribute to property values and generate income. It also aligns with the capabilities of many builders and property owners. As a result, neighborhoods are enriched with a greater variety of housing opportunities for all generations. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies:** 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 56, 57, 58, 59, and 61. **2040 LUP Policies:** **LUP 4.1.** Provide sufficient land to meet the diverse housing needs of Anchorage’s citizens, where the integrity of the residential neighborhood area is protected from expanding commercial corridors or non-neighborhood employment activities. **LUP 4.2.** Allow and encourage innovative compact housing types and a variety of housing options that respond to changing preferences. **LUP 4.3.** Promote balanced neighborhoods with diverse infill housing, and provide opportunities for development of affordable and accessible housing that avoids creating areas of concentrated low-income housing. **LUP 4.4.** Encourage property owners to preserve, rehabilitate, or redevelop properties in ways that minimize housing displacement and maintain affordability, health, and safety for residents. **LUP 4.5.** Consider actions that will affirmatively further fair housing and avoid having the effect of housing discrimination in decisions regarding land use, allocation of housing opportunities, and zoning map or land use regulation amendments. LUP Policies **1.5, 2.1, 2.3, 5.3, 6.1, 6.3,** and **7.1** are also integral to this Goal. ### Goal 5 Infrastructure-Land Use Coordinated and targeted infrastructure investments catalyze new growth, provide an acceptable return on investment, and equitably improve safety and quality of life. <
> Infrastructure is the part of the built and natural environment that conveys a public service and undergirds daily life. Infrastructure in the built environment includes public buildings, streets, sidewalks, parking, water and sewer pipes, schools, public art, public spaces, and communication networks. Infrastructure is expensive to construct, maintain, and replace. Parks and the natural environment serve as “green infrastructure” by absorbing storm water; maintaining water and air quality; and managing flooding, wildlife habitat, and access to recreation and nature. Availability of infrastructure, such as water and sewer, sidewalks, schools and parks, roads, public transit, and other services, influences how and where growth occurs. The *2040 LUP* recognizes that alignment of future land use and infrastructure capacity and investment is integral to achieving the envisioned growth. Anchorage must identify and resolve existing and projected infrastructure deficiencies. The Municipality must also balance priorities to phase infrastructure investments. Phasing allows for flexibility in the location and timing of public service upgrades. If the city grows more slowly than expected, phasing allows the city to spur substantial progress in at least some mixed-use centers and public transit corridors. The number of areas seeing improvement will be in synch with the location and rate of economic and population growth and will be in harmony with neighborhood-specific plans. This Plan focuses the resources for expanded infrastructure on projects and areas that will return the greatest public benefit—such as new housing, businesses, and neighborhood revitalization—for the cost of providing the services. Some public investments, such as alley paving, are an opportunity to positively impact neighborhood livability and leverage private investment in housing at a relatively low cost. Others may target key centers or designated mixed-use “main street” corridors. Prioritizing and coordinating these improvements allows equitable decision making. Coordination of infrastructure projects allows the Municipality to set “Placemaking” in motion as an economic development strategy. Investment in creating appealing public spaces as if they were an important form of urban infrastructure can catalyze infill and redevelopment. Placemaking is a long-term collaboration among citizens, utilities, and public agencies to build great urban places, and facilitate creative, diverse patterns of use in those places. High-quality urban spaces in the city’s centers and corridors make the type of city that millennials, downsizing seniors, and future generations will want to inhabit through changing economic cycles, creating a more resilient city. Anchorage must also provide space and investment for adequate schools, parks, and other facilities to support the growing population. As land becomes even scarcer, acquiring facility sites will continue to become more difficult. The *2040 Land Use Plan* reaffirms the *Anchorage 2020* policy that the first priority for uncommitted municipal lands is to serve projected needs for municipal facilities, including schools and parks. This Plan also depends on more efficient use of existing public lands and facilities, such as joint-use elementary schools/neighborhood parks, to support Anchorage’s continued growth. This Plan acknowledges that additional funding sources, strategies, and mechanisms will be necessary to accomplish many of the infrastructure needs of its infill growth strategy. However, compact growth patterns are much less expensive to serve than conventional suburban development patterns. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies:** 73, 75, 76, 77, 79, 80, and 90. **2040 LUP Policies:** **LUP 5.1.** Implement recommended land use patterns and growth in context with existing infrastructure capacity and planned improvements, for utilities, streets, trails, public transit, parks, green infrastructure, and schools. **LUP 5.2.** Fund and develop a return on investment (ROI) model to determine municipal prioritization and participation in public and private development projects. **LUP 5.3.** Accompany infill development with “placemaking” investments in infrastructure, such as walkable streets, enhanced streetscapes, parks and public spaces, and other services that improve the quality of life in targeted growth areas. Coordinate and prioritize capital improvements to upgrade neighborhoods that have capacity to accommodate infill housing near services, centers, public transit, with a walkable street grid and sidewalks. **LUP 5.4.** Incentivize developments to incorporate “low-impact development” techniques, such as reuse or filtration and use of on-site storm water and wastewater, energy efficiency and renewable energy, urban agriculture, and parking and congestion management strategies, and protection of riparian corridors and natural open spaces. **LUP 5.5.** Ensure that adequate public facilities such as schools and fire stations are available when and where they are needed, in an efficient and equitable distribution of services, based on long-term projections for population, student enrollment, and the location of future growth. **LUP 5.6.** Encourage public joint use, co-location, and efficient use of parks, schools, and other compatible public facilities. **LUP 5.7.** Pursue alternative strategies and funding mechanisms to support investment in infrastructure, including street networks, public transit, schools, pedestrian facilities, trail connections, parks, greenways, and maintenance and operations. LUP Policies **1.5, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 4.2, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, and 9.3** are also integral to this Goal. ### Goal 6 Accessible Land Use > Anchorage coordinates transportation and land use to provide safe, efficient, and affordable travel choices. No other form of infrastructure is as closely linked with land use patterns as the way people move around the city. As parts of the Bowl evolve to a more urban form and function, this Plan aligns changes in land use with improvements in the transportation network. Coordinating land use and transportation actions is especially important in places where a majority of new housing and employment will go. This Plan advances the concept of *accessibility* to capture the relationship between land use and transportation. *Accessibility* considers how easy it is for people to get to their destinations. It is a broader goal than *mobility*, which is the ability to move people and goods through the city quickly. Accessibility includes mobility but also considers the total distance that must be traveled and the number of destinations within a certain distance. For example, filling a commercial center with more housing and jobs can be a benefit to accessibility even as it causes congestion, if it provides more destinations within a short distance. Accessibility also includes other ways of getting around, such as walking, riding public transit, and bicycling. Maximizing all modes of travel, including street, sidewalk, transit, and trail connections, is critical to supporting successful growth. More frequent, predictable public transit service and extensions of the trails system should coincide with mixed-use centers targeted for growth. Transit and trails are critical to growth, while improving quality of life and mitigating road congestion. This Plan recognizes that some principal roadways may need to be redesigned in the future as land use activities evolve along these roadways. Slowing vehicle speeds and providing safer and more frequent pedestrian crossings will be important in some land use contexts. The concept of accessibility also allows that some principal roadways will emphasize mobility more than others. To protect the function of principal national highway system routes, the *2040 LUP* recognizes that additional street connections tie directly to the ability to grow in at least some of the commercial centers and corridors. New local and collector street connections and pathways between businesses and adjacent neighborhoods are needed to allow the street network to safely support mixed-use densities. Anchorage’s *Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)* identifies arterial and collector street network deficiencies and needed improvements. Implementation of the *MTP* ties directly to implementation of the *2040 LUP*. Anchorage will also need to use its existing rights-of-way more efficiently, by adapting streets to give people more travel choices. Integral to this effort is the development and implementation of a “Complete Streets” (see illustrative photo on page 34) policy and land-use-based street typologies that will guide streetscape design. (See page 65 sidebar regarding typologies.) *Complete Streets* are essential in traditional urban walkable neighborhood contexts, and in parts of Anchorage looking to attract private-sector reinvestment with innovative infill, redevelopment, and mixed uses. For *Complete Streets* to function, maintenance and operations must be accounted for in the planning, funding, and maintenance stages. Streets constructed for all transportation modes depend on higher levels of year-round maintenance and snow clearing to support accessibility for walking, bicycling, and riding transit. Street improvements will be phased and coordinated with other investments in areas designated by this Plan to absorb housing and commercial growth. Focused investments in and around designated centers will be balanced with needed maintenance and upgrades to transportation facilities in all parts of town. Making Anchorage more accessible also depends on land use patterns and forms of development that support transportation choices. Building and site design will contribute to the walkable *Complete Streets* environment. However, some *Complete Street* projects will be stand-alone road improvement projects. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies:** 12, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38, 45, 54, 55, 76, 81, and 92. **2040 LUP Policies:** **LUP 6.1.** Provide sufficient transportation infrastructure to support the growth that the *Comprehensive Plan* anticipates in Centers, Corridors, other employment areas, and neighborhoods. **LUP 6.2.** Provide new or upgraded pedestrian and local/collector street connections in Centers and Commercial Corridors to improve access to and from surrounding neighborhoods. **LUP 6.3.** Adopt and execute a *Complete Streets* policy to design streets to serve all users, including pedestrians, transit riders, and bicyclists, and align the design and scale of streets to be compatible with compact, accessible, and walkable land use patterns. LUP Policies **1.5**, **5.1**, **5.2**, and **5.7** are also integral to this Goal. ### Goal 7 Compatible Land Use Infill development is compatible with the valued characteristics of surrounding properties and neighborhoods. Anchorage’s neighborhoods and districts have distinct and valued characteristics—e.g., how buildings relate to one another and the street, how tall they are, the noise and traffic levels, or the presence of greenery (Map CC-1, *Neighborhood Contexts*, in Appendix A). Anchorage residents cherish their neighborhoods and wish to see what they love about them preserved. However, infill development and redevelopment within already built-up areas has become a greater share of total development activity. There are concerns about neighborhood character being harmed through the construction of different or larger-scale projects. While many people welcome more diverse housing options, current residents of the neighborhood often see new or different housing as being incompatible with their neighborhood’s scale, character, and livability. The form and scale that new developments take—more than its density—is increasingly a primary concern. This Plan recognizes that compatible design is a key part of growing successfully though infill and redevelopment. The scale or physical appearance of buildings, noise, glare, shadowing effects of taller buildings, parking, and other characteristics can impact neighboring properties. Tools like neighborhood plans and improved development codes can guide new development in ways that help keep it in character and scale with existing homes. Improving tools that allow neighborhoods to accept new types of housing opportunities without losing their essential character can reduce conflicts between neighbors and developers. The *2040 LUP* also addresses separations, transitions, and buffering between land uses of differing intensity or incompatible characteristics, such as between heavy industrial or airport facilities and homes. In addition to regulations, “Placemaking” upgrades—including well-designed and maintained streets, sidewalks, parks, and open spaces—improve cohesion between uses, mitigate the effects of higher densities, and contribute to neighborhood value. Public investments should accompany significant growth to improve: pedestrian connections to nearby shops and employment, opportunities for neighbors to meet and socialize, and development of healthy, safe environments. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies:** 5, 11, 12, 13, 21, 28, 35, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 66, and 79. **2040 LUP Policies:** **LUP 7.1.** Preserve, accommodate, and contribute to the character, scale, and identity of established neighborhoods as new infill housing and mixed-use development occurs. Protect and restore the natural environment as development occurs in these neighborhoods. **LUP 7.2.** Ease the transitions between more intensive uses and adjacent lower-density neighborhoods—in terms of the built scale, height, level of activity, and character. LUP Policies **1.6**, **2.3**, **4.3**, **5.3**, and **6.3** are also integral to this Goal. ### Goal 8 Open Space and Greenways > Anchorage maintains, improves, and strategically expands parks, greenbelts, riparian corridors, and trail corridors to enhance land values, public access, neighborhoods, and mixed-use centers. Anchorage offers the kinds of places that are gone from most other cities. Open spaces, greenbelts, and trail corridors are valued assets of this community. Anchorage recognizes that natural areas are vital infrastructure that sustains neighborhoods and centers experiencing infill and redevelopment. One of Anchorage’s many competitive advantages for attracting talent and investment in the global economy is its extensive network of greenbelts, trail corridors, and natural open space. These amenities support growth and livability of neighborhoods and centers. The *Anchorage 2020 Conceptual Natural Open Space Map*, updated as the *Natural Assets Map* (Map CI-7) in Appendix A, informs strategic decisions about preservation priorities and new additions to this green infrastructure. This Plan recommends adding parks and greenbelt connections to offset neighborhood deficiencies, and to support higher density development. These new open space features can also function as buffers between incompatible developments. Critical fish and wildlife habitats and natural areas important to water quality, public access, and recreation are retained in this Plan. Restored greenways and creek corridors support higher density and redevelopment with open space amenities. Connecting these assets to neighborhoods and employment centers by extending greenbelt trails and other pedestrian connections is also a high community priority. Anchorage will seek to work with partners to identify new acquisition alternatives and improved funding mechanisms for creating and maintaining open space and recreational areas. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies:** 50, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 84, 85, and 86. **2040 LUP Policies:** **LUP 8.1.** Ensure all neighborhoods and communities have access to nearby parks and recreational opportunities that support well-being. **LUP 8.2.** Provide new and improved trails, greenbelts, and other pedestrian facilities as alternative travel ways connecting open spaces, neighborhoods, and centers. **LUP 8.3.** Provide greenways and trail extensions into designated centers and reinvestment focus areas, to improve their connectivity with the trails system and overcome barriers to neighborhoods. LUP Policies **1.5, 5.3, 5.7,** and **10.1** are also integral to this Goal. ### Goal 9 Industrial Land > A sufficient, predictable, and strategically located industrial land supply allows Anchorage’s industrial employment sectors to thrive, protected from non-industrial uses that might displace them. From its origins near Ship Creek to the development of its airports, Anchorage has grown due to its function as a maritime, air, and land freight distribution center of vital importance to the Alaska economy. Its industrial sectors, strategically clustered on lands with access to the airport, railroad, and port facilities, drive the Anchorage economy and support other economic sectors. Industrial businesses tend to make a disproportionately important contribution to local employment and economic opportunity, paying higher wages and supporting the state’s key industries and population centers. However, Anchorage does not have sufficient industrial-zoned land to accommodate the forecast economic growth, even considering the Chugiak-Eagle River land supply. Moreover, in- dustrial lands in the Bowl face well-documented economic pressures to convert to other uses. This is due in part to land scarcity among commercial and residential land uses. Industrial uses are less able to adjust by using land more efficiently, such as multi-story development. This Plan recommends retention of a sustainable supply of industrial land in strategic areas and recommends limiting incompatible uses to avoid conflicts with industrial activities. For example, it reclassifies some areas no longer positioned for industrial use out of the industrial land supply and into other land use categories, and conversely identifies several opportunities to transfer new areas from other uses into industrial land designations, to better consolidate and protect the remaining industrial land supply. The Plan encourages a share of Anchorage's forecast employment growth to occur in these lands. It prioritizes industrial functions, including manufacturing, production, repair, and distribution enterprises, over low-employment uses like outdoor storage. "Traded Sectors" are key industrial land-utilizing sectors that export locally sourced goods and services to markets outside of Anchorage and tend to pay higher wages. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies**: 26. **2040 LUP Policies**: LUP 9.1. Identify and preserve a suitable, predictable supply of industrial land in areas most appropriate for existing and future high-priority industrial uses. LUP 9.2. Limit non-industrial uses that could displace or conflict with existing or potential industrial functions in industrially designated areas, in order to preserve these areas for primarily industrial development and ensure compatibility of adjacent uses and traffic. LUP 9.3. Encourage the retention and intensification of industrial uses on existing sites via reuse and redevelopment. LUP 9.4. Recognize industrial Traded Sectors as high priority for economic development and industrial land availability, preservation, and infrastructure investment actions. LUP Policies 1.5, 5.1, 5.2, and 10.1 are also integral to this Goal. ### Goal 10 Anchor Institutions The community supports its anchor institutions and facilities and recognizes the important local and statewide benefits they provide, while mitigating adverse impacts associated with development and expansion. Anchor institutions are large organizations that have an established presence by their sheer size, permanence, and stabilizing social ties and services to the surrounding community. They diversify the city's economy by employing large workforces, purchasing goods and services, generating research and technology, and attracting significant investment. They serve the needs of the city's residents and all of Alaska. Anchor institutions include: University of Alaska Anchorage, Alaska Pacific University, Providence Alaska Medical Center, and Alaska Native Medical Center in the UMED District; Alaska Regional Hospital; Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport; Port of Anchorage; Alaska Railroad; and Merrill Field. Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER), while located outside the Anchorage Bowl land use plan area boundary, is also a key contributor to the economic, social, and physical fabric of the city. Anchorage seeks to grow and evolve in ways compatible with JBER's performance of its national security mission. The universities and medical institutions play important roles delivering vital health and educational services to the residents of Anchorage and Alaska. All these anchor institutions have large campus settings and facilities. Their operations, growth, and expansion can impact surrounding neighborhoods and areas. This Plan and other elements of the *Comprehensive Plan*, including the *UMED District Plan*, seek to encourage coordinated institutional growth that creates integrated, connected campuses that respect the livability of surrounding residential neighborhoods and natural resources. Conversely, the institutions benefit from strong neighborhoods with workforce housing and a great living environment around them. The airport, railroad, and port facilities are managed primarily within present facility property boundaries. However, there is a need to prioritize water, sewer, and roadway and runway investments in order for these areas to modernize and grow. Also, transitions and buffers between major facilities and residential neighborhoods are essential. In some cases, the public has enjoyed the use of portions of these institution lands in areas reserved for future growth. **Related Anchorage 2020 Policies:** 26 and 28. **2040 LUP Policies:** **LUP 10.1.** Encourage and expand partnerships with Anchorage’s anchor institutions and facilities to promote and coordinate growth and development compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. LUP Policies **4.1, 7.2, 8.2** are also integral to Goal 10. ### Areas of Growth and Change **Map 1-2, Areas of Growth and Change**, highlights the relative degree of change guided by the *2040 LUP*. In most locations, the changes on this map reflect existing zoning, development trends, and adopted plans. It depicts the growth that is anticipated to occur through the year 2040, as follows: *Areas of Significant Growth* are expected to experience new development on vacant parcels, or redevelopment of underused parcels, that transforms the character or activity level of the area. These areas have the most potential to absorb growth. Public infrastructure, such as parks and streets, will be improved to enhance quality of life for residents, employees, and visitors. *Areas of Moderate Growth* are expected to experience development and evolve in a manner that enhances their form and character. These areas have moderate potential for absorbing growth over time. Some infill and redevelopment is likely to occur, mostly on individual lots or in clusters, and fit with the existing and planned street patterns, setbacks, and building form and scale. Incremental improvement to local infrastructure and street/walkway connectivity may occur. *Areas of Little Growth* are expected to experience only minor change and retain their existing use and character. These areas have limited potential for absorbing growth. Infill, reuse, and development will occur on a small number of scattered sites. Maintenance of existing infrastructure or incremental upgrades of street, trail, or other infrastructure should occur. Map 1-2 also shows where the *2040 LUP* recommends changes from adopted district or neighborhood plans, or changes in land use or intensity of use from what is currently provided by existing zoning. Areas where the *2040 LUP* shows Land Use Designations that are changes or updates from adopted neighborhood or district plans are shown in a thick forest green outline. Section 2.1 explains how the *2040 LUP* designation applies to these areas. ### How Were Areas of Growth and Change Identified? Below are the factors that emerged from analyses, public comments, and workshops during the development of the *2040 Land Use Plan Map*. These factors influence which areas are most likely to change or absorb growth: 1. In or near major commercial or employment centers, including Downtown, Midtown, and UMED. 2. Accessible to public transit, pedestrian, and bicycle routes. 3. Undergoing change, where development and investment is anticipated to continue. 4. Where existing zoning allows for greater intensity of development than occurs today. 5. Has buildable land or redevelopment opportunities. 6. Near or accessible to stores, jobs, restaurants, and other services, amenities, and attractions. 7. Has existing infrastructure (e.g., streets, parks, water, sewer, sidewalks) or where cost/feasibility of upgrading capacity is there to support additional growth. 8. Where reinvestment in infrastructure is already planned or anticipated, which will support additional growth. 9. Has fewer development constraints, natural hazards, or sensitive natural features. 10. Where capacity for growth has greater potential benefits than burdens for lower-income and vulnerable populations. 11. Prioritized in adopted neighborhood or district plans. The amount of change reflected on Map 1-2 is based on recent growth forecasts, housing needs, and recommendations of this Plan and other elements of the *Comprehensive Plan*, such as adopted neighborhood and district plans and public facility plans. Principles for infill design and compatibility in areas of growth are provided in Section 2.1. <
> Search online with "Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan" to go to the zoom-in interactive version of this map. ### Map 1-2. Areas of Growth and Change by 2040 September 26, 2017 <
> | | | | :--- | :--- | | ■ | Areas of Significant Growth | | ■ | Areas of Moderate Growth | | □ | Areas of Little Growth | | □ | Land Use Designation Change from an Area-Specific Plan | | ░ | Land Use Designation Change from Uses Currently Allowed by Existing Zoning (as of 2017) | | ■ | Open Space | | ■ | Major Transportation Facility Lands | | — | Anchorage Bowl Land Use Plan Area Boundary | This page is intentionally left blank. # Section 2: Plan # The Land Use Plan Map <
> This page is intentionally left blank. ## 2.1 Creating Great Places To achieve Anchorage’s growth strategy, the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Map* identifies 18 color-coded *Land Use Designations* that direct the use, intensity, and form of development across the Anchorage Bowl. These designations support an overall “structure” of six types of places that define Anchorage’s built and natural environment. Figure 2-1 overviews the types of places and their land use designations. This Section presents the *Land Use Plan Map* and its land use designations. The individual land use designations are defined in Section 2.2. Other features on the Map, including four *growth-supporting features*, are explained in Section 2.3. ### Land Use Designations Each land use designation begins with an overview of its role and function. It then identifies a range of appropriate land uses and intensities of use in the area, and a description of the area’s recommended physical character. It concludes with location criteria for where the land use designation is best suited. Taken together, these aspects shape and define the urban form and growth that will take place over the next 25 years. ### Density Ranges The *2040 Land Use Plan* guides the distribution of future population, housing, and employment across the Bowl by including a measurement of intended development density in most land use designations. The measurement is expressed as a range of potential densities of dwellings (per acre) or building floor area. This helps to meet forecast population, housing, and commercial and industrial land needs. The sidebar on the next page explains how this Plan measures density. <
> | Types of Places | Land Use Designations | | :--- | :--- | | Neighborhoods | Large-lot; Single-family and Two-family; Compact Mixed Residential-Low; Compact Mixed Residential-Medium; Urban Residential-High | | Centers | Neighborhood; Town; Regional Commercial; and City Centers | | Corridors | Commercial Corridor; Main Street Corridor | | Open Spaces | Park or Natural Area; Other Open Space | | Facilities and Institutions | Community Facility or Institution; University or Medical Center; Airport, Railroad, or Port | | Industrial | Light Industrial / Commercial; General Industrial | ### Character Any given density can result in places having very different characteristics, such as building heights and street layouts ranging from urban to suburban. Therefore, the description of each land use designation includes key physical characteristics that define it as a place. Character of place is integral to land use, the way people experience a place, and how that place functions. Good urban design is central to successful accommodation of additional housing and businesses in already-built neighborhoods, districts, and mixed-use centers. In addition to their individual physical characteristics, many land use designations refer to the shared infill design principles provided on pages 34 and 35 at the end of Section 2.1. ### Zoning Districts Most every land use designation has a corresponding set of zoning districts which implement it. This allows for a range of possible zoning densities to reflect local conditions and characteristics of the site and surrounding area. The area’s land use designation does not imply that the most intense corresponding zoning district is recommended or is the most appropriate for every parcel. Proposed rezones should be consistent with Title 21 approval criteria. Proposed rezones may be denied if they are found to be inconsistent with the policies of the *Comprehensive Plan* or the best interests of the public’s health, safety, or general welfare in the area. # Measurement of Density Each land use designation (except the Open Space and Facilities and Institutions designations) includes a measurement of development density, either in dwellings per acre or floor-to-area ratio (FAR). For most residential neighborhood land use designations, density is expressed as the number of dwellings, or housing units, per gross acre of land in the designation. "Gross" acreage includes the streets, open spaces, non-residential uses such as churches, and unusable lands. This means it is the intensity over the entire designation area, not individual parcels. Density on an individual parcel is "net" density (Fig. 2-3). Commercial and high density housing land use designations include a measure of building density expressed as Floor-Area Ratio (FAR). FAR is the building's floor area divided by the lot's land area. For example, a parcel with a 10,000 square foot building and 20,000 square feet of land area has a FAR of 0.5. The density ranges in this Plan do not apply to the permitting of development projects as the measure of how much is allowed on an individual lot. Title 21 regulations provide direction for allowable density. Location, topography, site development standards, and other factors also influence the buildable density on a lot. ### Figure 2-2. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) <
> ### Figure 2-3. Calculation of Gross Versus Net Residential Density <
> Gross Density = 28 housing units on the entire 7-acre neighborhood area = 4 housing units per gross acre. Net Density = A 5 housing units per net acre on the lot B 10 housing units per net acre on the lot C 20 housing units per net acre on the lot D 3 housing units per net acre on the lot E 10 housing units per net acre on the lot The zoning districts listed in Section 2 (e.g., R-1, B-3, etc.) are described with Map PP-1, Existing Zoning Districts, in Appendix A. Also, see the cross-reference table that summarizes the zoning districts by land use designation (Figure 3-2 on page 76 of Section 3.2.). Some implementation zones listed under the land use designations do not yet exist in code, or may need to be amended to fully implement this Plan. These are noted as action items in Section 3.3. In addition to the zoning districts listed, the Parks and Recreation (PR), Public Lands and Institutions (PLI), and Planned Community Development (PCD) districts are compatible with almost every land use designation. ## Location Most land use designations have a set of location criteria that are derived from the Goals and Policies in Section 1. These provide the rationale for recommending the locations and intensity of uses. The location criteria for each designation apply in combination rather than individually. However, it is not necessary that all criteria be met in every location. ## Land Use Plan Map The Land Use Plan Map appears on the next page as Map 2-1. A larger scale version is available separately, as well as in the inside back cover of this Plan. Also, a color-blind-friendly version is available in the online 2040 Land Use Plan map gallery and in Appendix A. ### Relationship to Land Use Designations in Area-specific Plans As of 2017, the 14 neighborhood, district, and other area-specific plans adopted for the Bowl collectively used 70 different land use designations to represent future intensity and distribution of land uses. Many of these designations share similar names and definitions. Map 2-1, Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Map, retains each plan’s land uses. The 2040 Land Use Plan Map illustrates a more general picture of future land use for the Bowl by distilling all 70 land use designations into 18. This provides a citywide land use policy structure which supports and coordinates the various plans with a common terminology. Figure 2-4 on the following pages cross-references the 2040 Land Use Plan Map designations with the corresponding designations applied in the area-specific plans. This system retains the land use designation categories in the neighborhood and district plans, which refine the citywide land use categories in order to address area-specific needs. <
> Search online with "Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan" to go to the zoom-in interactive version of this map. *** # Map 2-1. Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Map <
> Future area-specific plans may assign narrower categories as long as they align within the *2040 Land Use Plan Map* designations. Users of the *2040 Land Use Plan Map* should refer to **Map 1-1, Area-specific Plans** (Page 5), to determine which if any neighborhood, district, or other area plan applies in the area of interest. Users should refer to the applicable area-specific plan for greater details regarding planned land uses and development. ### Differences from Area-specific Land Use Designations In some locations, the *2040 LUP* land use designations differ from those in the area-specific plans, as discussed in Section 1.1. These areas are shown on **Map 1-2, Areas of Growth and Change**, at the end of Section 1.3 (page 27). For these areas, the *2040 LUP* applies. Additionally, the housing density ranges in several of the *2040 LUP* residential neighborhood designations differ from those in the area-specific plans. The *2040 LUP* density ranges govern in these cases. The area-specific plans carried forward assumptions from prior decades without the benefit of the updated *2040 LUP* housing analysis[^p48-1]. [^p48-1]: 2040 housing analysis is discussed in Section 1.2 and Appendix B. <
> | Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Designation | Area-Specific Plan Designation | Area-Specific Plan | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Large-lot Neighborhood | Limited Intensity Residential, 0-1 dua
Low Intensity Residential, 1-3 dua
Residential / Access Reserve | E, H, W
H
H | | Single-family and Two-family Neighborhood | Low Intensity Detached, >1-5 dua
Low Intensity Detached, up to 4 dua
Low Intensity Detached, >3-5 dua
Low Intensity Attached and Detached, 5-8 dua | E, U, W
F
H
E, GH, U, W | | Compact Mixed Residential–Low | Low/Medium Intensity Residential, >8-15 dua
Low/Medium Intensity, >8-15 dua | E, GH, MV
F, U, W | | Compact Mixed Residential–Medium | Medium Intensity Residential, >15-35 dua
Medium Intensity, >15-35 dua
Medium Intensity, >15-40 dua | H, GH, MV
E, U
F, W | | Urban Residential–High | City Center Intensity, >35 dua
Residential (City Center High Intensity), 40+ dua
High Intensity Residential/Mixed Use, 40+ dua | F
W
U | | Neighborhood Center | Neighborhood Center
Neighborhood Commercial Center
Limited Commercial | E, GH, W
U
H | | Town Center | Town Center
Tudor Community Commercial Center | E, W
U | | Regional Commercial Center | Regional Commercial Center | E, MV | | City Center | Major City Center
Downtown Core; Downtown Mixed-Use
Downtown Residential Mixed Use
Ship Creek Redevelopment Area | F
D
D
SC | | Commercial Corridor | Commercial Corridor
Office - Low Intensity | F, H, U, W
E, F, U, W | D - Anchorage Downtown Comprehensive Plan E- East Anchorage District Plan F - Fairview Neighborhood Plan FNB - Far North Bicentennial Park Master Plan GH - Government Hill Neighborhood Plan H - Hillside District Plan MV - Mountain View Targeted Neighborhood Plan SC - Ship Creek/Waterfront Land Use Study Tu35 - 3500 Tudor Road Master Plan TuPLI - Tudor Road Public Lands and Inst. Plan U - UMED District Plan W - West Anchorage District Plan ### Figure 2-4. Crosswalk between Bowl-wide and Area-specific Land Use Designations | Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan Designation | Area-Specific Plan Designation | Area-Specific Plan | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Main Street Corridor | Spenard Commercial Center
Fairview Mixed Use Corridor
Muldoon Corridor District
Mountain View Mixed-use Corridor | W
F
E
MV | | Park or Natural Area | Park or Natural Areas
Park(s) and Natural Resource(s)
Park
Existing Recreation; Open Space, Wetlands, and Recreation
Recreation and Recreation-Related Public Purposes
Watershed; Greenbelt; Active Recreation
Open Space or Park/Open Space | F
E, GH, H, W
MV, U
Tu35
Tu35
FNB
D, TuPLI | | Other Open Space | Other Areas that Function as Park and Natural Resource
Other Park or natural area
Greenbelt
Natural Area
Recreation and Recreation-Related Public Purposes
Public and Institutional Lands; Active Recreation | E, GH, H, W
F
FNB, SC
U
Tu35
FNB | | Community Facility or Institution | School(s) and/or Community Institution(s)
Redevelopment; Suitable for New Development
Existing Development
Development Area; Reserve
Public Utility/Facility | E, F, GH, H, MV, Tu35
Tu35
TuPLI
E, GH, H, MV, U, W | | University or Medical Center | Major Institutional | U | | Airport, Railroad, or Port Facility | Major Transportation Facility
Marine Industrial
Ship Creek Redevelopment Area | F, GH, W
SC
SC | | Light Industrial/Commercial | Light Industrial / Commercial
Industrial / Commercial
Industrial / Commercial (Limited)
Industrial / Commercial Reserve | MV
E, D, GH
F
W | | General Industrial | Industrial
Industrial / Industrial Reserve
General Industrial | F, MV
GH, W
SC | D - Anchorage Downtown Comprehensive Plan E- East Anchorage District Plan F - Fairview Neighborhood Plan FNB - Far North Bicentennial Park Master Plan GH - Government Hill Neighborhood Plan H - Hillside District Plan MV - Mountain View Targeted Neighborhood Plan SC - Ship Creek/Waterfront Land Use Study Tu35 - 3500 Tudor Road Master Plan TuPLI - Tudor Road Public Lands and Inst. Plan U - UMED District Plan W - West Anchorage District Plan Finally, some of the zoning districts in the *2040 LUP* land use designations differ from those in the area-specific plan designations. Reasons may include: * The zoning district listed in the area-specific plan has changed, no longer exists, or allows different uses or densities than what the area-specific plan actually intended. * The *2040 LUP* responds to updated analyses, trends, or public comments, such as the increasing interest in new mixed-use and “form-based” zones. * The *2040 LUP* addresses the entire Bowl while the area-specific plan lists only those implementation zoning districts that apply to its own neighborhood or study area. Where the *2040 LUP* lists a different implementation zoning district for the same land use designation from a neighborhood or district plan, the *2040 LUP* governs. When a new or revised neighborhood or district plan proposes a new zoning district from what the *2040 LUP* has shown, Strategy 12 at the end of Section 3.2 provides guidance on how future planning efforts may amend the *2040 LUP*. # Shared Infill Design Principles **Importance of Urban Design.** As Anchorage evolves, thoughtful urban design can help both protect and enhance the characteristics of its neighborhoods and districts that make it appealing to residents, workers, and visitors alike. In a flourishing city, design can help seamlessly integrate the new with the old. Tools like neighborhood plans, zoning, and incentives are increasingly used to protect, enhance, or reflect the character of established places, especially residential neighborhoods. Ensuring that new homes and transitional areas are in character with existing homes can help accommodate new housing types and reduce conflict between neighbors and developers. These tools guide both new development on vacant infill lots and redevelopment of under-utilized lots to support walkability and “Complete Streets”. Physical character is integral to the 2040 LUP Land Use Designations. The following infill design principles (next page) are concerned with the broad choices Anchorage makes about where and how to grow. They describe some of the intended physical characteristics common to many of the Land Use Designations and growth-supporting features in Section 2. Where these design principles are applicable, the Land Use Designation or growth-supporting feature will refer to them. **Land Use Decisions and Discretionary Reviews.** As growth and change occurs, it is the intent of this Plan that these Land Use Designations and growth-supporting features be guided by tools that focus on creating compatible and efficient development. The infill design principles are intended to build on the preferences expressed during the 2040 LUP planning process and in adopted area-specific and functional plans. The design principles do not apply to permit reviews and approvals of individual developments allowed by right. They guide targeted amendments to development regulations, incentive programs, and discretionary (non by right) land use decisions[^p50-1] such as rezonings or site plan reviews. Zoning regulations and development review processes help shape the characteristics of individual infill developments. <
> Duplex on Infill Lot Fronting Street <
> “Complete Street” with Bicycle Lane and Landascaped Sidewalk <
> Townhomes with Front Porch and Visual Interest [^p50-1]: As provided in Anchorage Municipal Code (AMC) Title 21 Section 21.01.080D.3. # Shared Infill Design Principles, continued <
> Residential Mixed-use with Active Storefront and Sidewalk <
> Apartment Windows, Balconies, and Entrances Oriented to Sidewalk <
> Apartments in Photo Above Provide a Transition in Building Scale and Form to Neighboring Single-family ### Infill Design Principles for mixed-use centers and corridors: * A mix of uses sharing the same public streets, sidewalks, and pedestrian spaces. * Active uses, such as retail shops and restaurants, at the ground level to provide pedestrian interest, especially at key intersections and street segments. * Parking located beside or behind buildings in urban settings. * Shared parking solutions among neighboring uses. Surface parking layout plans that address the possibility of transitioning to a higher-intensity use. ### Infill Design Principles to enhance connections and pedestrian access: * A connected grid of streets and pathways. * "Complete Streets" that accommodate bicycles and pedestrians. * Sidewalks and trails that are safe, comfortable, and attractive in all seasons. * Building orientation and scale that frames a welcoming walking environment. * Windows and entrances of active uses, such as stores, offices, or living spaces, address the street and public realm. * Parking located behind building frontages, with fewer driveway curb cuts across sidewalks. ### Infill Design Principles for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods: * New developments that provide a transition to existing smaller-scale, lower-density neighborhoods. * Incorporation of lower-intensity housing types or buildings along a shared street frontage. * Infill and redevelopment that is compatible with height, scale, and massing of adjacent homes and the overall character of the street frontage. * Protecting front-, side-, and rear-yard setbacks to provide open space, play space, landscaping, and sunlight access. ## 2.2 Land Use Designations ### Neighborhoods The five Neighborhood Land Use Designations reflect the diversity of housing and neighborhood characteristics found in the Bowl. These include Large-lot, Single-family and Two-family, Compact Mixed Residential–Low, Compact Mixed Residential–Medium, and Urban Residential–High designations. Neighborhoods range from very low intensity in semi-rural areas to suburban patterns, to traditional urban grid street pattern, and high-intensity urban neighborhoods. Compatible institutional uses such as places of worship, parks, and child care facilities are allowed in Neighborhoods. Neighborhood-designated areas can include small-scale commercial services located in existing neighborhood business zoning districts or in new locations designated by a neighborhood or district plan. For example, the *West Anchorage District Plan*’s Land Use Plan Map shows a maroon asterisk ✱ over several of its residentially designated areas to provide for small-scale commercial uses. These asterisk designations still apply in the *2040 LUP*. The B-1A district is the implementing district. ### Large-lot Residential This designation provides for single-family residences on lots that are generally one acre or larger in rural and semi-rural environments. Most areas are served by private wells and septic systems. <
> Large-lot Residential Neighborhood Scene ### Uses * Single-family detached homes. * Accessory dwelling units and two-family structures may also occur on large lots. ### Character * Low building coverage on large lots, with broad setbacks and a variety of custom home designs. * Natural vegetation, hillside topography, environmental constraints, and adjacent natural open spaces that contribute to the overall rural character. * Rural street standards. * “Conservation subdivisions” that cluster homes to preserve natural features and shared open spaces. ### Density * One housing unit or less per gross acre. * Where delineated in the *Hillside District Plan*, Map 2.1 Land Use Plan for *Low-Intensity Residential, 1-3 dwelling units per acre*, this designation also includes subdivisions with half-acre or larger lots with flexibility for somewhat smaller lots, at densities up to three units per gross acre, subject to the *Hillside District Plan*. ### Zoning * R-6, R-8, R-9, and R-10 districts. * R-7 in areas designated in the *Hillside District Plan*, Map 2.1 Land Use Plan, for *Low-Intensity Residential, 1-3 dwelling units per acre*. ### Location * Areas with established large-lot rural development pattern; * Areas outside of water/wastewater service boundaries; * Areas furthest away from jobs and urban services; * Areas with limited road access; and * Areas with topography and other natural constraints to more intensive use. <
> Single-Family Neighborhood Detached Homes Single-family and Two-family This designation provides for a variety of low-density urban/suburban residential neighborhoods. Most areas have well-developed infrastructure, public water and sewer, and municipal services. Uses * Single-family subdivisions with homes on lots 6,000 square feet or larger. * Accessory dwelling units may also occur. * Compatible forms of two- to three-unit townhome structures may be allowed on transition lots next to higher intensity uses, such as commercial districts. * Includes some neighborhood areas with more compact forms of single-family homes, such as attached single-family structures, patio homes, “small-lot” housing, and two-unit structures. Lot size for a single dwelling may be reduced in a small-lot housing subdivision. Compact housing forms and the efficient use of land will support affordable housing opportunities in these areas. Neighborhood and district plans may delineate attached and two-family areas separate from single-family detached neighborhoods. Character * Residential building scale, lot coverage, landscaped setbacks, and low traffic volumes contribute to a low-intensity residential environment. * Accessory dwelling units have compatible character and intensity of use. * Some neighborhoods may be more isolated, such that residents must drive to nearby shopping and employment destinations; a more integrated pattern of uses is encouraged for new or redeveloping areas. * Fewer changes are anticipated for existing single-family neighborhoods. Changes may focus on improving connectivity, pedestrian and bike safety, neighborhood character, housing choice, and buffering transitions to more intensive land uses. Density * 3 to 5 housing units per gross acre in single-family areas; * 5 to 8 units in two-family areas. Zoning * R-1 and R-1A districts. * R-2A and R-2D in attached and two-family areas. <
> Backyard Accessory Dwelling Unit (foreground) <
> Duplexes Each with a Third Unit in back above a Detached Garage <
> New Small Single-family Home Location * Areas with established single-family development patterns; * Areas not severely impacted by incompatible land uses or development intensities; * Areas with low through traffic; * Areas outside of redevelopment/mixed-use areas, town centers and transit-supportive development corridors; * Areas away from employment and services, where low-density development helps avoid traffic congestion; and * Areas of attached single-family and two-family development. ### Compact Mixed Residential-Low This designation provides for a compatible, diverse range of single-family, attached, and smaller-scale apartment housing choices in the same neighborhood. **Uses** * Single-family detached homes on standard-sized single-family lots. * Accessory dwelling units may also occur. * Small-lot single-family homes, cottage home courts, attached single-family, two-family, and other kinds of compact housing. * Townhomes and smaller apartment structures that are consistent with the area’s scale and intensity. * A neighborhood-wide mix of housing types, unit sizes, and household incomes. * Compatible infill on vacant or underutilized lots is encouraged. **Character** * Lots generally 6,000 square feet or larger. * Lot size for a single dwelling may be reduced in small-lot housing, attached single-family, and townhomes. * Retains the characteristics of single-family <
> Compact Courtyard Housing neighborhoods, such as front and rear yards, front entries, driveways, and building height. * The building scale, appearance, and street orientation of new multi-unit/attached housing development is compatible with a neighborhood built environment that includes single-family homes and invites walking. * Infill Design Principles to enhance connections and pedestrian access, and for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods apply (Section 2.1). **Density** * 5 to 15 housing units per gross acre, with 8 or more near Centers or Transit-supportive Development corridors. **Zoning** * R-2M primarily; R-2D to assist transition areas between different zoning districts. <
> Neighborhood Infill Housing: A Site Built with a Duplex and a House Facing the Street, and Townhouse Units in back on Alley <
> Small-lot Single-family Homes, Each on its Own Lot. Shared Driveway and Utility Easements. Front Unit is Oriented to the Street with Front Entrance and Path. * New small-scale compact housing district between R-2D and R-2M. ### Location * Areas with a mix of single-family and low-intensity multi-family housing; * Areas that provide a transition from more intense uses or traffic volumes to lower-intensity residential areas; * Areas in a quarter-mile walking distance of schools, parks, transit, and local services; * Areas accessible to major streets without travel through less-intensive uses; and * Areas distant from high-intensity uses, such as City Centers, and that have developed with smaller lot sizes and lower-than-medium housing densities. ### Compact Mixed Residential-Medium This designation provides for multi-unit apartment and townhouse living and a mix of compact single-family and attached housing in a cohesive neighborhood. It makes efficient use of residential land near services, shopping, jobs, and commercial mixed-use Centers. Apartment and townhouse development supports greater housing opportunities near jobs and services, efficient public services, and frequent transit service. ### Uses * Townhouses, garden apartments, and other forms of low-rise apartments. * Single-family and two-family residences are allowed. New single-family development is encouraged to be compact-i.e., on small lots or mixed with other housing types (to use multi-family residential land and public infrastructure efficiently). * Accessory dwelling units may also occur. * A neighborhood-wide mix of housing types, unit sizes, and household incomes. ### Character * Primarily two to three story buildings. * Landscaped yards, off-street parking, and common open space in developments. * Infrastructure investments focus on streetscape and sidewalk improvements, and connections to nearby amenities. <
> Low-rise Apartments, with Three Stories above Partially-underground Garage <
> Three-story Apartment on a Small Infill Lot, Oriented to Sidewalk <
> Townhouses, with Each Unit Having its Own Rooftop, Front Entry, and Landscaping * Areas within a quarter-mile walking distance of Town Centers and City Centers may allow a fourth story or additional compact housing units, subject to additional compatibility criteria. * Infill Design Principles to enhance connections and pedestrian access, and for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods apply (Section 2.1). ### Density * 10 to 30 housing units per gross acre, with 15 or more near Centers or Transit-supportive Development corridors; ### Zoning * R-3 primarily; R-2M to assist transition areas between different zoning districts. * New R-3A (mixed-use variation of R-3) district in "Residential Mixed-use Development" areas (Section 2.3). ### Location * Areas with existing apartment housing; * Areas of transition between higher-intensity uses and lower-density neighborhoods; * Areas accessible to arterials without traveling through less-intensive uses; * Areas in walking distance of schools and other community facilities, transit routes, shopping and employment; * Areas positioned to provide more housing within a quarter mile of Transit-supportive Development corridor bus routes or near Town and City Centers ; and * Areas positioned for redevelopment and designated by an adopted plan for medium-intensity use. ## Urban Residential–High This designation provides for urban living opportunities close to major employment centers—Downtown, Midtown, UMED—and contributes to the vitality of City Centers by concentrating new housing nearby. ### Uses * Apartment buildings, condominiums, and townhouses. * New single-family and two-family development is compact, such as small-lot housing or mixed-density projects, to make efficient use of public infrastructure and multi-family lands near City Centers. Retention of existing single-family homes is allowed. * Limited ground-floor commercial space within residential projects. * A neighborhood-wide mix of housing types, unit sizes, and household incomes. * Small urban parks and green spaces in support of higher density housing. ### Character * Buildings generally three to five stories high. Taller buildings may be allowed within large development sites. * New projects can maximize the locational advantages using structured parking, less parking, and a multi-story design. * Developments typically provide common open space and shared amenities. <
> Multi-story Residential Apartments near Downtown <
> Apartments over Parking on a Greenway * Infill Design Principles to enhance connections and pedestrian access, and for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods apply (Section 2.1). Density * Dwellings: 15 to 80 housing units per gross acre, with 20 or more near Centers or transit corridors. * Buildings: ½ to 2 FAR. Zoning * R-4 primarily; R-3 to assist transition areas between different zoning districts. * R-4A in "Residential Mixed-use Development" areas (Section 2.3). Location * Existing high-density multi-family districts or use areas; * Underutilized residential lands well positioned for compatible infill of high-density residential development near Downtown or Midtown shopping, transit, parks, schools, or employment; * Areas designated by an adopted plan as redevelopment/mixed-use areas around Downtown and Midtown; and * Where higher-capacity urban infrastructure including water and sewer is available. <
> Urban Residential-High infill development. Includes Ground-floor Commercial Storefront: Mixed-use Buildings are Allowed in Areas Designated for Residential Mixed-use Development (Section 2.3). Figure 2-5. Neighborhood Housing Types <
> 2040 LUP Neighborhood land use designations # Centers Four types of Centers appear on the Land Use Plan Map: Neighborhood Centers, Town Centers, Regional Commercial Centers, and City Centers (Downtown and Midtown). These Centers vary in size, location, mix of uses, scale, and intensity. Centers are focal points for locating community and civic activity, and government, commercial, entertainment, cultural, and residential uses. They exhibit the highest degree of interaction between different land uses. They are intended to evolve to a more compact, pedestrian- and transit-oriented pattern of development. Centers also allow housing within commercial projects, or stand-alone residential projects at densities that support nearby businesses. More than just fulfilling city growth targets, Centers are intended to be attractive places in which to live, work, and play. To address the needs of growth in these locations, this Plan recommends investment in infrastructure, services, and activities such as libraries, public safety, public spaces, trails, and transit. ## Neighborhood Center This designation provides small- to medium-size retail centers that serve one or more surrounding neighborhoods. These fill gaps in areas between the larger Centers and provide services convenient to nearby residents. <
> Neighborhood Center – Street-oriented, Small-scale Mixed-use <
> Neighborhood Center – Street-oriented Professional Offices ### Uses * A mix of uses including small- to medium-scale convenience retail and personal services, such as food markets, bakeries, drug stores, restaurants, and professional offices oriented to the needs of the surrounding population. * Larger Neighborhood Centers may be anchored by a grocery store. * Residential mixed-use and compact, attached, or apartment housing. ### Character * The compact scale, appearance, and function of new development is compatible with adjacent residential areas. * Building heights are one to three stories; residential buildings may have up to four stories. * Urban design reduces dependence on motorized vehicle travel to local services. * Infill Design Principles for mixed-use centers, to enhance connections and pedestrian access, and for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods apply (Section 2.1). ### Density * Buildings: 1/3 to 1 FAR. * Dwellings: 8 to 15 housing units per net acre. ### Zoning * B-1A and B-1B districts; CCO overlay. * Potential new overlay zone or form-based district for Traditional Neighborhood Design contexts. ### Location * Existing neighborhood commercial locations typically of 2 to 25 acres; * Areas designated by an adopted plan as neighborhood commercial centers; * Areas generally 2 to 10 acres in size for new centers; * Areas with direct walking and bicycle connections to neighboring areas; and * Areas having frontage on two streets and a locally important street corner. ### Town Center This designation provides a focal point of activity for a group of neighborhoods, and the regional “heart” for major parts of the Bowl. Town Centers will serve as destinations for shopping, entertainment, and services in cohesive, pedestrian-friendly urban settings. These centers integrate community-serving retail that meets the daily needs of several surrounding neighborhoods, and include public services and civic facilities. New apartments, compact housing, and live/work units are encouraged to develop alongside long-time properties. With additional housing and public investment, Town Centers can evolve into mixed-use core areas as envisioned in *Anchorage 2020* and area-specific plans. Infill, redevelopment, and reuse of existing buildings, along with infrastructure improvements, will strengthen district identity, cohesion, and levels of activity. ### Uses * Retail shopping and local services, including grocery store anchors, eating and entertainment venues, personal services, and day care centers. * Offices providing professional and financial services and employment. * Civic facilities such as post offices, recreational centers, branch libraries, and schools add to the life and vitality of the center. * Residential mixed-use, apartment, live/work, or compact housing development, compatible with commercial activities. <
> Town Center – Mixed-use Main Street <
> Transit-served Mixed-use Town Center ### Character * Buildings are typically two to five stories. * Infill Design Principles for mixed-use centers, to enhance connections and pedestrian access, and for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods apply (Section 2.1). * Integrated with adjoining compact and medium-density neighborhoods, with convenient, direct walking and bicycle connections to adjoining neighborhoods. ### Density * Buildings: ½ to 2 FAR. * Dwellings: 15 to 40 dwellings per net acre. ### Zoning * B-3 and B-1B districts; CCO overlay. * Potential new form-based overlay or district. * R-3 and new R-3A (residential mixed-use variation of R-3). ### Location * Areas designated by an adopted plan as mixed-use centers or town centers; * Areas at the intersection of arterial streets served by public transit; * Areas generally 40 to 80 acres or more in size, 2 to 4 miles away from other town centers, each serving large subareas of the Anchorage Bowl; * Areas with trails and walk-in trade from adjoining Neighborhoods; and * Areas well positioned for infill and redevelopment and increased intensities. Regional Commercial Center This designation provides for large-scale commercial retail destinations serving a citywide or regional market. Located on large sites at the intersection of freeways and major arterials, these centers are more tied to the regional transportation system, and less dependent than Town Centers on adjacent residential neighborhoods. The Plan encourages Regional Commercial Centers to evolve into mixed-use activity hubs with office, lodging, community, and residential uses. ### Uses * Retail uses with large floor areas—such as shopping malls or clusters of large retail establishments—anchor the Regional Commercial Centers. * Entertainment, food, and other retail services round out the shopping destination. * Automobile-dependent uses such as big furniture stores and car dealerships also fit in here more than in the other Centers. * Hotels and office professional services, at densities of 20 or more employees per acre. * Compatible civic uses and public transit hubs. <
> Regional Commercial Center at Glenn Square ### Figure 2-6. Centers – Built Scale and Form (Placeholder) Placeholder for illustration to be provided by Planning Department - Medium-rise or mixed-use housing at 8 or more housing units per net acre, and 15 or more units per acre are encouraged in commuter rail station areas and Transit-supportive Development corridors. ### Character - Building scale ranges from single-story “big box” stores to low-rise malls, commercial buildings, and housing; and up to 4- to 8-story residential, office, and hotel towers. - Evolves into a physically integrated mix of commercial, civic, public open space, and residential uses. ### Density - 1/3 to 2 FAR. ### Zoning - B-3 district. ### Location - Retail centers anchored by large malls and multiple large-retail establishments; - At least 80 to 100 acres of commercial use at the intersection of arterials and freeways; - Areas with public transit hubs; and - Opportunity areas for redevelopment on vacant or underused land. ### City Center This designation applies to Downtown and Midtown Anchorage. It provides for the highest concentration and diversity of employment, civic and cultural institutions, and regional commercial uses. Urban housing and residential mixed-use is encouraged. ### Downtown The *Comprehensive Plan* emphasizes Downtown as the preferred location for municipal, state, and federal government administration, and for regional arts and cultural institutions. Because a vibrant downtown is at the heart of a successful city, revitalizing Downtown is a key strategy for Anchorage to grow as the economic and cultural center for the region, attracting and retaining talent and investment. Downtown’s strategy for revitalization emphasizes the ground-floor pedestrian environment, a shared network of sidewalks and public spaces, and historic preservation and reuse of iconic buildings. Development intensities and character vary by subarea of Downtown. Downtown includes the Ship Creek redevelopment district and the Alaska Railroad intermodal station area. Adaptive re-use and preservation of historic resources are promoted to contribute to distinctive, attractive character (Figure 2-7). Parts of Downtown lie on seismically unstable ground. These areas could experience significant <
> Downtown City Center ground displacements that would cause failure or collapse of structures built in these zones. Development should be designed to resist the anticipated ground displacement and not reduce site and surrounding ground stability. Critical and high-density structures should not be placed in very high hazard areas (ie., ground failure hazard zone #5). Examples of critical or high-density structures include public safety facilities, medical facilities, schools, and high-rise residential or office buildings with high occupancies. <
> City Center – View into Downtown from Delaney Park ### Figure 2-7. Downtown Seismic Hazards and Historic Preservation | | | | :--- | :--- | | **Very High Seismically-Induced Ground Failure Hazard** (Seismic Zone #5) | <
> | | **Seismic Ground Failure Buttress Area** (See Appendix A, Map CC-6 for more information) | | | **Potential Downtown Historic Districts** (Anchorage Original Neighborhoods Historic Preservation Plan) | | ### Midtown Midtown has seen substantial growth over the last 20 years in new construction of offices, hotels, restaurants, shopping, and other amenities. Midtown receives focus due to the Z.J. Loussac Library, concentrations of professional offices, its potential for adjacent neighborhood redevelopment, and its draw as a regional employment center. ### Uses * Medium- to large-scale office developments with professional, financial, and administrative services at employment densities of 20 to 50 employees per gross acre. * A variety of large and small retailers serving citywide, regional, and tourism markets. * Hotel, convention, cultural, theater, dining, and other venues. * Medium- to high-density housing projects and Mixed-use residential projects are encouraged. * Supportive retail uses including grocery stores, day care, and banking services create mixed-use neighborhoods. ### Character * Buildings are typically 2 to 20 stories. * Pedestrian-friendly with wider sidewalks that are maintained and attractive, distinct streetscape themes and features. * Integrated with adjoining compact and medium- to high-density neighborhoods, including convenient, direct walking and bicycle connections to adjoining neighborhoods. * Infill Design Principles for mixed-use centers, to enhance connections and pedestrian access, and for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods apply (Section 2.1). ### Density * Buildings: 2 to 10 FAR in Downtown; and 1/3 to 5 FAR in Midtown. * Dwellings: 15 or more dwellings per net acre. ### Zoning * Downtown zoning districts B-2A, B-2B, B-2C * PCD and I-2 district in Ship Creek. * B-3 district with CCO or other overlay available in Midtown. * R-4 and R-4A possible for housing or mixed-use residential development. <
> Midtown City Center <
> Buildings Oriented to 36th Avenue in Midtown * New seismically-induced ground failure overlay zone as applied to seismic Zones #4 and #5 of Downtown and Ship Creek areas. ### Location * The designated Downtown and Midtown major employment centers; * Areas within Downtown and Midtown optimal for concentrations of regional commercial, or employment densities at 20 to 50+ employees per acre; * Areas within unobstructed walking distance of high-density residential; * Contiguous core areas of commercial Downtown or Midtown rather than sites isolated from the primary City Center areas; and * Not intended to be physically expanded at the expense of residential Neighborhood areas. | Figure 2-8. Parking Lot Redevelopment (Placeholder) | | :--- | | | | Placeholder for illustration to be provided by Planning Department | | | <
> City Center Spaces for People – 4th Avenue <
> Adaptive Reuse and New Housing <
> Transit-oriented Redevelopment # Corridors Corridors connect Centers, employment hubs, and neighborhoods. Corridors include a growing mix of uses to support a range of shopping, retail, medical and professional services, and low- to moderate-intensity employment. Corridors also include office-residential (RO zoned) areas, which limit retail uses and serve as neighborhood transitions to more intense commercial areas. Some corridors are automobile-dependent and characterized by low-rise, stand-alone retail buildings or multi-tenant strip malls. Other corridors are designated to focus more on accommodating pedestrians and transit-oriented development. These corridors often feature older buildings, smaller-lot development patterns, more frequent transit service, and are well positioned for infill and redevelopment. This plan supports the evolution of auto-oriented commercial corridors to mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented and transit-supported environments. Places that attract mixed-use development and residential uses are encouraged to transition to pedestrian-oriented streetscapes and evolve into local gathering places (such as cafes, restaurants, and plazas). Development in corridors adjacent to established neighborhoods will transition from higher-intensity uses to lower intensities on the edges of these corridor areas to be compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhoods. ## Corridors and Street Typologies The Corridor designations in this section describe future land use activities and patterns of development in commercial areas along important streets. They should not be confused with the "Street Typology" design types in the *AMATS Official Streets & Highways Plan* and area-specific plans (e.g., the *Anchorage Downtown Comprehensive Plan*). These plans establish "Mixed-use Street," "Commercial Street," "Main Street," and other street typologies. Street typology addresses the design features in the street right-of-way that respond to the surrounding land uses and development patterns. It provides for greater or lesser emphasis on multimodal and pedestrian-friendly street design in that land use and urban design context. See the sidebar on page 65 of Section 2.3 for more about integrating land uses and Street Typologies. ## Commercial Corridor This land use designation applies to auto-oriented, low-intensity retail, office, and commercial services along arterial corridors, which support surrounding suburban residential neighborhoods. Most Commercial Corridors are envisioned to evolve through infill commercial and housing development, and investment in streetscape and pedestrian enhancements. Revitalization of commercial properties will promote economic vitality and enhance shopping activities by trending toward a mix of uses. ### Uses * Office development consists of small- to medium-sized buildings or complexes with professional, medical, or business services. <
> Pedestrian-oriented Commercial Corridor Retail along the Arterial Street <
> Office Building in RO-zoned Area * Typical retail uses include food and drug stores, restaurants, small retail stores, exercise studios, and personal services. Commercial services include banks, real estate, medical offices, and professional services in small offices. * Auto-dependent uses include drive-through retail, fueling stations, hotels, car dealers, big box stores, and minor auto services. * Smaller light-industrial uses with storefronts are also allowed, subject to compatibility criteria. * Residential or mixed-use housing are encouraged. * In residential-office (RO) areas, offices are the primary commercial use. Residential apartments or a mix of office and multi-family residential is encouraged. Lodging, dining, and small retail uses may occur in a limited amount in an office development. More intensive retail, auto-dependent uses, and industrial activities are discouraged in RO areas. ### Character * Individual low-rise single-use commercial buildings and multi-tenant strip malls characterize the built environment. * In residential-office (RO) areas, new office development is situated to minimize impacts to adjacent residential areas including scale, bulk, landscaped setbacks, and traffic generation. Former residential areas may retain a strong residential character with small office uses. Development is generally 2 to 4 stories with ample landscaped setbacks and moderate building footprints on the lot. * Infill Design Principles to enhance connections and pedestrian access, and for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods apply (Section 2.1). ### Density * Buildings: 01/3 to 2 FAR. * Dwellings: 8 to 40 housing units per acre. * RO office areas: 1/3 to 1 FAR. ### Zoning * B-3, and secondarily B-1A and B-1B. * RO in residential-office areas. * R-3 where appropriate for housing opportunities. ### Location * Existing commercial corridors with stand-alone stores or multi-tenant strip malls; * Intersections of arterials or collectors convenient for customers and employees; * High concentrations of employment and traffic kept near major intersections; * For RO: Existing office areas that remain optimal for medical or other office use; * For RO: Areas that provide a transition between more intensive retail uses or traffic and surrounding residential areas; * For RO: Underutilized areas along major thoroughfares well positioned for office or residential reuse; and * Not intended to be physically expanded at the expense of Neighborhood- or Industrial-designated areas. ### Main Street Corridor This land use designation provides for commercial and mixed-uses within urban neighborhoods that can evolve as pedestrian-oriented, transit-served “main street” development. It includes specific corridors recommended in neighborhood and district plans. Main streets feature transit access, wider sidewalks, pedestrian amenities, street tree landscaping, and relocation of utility poles and boxes and other impediments to a safe, comfortable pedestrian environment. Examples of this designation include all or segments of: Spenard Road, Arctic Boulevard, DeBarr Road, Muldoon Road, Mountain View Drive, and Gambell Street. <
> Main Street Corridor Compared with Commercial Corridors, many of these areas feature street grids, smaller lot development patterns, greater building lot coverage, limited front and side yard setbacks, and a network of frequent street and sidewalk connections into adjacent neighborhoods along the corridor. The close proximity of neighborhoods to the corridor has a strong impact on the character of development. In many cases, redevelopment will be more compact, with a greater variety of smaller buildings. Small businesses, live/work spaces, and new infill housing will be established through redevelopment and reuse of existing buildings. ### Uses * A mix of retail and services, offices and other employment, public facilities, and housing. * Local serving businesses, employers, activities, community uses, and amenities are promoted. * Residential mixed-use, apartments, and compact housing developments are encouraged. <
> Pedestrian-oriented Multi-tenant Retail ### Character * Infill and redevelopment building heights typically range from two to four stories. * Multi-story structures and more intense uses may occur at major intersections, while lower-intensity buildings and uses may occur adjacent to neighborhoods. * Infill Design Principles for mixed-use corridors, to enhance connections and pedestrian access, and for relationship to surrounding neighborhoods apply (Section 2.1). ### Density * Buildings: 1/2 to 2 FAR. * Housing: 15 or more units per net acre ### Zoning * B-3 or B-1B, or RO in residential-office locations, with CCO overlay or new overlay zone. * Potential new overlay zone or form-based district for Traditional Neighborhood Design contexts. * R-3 and new R-3A residential mixed-use variation of R-3. In Fairview Mixed-use Corridor: R-4 or R-4A are also possible, per Fairview Neighborhood Plan. ### Location * Existing commercial corridors designated by an adopted plan for transit-oriented (re)development and mixed use; * Early post-World War II era commercial corridors with smaller lot development patterns near Midtown; and * Not intended to be physically expanded at the expense of Neighborhood- or Industrial-designated areas. ## Open Spaces Anchorage’s beauty and livability is due in large part to its parks, trails, and natural open space system. Natural open spaces sustain Anchorage’s urban developments and support its economic growth. Natural open spaces including lakes, streams, and greenbelts provide fish and wildlife habitat. Open Spaces can also include hazardous areas, such as places with very high earthquake-induced ground failure susceptibility. This Plan preserves and retains open space in two designations. The first, “Park or Natural Area,” depicts existing and planned municipal open spaces. The second, “Other Open Space,” comprises other areas that are expected to retain open space functions, such as wetlands, habitat, visual buffering, or recreation. For map legibility, some smaller open spaces are not shown and instead integrated under other land use designations. Additional new parks and open spaces are part of the city’s growth strategy. The Land Use Plan Map will be updated after new open spaces are established. ### Park or Natural Area The Park or Natural Area designation provides for active and passive outdoor recreation needs, conservation of natural areas and greenbelts, and trail connections. These open spaces are municipally-owned lands; however, they may include privately-operated recreation facilities (e.g., O’Malley’s on the Green at the Anchorage Golf Course). This designation includes neighborhood, community, natural resource use parks, special use parks, golf courses, greenbelts, and other municipal open spaces dedicated or designated by an adopted plan. Other municipal lands of high natural value or that are unsuitable for development are also included. Some municipal lands have conservation easements or wetlands. #### Uses * Parks include active and passive park areas, outdoor recreation facilities, community and interpretive gardens, trails, and natural habitats. * Special-purpose facilities such as sports complexes, recreational centers, or interpretive centers may be allowed through special review. * Ancillary uses such as caretaker housing and park maintenance facilities are allowed. #### Zoning * PR and PLI districts. * Other zones can include non-dedicated parks and natural areas. #### Location * See Map CI-6, *Parks and Open Space*, in Appendix A. <
> Midtown Cuddy Park <
> Russian Jack Park Scene ### Other Open Space This designation applies to non-municipal public and private open spaces that function as part of the Anchorage Bowl’s system of parks, open spaces, outdoor recreational facilities, and natural preservation areas. It includes state and federal lands currently used or designated by an adopted plan as park or natural resource use or that are environmentally unsuitable for development. It also includes private lands that—by easement, subdivision, permit conditions, agreement, commercial activity, or environmental constraints—will continue to function as open space. Many are private lands set aside as common open space tracts in residential development. Some open spaces in this designation are not intended to provide public recreation access. <
> Natural Area ### Uses * Natural areas, passive use areas, indoor and outdoor recreation facilities, community playgrounds, community or interpretive gardens, outdoor commercial recreation, or agricultural nursery and horticultural uses. ### Zoning * PLI or other districts depending on location. ## Facilities and Institutions The three Facilities and Institutions designations depict existing and planned community, institutional, and public facilities in campus settings. Facilities and Institutions comprise a wide range of uses, such as schools, civic institutions, public works maintenance yards, and utility facilities. This category also includes anchor institutions and facilities. Anchor institutions are large organizations (e.g., universities) that have an established presence by their permanence and stabilizing physical and social ties to the surrounding community. They help diversify the city’s economy by employing large workforces, purchasing goods and services, and attracting significant investment. Anchor facilities are the airports, railroad, and port transportation hubs. ## Community Facility or Institution This designation provides for public or institutional facilities on public or institutional lands. These institutions and facilities are integrated with the neighborhoods and provide a community service or focus for the area or wider community. Public institutions and facilities help define their community because of their permanence, civic design, and public service function. For map legibility, some institutions and facilities smaller than one acre may be shown with the adjacent use designation. For example, utility substations are not shown on the Plan Map but are included in the surrounding predominant Land Use Designations. Likewise, religious institutions on smaller sites are generally included in the residential Neighborhood designations. ### Future Public Facility Locations The Land Use Plan Map classifies a portion of the redevelopment areas in the 3500 Tudor municipal facilities campus, the Mental Health Trust lands northwest of Northern Lights and Bragaw, and the former Native Medical Center site in Downtown as “Community Facility or Institution” and/or “Park or Natural Area.” The location and acreage of park and community facility uses within these areas are noted for conceptual planning purposes only. The exact size and location of these areas will be determined in consideration of long-term projections for school, park, and public facility needs in these areas and through area-specific site or master planning. <
> K-12 Schools – Robert Service High School and Trailside Elementary <
> Civic Institutions – Z.J. Loussac Library ### Uses * Schools, community recreation centers, fire stations, libraries, museums, government offices, and cemeteries. * Religious institutions with large campuses. * Administrative offices of institutional and not-for-profit uses may also occur. * Public facilities and utilities such as electrical power stations, water and sewer treatment facilities, public works maintenance yards, and water tank reservoirs. * Public facility lands excess to public need may be used for residential or mixed-use development by a joint public-private agreement where consistent with the policies of the *Comprehensive Plan*. Locational criteria shall be developed for these circumstances. * Due to a wide variety of civic uses and public facilities in this designation, the Land Use Plan Map marks some community facilities with the following symbols: <
> K-12 School <
> Utility/Public Works Facility <
> Power Generation Facility ### Character * Civic design. * Institutions are compatible with the physical scale and character of the surrounding neighborhoods. * Utility/public works facilities are typically more industrial in character and less oriented to on-site customer service. * Pedestrian connectivity is provided to schools and community institutions. The Infill Design Principles to enhance connections and pedestrian access apply (Section 2.1). ### Zoning * PLI and other districts. * For utility/public works facilities, I-1 and I-2 zones may also be appropriate. For antenna farms, AF zone may be appropriate. ### University or Medical Center The University or Medical Center designation provides for major educational, health, and social service institutions that serve the wider community, region, and state. Beyond fulfilling their vital missions to educate, heal, cultivate the arts, and serve the community in other ways, these “anchor institutions” collectively function as major activity centers and generators of employment in Anchorage. The *Comprehensive Plan* supports the continued, coordinated growth of the major institutions in cohesive campus districts in a mutually beneficial manner with surrounding communities and outdoor recreational amenities. *UMED Development Reserves*. While much of the undeveloped area in this designation is reserved and mandated to support facility expansions, it also includes important habitats, buffers, and scenic values. Although these lands are imperative to the growth of University or Medical Center institutions, there is a community desire that some of the open space functions and values be retained. This fact is clearly described in the institutional master plans and in the *UMED District Plan*, which provides planning and development guidelines intended to retain important natural features and functions. It is imperative that future planning and adjudicatory actions in this area be consistent with the institutional master plans and the *UMED District Plan* to address the careful meshing of natural areas with future facility and institutional developments. <
> University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) Integrated Science Building <
> Alaska Native Medical Center in UMED District <
> University in a Natural Setting: Trail Crossing Chester Creek to UAA Commons Building in Background ### Uses * Medical, health, education, social, and cultural service institutions in a campus setting. * Ancillary uses include food, lodging, group housing, administrative, and outpatient medical services and supporting retail uses as identified in neighborhood or district plans. * Gateways may include mixed-use designated development. * Natural areas and outdoor recreational uses serve to tie the built environment of the campus areas together. ### Character * Physical design, setbacks, and buffering mitigate the external impacts of scale and allow the facilities to relate positively to surrounding streets, neighborhoods, and natural areas. * Trail connections, enhanced transit service, structured and shared parking, and other strategies help reduce traffic, protect the natural character from new parking lots, and provide equitable access for non-drivers. * This designation ties to strong neighborhoods with more housing opportunities, mixed use, and amenities. Investment in the livability of surrounding areas will support a more active campus district and increase the institutions' attractiveness to potential clients. Where institutions directly interface with neighborhoods and public thoroughfares, they feature an open campus with active edges and limit perimeter uses such as parking and storage. * Perimeter natural open space buffers, important wetlands and drainages, and habitat connectivity are preserved. Access to open spaces is identified in institutional master plans and implemented consistent with such plans and the *UMED District Plan*. * Future growth minimizes impacts on surrounding areas, including traffic impacts or displacement of housing or businesses. ### Zoning * PLI as the primary district. * RO in limited locations, subject to special limitations including conformity to area-specific plans. * Zoning to implement the UMED Village, per *UMED District Plan*. ### Location * Institutions are not intended for expansion into existing neighborhoods at a loss of residential land. ### Airport, Port, or Railroad Facility The Airport, Port, or Railroad Facility designation represents the major facilities that make Anchorage the statewide transportation hub and gateway for Alaska. They are extensive in land area and their intermodal facilities are essential to the economy and transportation system. They also affect adjacent neighborhoods, open spaces, and industrial distribution activities. This designation comprises (1) the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (TSAIA), Lake Hood Floatplane Base, and Merrill Field Airport, which are subject to FAA use regulations and grant assurances; (2) the Port of Anchorage and water-borne transportation-related areas; and (3) the Alaska Railroad operations areas and railroad corridor, which are subject to certain circumstances to exclusive United States Surface Transportation Board regulation. Planning and development of these facilities should account for resiliency to natural hazards, including the need to remain operational following seismic events. In Airport lands, wetland permits, land use regulations, FAA regulations and grant assurances, and other requirements would frame land uses and future development configurations. ### Airport Expansion The Comprehensive Plan supports the continued development of the transportation facilities in a coordinated, mutually beneficial manner with the surrounding communities. The airports have occasionally added new parcels to their land inventories at their interfaces with residential neighborhoods, such as Merrill Field Airport’s western boundary with Fairview Neighborhood. This has concerned the neighborhoods, which seek predictable, stable airport boundaries. This <
> Port of Anchorage <
> Alaska Railroad Plan does not anticipate significant future airport additions into residential neighborhoods. Future growth of Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (TSAIA) involves the long-term resolution of a future need for an additional North-South (N-S) runway, as described in the *West Anchorage District Plan (WADP)*. Need for a new N-S runway may arise in the 2040 LUP time frame, and some of the municipal lands west of the Airport would be affected. TSAIA needs for a future second N-S runway and West Airpark expansion may include acreage in the AWWU reserve parcel and/or west to the bluff in Pt. Woronzof Park. This Plan acknowledges this possibility, in keeping with *Anchorage 2020* and *WADP*. Forecasts are used to predict operational demands, congestion, and delays. Air transportation market factors have been projected to eventually trigger the need for a second N-S runway. Although TSAIA does not anticipate needing a new N-S runway before the year 2035, TSAIA and the FAA seek predictability of ownership of the necessary land area, since it takes many years in advance for state and federal agencies to plan, fund, design, review, and construct a runway. Ownership and parcel boundary changes would be necessary to enable Airport expansion. These might be accomplished via land exchange, fee-simple acquisition, or other permanent means subject to municipal, state, and FAA regulations. *Eminent domain* is a viable tool for necessary land <
> Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport acquisition for a future runway. Land acquisitions or exchanges are complicated and take time. Also, any change in ownership of municipally owned and dedicated parkland would first require a majority vote of Anchorage residents to un-dedicate the parkland. In such a case, the purpose and need for a new runway faces rigorous analyses and substantiation. Both the land negotiations and the design and permitting requirements for a new runway include a robust and significant public process and community dialogue ahead of construction. Although the timing of a new runway is years away, 10 to 20 years of advance planning, design, reviews, and construction would be needed. While a land exchange may be feasible and prove to be an optimal resolution mechanism for land issues around the Airport, this Plan does not endorse one. The land exchange action is only listed here as a potential mechanism following details in the *WADP*. There are longstanding public concerns about airport growth and encroachment into the Coastal Trail corridor and public recreation use areas. Any airport expansion must preserve AWWU water treatment facility operations and future expansion needs, Coastal Trail realignment requirements, as well as maximum retention of the Coastal Trail. The borders between open space and any airport growth areas would be established through area-specific planning and would include a public process. ### Uses * Primary uses include transportation facility operational activities and aviation- or marine-dependent businesses. * Light industrial, freight distribution, and office-warehouse activities may be accommodated on leased lots. Utility and public works facilities may also be accommodated. Uses in these areas are subject to each facility’s master plan and other regulations. * Airport master plans may designate certain areas for long-term leases to non-aeronautical uses. The Plan Map prioritizes non-facility use lands in the Airport, Port, or Railroad Facility designation for future industrial *production, distribution, and repair* (PDR) use. ### Zoning * MI, I-1, I-2, MC, PLI. * Airport zoning district. (See Section 3 Actions). * The Railroad Utility Corridor passes through a variety of zoning districts. <
> ### Potential Open Space Alternative Areas with a green-blue hatch pattern over Airport, Port, or Railroad Facility lands depict an alternative land use designation over the base land use color of transportation facility. This alternative pattern applies to primarily underdeveloped parcels of TSAIA, Merrill Field, Port of Anchorage, and the Alaska Railroad where there is a public interest in retaining existing open spaces. These areas include important wildlife habitat, natural areas, vegetative buffers, greenbelt and trail connections, scenic values, or other recreation uses. These lands are development reserves subject to owner facility and associated jurisdictions. This pattern overlay on public facility lands reflects natural open space or possible recreation as an alternative use should some of these areas be preserved or change ownership. The *Anchorage 2020* conceptual natural open space map¹ designated portions of these areas for future open space planning actions. The *2040 LUP* promotes strategies that balance conservation with the owner facility’s requisite objectives or requirements to grow. <
> Anchorage Airport in Natural Setting The majority of these Open Space Alternative lands are tracts in TSAIA. They also include tracts in Merrill Field Airport, Port of Anchorage, and greenbelts in the Alaska Railroad Ship Creek Terminal Reserve. Federal regulations apply to these transportation lands. The land owners of these facilities have allowed public recreational use on many of these parcels, by formal agreement, land patents, subdivision, easement or permit. In some areas these formal mechanisms have expired although recreational access continues to be allowed. In all cases the primary land use remains focused on the owner facility’s needs and jurisdiction. Public access is subject to the owner facility’s discretion and is not considered a by-right or permanent use. Open space recreational uses must be compatible with the owner facility operations and federal regulatory conditions. [^p72-1]: Updated by Map CI-7, *Natural Assets*, in Appendix A. In many cases, lands within the Open Space Alternative overlay are considered public use areas. There is public sentiment that they remain as currently used. Conflicts exist between that sentiment and the jurisdictional requirements of the managing agency. Within Open Space Alternative overlay areas, the boundaries between open space and public facility expansion will be established through area planning. Alternative means of preserving lands may include land exchanges, wetland banking, purchase, or easements. Future growth within these areas will include careful assessment of the value of open space components relative to further developments. Open spaces may be reduced or re-shaped to accommodate program needs and facilities; however, losses should be minimized to those necessary to provide for development. Design elements for recreation, trail connections, and ecological benefits will be consistent with adopted plans, such as the *West Anchorage District Plan*, and the facilities’ adopted master plans. The main section of the Turnagain Bog in the northeast corner of TSAIA is included in this Open Space Alternative overlay. With TSAIA’s location relative to nearby neighborhoods, Airport growth generates considerable concern about impacts to these areas. Growth plans must address these impacts. Assembly Ordinance 2000-151 (S-2) was adopted specifically to address Airport expansions and buffering in that section of the facility. The ordinance directs joint Airport-Municipality master planning in the main section of Turnagain Bog prior to future development along with a scenic easement between Airport land and the adjacent neighborhoods. <
> ### Industrial Areas Industrial uses in Anchorage make a disproportionately large contribution in local income, jobs, and economic growth. However, it is difficult for industrial enterprises to compete for space against other uses in this limited land market. The *2040 LUP* recommends retention of industrial areas to ensure a predictable, sustainable supply of industrial land, and encourages efficient use of these lands by industry. Because industrial areas are also attractive to non-industrial uses, this Plan recommends limiting incompatible uses to avoid conflicts with industrial activities and prevent displacement of industrial employers. Two Industrial designations appear on the Land Use Plan Map. Both are oriented toward *production, distribution, and repair* (PDR) uses. ### Light Industrial/Commercial Light Industrial/Commercial areas provide for multi-sector employment in an industrial setting. It gives priority to light industrial PDR uses. #### Uses * Manufacturing, construction contracting, freight distribution, delivery operations, wholesale, and warehousing uses that generate employment and economic activity with eight or more employees per acre. * Vehicle and equipment repair uses. * A limited range of retail, customer service, and professional service uses that are industrial in character or compatible in an industrial use area. Examples include retail sales and services for equipment, building supplies, and large goods like vehicles or furniture. * Office industrial parks and office developments are allowed that provide technical services, research and development, <
> Light Industrial "PDR" Uses – Wholesale Distribution and Boat Fabrication Enterprises <
> Office-Warehouse with Environmental Tech Services Firm or that integrate with industrial production or distribution uses. * Other uses such as restaurants, banking, grocery stores, self-storage, lodging, commercial recreation, or group assembly are subject to limits that minimize traffic, land use conflicts, or loss of PDR employment. Some caretaker, owner, or rental housing units are allowed that retain the ground level for operations. The Light Industrial/Commercial designation encourages more intensive retail, office, and housing to locate in Corridors and Centers. ### Character Development is compatible with available infrastructure and adjacent residential areas through physical scale, intensity of activities, and buffering and transitions. ### Density * 0.15 to 0.75 FAR. ### Zoning * I-1, Ship Creek PCD. ### Location * Industry clusters and supplier networks; * Areas where primary functions are industrial activity and industrial-related commercial activities; * Efficient transportation access to customers and suppliers without impacting other land uses; * Efficient access to the Airport, Railroad, or Port, and to freight routes; * Areas characterized by buildings and sites with large space for equipment and materials movement and storage; and * Industrial areas experiencing commercial encroachment or a mix of uses that are still optimal for PDR uses. ## General Industrial This designation provides strategic areas for concentrated industrial employment and economic development, often being interdependent with the major rail, port, and airport facilities in the Bowl. ### Uses * A full range of light to heavy industrial uses: Heavy manufacturing and production, power generation plants, mineral processing, major freight distribution terminals, railroad operations, heavy equipment repair, hazardous materials storage, recycling facilities, and waste processing and salvage, as well as the PDR uses allowed in Light Industrial/Commercial designation. * Certain non-industrial uses are allowed that support or integrate with industrial operations; for example, professional services, engineering, environmental, or other technical services. ### Character * These areas are protected from encroachment by potentially incompatible uses such as retail, commercial office, lodging, and group <
> Industrial Repair Uses – Tractor-trailer Repair Shop Located near a Ground Freight Distributor <
> Industrial Production – Heavy Construction Contractor and AS&G Plant assembly. This designation discourages uses that may appear industrial in character but in fact provide little PDR employment, making inefficient use of the limited economic development land base—e.g., self-storage space rentals and automobile sales and rental. * Industrial areas are located to minimize the potential for generating off-site impacts, including noise, odors, vibration, large quantities of hazardous materials, and truck traffic. Greater buffering and screening may be required to enhance public rights-of-way and improve land use compatibility. ### Density * 0.15 to 0.75 FAR. ### Zoning * I-2 and MI. ### Location * See Light Industrial/Commercial location criteria; * Areas with established clusters of industrial PDR development; * Areas next to or with efficient access to Airport, Railroad, or Port Facilities; * Lands not significantly constrained by poor soils, utilities, or other conditions; and * Separation or buffering from Neighborhoods and Centers. ### Definition of Industrial Activities: Production, Distribution, and Repair (PDR) Land use planning requires an understanding of what is "industrial" and the types and characteristics of contemporary industrial activities that drive the local economy. The phrase "production, distribution, and repair," or PDR, provides a way of thinking about contemporary industry which reflects trends toward "lighter" (e.g., less dirty, noisy, or bulky) forms of industry. It is more descriptive because it helps recognize that industrial is more than manufacturing—including goods handling, transportation, and repair uses. This shift in terms characterizes Anchorage's industrial economy. **Production** in many cities is mainly manufacturing. However, it also includes power generation and construction contracting enterprises, which are prevalent in Anchorage. Nationally, manufacturing is evolving toward small and medium enterprises and light manufacturers. **Distribution** includes ground freight trucking, delivery, and other transportation services; warehousing; snow storage; and waste management. It also includes the major regional airport, port, and railroad facilities. **Repair** establishments work closely with production and distribution enterprises and include repair services to vehicles and equipment, as well as building and facility maintenance services. ## 2.3 Additional Map Features ### Growth-supporting Features Four growth-supporting features overlay the land use designations: * Transit-supportive Development, * Greenway-supported Development, * Traditional Neighborhood Design, and * Residential Mixed-use Development. These features support resilient growth. They catalyze and enhance development by: reducing traffic congestion; lowering household travel costs; reducing road infrastructure and maintenance costs; and using less land for parking. They include enhancements to neighborhood design and natural resources. Such development meets the demand for walkable neighborhoods and connections to businesses. Each of these features is gaining interest and public support because they enhance property values. Each Growth-Supporting Feature modifies an area’s underlying land use designation by introducing development concepts that otherwise might not exist at the site. ### Transit-supportive Development Transit-supportive Development (TSD) identifies corridors where expanded public transit service will support a compact, walkable pattern of commercial, residential, and/or mixed-use development. Over time, compact development can create ridership demand to support more frequent bus service. It will give Anchorage’s households more choices in how to get to work and other destinations. It also provides more opportunities to live in a walkable, accessible, and affordable neighborhood environment. <
> Street-facing Medical Services Building on Lake Otis Transit Route <
> Transit-supportive Mixed-use Building with Housing TSD could affect the design of streets, pedestrian facilities, and property developments for up to a quarter mile or a 5- to 15-minute walk from the transit route. Exact boundaries will be determined through corridor studies and coordination with residents, businesses, and property owners (See Section 3.3 Actions). Future development is encouraged to be generally in the range of 8 to 20 housing units per acre on average over the entire corridor. However, individual parts of the corridor, such as in existing single-family and two-family neighborhoods, may have less density. TSD is consistent with the density ranges of the underlying land use designations shown on the Land Use Plan Map. It does not raise density ranges above the designations. Successful transit corridors can enhance property values. Increased bus service reduces dependence on personal vehicles and curbs their attendant effect on urban spaces devoted primarily to parking rather than people, households, and businesses. They can expand housing opportunities, as well as commercial land uses to provide job opportunities and other daily needs closer to where employees live. To achieve these benefits, more residences (including workforce and affordable housing) and commercial building space are needed in the corridor to support more frequent, all-day transit service. Buses should run consistently every 10 to 15 minutes and connect to local and regional destinations: Town Centers, City Centers, and other service/ employment centers, such as the UMED. <
> Multi-unit Building and Detached ADU above Garage Fit into Neighborhood <
> Neighborhood-scale Transit-supportive Mixed-use Additionally, the shared infill design principles in Section 2.1 (page 35) for enhancing connections and pedestrian access apply. Road improvements on the TSD corridor should incorporate expanded sidewalks, strategically placed crosswalks, enhanced street furniture, highly visible transit facilities, and other pedestrian amenities. TSDs continue to accommodate through traffic, and some roadway improvements may be needed to address congestion. Such improvements should minimize impacts on the pedestrian environment and transit service. Several Transit-supportive Development areas also encourage transit-oriented land use patterns in potential commuter rail station areas along the Alaska Railroad Corridor. The 2040 LUP supports a long-term vision in which regional rail service between Anchorage and the Matanuska-Susitna Valley could connect with local public transit service in the Bowl and interact with transit-oriented development in mixed-use Centers and Corridors. Several potential sites in the Bowl have been identified in various adopted plans and studies. The Municipality and partners will continue to explore the future feasibility of commuter rail service. The 2040 LUP envisions Transit-supportive Development on all or segments of the following corridors listed in general order of priority: * Spenard Road * 15th Avenue/DeBarr Road * Northern Lights/Benson Boulevard * Mountain View Drive/Bragaw Street * Arctic Boulevard * Muldoon Road * A/C Street and Tudor Road * Lake Otis Parkway/Abbott Road/92nd Ave. * Jewel Lake Road Public transit routes will continue to operate on many other roads. Public and private improvements on other roads should continue to facilitate multi-modal access to transit. ### Zoning * See implementation zones of underlying land use designation. * May include new transit-oriented development overlay (See Action 6-5, Section 3.3). ### Greenway-supported Development Anchorage’s greenbelts run from Chugach State Park to Cook Inlet. Without its greenbelts, Anchorage would be a dramatically different community. Greenway-Supported Development (GSD) identifies where new development will incorporate natural open spaces, creek corridors, and pedestrian routes. GSDs are a development concept that focuses on catalyzing new infill <
> Creek Restoration through Downtown Bothell, WA and redevelopment projects, based on a creek or greenway restoration. Future redevelopment projects have the potential to interface with revitalized urban creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, public spaces, or multi-use trails. GSDs are depicted on the 2040 Land Use Plan Map with a green tartan-style hatch pattern. The underlying base color indicates the land use designation. A typical GSD development pattern would extend for up to a quarter mile or a 5- to 15-minute walk from the creek corridor or trail greenway. GSDs would enhance new construction and property values by attracting more uses, housing, businesses, and employment. Commuter trails within greenways improve travel alternatives between centers and surrounding neighborhoods. New development projects benefit from trail access with decreased parking requirements and lower traffic volumes, as well as a higher quality <
> Redevelopment around Greenway Corridor in Thornton, CO <
> Indian Creek Daylighting and Urban Revitalization in Downtown Caldwell, ID urban environment. GSDs are a powerful place-making feature within any redevelopment area. The linear component of a GSD is based on restoring creek sections or other natural functions in redeveloping areas of the Bowl. Restored channels, drainage features, and mini-greenbelts become neighborhood assets, sustainable storm water systems, and non-motorized trail connections. Restored or daylighted creeks can reduce pollution and flooding. The key element of the GSD feature in the 2040 LUP is redevelopment of existing built areas in designated mixed-use Centers and Main Street Corridors. This makes GSDs different from simple creek projects, natural greenbelt restorations, or new trail sections. New trail connections, greenbelts, and natural areas protection are addressed in functional plans such as the Areawide Trails Plan, Bike Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Wetlands Management Plan, and Chester Creek Watershed Plan. <
> Indian Creek Daylighting and Urban Revitalization in Downtown Caldwell, ID *“A stream can be used as a dynamic economic feature to draw shoppers and tourists to a business district.” -- Ann Riley, author, Restoring Streams in Cities.* For GSDs to most effectively catalyze redevelopment and alternative access modes, they should connect to existing pedestrian corridors and trails ### Trail, Urban Space and Natural Features Urban amenities such as pocket parks, promenades, and mini-greenbelts create spaces for people in higher-density residential areas and employment centers. They become destinations attracting residents, visitors, shoppers, and employers. Urbanized areas like Midtown and Creekside Town Center area in Muldoon experience periodic flooding. Reclaiming natural channels and drainages raises land valuations and reduces flooding, icing, runoff, and improves habitat, air quality, and aesthetics. especially where the GSD is located in or adjacent to a Reinvestment Focus Area (Section 3.2, Strategy 2). The shared infill design principles in Section 2.1 apply to development patterns in the linear GSDs. Many western and northern U.S. cities incorporate creek restorations and/or linear greenbelts into redevelopment projects. Urban greenways may be incorporated into developments in various ways: as a newly constructed stream channel and greenway threaded between existing or future buildings, streets, or parking lots; or, as recreated natural water features and green spaces at intervals along a redevelopment corridor. This type of development will usually involve some restoration of natural features and functions. The location of future trail or linear greenbelts would be determined through studies and coordination between agencies, neighborhoods, property owners, and developers. GSD features are proposed in the following locations listed in general order of priority: * Fish Creek drainage across Midtown, potentially from west of Minnesota Drive to east of Seward Highway, bringing Fish Creek to the surface with a parallel trail system. * Eastern extension of the Midtown Fish Creek GSD from the channel of Fish Creek drainage near Lake Otis Parkway, crossing Lake Otis eastward to generally follow E. 42nd Avenue to Dale Street and into the UMED. * Eastern Chester Creek, the North Branch of the South Fork in Muldoon and at Creekside Town Center. * Lower Ship Creek to Coastal Trail connection. * Chester Creek northwest of Bragaw Street and Northern Lights Boulevard. * Furrow Creek drainage crossing the Huffman Town Center. * Fairview’s Gambell Street mixed-use corridor, from 3rd to 15th Avenues, as part of Seward-to-Glenn Highway connection project. GSDs are not a regulation or a zoning district. Implementation will come through partnerships, agreements, and Small Area Implementation Plans. GSDs require agency and funding coordination, public dollars, staff commitments, and a long-term effort. GSD projects may develop in pieces, sometimes including only portions of <
> Local Creek Restoration and Greenway-Supported Development in Muldoon Creekside Town Center. See also creek daylighting in Midtown Cuddy Park photo on page 51. <
> The GSD linear feature can also simply be a pedestrian trail, street, or greenway restored stream reaches or pedestrian ways, based on investor or landowner and public commitments. A combination of development incentives, public parking, and street, trail, and infrastructure improvement projects supportive of the greenway would implement this growth-supporting feature. # Traditional Neighborhood Design This growth-supporting feature enhances existing urban patterns of development. These older urban neighborhoods and districts have a more highly interconnected street system, smaller block sizes, greater connectivity, and sidewalks. The Neighborhood Development Patterns map (Map CC-1, *Neighborhood Development Patterns*, in Appendix A) identifies these parts of town compared with other neighborhoods which have a more suburban or semi-rural character. For an evolving market, traditional urban neighborhoods and the characteristics associated with them are desirable and expected to be sought-after in the future. Neighborhoods such as South Addition, Fairview, and Mountain View share the same block grid of streets and alleys with Downtown. Other neighborhoods have a more relaxed and irregular street grid/alley pattern, such as Government Hill, Airport Heights, Rogers Park, and parts of Spenard and western Midtown. Some neighborhood plans have recognized these character areas and recommend that future infill and redevelopment occur in a compatible pattern. Downtown, Fairview, and Government Hill have recommended new overlay zones or zoning districts with urban guidelines that enhance the character of such areas. Traditional Neighborhood Design facilitates compact development that reinforces these char- <
> South Addition Street Grid <
> Spenard Street Grid acteristics. It promotes policies, guidelines, and incentives that allow for and encourage new development and infrastructure (streets, sidewalks) to capitalize on this urban form. The shared infill design principles in Section 2.1 apply. Changes may include alternative parking and driveway standards, and new overlay districts or <
> New Townhouses along Sidewalk with Alley in Older Neighborhood <
> Narrow-lot Homes on Street without Alleys. form-based codes. Certain undeveloped tracts or redevelopment sites adjacent to existing urban neighborhoods are also included in this designation. (See Section 3.) ### Zoning * See implementation zones of underlying land use designation. * May include potential new TND overlay zone or form-based districts (See Action 7-4 in Section 3.3). # Street Typologies and Land Use Different kinds of streets play different roles. The Municipality’s AMATS *Official Streets and Highways Plan (OS&HP)* establishes different street types for the purposes of addressing streetscape design. The design elements that make up a street can include the number of lanes it has, the width of its sidewalks, the presence of bike lanes, the placement of landscaping, and other characteristics. Street Typologies respond to the surrounding land uses (e.g., residential or commercial) and development patterns (e.g., downtown versus suburban). They do not replace the functional classifications of “arterial,” “collector,” and “local” streets, but help to guide decisions about street design elements based on the land use context. *OS&HP* Street Typologies include: Residential Street, Commercial Street, Industrial Street, Main Street, Mixed-use Street, Transit Street, Parkland Street, Institutional District Street, and Low-density Residential Street. For each street type, the *OS&HP* lists priority design elements. For example, a Mixed-use Street could feature wider sidewalks, street trees, and on-street parking. Area-specific plans, such as the Anchorage Downtown Comprehensive Plan’s *Core Streets Streetscape Plan*, can provide more tailored sub-types (e.g., Downtown’s “Signature Street”). Street Typologies provide a framework to allow street design flexibility that can prioritize walking, bicycling, or public transit modes of travel in certain land use policy areas. *OS&HP* Street types coordinate well with the 2040 LUP land use designations and “Traditional Neighborhood Design” to help achieve walkable, livable, and healthy communities. <
> # Residential Mixed-use Development This growth-supporting feature promotes medium- to high-density housing opportunities combined with commercial mixed-use retail, office, lodging, other services, and coordinated public infrastructure investments to create a mixed-use neighborhood. Residential Mixed-use Development is appropriate where it can facilitate revitalization in or near City Centers, University or Medical Centers, Town Centers, and Main Street Corridors served by transit and trails. Housing remains essential. The goal of this feature is to retain and grow local housing capacity, not erode the residentially zoned land supply. Residential Mixed-use Development allows for an increase in density and scale of development over the base designation. These increases are coupled with transitions in building height and bulk to lower-density neighborhoods. <
> Residential Mixed-use Building <
> Residential Mixed-use Development with Housing and Commercial Uses in Separate Buildings <
> Residential Mixed-use in Whitehorse. Ground-floor Commercial Contributes to Street Activity. Where it overlays Neighborhood land use designations, this growth-supporting feature provides flexibility to integrate mixed-use into residential developments, while recommending minimum residential densities consistent with the underlying residential designation. Some Residential Mixed-use Development areas reflect adopted neighborhood or district plans, including in Downtown, Fairview and East Anchorage. Some Residential Mixed-use Development areas are in existing residential zones. In such areas, residential units are required to be included at a minimum housing density (20 dua in R-4 and R-4A and 12 dua in the R-3) to avoid loss of residential land base. This includes, for example, multi-family-zoned blocks of Fairview in the Gambell Street mixed-use corridor, multi-family-zoned parcels along Piper Street south of UMED, and part of the Rangeview mobile home park near Creekside Town Center on Muldoon. Underutilized sites in non-residential zones include the Downtown DT-3 District and sections of the Spenard B-3 corridor. These areas will continue to allow non-residential projects such as office/retail mixed-use, but at a scale and intensity compatible with an urban living environment, while encouraging residential development through new incentives, partnerships, and infrastructure investments. Where they overlay Centers or Main Street Corridors, Residential Mixed-use Development areas are encouraged to become mixed-use urban villages that include housing. Where these designations are in existing residential zoning districts, rezonings and projects to develop commercial use may be expected to incorporate site plans or development agreements that indicate the location of future housing phases on the development site. This is particularly true for areas in which the Municipality is incentivizing housing development in tax abatement areas and Reinvestment Focus Areas (Section 3.2, Strategy 2). For example, an office building’s rear parking lot <
> Higher-intensity Residential Mixed-use. Oriented to an Enhanced Sidewalk with On-street Parking may be configured on the site plan to redevelop later into mixed-use housing. In all areas, buildings are oriented to the street with windows, entries, and balconies, and have strong pedestrian and bicycle connections with nearby neighborhoods, business districts, and amenities. Neighborhood parks, pedestrian streetscapes, and linkages between uses should be provided as residential/mixed-use occurs. This urban design fosters efficient use of land with less traffic congestion or need for parking. This Plan leaves site planning flexibility to arrange commercial, mixed-use, and residential uses on the site, and does not require commercial uses to be in the same building as the housing units. ### Zoning * R-4A; new R-3A variation of R-3 zone. * New DT-3 district in Downtown. * RO district or potential overlay zoning in areas currently commercially zoned and designated in this Plan as Centers and Corridors. ### Other Map Features #### Major Streets Future and existing major streets designated in the AMATS *Metropolitan Transportation Plan* (MTP) appear in white on the Land Use Plan Map. This illustrates the relationship between future land uses and the city’s planned primary road network. It also shows the land area devoted to these rights-of-way. The right-of-way space includes the roadway itself, pedestrian sidewalks and pathways, and street or highway landscaping. The 2040 LUP does not predetermine specific future roadway alignments. It should be updated and amended to reflect future area-specific plans and transportation plans and projects. Three potential major street connections are not shown on the Land Use Plan Map because their timing, funding, design, and alignment are uncertain. However, they are significant due to their potential impacts on land use. They are illustrated in Figures 2-11 and 2-12 as white translucent dashed lines overlaid onto the 2040 LUP land use designations. The Seward-to-Glenn Highway connection (in Fig. 2-11) is identified in the MTP. Determining its route alignment is important to the desired land use patterns in the 2040 LUP. The Knik Arm Crossing (Fig. 2-11) is removed from consideration in the 2040 MTP, unsupported by AMATS, and considered unlikely to occur in the 2040 time frame. The UMED Northern Access (Fig. 2-12) is identified in the MTP. These proposed projects are illustrated in this Plan because of their potential impact on <
> <
> Minnesota Drive at Westchester Lagoon Anchorage’s economic, development, and housing future. Planning and implementation will be required consistent with all adopted plans. Mitigation will be required pursuant to all federal regulations. The locations of these road projects on the insets are illustrative only. #### Lakes and Streams Lakes and streams appear on the Land Use Plan Map as landmarks for visual orientation. They illustrate relationships between future intended land uses, such as open space and important water resources. Due to map scale, not all smaller lakes, streams, and tributaries are shown. The Land Use Plan Map is not intended for use in determining the location of streams or stream protection setbacks. # Land Use Plan Area Boundary The Anchorage Bowl Land Use Plan Area Boundary depicts the extent of the land use planning area of the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan*. Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Fire Island, and lands of the State of Alaska in Chugach State Park and the Anchorage Coastal Wildlife Refuge are not subject to the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan*. Certain inholdings of municipal and private land exist within the legislative boundary of the Anchorage Coastal Wildlife Refuge in the Bowl. These inholdings are subject to the *2040 LUP* and are within its Plan Area Boundary. Areas outside of the Plan Area Boundary are subject to the overall municipal *Comprehensive Plan* as addressed in other plan elements and Title 21. The Land Use Plan Area Boundary may change over time as a result of future land transfers, exchanges or agreements between the surrounding land management agencies, private landowners, or the Municipality. Changes to the boundary are processed as an amendment to the *2040 LUP*. <
> Anchorage Stream <
> Bluebells <
> Boreal Chickadee # Section 3: Action Strategies and Actions to Achieve the Plan <
> This page is intentionally left blank. # 3.1 Implementation Tools Achieving the goals of the 2040 Anchorage Land Use Plan requires sustained actions and decisions by many groups and individuals over many years. To implement the Plan, the Municipality and its partners will need to change certain regulations, permitting processes, and other practices. Partners include government agencies, utilities, neighborhoods, civic organizations, and the business community, as well as property owners and developers. The municipal Planning Department will coordinate many of these actions. Section 3 identifies changes needed to implement the goals and policies presented in Sections 1 and 2. Section 3.1 identifies the implementation tools available to the Municipality. Section 3.2 recommends essential mechanisms, known as Strategies, that use the tools described in 3.1. Section 3.3 provides a specific Actions Checklist. The checklist outlines time frames and responsibilities for a range of Actions. Some of the Actions are illustrated in an Actions Map at the end of the section. To ensure success with the 2040 LUP’s recommendations, status reviews and updates to the Actions Checklist are critical. Updates recognize Actions that have been completed or when an Action is found to be insufficient to accomplish its policy. In that case, the policy guidance still holds and an alternate Action should be found. The 2040 LUP is intended to be a “living document,” and its Strategies and Actions updated regularly as new opportunities and information arise. The primary tools that the Municipality uses to guide land use changes and implement this Plan include: ## A. Zoning and Development Regulations Zoning and subdivision regulations (found in Title 21 of the Anchorage Municipal Code) are the primary land use and development controls. Zoning regulations apply three sets of rules to properties: * The kinds of uses that are allowed; * Form regulations, such as height and setbacks; and * Site development regulations, such as parking and landscaping. Subdivision regulations guide platting actions, lot patterns, and how particular parcels can be subdivided into two or more smaller parcels or combined to form larger parcels. These Title 21 regulations ensure development compatibility and provide for access, infrastructure, and safety. Other development regulations include the building code, traffic engineering policies, and the municipal Design Criteria Manual. Together, these shape the location, intensity, and physical character of development. Administrative procedures for review and approval of proposed developments also influence land use patterns. The permitting process may be more intensive for conditional uses or exceptions. Projects that achieve certain city objectives may be expedited. ## B. Capital Improvements The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and AMATS Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) are the two primary municipal planning and budgeting processes used to determine cost, timing, funding, and priorities of capital projects. The CIP spans a six-year period, while the TIP spans a four-year period. Other agencies, such as the Anchorage School District and the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, have their own capital improvement planning processes, which inform or coordinate with the CIP and TIP. Municipal general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, developer exactions for off-site infrastructure improvements, and state and federal intergovernmental grants usually finance capital projects. Because of limited public dollars, the Municipality must balance infrastructure investment priorities with available revenues and funding. This Plan intends that future updates to the CIP be consistent with the priorities established in the Comprehensive Plan. Functional plans direct improvements to public facilities and services, such as transportation, trails, parks and recreation, and water and sewer systems. Facility planning guarantees there are adequate public facilities to serve existing and new development, reduces the cost of serving new development with public facilities, and ensures that facilities will be in place when development occurs. The plans provide input into the CIP’s annual Capital Improvement Budget. ## C. Financing and Taxation The Municipality can adopt financing and taxation policies that incentivize important developments that are difficult to finance, such as multifamily housing or industrial “traded sector” businesses, and development within Reinvestment Focus Areas. New incentives would support reinvestment in revitalization priority areas. Municipal financial incentive tools include: * Property tax abatements, where the current property tax rate is locked in for up to 10 years. This provides property tax relief and frees up funds to invest in property development, for example, on properties identified by the Municipality as deteriorated, per Municipal Code. Tax deductions or tax credits may also be employed. * Forgivable loans, loan guarantees, “below-market” interest rate loans, revolving loan funds, or in-kind benefits or grants. * Municipal bonds, by which the Municipality may issue debt in the form of general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, or other bonds, to finance facilities or projects. Investment by the Anchorage Community Development Authority (ACDA) in development projects, using its bonding capacity as authorized by the Assembly, is also possible. ## D. Land Acquisition and Preparation Land banks and development authorities specialize in the acquisition or management of land to achieve a public policy—such as natural area conservation, public land reserves, or conversion of foreclosed property into productive uses like housing. The Anchorage Community Development Authority (ACDA) has the authority to acquire and amass vacant, underutilized, or compromised properties. Such lot consolidations and municipal investment in public infrastructure may be used in tandem with other tools to facilitate redevelopment and catalyze new development. The Heritage Land Bank (HLB) and municipal Real Estate Services (RES) are divisions of the Real Estate Department (RED). The HLB manages municipal-owned real estate in the HLB inventory. RES administers the tax foreclosure process and manages real estate in the general municipal inventory. The HLB manages and surpluses public land for new schools, parks, or other developments. HLB is also creating a wetland mitigation banking instrument where conservation easements are employed to preserve natural areas. The RED in conjunction with other agencies may administer brownfield remediation programs that clean up and prepare contaminated sites constrained by cleanup costs. ## E. Coordination and Partnerships Much of what Anchorage residents and businesses want for the future goes beyond what the Municipality can provide on its own. Partnering with other entities is key to achieving the Comprehensive Plan. Public-Private Partnerships provide cost-effective services or facilities for use by the partners and the general public. An example of this is a Business Improvement District (BID). BIDs are designated areas in which property and business owners assess (tax) themselves to collectively fund the district’s maintenance or improvements. The Anchorage Downtown Partnership is a BID. Other government agencies exercise land management controls that are not under the Municipality’s direct jurisdiction. Nevertheless, this Plan constitutes the Municipality’s public policy as to how state and federal land management agencies should conform to the Comprehensive Plan. Many of the Actions and Strategies that implement this Plan (e.g., RFAs) rely on building and maintaining strong partnerships among municipal and state agencies. Such is the case for roadway and utility construction, planning, maintenance, and administrative coordination. State agencies such as DOT&PF, ADEC, and ADF&G, and the various utilities will continue to be active partners. ## 3.2 Essential Strategies The 2040 LUP presents 12 strategies as a means for accomplishing Anchorage's desired land use goals. Strategies are pathways, or key mechanisms, to carry out the *2040 Land Use Plan*. They provide details for how to meet the Goals and Policies of Section 1 and achieve the land uses in Section 2 (Figure 1-14 on page 15). Strategies are long-term engagements that involve forming lasting partnerships among multiple organizations and the community. These Strategies are implemented through Actions. Actions are the specific measures to carry out the Policies and Strategies. An individual Action is often part of a longer-term Strategy. Actions are short-term steps: Most have an identifiable end state after which the Action is considered complete. The Actions are presented in Section 3.3. The following Strategies drive many of the Actions. ### Strategy 1: Phasing of Growth and Investment Phasing of new development and public infrastructure is integral to how the Plan is implemented. While this Plan guides growth to 2040, not all of that growth will occur everywhere all at once. Phasing and prioritization of limited public investments within key locations will help achieve community goals for housing and job growth. The Municipality will balance its priorities to phase growth and infrastructure investments over time. Phasing allows flexibility in how growth or public service upgrades occur. Phasing applies specifically to growth-supporting features of this Plan, such that only one or two Transit-supportive Development and Greenway-supported Development corridors may receive attention at any given time. The general order of phasing priority appears on the *Actions Map*. If growth is slower than expected, phasing allows the city to make substantial progress in at least some mixed-use Centers, Transit-supportive Development corridors, or new Greenway corridors. The number of areas seeing improvement will be in synch with the rate of economic and population growth. The strategy is to develop and implement phasing mechanisms and apply them across the various infrastructure entities. ### Strategy 2: Reinvestment Focus Areas One important phasing mechanism is the identification of Reinvestment Focus Areas (RFAs). RFAs direct infrastructure investments, incentives, and other actions to catalyze infill and redevelopment in strategic areas. This will spur new compact housing and business investment within targeted urban centers, mixed-use corridors, industrial employment areas, and older neighborhoods. Investment in infrastructure may include a combination of streetscapes, sidewalks, drainage systems, utilities, parks, schools, and civic amenities, etc. These can be coordinated with incentives, such as tax abatement, land assemblage incentives, or permit review assistance. Targeted reinvestment in older neighborhoods and commercial areas will enhance quality of life and improve a neighborhood's ability to attract and retain residents and businesses. This strategy focuses public redevelopment efforts on a few neighborhoods or districts each year. It maintains these priorities until infrastructure or services are in place that support private investment. The focus then moves to another area in a phased manner. Selection of RFAs should follow criteria that begin with factors 1 through 11 at the end of Section 1.3, *Areas of Growth and Change* (pages 26-27). In particular, RFAs exhibit the following characteristics to a high degree: * Close proximity to major employment centers. * Walkable to area shopping and attractions. * Development-ready sites. * Potential for additional housing. * Interested land owners. * Sufficient infrastructure capacity with cost-effective public investment. * Avoids natural hazards or big constraints. In conformance with these criteria, RFAs should be areas of anticipated growth on Map 1-2, *Areas of Growth and Change*, and of compact housing or mixed use on the *2040 Land Use Plan Map*. In addition, an RFA demonstrates need, opportunity, and local support. It is in need of public-sector assistance to catalyze private-sector reinvestment. It is also an area of opportunity expected to give the greatest return on the public investment and incentives--producing more new housing, yielding greater economic development, and creating great places where people want to live, work, and play. This Plan identifies RFAs for a near-term focus of implementation and candidate RFAs for future prioritization. During the 2040 LUP planning process, three RFAs rose to the top as initial priorities for implementation. The priority RFAs are depicted in dark purple on the Actions Map at the end of Section 3: 1. South Downtown Residential Mixed-use 2. Central Spenard 3. West Fairview / Third Addition RFA implementation will require a new formal selection and approval process by the Assembly that would incorporate procedures and responsible parties for taking actions. This should include a development feasibility screening process to confirm the basic infrastructure exists or can be provided to support the focused development. It should also include a review against the other criteria in this section. This new municipal process will provide policy, staffing, and budget directives to guide RFA implementation and funding. Additional RFAs were identified that could become top priorities as phasing progresses. These candidate RFAs are depicted in light purple on the Actions Map: * Boniface / Riviera * Bragaw / Northern Lights * Denali Street Area / Fish Creek * East Creekside Town Center * Fireweed / Northern Lights * Ship Creek Mixed-use (PCD zone area) * South of Dowling / Seward Industrial * South UMED Residential/Mixed-use * Spenard Town Center This Plan retains flexibility for the Municipality to add, remove, shift, or re-prioritize the RFAs. The list of RFAs above and their locations and boundaries depicted on the Actions Map are flexible. This Plan also allows for encouraging redevelopment/reinvestment on sites outside of RFAs in response to future land use needs, opportunities, market demands, and emerging trends. Once the Assembly adopts a new formal RFA selection and approval process, RFAs would be implemented through small-area implementation plans (Strategy 11) and other strategic actions, such as an infrastructure inventory, Return on Investment (ROI) analysis, and incentive identification. Development agreements, targeted area rezonings, and other strategies in this section are applicable in RFAs. In some cases, the Municipality would sponsor traffic impact modeling or other analyses as part of feasibility determinations or for clarification of planned housing densities, other uses, or streets and access. ### Strategy 3: Provision and Financing of Infrastructure This strategy identifies ways to finance and provide infrastructure improvements. It seeks to coordinate infrastructure planning and prioritize infrastructure investments that yield the greatest return. Infrastructure improvements retain or expand the capacity of streets, public parking, pedestrian facilities, public transit, schools, water and wastewater facilities, and other public infrastructure. These improvements are necessary to provide more housing and jobs in areas designated for infill and redevelopment. Assisting in the financing or provision of new infrastructure needs to be balanced with current infrastructure maintenance and safety obligations. As the Municipality and its partner agencies move forward, it is important that an ROI analysis on infrastructure investment options be performed to prioritize proposed projects. Preparing an asset inventory of existing infrastructure conditions and capacity in areas intended for growth or revitalization is necessary to inform long-term capital improvement programming. ### Infrastructure Finance Strategies The following funding methods are viable considerations for the Municipality: *Revenue Bonds:* Municipal revenue bonds can be secured by user fees from a project financed Figure 3-1. Central Spenard Reinvestment Focus Area: Chugach Way Vicinity **Action Items From Actions** **Checklist Table Fig. 3-5:** * 2-2 and 2-3: Central Spenard RFA * 4-3: By-Right Parking Reductions * 4-5: Utility Engineering Design Criteria * 4-6: Reduced Internal Driveway Widths * 4-7: Accessory Dwellings * 4-10: Small-lot Housing * 5-3: Infrastructure Asset Inventory * 5-1: CIP Priorities <
> **Transit-supportive** **Development Corridor** **bus route** **Greenway-supported** **Development Corridor** **Targeted Area** **Rezoning Boundary** **Potential Mixed-** **use Residential** **Redevelopment Sites** **Zoning Boundaries** by the bonds, or from a special tax approved by voters. For example, parking garages and water and sewer systems are generally at least partially supported by user fees. The Anchorage Community Development Authority (ACDA ) is a public corporation with the authority to sell, issue, retire, or service bonds for the purpose of paying for a municipal facility. The ACDA can bond for parking facilities to serve a designated Reinvestment Focus Area. *Intergovernmental Grants* are available to help restore natural features, build transit corridors, develop and maintain housing, and make public health-related pedestrian improvements. Examples include EPA funds and HUD grants. *Area-specific taxes* provide ways to finance capital improvements that provide a special benefit to the properties within the area boundary. These include: * *Local Improvement District (LID).* LID formation can lead to the finance of road or utility infrastructure through the sale of bonds and the retirement of those bonds via annual payments by the property owners within the district. This enables public utilities to deliver infrastructure to targeted development areas. * *Business Improvement Districts (BID).* BIDs are designated areas in which property and business owners vote and approve to tax themselves to collectively fund services, maintenance, or improvements in a district. * *Tax Increment Finance (TIF) Districts.* TIFs are discussed in Strategy 4. * *Payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOTs).* PILOTs are agreements with institutions not subject to local property tax, such as universities or non-profit medical centers that could contribute funds for municipal services through an agreement. *Systematic Off-site Improvements Requirements* can provide a more flexible and predictable formula for determining basic off-site improvement requirements for developments. Reforms could create or enhance fee-in-lieu programs versus the current requirement to build off-site improvements. ### Efficient Shared Facilities In addition to creative financing for additional infrastructure, more efficient and shared use of infrastructure and facilities is also a key strategy. This includes shared parking facilities and parking districts. The Municipality may encourage or participate in shared parking facilities among multiple businesses, including shared surface lots, shared parking structures, smaller common parking aisles between businesses, reconfiguration of on-site parking layout to more efficient shared parking areas, and managed on-street parking. Shared use of public facilities can also occur. For example, the Anchorage School District could establish a *facility sharing and maintenance partnership* with the municipal Parks and Recreation Department. The infrastructure strategies above use special agreements and partnering mechanisms. In particular, *Development Agreements* commit the Municipality to provide infrastructure and lock in the development standards, providing certainty for all parties and enabling larger projects to be financially feasible. ### Strategy 4: Financial and Taxation Incentives Developers and other private businesses interested in creating new projects are generally confronted with a lengthy, capital-intensive process that may need public-sector participation on several fronts. Sometimes market conditions, lending requirements, and other issues leave “gaps” in the private financing necessary to move a project forward. Strategic public financing tools can be invaluable to fill those gaps. Because the interests of the private-sector and governmental entities are aligned in terms of urban revitalization, housing, economic development, and job creation, private businesses and the public sector can successfully partner toward efficient, strategic development. These partnerships may utilize public resources, such as public land, bonding capability, permit assistance, and other tools, as catalysts for desired types of private-sector investment and development. This strategy requires creativity and an understanding of the existing financing tools and techniques available. Classic public financing and economic development tools (such as those listed on pages 69 and 70), as well as new and innovative funding mechanisms, can leverage desired projects that are difficult to finance without public-sector involvement. Financial and taxation assistance will be needed to spur the kinds of growth in some of the locations that the *2040 LUP* envisions. For example: * Improve the existing state statute regarding deteriorated properties and economic development status to simplify the administration and application of tax abatement. Tax abatement will be used in Anchorage with an emphasis on incentivizing new housing. * Amend state law to allow the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF). TIF is another means of encouraging private investment in deteriorating areas by allowing local governments to use future property tax revenues to finance the current infrastructure costs needed to attract development. * Form public-private partnerships to advance projects, by: leveraging access to development project grants that require public entity participation; providing permit application assistance or waiver of fees; or using local or state properties deemed excess to public need as catalytic development sites. * Pursue funding sources to assist site assessment and cleanup of contaminated (brownfield) sites to return parcels to development-ready condition. * Evaluate "land-based" taxation as a means to encourage properties with low-density uses, such as commercial parking lots or ministorage, to redevelop to higher-intensity uses in designated policy areas where usable land is at a premium. ### Strategy 5: Development Permitting Assistance This Plan recommends several improvements to the municipal development permit review process. The first improvement creates a "Project Review Management Service." This service would help applicants navigate the permit review process if their proposals meet certain criteria. It would be available to development proposals that achieve certain objectives of the *Comprehensive Plan*, such as workforce housing, compact housing types, adaptive reuse of older structures, or industrial "traded sector" businesses. It could serve projects with challenging site conditions (e.g., floodplain, slope, or wetlands), complex reviews, or phased permits. It would serve proposed rezonings that implement the Land Use Plan Map. (See Strategy 6.) Under the Project Review Management Service, a project manager would be assigned to a project's review process. The service would assist the applicant in understanding municipal requirements and identifying issues up front, helping them to submit complete applications, and avoid delays. It also facilitates interagency reviews. Strategy 5 could also prioritize development application processing in designated Centers, such as Downtown, and in the RFAs. To carry out Strategy 5, the Municipality will need to determine and provide the necessary resources, weigh the costs for delivery, and determine impacts to existing permit processes. Strategy 6 that follows focuses on permitting assistance in rezonings. ### Strategy 6: Targeted Area Rezonings The *2040 LUP* does not recommend a Bowl-wide rezoning to bring the municipal zoning map into compliance with the Land Use Plan Map. Instead, where existing zoning does not align with the Land Use Plan Map designation, the Municipality can initiate targeted rezonings for specific areas. It can also reduce barriers to individual rezonings that property owners may bring forward as they determine they are ready to develop, and as the need arises. The Municipality can expedite implementation of the Plan in priority areas by initiating "targeted area" rezonings with the support of the property owners. For example, a targeted area rezoning to residential mixed-use could enable desired types of development in Reinvestment Focus Areas where there are multiple property owners. Some RFAs may need platting assistance. This strategy may extend to targeted area re-plats as facilitated subdivision platting assistance for housing development in RFAs. In other cases, the Municipality may facilitate rezonings of industrial land to non-industrial because industrial is not consistent with how the area has developed. ### Figure 3-2. 2040 LUP and Zoning District Cross-Reference | Types of Places | Land Use Designations | Potential Implementation Zoning Districts as Established in Section 2 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Neighborhoods | Large-lot Residential | R-6, R-8, R-9, and R-10; R-7 where designated in *HDP* Map 2.1 Land Use Plan for 1-3 units per acre. | | | Single-family and Two-family | R-1 and R-1A; R-2A and R-2D in attached and two-family areas. | | | Compact Mixed Residential–Low | R-2M; R-2D in transition areas; New compact housing district between R-2D and R-2M. | | | Compact Mixed Residential–Medium | R-3; R-2M in transition areas; New R-3A mixed-use variation of R-3 in “Residential Mixed-use Development” areas. | | | Urban Residential–High | R-4; R-3 in transition areas; R-4A in “Residential Mixed-use Development” areas. | | | Small-scale commercial uses in the Neighborhood designations above | B-1A in existing locations or in new locations designated by a neighborhood or district plan; R-4 allows limited ground-floor commercial space within residential projects. | | Centers | Neighborhood Center | B-1A and B-1B; CCO overlay zone. Potential new form-based district or overlay zone in “Traditional Neighborhood Design” areas. | | | Town Center | B-3 and B-1B; CCO overlay zone. New form-based overlay or district. R-3 and new R-3A (mixed-use variation of R-3) also possible for housing sites. | | | Regional Commercial Center | B-3 District. | | | City Center | Downtown zoning districts B-2A, B-2B, B-2C; PCD and I-2 in Ship Creek; New seismically-induced ground failure overlay zone in parts of Downtown; B-3 with CCO overlay or other overlay in Midtown; R-4 and R-4A also possible. | | Corridors | Commercial Corridor | B-3 primarily; secondarily B-1A and B-1B; RO in residential-office areas; R-3. | | | Main Street Corridor | B-3 or B-1B, or RO in residential-office locations, with CCO overlay or new overlay zone; potential new overlay or form-based zone in “Traditional Neighborhood Design” areas; R-3 and new R-3A mixed-use variation of R-3 also possible; R-4 or R-4A possible in Fairview. | | Open Spaces | Park or Natural Area | PR and PLI. | | | Other Open Space | PLI or other districts depending on location. | | Facilities and Institutions | Community Facility or Institution | PLI and other districts; utility / public works facilities may be implemented by I-1 and I-2, and antenna farms by AF. | | | University or Medical Center | PLI primarily; RO in limited locations, subject to special limitations; zoning to implement UMED Village. | | | Airport, Railroad, or Port Facility | MI, I-1, I-2, and PLI; new Airport District; Alaska Railroad Corridor passes through a variety of zoning districts. | | Industrial Area | Light Industrial / Commercial | I-1 and Ship Creek PCD. | | | General Industrial | I-2 and MI. | | Growth-supporting Features | Transit-supportive Development | The underlying base color indicates the land use designation. Potential new overlay zone. | | | Greenway-supported Development | The underlying base color indicates the land use designation. | | | Traditional Neighborhood Design | The underlying base color indicates the land use designation. Potential new overlay or form-based districts. | | | Residential Mixed-use Development | R-4A, and new R-3A mixed-use variation of R-3 district; new DT-3 district in Downtown; RO also possible in designated Centers and Corridors. | The following are justifications for a Targeted Area Rezone: 1. An area specified in Title 21 for additional analysis and potential rezoning. 2. 2040 LUP land use designation and existing zoning are inconsistent, especially within RFAs and Centers. 3. Rezone can further catalyze reinvestment and redevelopment in an area that has received recent public investments. Strategy 6 also includes ways to reduce barriers to proposed rezonings that conform to the Land Use Plan Map, such as: * Assist applicants navigating the rezoning process as described in Strategy 5 (Development Permitting Assistance). * Reduce entitlement application and permit fees through a municipal ordinance. * Amend the Title 21 rezoning process to reduce unnecessary barriers while retaining the integrity of the public process. This would include eliminating the requirement for approval by an Assembly supermajority if a protest is filed against a rezoning that is consistent with the land use plan. Figure 3-2 cross-references the 2040 LUP land use designations and their corresponding potential implementation zoning districts. It reflects and summarizes the assignment of zoning districts in Section 2. ### Strategy 7: New Zoning Districts/Overlay Zones Other adopted *Comprehensive Plan* elements recommend making Title 21 more versatile and responsive to contemporary land use trends. They recommended innovative zoning districts designed to grow the city through compact development in the city’s centers, compatible development in existing neighborhoods, and growing key economic sectors. Examples include the *West Anchorage District Plan’s* recommended airport zoning, and the *Anchorage Downtown Comprehensive Plan’s* recommendation for new zoning districts to address Central Business District (CBD) revitalization and mixed-use housing. Other neighborhood and district plans call for new overlay zones to encourage pedestrian-oriented mixed-use and neighborhood infill. The Actions Checklist (Figure 3-5) includes the creation of a number of these innovative zoning tools. ### Strategy 8: Preservation and Re-use of Older Buildings Older and historic buildings are an important component of distinctive, authentic, and economically diverse places. Older buildings, as second- and third-generation spaces, provide affordable options for start-up businesses and entrepreneurs. Rehabilitation of existing buildings typically triggers requirements to meet current codes. However, current codes can inadvertently stymie reinvestment in older buildings in existing urban districts. “Adaptive reuse” is a transitional step to main street or town center mixed-use redevelopment. Adaptive reuse provisions that support rehabilitation and reuse can jump-start local business investment, attract new businesses that serve the neighborhood, generate more revenue, and be a catalyst for larger redevelopment to come later. It supports an incremental approach, phasing, and a “blended” build-out that includes older buildings, not just new buildings, and that reflects individual owners’ objectives and redevelopment capacities. It is a little grittier and more varied than classic mixed-use redevelopments in larger cities but is tailored for Alaskan conditions. ### Strategy 9: Infill Housing Development Regulations This strategy supports amending Title 21 and other regulations to allow infill housing of many types, and include design standards and address neighborhood compatibility. It includes expanding provisions for innovative housing types, such as small-lot housing, accessory dwellings, and townhouses. It also includes increasing flexibility in some site development standards that may be obstacles to compact, walkable housing in policy priority areas. Examples include allowing parking reductions by right, reducing traffic mitigation requirements, and reducing internal site drive aisle minimum width requirements near Downtown in traditional urban neighborhoods such as Fairview. Such reforms might also apply in Transit-supportive Development corridors. It could include more flexible on-site water, sewer, or stormwater engineering design criteria for infill housing. It also includes exploring compatible ways to allow additional units on small- to medium-sized lots near Town and City Centers as well as other housing priority areas. For example, an additional dwelling on a lot or an additional story may be allowed if it meets compatibility standards for building massing and scale, design, lot coverage, setbacks, and access. New small-lot housing regulations, such as unit-lot subdivisions, can promote efficient use of residential land in a form that is compatible with the neighborhood. The Actions Checklist (Fig. 3-5) includes a series of code amendments to foster innovative infill housing projects that can fit into the neighborhood context. This Plan intends that this series of reforms include a public planning process. Additionally, various manufactured home parks may undergo ownership changes or redevelopment during the life of this Plan. The Municipality recognizes that manufactured home parks provide viable, affordable housing choices and neighborhood lifestyle options. This Plan seeks to mitigate the potential loss of manufactured home parks and displacement of residents through deliberate adoption of public policies, actions, and mitigation strategies. ### Strategy 10: Traded Sectors Industrial Site Availability and Readiness This strategy attracts and retains targeted industrial "traded sector" businesses, which provide well-documented economic benefits in Anchorage. It helps these uses find suitable sites and overcome obstacles to industrial development feasibility on these industrially zoned lands. The strategy begins with identification of geographic clusters of key industrial uses and traded sectors, along with their supporting supply chain sectors. Outreach to these businesses then helps to identify their characteristic site needs. This informs an enhanced industrial land inventory and property database which assists municipal and business decision-making to better meet the needs of traded sectors. For example, the improved information and public-private relationships can lead to more targeted, effective land use policies and decisions regarding key industrial areas. Better land use data also provides the foundation for evolving an industrial development readiness program as the second stage of Strategy 10. Such a program includes (a) fiscal tools and (b) a "development-ready" site program to facilitate industrial development and redevelopment. These help overcome expensive obstacles to industrial development feasibility. Fiscal tools include tax increment financing, property tax abatements, industrial bonds, and property acquisition and sale. They can also include enhanced programs by which utilities may pay for up-front costs of extension and be repaid over time. The "development-ready" site program will provide advance due diligence that "certifies" an industrial site is fully served with infrastructure, utilities, and has all potential development issues documented. This information can enable a user to begin construction within a defined time frame. As more of the development inventory consists of redevelopment sites, most vacated industrial sites will have uncertainty about contamination issues. Many will qualify as brownfield sites for federal programs and funding for remediation if necessary. ### Strategy 11: Special Study Areas/ Small-area Implementation Plans *Special Study Areas* are locations where additional analysis is needed to refine the land use designation boundaries and local implementation actions. Some areas have been identified through adopted neighborhood and district plans. Others will help implement RFAs. Some will be study areas for transportation and infrastructure improvements, such as secondary street and sidewalk connections that are needed to support planned growth. In particular, they would focus on where changes are needed to the overall network within the Special Study Area, including the smaller local connectors. It is a level of planning beyond identifying improvements to just one street or arterial, yet is more local in focus than the entire city transportation network. Examples include the northern Muldoon Road corridor, Fairview’s Gambell/Ingra Street corridor, and the 3500 Tudor Road Master Plan redevelopment area, as well as along the Tudor Road corridor in general between Lake Otis Parkway and Elmore Road. These and other examples are depicted on the Actions Map. Until new land use designations are adopted from Special Study Areas, existing land use policies and regulations apply to these areas. *Small-area Implementation Plans* are a tool to evaluate, propose, and help carry out land use or residential density changes to priority areas of the Bowl. These plans can resolve conflicts related to development and growth and direct private and public investment. The plans cover several geographic scales—large parcels, a small neighborhood, or part of a street corridor. Small-area Implementation Plans encompass a specific boundary that has a cohesive set of existing or desired future characteristics. This type of planning works as a partnership between the Municipality, residents, businesses, builders, and developers and includes a public process. Small-area Implementation Plans are not intended to be *Comprehensive Plan* amendments. Rather than becoming a part of the *Comprehensive Plan*, they serve as master plan processes similar to Area or Development Master Plans for Girdwood or Institutional Master Plans procedure for UMED in Title 21. This master plan approach best suits the need for carrying out land use determinations on this scale. In the context of the 2040 LUP, these plans are identified as key tools for implementing the Plan’s land use changes and new planning concepts. ### Strategy 12: Systematic Monitoring and Amendment of this Plan Planning is a process that continues beyond the production of a document. It includes monitoring urban conditions, collecting data on changes over time, and making adjustments to a plan as the need arises. *Comprehensive Plan* amendments are a public process. Like the rest of the *Comprehensive Plan*, the 2040 LUP is a “living document.” It should be updated based on performance indicators and new information as the city evolves and responds to new circumstances. Monitoring and periodic assessment of the *Comprehensive Plan* is how the Municipality and public can best measure progress, successes, and challenges in achieving its goals. Performance measures monitor progress toward achieving community goals and provide a basis for periodic plan updates or improvements. This Strategy requires the creation of new performance measures. (See Actions Checklist, Action 1-2.) Development of a key indicators list will provide measurable data and insight about progress on key land use issues (e.g., housing production and affordability) that are addressed by this Plan. Regular reports on these indicators can help the public and elected officials judge the effectiveness of the Plan and the Municipality’s Strategies and Actions to implement it. The Planning Department is the agency responsible for periodic assessment of the progress being made toward achieving the goals and policies of the *Comprehensive Plan*. The Municipality may also consider *Land Use Plan Map* amendments concurrently with associated development proposals. A rezoning that deviates from the 2040 LUP may be appropriate if it demonstrates community-wide benefits or responds to new issues, needs, or opportunities not addressed in the *Comprehensive Plan*. Such a rezoning should demonstrate consistency with the Goals and Policies of 2040 LUP, and should not set precedents or pose long-term effects that run contrary to the Plan. Land use decisions, such as rezonings, facility site selections, and area-specific plans, that deviate from the *Land Use Plan Map* should be accompanied by a concurrent amendment to the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan*. This is essential for the *Comprehensive Plan* to remain current and effective as a policy guide. It maintains alignment between land use decisions and *Comprehensive Plan* elements and addresses potential impacts on other parts the community. ## 3.3 Actions Checklist The Actions Checklist identifies the specific Actions to achieve the *Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan*. Several tables and maps follow: * **Figures 3-3 and 3-4** provide the key to the terms and acronyms used in the Actions Checklist. * **Figure 3-5** is the Actions Checklist identifying the specific Actions to carry out the Plan. * **Map 3-1** is the **Actions Map**, which shows the location of selected key Actions. Figure 3-6 is an inset of the Actions Map. * **Figure 3-7**, the Optimal Work Flow diagram, prioritizes the sequence of near-term Actions. Actions are specific tasks to carry out the Goals, Policies, and Strategies of this Plan. They identify particular programs, regulations, or partnerships. The Actions Checklist assigns Actions to responsible agencies and gives each a time frame. It identifies if the Action requires additional funds. The *2040 LUP* is structured so that the Actions Checklist will be updated periodically as implementation occurs. Through the plan monitoring and assessment process, Actions can be removed if accomplished or if deemed infeasible. If necessary, the Municipality would seek alternative ways of accomplishing a Policy. The Actions Checklist table is structured around the 10 Goals identified in Section 1. Actions under each Goal are generally prioritized by time frame, with nearer-term Actions usually first. ### Figure 3-3. Key to Time Frames and Responsible Agencies in Actions Checklist | Time Frame | Description | | :--- | :--- | | Now | Immediate: at time of adoption or within several months after adoption of plan. | | 1 - 3 | Near-term: within 1 to 3 years of plan adoption or amendment. | | 4 - 6 | Medium-term: within 4 to 6 years of adoption or amendment. | | 7 - 10 | Long-term: within 7 to 10 years of adoption until next update of plan. | | Ongoing | On-going: continuous; no predetermined start or end; to be worked on for foreseeable future. | | **Municipal Agencies** | **Description** | | ACDA | Anchorage Community Development Authority | | AMATS | Transportation Planning Division | | ASD | Anchorage School District | | AWWU | Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utility | | DevServ | Development Services Department | | DHHS | Department of Health and Human Services | | Finance | Finance Department | | GIS | Geographic Data and Information Center | | HLB/RED | Heritage Land Bank/Real Estate Development | | OECD | Office of Economic and Community Development | | OMB | Office of Management and Budget | | PA | Property Appraisal Department | | Parks | Parks and Recreation Department | | Planning | Planning Department | | PM&E | Project Management & Engineering | | Traffic | Traffic Engineering | | Transit | Public Transportation Department | | **Other Agencies or Partners** | **Description** | | AEDC | Anchorage Economic Development Corporation | | Airports | Airports in general, including TSAIA, Merrill Field, and JBER (see below for TSAIA specifically) | | DOT&PF | Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities | | PRIV | Private Sector (e.g., Developers, Property Owners, Neighborhood Groups, Non-profits) | | Railroad | Alaska Railroad Corporation | | SOA | State of Alaska | | TSAIA | Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport | | Utilities | Utilities generally include AWWU, ML&P, Chugach Electric Association, Enstar, etc. | Figure 3-4. Key to Plans and Studies and Funding Needs in Actions Checklist | Comprehensive Plans | Description | | :--- | :--- | | AB Comp Plan | Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan–Anchorage 2020 | | **Area-specific Plans** | **Description** | | DTP | Anchorage Downtown Comprehensive Plan | | EADP | East Anchorage District Plan | | FV | Fairview Neighborhood Plan | | FNB | Far North Bicentennial Park Master Plan | | GH | Government Hill Neighborhood Plan | | HDP | Hillside District Plan | | MV | Mountain View Targeted Neighborhood Plan | | SC | Ship Creek/Waterfront Land Use Study | | Tu35 | 3500 Tudor Road Master Plan | | UMED | UMED District Plan | | WADP | West Anchorage District Plan | | **Functional Plans** | **Description** | | AWMP | Anchorage Wetlands Management Plan | | AW/WP | Anchorage Water and/or Wastewater Master Plan | | BIKE | Anchorage Bicycle Plan | | FHP | HUD Assessment to Fair Housing Plan | | HCDP | Consolidated Housing and Community Development Plan | | MTP | Metropolitan Transportation Plan | | ONHPP | Original Neighborhoods Historic Preservation Plan | | OSHP | Official Streets and Highways Plan | | PARK | Anchorage Bowl Park, Natural Resource, and RecreationFacility Plan | | PED | Anchorage Pedestrian Plan | | TRAIL | Areawide Trails Plan | | WATER | Watershed Plans (Little Campbell Creek or Chester Creek) | | **Other Documents** | **Description** | | AMP | Airport Master Plans (TSAIA or Merrill Field) | | CLA | Anchorage Commercial Lands Assessment (2012) | | DCM | Municipal Design Criteria Manual | | HMA | Anchorage Housing Market Analysis (2012) | | ILA | Anchorage Industrial Lands Assessment (2015) | | Seismic | Anchorage Seismic Risk Assessment Report (2010) | | **Funding Needs Icon** | **Description** | | $ | Green icon with dollar sign indicates that the Action requires additional operations or special project funding, grant or partner funds, or capital funds, such as from the Capital Improvements Program, Transportation Improvement Program, or other source. | Each Action in Figure 3-5 contains four main parts: **Action Statement:** This statement provides what each Action is intended to accomplish. Some statements are simple, while others provide more detail and guidance. Each Action requires further work and analyses as part of its implementation. The dollar sign icon to the left of the action statement denotes whether the Action requires additional operational or capital funds. **Responsible Agencies:** This identifies the agencies and partners most likely to carry out the Action. Responsibility for implementing most Actions rests with municipal departments and involves multiple departments to mobilize expertise across the Municipality. In some cases, the Action can be partly or entirely managed within the private or non-profit sector. Where more than one implementer is specified, the first to be listed is the lead agency, with subsequent participants in a supporting role. It is expected that as each of the Actions are implemented, other agencies and stakeholders will be consulted to provide their input, especially when the Action requires their participation. **Time Frame:** This indicates when the Action should occur in the short term, medium term, or long term, or if it is ongoing. Time frames are general and depend on resources and community support. **Related Plans and Studies:** This identifies other adopted municipal plans and studies that recommend policies, strategies, or actions that directly relate to the Action. Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Goal 1** | **Anchorage achieves residential and commercial growth, which improves community resiliency and citizens’ quality of life as it supports their vision for the future expressed in the Comprehensive Plan.** | | | | | 1-1 | Update, maintain, and publish a land use and buildable lands inventory database, development and demographic trends data, and environmental conditions data. | GIS, Planning, HLB/ RED, DevServ, PA, PRIV, ASD, AEDC | Now/ Ongoing | HMA, CLA, ILA | | 1-2 | Identify key indicators of progress on issues addressed by the *2040 LUP*, monitor progress, and report to the Planning and Zoning Commission on the progress and indicators on a regular basis. Integrate progress monitoring of other *Comprehensive Plan* elements that impact land use and growth, including functional plans (e.g., *2040 MTP*, *Bike Plan*, *Fair Housing Plan*) and area-specific plans. | Planning, OECD, PRIV | Now/ Ongoing | AB Comp Plan | | 1-3 | Use Actions 1-1 and 1-2 to inform regular updates and improvements to this Plan, including its implementation Actions. | Planning, AMATS | 1-3/ Ongoing | | | 1-4 | Initiate a complete revision of the *Anchorage 2020–Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan*. | Planning | 1-3 | | | | | | | | | **Goal 2** | **Infill and redevelopment meets the housing and employment needs of residents and businesses in Anchorage.** | | | | | | Actions 1-1, 5-3, 6-2, 6-4, and 6-8 in other sections of this table are also integral to this Goal. | | | | | 2-1 | Revise state laws to expand municipal tax incentive tools for economic development, and adopt local economic development tools, including improved tax abatement, tax increment financing (TIF), bonding capacity, and other programs to catalyze growth and redevelopment that advances policy objectives for housing, development, and neighborhood compatibility. | OECD, ACDA, PA, SOA, Finance | Now | DTP, EADP, FV, UMED, WADP, FHP | | 2-2 | Coordinate with agencies and partners to establish criteria, responsibilities, and the public-private partnership framework for the Reinvestment Focus Areas (RFAs). Identify a range of public investments, fiscal incentives, and other tools, and how they may be coordinated. Create a formal RFA selection and approval process that serves as the policy and procedure guide and funding/action directive for RFAs. | OECD, Planning, ACDA, PRIV, Utilities, PM&E, Parks, ASD, AMATS, SOA, Transit, Finance, PA. | Now | | | 2-3 | Implement the formal RFA selection and approval process from Action 2-2 and initiate action on the priority RFAs as established in Section 3.2 of this Plan. | OECD, ACDA, Planning, Utilities, Traffic, Transit, AMATS, DOT&PF, PM&E, Parks | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, DTP, WADP, FV | ### Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 2-4 | Identify and implement appropriate ways to modify, simplify, or waive procedural requirements and application fees for certain permit reviews, while maintaining the integrity of those review processes, for projects in Reinvestment Focus Areas and for proposed rezonings that conform to and implement the *2040 LUP*. | Planning, DevServ, PRIV | 1-3 | HMA, ILA | | 2-5 | Create a Project Review Management Service to help applicants navigate the permitting process for *2040 LUP* priority projects, such as compact housing and adaptive reuse of older buildings, and developments in Reinvestment Focus Areas. | Planning, DevServ, Traffic | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, HMA, ILA | | 2-6 | Amend Title 21 to create a medium-density residential district that allows mixed-use commercial in an integrated neighborhood setting. Require projects to prioritize residential use and meet or exceed an established minimum housing density. Promote mixed-use development that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Direct this district to locations next to Centers or Corridors. | Planning | Now | EADP | | 2-7 | Adopt and apply an adaptive reuse ordinance to promote reuse of older structures, consistent with life safety standards. | Planning, DevServ, Traffic | 1-3 | 4NHPP | | 2-8 | Analyze and recommend amendments to the Land Use Plan Map changing public and institutional lands to a residential designation that permits compact mixed housing to be developed in the future. | Planning | 4-6 | HMA | | 2-9 | Explore the potential of expanding Anchorage’s use of “Transfer of Development Rights” (TDR) as a tool to assist plan implementation including supporting Action 4-18 and other Actions that may benefit. | Planning, OECD, PRIV | 4-6 | AB Comp Plan, DT, UMED | | 2-10 | Host a joint workshop with the housing finance and mortgaging lenders and AHFC regarding implementation of the *2040 LUP*. Provide a workshop report with findings and conclusions regarding potential lending programs and practices that could coordinate with municipal policies and regulations to reduce housing costs and promote new housing choices. | OECD, Planning, Finance, AMATS, PRIV, ACDA | 1-3 | HMA | | 2-11 | Amend Title 21 to create a Small-area Implementation Plan master planning procedure, which details what it does, where it is to be applied, approval criteria, and how one is to be adopted. | Planning | 1-3 | EADP, FV, GHNP, UMED | | 2-12 | Reform the system for requiring off-site public infrastructure improvements to be more flexible and enhance certainty in the development approval process. Flexibility may include a lower level-of-service (LOS) standard for off-site transportation improvements in delineated Reinvestment Focus Areas where alternative transportation modes such as transit and pedestrian access exist. Retain the objective to provide adequate public facilities. | OECD, DevServ, Traffic, Planning, PM&E, Utilities, PRIV, Finance, OMB | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, HMA | Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Goal 3** | **Mixed-use, walkable commercial centers and corridors thrive within their neighborhood context, offer housing affordable to a range of incomes, and enable business growth.**

Actions 2-1 to 2-7, 4-2, 5-1 to 5-3, 6-2 to 6-5, and 6-8 are also integral to this Goal. | | | | | 3-1 | Amend Title 21 to simplify zoning regulations for mixed-use projects relative to commercial or other projects. | Planning | Now | AB Comp Plan, UMED, FV, MV, DTP, EADP | | 3-2 | Amend Title 21 to reformat the B-2A, B-2B, and B-2C Downtown zoning district regulations from the old Title 21 to include in current Title 21, in a simpler “form-based code” style of district. Primarily refresh existing regulations to a more transparent format. Incorporate only limited substantive revisions, anticipating that Action 3-9 will help implement the Downtown Comprehensive Plan. | Planning, OECD, PRIV | 1-3 | DTP | | 3-3 | Adopt a seismic hazard mitigation overlay zone. | Planning | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, DTP, Seismic | | 3-4 | Establish financial and zoning incentives for housing projects to meet or exceed a minimum housing density in Town Centers, City Centers, and high-frequency public transit corridors. | OECD, Planning, ACDA, Finance | 1-3 | | | 3-5 | Revise the Title 21 Commercial Center Overlay zoning district to more effectively implement and apply to Neighborhood Centers, Town Centers, and Main Street Corridors. | Planning | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, FV, GH, UMED, MV, EADP, WADP | | 3-6 | Conduct a limited, expedited Small-area Implementation Plan for Northway Town Center area including Alaska Regional Hospital, municipal properties, and the Penland Manufactured Home Community, possibly as part of a near-term amendment to the 2040 LUP. Consult with residents, property owners, employers, and community councils to help determine appropriate land use designations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and recommend amendments to the 2040 LUP. | Planning | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, MV | | 3-7 | Facilitate a set of Targeted Area Rezonings in the designated Town Center areas of Northway, Huffman, Creekside, Tudor/UMED, and/or Jewel Lake Town Centers, as a prerequisite to encouraging commercial and mixed-use development in these centers. | Planning | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, WADP, EADP, HDP, MV, UMED, CLA, ILA | Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 3-8 | Amend the Title 21 Conditional Use provisions to create a process and review criteria for how and where new small-scale commercial uses might be permitted within neighborhoods in certain residential zoning districts. Consider including a provision that the areas appropriate for small commercial be highlighted first by an Area-specific Plan or Small-area Implementation Plan. | Planning | 1-3 | MV, FV | | 3-9 | Complete a comprehensive update to the downtown zoning regulations, establishing Downtown zoning districts B-2A, B-2B, B-2C, as part of a targeted plan review and update to the Downtown Comprehensive Plan with an analytical report of issues and conditions. | Planning, OECD, PRIV | 4-6 | DTP | | **Goal 4** | **Anchorage’s neighborhoods provide a range of places to live, meeting the housing needs of residents at all income levels, household sizes, interests, ages, abilities, and races and ethnicities.** Actions 1-1, 2-1 to 2-5, 2-12, 5-3, 6-2, 6-8, and 7-2 to 7-4 are also integral to this Goal. | | | | | 4-1 | Expand regulatory user guidance/assistance materials for residential uses, including for ADUs, and other desired use types. | Planning, OECD, DevServ | Now/ Ongoing | HMA | | 4-2 | Facilitate a Targeted Area Rezoning in the vicinity of Central Spenard Reinvestment Focus Area, with coordinated targeted area re-platting assistance or small-area plans on some portions, and expansion of the Midtown Deteriorated Properties Tax Abatement designated area as shown on the Actions Map to specifically incentivize housing. | Planning, PRIV, AMATS | Now | | | 4-3 | Amend Title 21 to allow parking reductions by right for residential uses; offer greater reductions in RFAs and other key development areas. | Planning, Traffic | Now | | | 4-4 | Amend Title 21 to allow compact housing on R-2M or R-3 zoned lots near designated Centers. May include increased height or allowed units per lot, subject to additional urban design and neighborhood compatibility standards, such as for building massing and scale, lot coverage, setbacks, and vehicle access. Determine appropriate measures through a public process including collaboration with neighborhoods and stakeholders. | Planning | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, EADP | | 4-5 | Review site and utility engineering design criteria for infill housing and explore amendments to standards and procedures to reduce infrastructure costs while preserving safety and engineering objectives. | OECD, PM&E, Utilities, Traffic, DevServ, Planning | 1-3 | DCM, HMA | | 4-6 | Amend Title 21 and other regulations for internal site circulation for vehicles, parking courtyards, and private lanes for compact infill housing. | Planning, Traffic, PM&E, DevServ | 1-3 | HMA | Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 4-7 | Amend Title 21 to ease restrictions that currently deter construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Determine appropriate measures through a meaningful, collaborative public process and include development standards for neighborhood compatibility. | OECD, Planning, DevServ, PRIV, AWWU | Now | AB Comp Plan, HMA | | 4-8 | Evaluate and monitor barriers to fair housing in Anchorage, and establish goals and actions to overcome those barriers. | DHHS, Planning | 4-6/ Ongoing | FHP | | 4-9 | Encourage the construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) through a permit review assistance program, applicant guidance materials, improved tracking of ADU development trends, and public information. | OECD, Planning, DevServ, PRIV | 4-6 | | | 4-10 | Amend Title 21 to reduce restrictions that currently deter construction of compact housing types; and expand provisions that allow for compact housing types, including small-lot housing, cottage houses with shared courtyards, townhouses, and small-scale garden apartments. Determine appropriate measures through a meaningful, collaborative public process and make subject to site development standards including standards for neighborhood compatibility. | OECD, Planning, DevServ, PRIV, AWWU | 1-3 | HMA | | 4-11 | Partner with other agencies to provide public education about the provisions of the Fair Housing Act and municipal laws to developers, landlords, tenants, financial institutions, and homebuyers. | DHHS | 4-6 | FHP | | 4-12 | Work jointly with the manufactured housing industry/community and affordable housing advocates to develop an affordable housing redevelopment displacement mitigation strategy. | DHHS, Planning, HLB/ RED, ACDA, PRIV | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, neighborhood and district plans, HMA, FHP | | 4-13 | Research and pre-approve housing construction plans that specifically promote desired new forms of compact housing development for walkable infill neighborhood contexts. Review existing municipally pre-approved plans to determine forms of housing that may be more appropriate to pre-approve primarily in suburban contexts, and replace those with pre-approved variations more appropriate in urban neighborhood environments. | OECD, DevServ, PRIV, Planning | 4-6 | AB Comp Plan, FV | | 4-14 | Require minimum densities for new single-family in multifamily zones in areas that are near Town and City Centers and are designated for public infrastructure investment or incentives for housing, such as Reinvestment Focus Areas. | Planning | 4-6 | AB Comp Plan | Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 4-15 | Prepare a special study/small-area implementation plan for the Tudor Road land use and transportation corridor between Lake Otis Parkway and Elmore Road, including the 3500 Tudor Road mixed-use redevelopment and public facilities campus. | Planning, HLB/RED, Transit, PM&E, PRIV, DOT&PF, ASD | 1-3 | Tu35, EADP, UMED, HMA | | 4-16 | Update the 2012 Anchorage Housing Market Analysis including market trends and forecast housing needs. | Planning, AEDC | 4-6 | HMA | | 4-17 | Amend Title 21 to allow small-lot subdivisions enabling more forms of small-lot housing as an alternative to large multi-unit buildings in multifamily districts. | Planning, DevServ, Traffic, PRIV, AWWU | Now | AB Comp Plan, HMA | | 4-18 | Adopt a housing impact mitigation program to ensure that any losses of housing units or residential land to rezonings or ROW acquisitions are offset by additions in an appropriate location. | Planning, PRIV | 4-6 | AB Comp Plan, HMA | | 4-19 | Adopt a low-density compact housing district that allows a modest increase in density above the R-2D two-family district, of up to 3 to 4 residential units per structure, while retaining the prevailing lotting pattern and built scale within existing neighborhoods. Avoid lot aggregation of whole blocks or construction of eight-plexes, which is already allowed in the R-2M zone. | Planning | 4-6 | | | **Goal 5** | **Coordinated and targeted infrastructure investments catalyze new growth, provide an acceptable return on investment, and equitably improve safety and quality of life.**

Actions 2-2, 2-3, 2-12, 6-1, 6-2, 6-4, 6-8, 8-1, 8-2, 8-8, and 8-10 are also integral to this Goal. | | | | | 5-1 | Refine the criteria used for the review of capital projects to be included in the CIP to promote implementation of the capital priorities identified in the *2040 LUP*, functional plans, and neighborhood and district plans. | PM&E, OECD, Finance, Planning, AMATS, Parks | Now | | | 5-2 | Develop and incorporate a method for estimating and including Return on Investment (ROI) in criteria used to prioritize capital projects and transportation projects in the CIP, TIP, and other programs within RFAs. | Finance, PM&E, AMATS, ACDA | 1-3 | EADP, DTP | | 5-3 | Develop and maintain an updatable asset inventory of the condition and capacity of Anchorage's infrastructure, including water, wastewater, storm water, roads, alleys, sidewalks, public transit, schools, energy utilities, and "green infrastructure" such as parks, wetlands, riparian corridors, and natural drainageways—especially in areas designated for growth. A street inventory includes the identification of needed additional local and collector street connections, intersection and access improvements, and pedestrian connections. | OECD, AWWU, PM&E, Traffic, DOT&PF, Utilities, Planning, ASD, AMATS, GIS, Parks, Transit. | 1-3 | | ### Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 5-4 | Develop an enhanced measure of school facility capacity relative to long-term projections for student enrollment and designated housing growth, as a means to coordinate planning for future school facility needs with land use planning and allocation of growth. | ASD, Planning | Now | | | 5-5 | Expand existing programs by which AWWU may finance or provide infrastructure ahead of development within the water and wastewater service area, to include reimbursement of AWWU costs. | AWWU, OECD, SOA | 1-3 | HMA | | 5-6 | Evaluate parameters and feasibility of a storm water utility, to address management and maintenance of storm water pipe infrastructure and runoff drainage problems. | PM&E | 1-3 | HDP | | 5-7 | Determine future school site needs under the 2040 LUP and incorporate adequate school capacity, sites, and investment into the Plan. | Planning, ASD | 1-3 | | | 5-8 | Document the up-front utility infrastructure costs borne by private development that inhibit housing development in Anchorage. With utilities, explore infrastructure finance tools that address up-front infrastructure costs on private development. As part of this effort, undertake a comparison to peer group cities’ revenue sources and fee mechanisms. | OECD, ACDA, Utilities, Finance, SOA, PRIV | 1-3 | DTP, EADP, HMA | | 5-9 | Document the cost of parking structures for high-intensity development in Downtown and Midtown Anchorage that inhibits private development of housing and mixed-use. Explore how other cities’ parking districts and development authorities have facilitated private development through public-private partnership. | OECD, ACDA, Planning, Finance, SOA | 1-3 | DTP, HMA, CLA | | **Goal 6** | **Anchorage coordinates transportation and land use to provide safe, efficient, and affordable travel choices.** | | | | | | Actions 1-2, 1-3, 2-2, 2-3, and 5-1 to 5-3 are also integral to this Goal. | | | | | 6-1 | Update the Metropolitan Transportation Plan’s (MTP) growth allocation model to reflect the 2040 LUP land use designations. | AMATS | 1-3 | | | 6-2 | Adopt a policy and municipal street design criteria for “Complete Streets” and urban and mixed-use Street Typologies to serve all users and reflect adjacent land use patterns. Apply these in priority Reinvestment Focus Areas. | AMATS, PM&E, Traffic, Transit, DOT&PF | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, OSHP,DTP,FV, GH,EADP,DCM | | 6-3 | Adopt a Transit-supportive Development Corridor/Transit-oriented Development implementation plan. | AMATS, Transit, Traffic | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, MTP | ### Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 6-4 | Adopt a Street Typology map that reflects and integrates existing and future land uses, and a procedure for determining typologies as part of individual street improvement projects. | AMATS, PM&E, DOT&PF, Traffic, Transit | 1-3 | OSHP,DTP | | 6-5 | Adopt a Transit-oriented Development (TOD) overlay to support and regulate TOD uses, necessary infill intensities, and related projects. | Planning, AMATS, DOT&PF, Traffic, Transit | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan | | 6-6 | Complete the Seward-to-Glenn Highway connection alignment study as identified in the *Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)*. | DOT&PF, AMATS | 1-3 | MTP, DTP, FV, EADP, MV | | 6-7 | Facilitate one or a series of Targeted Area Rezonings in housing opportunity areas along public transportation corridors. | Planning | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan | | 6-8 | Develop a phasing and prioritization program for additional local and collector street connections, intersection and access improvements, right-of-way width, and pedestrian connections that are needed to support infill and redevelopment in neighborhoods, centers, and corridors targeted to experience growth and change, including in Special Study Areas identified along Lake Otis and Tudor near the UMED District, along northern Muldoon Road, and other areas shown on the Actions Map. | AMATS, Traffic, PM&E, DOT&PF, Transit, Utilities | 4-6 | DCM, DTP, OSHP | | 6-9 | Establish a Framework Agreement between the Municipality and DOT&PF regarding the designation and improvement of streets or street segments where greater emphasis will be placed on multi-modal, “Complete Street” design. Potential ways to achieve these streets will be identified, which may include ownership transfers and other case-by-case solutions. | AMATS, DOT&PF, Traffic, PM&E, Utilities | 1-3/ Ongoing | | | Goal 7 | Infill development is compatible with the valued characteristics of surrounding properties and neighborhoods. | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | Actions 4-13, 4-18, 6-2, 6-4, 6-8, 10-3, and 10-4 are also integral to this Goal. | | | | | 7-1 | Adopt measures that buffer residential and recreation land uses adjacent to TSAIA that are compatible with FAA policies for airport land and that align with standards and policies in the *WADP*, as part of the Airport Management Zoning District (Action 10-1). | Planning, TSAIA | Now | WADP | | 7-2 | Incorporate neighborhood compatibility standards in compact housing amendments in Actions 3-4, 4-3, 4-4, 4-6, 4-7, and 4-10. | Planning, PRIV | Now/ 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, FV, GH | ### Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 7-3 | Adopt and apply compatibility criteria in the economic development tools (Action 2-1) and other incentives to ensure consistency with the *2040 LUP* and Neighborhood and District Plans, and compatibility with desired neighborhood character while supporting infill and redevelopment. | Planning, ACDA, HLB/ RED, OECD | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, FVNP, GHNP | | 7-4 | Adopt one or more Traditional Neighborhood Design zoning districts or overlay zones for urban neighborhoods, which reflect adopted plans and incorporate "form-based" regulations. Structure the form-based code to accommodate neighborhood differences and characteristics while staying consistent and simple in format. For example, this action includes helping to implement the "City Center" and "Mixed-use (a.k.a., Main Street) Corridor” land use designations in the Fairview Neighborhood Plan area. | Planning | 1-3 | FV, 4NHPP, GH, MV, UMED | | 7-5 | Facilitate a Targeted Area Rezoning in areas of eastern Downtown and northern and central Fairview currently zoned RO, B-3, and R-4, as a prerequisite to downtown-oriented and mixed-use main street development that is consistent with the Downtown and Fairview Plans and implementing the form-based district from Action 7-4. | Planning | 1-3 | DTP, FV, SC, CLA, ILA | | 7-6 | Adopt a Hillside Conservation Subdivision ordinance following the policy direction in the *Hillside District Plan*. | Planning, DevServ, PRIV | 4-6 | HDP | | 7-7 | Identify development standards and incentives to mitigate impacts to wildlife near wildlife habitats. | Planning | 7-10 | AB Comp Plan,UMED, HDP | | **Goal 8** | **Anchorage maintains, improves, and strategically expands parks, greenbelts, riparian corridors, and trail corridors to enhance land values, public access, neighborhoods, and mixed-use centers.**
Actions 5-3, 6-8, and 10-4 are also integral to this Goal. | | | | | 8-1 | Pursue financial resources including state and federal grants and bonding to fund feasibility findings, engineering, acquisition, and restoration projects for creek corridors, high-priority linear Greenway-supported Development designations, and wetlands. | PM&E, Planning | Ongoing | Watershed, AWMP | | 8-2 | Establish a municipal wetlands bank employing conservation easements. | HLB/RED | 1-3 | AWMP, HLB Plan | | 8-3 | Adopt stream protection setbacks in Title 21. | PM&E, Planning | 1-3 | AWMP, AB Comp Plan, HDP | ### Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | |---|---|---|---|---| | 8-4 | Conduct housekeeping rezone of dedicated parks to PR district, and some T-zoned lands to PLI. | Planning, HLB/RED, Parks, | 1-3 | Park | | 8-5 | Establish a facilities-sharing-and-maintenance partnership between municipal Parks and Recreation and the Anchorage School District. | Parks, ASD, PRIV | 1-3 | Park | | 8-6 | Expand the Anchorage Parks and Recreation Service Area, consistent with the HDP, to include the entire Anchorage Bowl. | Parks, Planning | 1-3 | HDP, Park | | 8-7 $ | Prepare a Small-area Implementation Plan for the block between 100th Avenue, Minnesota Drive, and C Street to integrate the open space and future development in a cohesive land use pattern across the public and private parcels. | Planning, Parks, HLB/ RED, PRIV, AMATS, DOT&PF | 1-3 | | | 8-8 $ | Update the Anchorage Bowl parks plan and include analyses of designated infill and redevelopment areas and underserved neighborhoods to pursue methods to resolve park and natural area deficiencies. Address viewshed assessment and protection in the plan. | Planning, Parks, HLB/RED, AWWU, DOT&PF | 4-6 | Park, DTP, FV | | 8-9 | Determine which municipal parks are not yet dedicated parks for potential consideration to full dedication status. | Planning, HLB/RED, Parks, municipal Legal Dept. | 4-6 | | | 8-10 $ | Conduct valuation and ecological studies of the natural economy of Anchorage's ecosystem to determine current watershed and wetland functions, economic value, and land use development impacts. | PM&E, Planning, AWWU, PA | 4-6 | AB Comp Plan, UMED | | **Goal 9** | **A sufficient, predictable, and strategically located industrial land supply allows Anchorage’s industrial employment sectors to thrive, protected from non-industrial uses that might displace them.** | | | | | | Actions 1-1, 2-1, 2-5, 5-1 to 5-3, and 10-1 are also integral to this Goal. | | | | | 9-1 | Designate TSAIA land on Raspberry Road for airport/logistics industry use as part of Action 10-1 to create an airport zoning district. | Planning, TSAIA, OECD, PRIV | Now | WADP, ILA | | 9-2 | Facilitate a Targeted Area Rezoning of selected south "C" Street I-2 zoned lands to B-3, PCD, and I-1 as a prerequisite to implementing industrial use protections in the I-2 district. | Planning, PRIV | Now | ILA | | 9-3 | Facilitate a Targeted Area Rezoning of selected Abbott Town Center I-2 zoned lands to B-3 and I-1 as a prerequisite to implement industrial use protections in the I-2 district. | Planning, PRIV | Now | AB Comp Plan, ILA | # Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 9-4 | Amend Title 21 commercial allowed-use entitlements in the industrial zoning districts in consideration of findings of the 2015 Anchorage Industrial Lands Assessment (ILA). This includes easing restrictions on some non-industrial uses and other supportive uses found in I zones, while increasing limitations on uses found problematic by the ILA. For example, expand allowances for technical/professional service office uses. Clarify industrial sector allowed-use categories in Title 21 to reflect Anchorage industrial land use patterns and business trends. | Planning | 1-3 | ILA, CLA | | 9-5 | Carry out the recommendations of the Anchorage Industrial Lands Assessment report (2015) and the 2040 LUP Appendix C: Traded Industry Sectors Analysis report to identify geographic clusters of industrial traded sector uses along with their supply chain sectors. Determine the characteristic site needs of these sectors. Recommend priorities to protect, incentivize, and support these sectors into the future. | Planning, AEDC, AMATS, DOT&PF, Traffic, PRIV | 1-3 | ILA | | 9-6 | Facilitate one or a series of Targeted Area Rezonings of commercial and industrial areas that implement the 2040 LUP to provide more consolidated, stable, and appropriately located land supply of commercial and industrial uses. | Planning | 1-3 | AB Comp Plan, WADP, EADP, MV, CLA, ILA | | 9-7 | Create an industrial readiness program for industrial traded sector uses, which comprises fiscal incentives and a development-ready site program. | Planning, AEDC, PRIV, HLB/RED, ACDA, OECD | 4-6 | | | 9-8 | Determine methods to upgrade/extend public utilities/roads to targeted industrial lands in Anchorage Bowl. | AWWU, PM&E, ACDA | 4-6 | ILA | | 9-9 | Allow innovative forms of "live-work" industrial mixed use in parts of Downtown, Ship Creek, Fairview, Mountain View, etc. | Planning | 4-6 | DTP | | 9-10 | Expand brownfield remediation assistance programs for industrial reuse by traded sector firms. Apply for loans and grant incentives to expand brownfield remediation programs. | HLB/RED, ACDA, SOA | 7-10 | DTP, ILA, HLB Plan | Figure 3-5. Actions Checklist | # | Action | Responsible Agency | Time Frame | Related Plans and Studies | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Goal 10** | **The community supports its anchor institutions and facilities and recognizes the important local and statewide benefits they provide, while mitigating adverse impacts associated with development and expansion. Actions 6-8 and 7-1 are also integral to this Goal.** | | | | | 10-1 | Adopt an Airport Management zoning district that combines multiple zoning districts at TSAIA. Incorporate actions 7-1 and 9-1. | Planning, TSAIA | Now | WADP, AMP | | 10-2 | Amend Title 21 to allow for implementation of the master-planned, mixed-use “UMED Village” established in Section 3.2 of the *UMED District Plan*, and to encourage institutional master planning and coordination generally in the PLI District. | Planning, PRIV | 1-3 | UMED | | 10-3 | Develop an airport interface compatibility (AIC) overlay zone for areas next to TSAIA, Merrill Field, and JBER to address noise, runway/aircraft protection zones, public safety, compatibility of land use and intensities of use, and airport special functions. Apply the AIC on areas next to these airports’ runways. | Planning, Airports, DevServ | 4-6 | WADP, MV, FV | | 10-4 | Resolve land use, ownership, and open space conflicts around TSAIA. | Planning, HLB/RED, TSAIA, PRIV | 7-10 | WADP, AMP | | 10-5 | Conduct a Targeted Area Rezoning of multifamily and other designated lands within the JBER Accident Potential Zone (APZ) to appropriate residential, commercial, or light industrial districts to guide future development within an APZ. | Planning | 4-6 | MV, EADP | # Actions Map Map 3-1, Actions Map, illustrates the location of some key Actions from the Actions Checklist and shows their spatial relationships. Many Actions take place in Downtown and Midtown. Figure 3-6 below shows Downtown and Midtown at a larger scale. ## Figure 3-6. Actions Map Inset <
> Search online with "Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan" to go to the zoom-in interactive version of this map. # Map 3-1. Actions Map <
> **2040 Land Use Plan Actions** * Initial Priority Reinvestment Focus Area* * Candidate Future Reinvestment Area * Targeted Area Rezonings* * Small-area Implementation Plans * Special Study Areas* * Transit-supportive Development Corridors (numbered in order of phasing priority) * Greenway-supported Development Corridors (numbered in order of phasing priority) **Actions Incorporated from Adopted Area-specific Plans** * New Zoning District* * Overlay Zone * Special Study Areas * Historic Districts (Proposed by Adopted Plan) * Deteriorated Properties Tax Abatement *Black number labels refer to Actions Checklist items in the 2040 Plan narrative. The Actions Map shows the approximate locations of the candidate Reinvestment Focus Area (RFAs) discussed in Section 3.2. Multiple actions in the Actions Checklist refer to RFAs. The map also shows the locations of initial Targeted Area Rezonings specified in the Actions Checklist. The number labels on the map correspond to the action number of each Targeted Area Rezoning in the Actions Checklist. The boundaries may be adjusted as part of each rezoning process. Not all Targeted Area Rezonings in the Plan are depicted on the Actions Map. Some will occur on a later time frame and can be shown on the Actions Map as part of updates to the Plan in Action 1-3. Some areas that reflect adopted neighborhood and district plans also appear on the Actions Map. These include new zoning districts, overlay zones, special study areas, and proposed historic districts from the area-specific plans. Three areas designated by the Municipality for tax abatement are shown in red (Deteriorated Properties Tax Abatement). Two of these appear as red dots (one on 4th Avenue and one on Northern Lights and Benson Boulevard) because of their small size. Lastly, the Actions Map illustrates the location and phasing priority of the Transit-supportive Development and Greenway-supported Development corridors, as discussed in this Plan. ## Near-term Work Flow Priorities The Optimal Work Flow diagram (Figure 3-7) on page 96 provides an overview of the near-term Actions to be implemented in the first three years after Plan adoption. The numbered items in the Optimal Work Flow diagram correspond to the Actions in the Actions Checklist. The diagram illustrates the recommended work flow prioritization for implementation by type of action. The color categories of the Action items reflects the lead agencies named for each Action in the Actions Checklist table. The placement of the red dollar signs in Figure 3-7 reflects the green dollar sign icons in the Actions Checklist table. The timing and order of these Actions are not set in stone but are estimations based on current priorities, sequence of actions, and resources. It is expected that there will be periodic or annual review of the work plan for carrying out the Actions, such as the Targeted Area Rezones, to determine which should go forward in the following year(s) based on need and resources. Periodic updates to the Optimal Work Flow diagram will keep it current and useful as a summary of the next Actions expected to carry out the Anchorage 2040 Land Use Plan. Figure 3-7. Optimal Work Flow of the Near-Term Actions from the Actions Checklist | Types of Actions | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | "Now" Actions | | 1-3 Year Actions | | | Targeted Area Rezones, Reinvestment Focus Areas, and Small Area Plans | $ 2-2 $ 4-2 9-2 | 9-3 $ 2-3 3-6 | 2-11 3-7 7-5 $ 4-15 | 9-6 $ 8-7 | | Changes to Title 21 Land Use and Development Regulations for Housing Projects | 4-17 $ 4-1 4-3 | 4-7 4-6 4-4 $ 4-5 | $ 4-10 4-12 | 6-7 | | Changes to Title 21 Mixed-use, Commercial, Industrial, and Residential Regulations | 2-6 3-1 | 3-2 7-1 3-3 9-1 10-1 | $ 7-4 9-4 3-5 | 2-7 10-2 3-8 9-9 $ 3-9 | | Economic Development Tools Including Financial Incentives | | $ 2-1 2-4 7-3 $ 2-5 $ 5-2 2-10 | 3-4 | $ 5-9 $ 6-5 | | Infrastructure, Transportation, Open Space, and Information Support | 8-3 5-1 5-4 1-1 6-2 | 8-4 $ 5-5 1-2 1-3 6-1 $ 5-8 $ 8-1 6-3 | $ 9-5 $ 5-6 $ 5-3 $ 6-8 6-4 5-7 | $ 6-9 $ 1-4 8-2 $ 6-6 $ 2-12 8-5 | Responsible Agency Leads: [Planning Department] = Planning Department [AMATS] = AMATS [Other Department] = Other Department - Timing is to be viewed as flexible depending on circumstances, resources, and level of community support. - $ = Requires new funding # Index Accessible Land Use, 21-2 Actions Checklist, 69, 73, 77-92 *(see also Action Statement, 81; Responsible Agencies, 81; Time Frame, 81; Related Plans and Studies, 81; Strategy 9: Infill Housing Development Regulations, 77; Strategy 12: Systematic Monitoring and Amendment of this Plan, 79; Fig. 3-5 Actions Checklist, 82-93)* Actions Map, 69, 71-2, 79, 80, 94-5 Action Statement, 81 Adaptive Reuse, 17-8, 75, 77 ADU (accessory dwelling unit), 19 Airport, Railroad, or Port Facility, 33, 54-6, 76 *(see also Land Use Designations, 36)* Anchor Institutions, 16, 25-6, 52-3 *Anchorage 2020*, ix, 1-7, 15-26, 43, 55-6, 81 *Anchorage 2040 Growth Forecast*, ix, 8-11, 13, 16, 27 Anchorage’s Growth Strategy, 15-27, 29, 50 AMATS Metropolitan Transportation Plan, 2-4, 13-4, 22, 67, 81 *(see also Functional Plans, 2-4)* AMATS *Official Streets & Highways Plan*, 65, 81 *(see also Street Typologies and Land Use, 65, 81)* Areas of Growth and Change, ix, 4, 26-7, 32, 71 *(see also Areas of Significant Growth, 26; Areas of Moderate Growth, 26; Areas of Little Growth, 26)* Area Specific Plans, 4-5, 15, 67, 79, 95 Building Heights, 6, 29 Capital Improvements, 4, 21, 69-70, 74, 81 Centers, 13, 18-9, 22, 29, 38, 42-8, 58-60, 62, 66, 75-8 *(see also Neighborhood Center, 42-3; Town Center, 43; Regional Commercial Center, 44-5; City Center, 45-7)* City Center, 1, 18, 29, 32, 39, 40, 42, 45-7, 60, 65, 76, 78 Climate Change, 16 *(see also Northern Climate, 3)* Commercial Corridor, 48-9 Community Expansion, 14 Community Facilities or Institutions, 52-7 Compact Mixed Residential-Low, 29, 32, 36, 38-9, 76 Complete Streets, 22-3, 34-5 Compact Mixed Residential-Medium, 29, 32, 36, 39-40 Coordination and Partnerships, 70 Corridors, 3-4, 16, 18-22, 24, 29, 35, 48-50, 58, 60-1, 76 *(see also Commercial Corridor, 48-9; Main Street Corridor, 49-50)* Density, 23-4, 29-30, 32, 63, 65-6, 75, 79 *(see also Density Ranges, 29; measurement of density, 30)* Design Principles, 29, 34-5, 53, 63-4 Development Permitting Assistance, 75, 77 *(see also Project Review Management Service, 75)* Differences from Area-specific Land Use Designations, 32-3 Downtown, 18, 26, 32-3, 45-6, 65-6, 70-2, 75-8, 81 *(see also Seismically Unstable Ground)* Essential Strategies, 71 FAR (floor-area ratio), 30 Facilities and Institutions, 29-30, 52-7 *(see also Community Facility or Institution, 52-3; University or Medical Center, 53-4; Airport, Port, or Railroad Facility, 54-6; Potential Open Space Alternative, 56-7)* Financing and Taxation Policies, 70 Financial and Taxation Incentives, 74-5 Forecasting Growth, 8-14 Functional Plans, 2-5, 34, 62, 69, 81 General Industrial, 29, 33, 58-9, 76 Green Infrastructure, 19-20, 24 Greenway-supported Development, ix, 60-3, 71, 73, 76, 95 Growth Capacity, 12 *(see also Anchorage 2040 Growth Forecast, 8-11, 13, 16, 27)* Growth Supporting Features, ix, 29, 34, 60-6, 71, 76 *(see also Transit-supportive Development, ix, 60-1, 71, 76, 78, 95; Greenway-supported Development, ix, 60-3, 71, 73, 76; Traditional Neighborhood Design, ix, 60, 64-5, 76; Residential Mixed-Use Development, ix, 60,65-6, 76)* Historic Preservation, 45, 81 Implementation Tools, 69-70 *(see also Zoning and Development Regulations, 69; Capital Improvements, 4, 21, 69-70, 74, 81; Financing and Taxation, 70; Land Acquisition and Preparation, 70; Coordination and Partnerships, 70)* Industrial Areas, 13, 57-9, 78, 92 *(see also Light Industrial/Commercial 33. 57-9; General Industrial, 29, 33, 58-9, 76)* Industrial Land, 3, 7-13, 24-5, 29, 57, 75, 78, 81 Infill Design Principles, 29, 34-5, 61, 63-4 Infill and Redevelopment, ix, 2, 17-9, 21, 23-6, 35, 48, 64, 71-2 Infill Housing Development Regulations, 77-8 Infrastructure Financing and Provision, 72-4 Infrastructure-Land Use, 20-1 (*see also* green infrastructure, 19-20, 24; low impact development, 21) Lakes and Streams, 67 Land Acquisition and Preparation, 70 Land Capacity for Housing & Employment, 10-11 Land Use (Plan Map) Designations, 4, 26, 29, 31-4, 36, 60, 65-7, 76-9 (*see also* Neighborhoods, 36-41; Centers, 42-7; Corridors, 48-50; Open Spaces, 50-2; Facilities and Institutions, 52-4; Industrial Areas, 57; Fig. 3-2, 76) Land Use Plan Area Boundary, 25, 68 Land Use Plan Map, ix, 5-6, 26, 29, 30-2, 71, 75, 77, 79 Large-lot Residential, 36, 76 Light Industrial/Commercial, 33, 57-9 Low Impact Development, 21 Main Street Corridor, 49-50, 62, 65-6, 76 Major Streets, 39, 67 Neighborhoods, 36-41 (*see also* Large-lot Residential, 36, 76; Single-family and Two-family, 29, 32, 36-8, 60, 76; Compact Mixed Residential-Low, 29, 32, 36, 38-9, 76; Compact Mixed Residential-Medium, 29, 32, 36, 39-40, 76; Urban Residential-High, 29, 32, 36, 40-1, 76) Neighborhood Centers, 42-3, 84 Neighborhood and District Plans, 3-5, 7, 27, 31 New Zoning Districts/Overlay Zones, 77 Northern Climate, 3 Park or Natural Area, 33, 51 Placemaking, 2, 19-21, 23 Plan for Growth and Livability, 16-7 Open Spaces, 26, 50-2, 56-7 (*see also* Other Open Space, Park or Natural Area, 50-2) Open Space and Greenways, 16, 24 Other Map Features, 67 (*see also* Major Streets, 39, 67; Lakes and Streams, 67; Land Use Plan Area Boundary, 25, 68) Other Open Space, Park or Natural Area, 51 Phasing of Growth and Investment, 71 Platting, 69, 75 Potential Airport Expansion Alternatives, 55-7 Potential Open Space Alternative, 56-7 Preservation and Re-use of Older Buildings, 77 Project Review Management Service, 75 (*see also* Permit Review Assistance, 71, 77) Public Engagement, 7 Reinvestment Focus Areas (RFAs), 24, 63, 66, 70-2, Fig. 3-1, 73-5, 77, 82, 95-6 Relationship to Other Plans, 2, 31-3 (*see also* Crosswalk Fig. 2-3 and Fig. 2-24, 32-3; Functional Plans, 2-3, 34, 62, 69, 81; Neighborhood and District Plans, 3-5, 7, 27, 31) Residential Mixed-use Development, ix, 41, 60, 65-6, 76, 96 Rezonings, ix, 6, 29, 34, 66, 72, 75, 77, 79, 95 Seismically Unstable Ground, 45-7 Single-family and Two-Family, 29, 32, 36-8, 60, 76 Small-area Implementation Plans, 62, 72, 78-9, 83 Special Study Areas/Small-area Implementation Plans, 63, 78-9, 89, 95 Street Typologies and Land Use, 22, 48, 65, 88 (*see also* AMATS OS&HP) Systematic Monitoring and Amendment of 2040 *Land Use Plan*, 79 Targeted Area Rezonings (TARs), 75, 77, 95 (*see also* Rezonings, 79) Traded Sectors Industrial Site Availability and Readiness, 78 (*see also* Traded Sectors, 11-12, 25, 70); Definition of Industrial Activities, 59; PDR (production, distribution, and repair), 56-9 Traditional Neighborhood Design, 60, 64-5, 76 Transit-supportive Development, ix, 40, 45, 60-1, 71, 73, 76, 78 University or Medical Center, 29, 33, 53-4, 65, 76 Urban Design, 29, 34-5 Urban Residential-High, 29, 32, 40-1, 76 Zoning and Development Regulations, 69 Zoning Districts, 6, 29-30, 33, 76-7, 95 # Credits and Acknowledgements ### Plan Development Team Kristine Bunnell Jon Cecil, AICP Tom Davis, AICP – project manager Terry Lamberson – GIS lead Sue Perry – editing, website, publishing Jody Seitz – public involvement lead Renee Stewart – contracts and finance Thede Tobish Carol Wong, Long-Range Planning Manager ### Geographic Data, Analysis, and Cartography Terry Lamberson, PM&E Land Records/GIS Division – lead GIS specialist Tina Miller, GIDC – GIS data management, team coordinator, and funding Lisa Ameen, AMATS Growth Allocation Model Contractor Jeff Anderson, PM&E Land Records/GIS Division Collin Hodges, Public Transportation Department Amber Jackson, Geographic Information and Data Center (GIDC) Michael Knapp, Blue Skies Solution, LLC Cassondra Newman, AmeriCorps VISTA Scott Norton, HDR, Inc. Jennifer Novy, PM&E Land Records/GIS Division John St. Clair, AWWU GIS Center of Excellence ### Publication Design, Layout, and Illustrations Leslie McDonald, Barrett Studio Architects - lead Lisa Ameen – project logo Rebecca Laszewski, Barrett Studio Architects Nick Cecere, Barrett Studio Architects Leah Decker, Barrett Studio Architects Nicole Delmage, Barrett Studio Architects Connor Scher – assistance with Fig. 2-3 and 2-7 ### Growth Forecasts and Land Demand/Capacity Analyses Lisa Ameen, AMATS Growth Allocation Model Contractor Tom Davis, AICP Terry Lamberson, PM&E Land Records/GIS Division Bill Reid, PNW Economics, LLC Jon Spring, AMATS Growth Allocation Model Consultant ### Municipal Agencies – Technical Assistance Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions (AMATS) AWWU, GIS Center of Excellence AWWU, Planning Division Current Planning Division, Planning Department Parks and Recreation Department OECD, Geographic Information and Data Center Public Transportation Department ### Municipal Agencies – Consultations and Review Includes the agencies listed above and: Anchorage Fire Department • Anchorage Police Department • Anchorage School District • Development Services Department • Health and Human Services Department • Heritage Land Bank / Real Estate Department • Merrill Field Airport • Office of Emergency Management • Office of Management and Budget • Project Management & Engineering Department • Property Appraisal Department • Traffic Engineering Department ### Municipal Commissions – Review and Recommendations Planning and Zoning Commission – lead Geotechnical Advisory Commission Housing and Neighborhood Development Commission Parks and Recreation Commission Urban Design Commission Watersheds and Natural Resources Advisory Commission ### Public and Private Organizations Agnew::Beck Consulting Alaska Center for the Environment Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) Alaska Housing and Finance Corporation (AHFC) Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) Alaska Mental Health Trust, The Trust Land Office Alaska Railroad Corporation Anchorage Chamber of Commerce Anchorage Citizens Coalition Anchorage Community Development Authority (ACDA) Anchorage Community Land Trust (ACLT) Anchorage Economic Development Corporation (AEDC) AEDC Live.Work.Play. Housing Area of Focus Anchorage Home Builders Association Anchorage Park Foundation Anchorage Senior Activity Center Bettisworth North BOMA Anchorage Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Carr-Gottstein Properties CIRI Land Development Company Chugach Electric Association Chugach State Park Community Councils (see also below) Cook Inlet Housing Authority (CIHA) Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC) Crosspoint Church CY Investments, LLC Debenham Properties Dimond Center Mall DOWL Eklutna, Inc. Federation of Community Councils Friends of the Anchorage Coastal Wildlife Refuge Great Land Trust Habitat for Humanity Anchorage Home And Land Owners Association for the Anchorage Hillside (HALO) Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) McCool Carlson Green Architects NeighborWorks Alaska Port of Anchorage RIM Architects University of Alaska Anchorage, Facilities & Campus Services US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Anchorage Field Office William Jack Hernandez Sports Fish Hatchery (ADF&G) ### Public and Private Organizations: Community Councils Abbott Loop • Airport Heights • Campbell Park • Fairview • Government Hill • Huffman-O’Malley • Mountain View • North Star • Northeast • Rabbit Creek • Russian Jack Park • South Addition • Spenard • Turnagain • University Area ### 2040 LUP Residential Lands Focus Group Participants Pita Benz, CITC; Mark Butler, Federation of Community Councils; Tamas Deak, KPB Architects; Daniel Delfino, AHFC; Trevor Edmondson, The Peterson Group; Garrett Evridge, McDowell Group; Susan Fison, Fison & Associates; Melinda Gant, ACDA; Erika McConnell, OECD; Bill Popp, AEDC; Tyler Robinson, CIHA; Andre Spinelli, Spinell Homes; Jon Spring, AMATS Consultant; Eric Visser, Visser Construction; Robin Ward, HLB ### 2040 LUP Industrial/Commercial Lands Focus Group Participants Gary Baugh; Andy Baugh; Shaun Debenham, BOMA; Ron Doshier, Steel Fab; Mark Filipenko, Bond Filipenko Commercial Properties; Carl Kuhn, Jack White Commercial Real Estate; Will Kyzer, AEDC; Terri Lindseth, TSAIA; John Opinsky, Frampton & Opinsky; Tim Potter, DOWL; Sou Souvanny, Cardno; Brandon Spoerhase, BSI Commercial Real Estate; Jon Spring, AMATS Consultant; J.R. Wilcox, Anchorage Chamber of Commerce ### Individuals Kay Abrams • Adam Lees • Mohamed Ade • Gary Agron • Donna Aguiniga • Merle Akers • Paul Alcantar • Marie Allen • Don Alspach • Monica Alvarez • Jim Amundsen• Judith Anderegg • Jim Anderson • Julie Anderson • Nancy Anderson • Seth Anderson • Alison Arian• Teresa Arnold • Walt Arthur • Carol Ashlock • Hugh Ashlock • Bob Auth• Peggy Auth • Melisa Babb • Joshua Babcock • Sarah Badten • Danielle Bailey • Doug Ballou • Stuart Bannon • Mitzi Barker • Waltraud Barron • Dave Battle • Ken Bauer • Stephanie Bauer • Andy Baugh • Gary Baugh • Brian Baus • Nancy Beardsley • Steve Beardsley • Amy Behm • Greg Bendle • Pita Benz • Jason Bergerson • Colleen Bickford • Dan Billman • Alan Bittner • Per Bjorn-Roli • James Boehm • Jason Bookman • Kelly Borgstede • Daryl Bowen • Paul Bowers • Vivian Brantley • Anna Brawley • Kyle Brennan • Jan Bronson • J. Jay Brooks • Colonel Brian Bruckbauer • Rosemary Burchardt • Cedric Burden • Matt Burkholder • Niki Burrows • Garrett Burtner • Bruce Bustamante • Mark Butler • Bill Campbell • Mike Carlson • Mara Carnahan • Polly Carr • Marla Carter • Mary Cary • Roselynn Cary • Dave Cavitt • Sharon Chamard • Derrick Chan • Hans Charles • Frank Charmley • Su Chon • Sharon Cissna • Art Clark • Bridgette Coleman • Eileen Collins • Joel Condon • Steve Connelly • Christopher Constant • Penny Cordes • Chuck Counts • Ralph Courtney • Todd Cowles • John Crapps • Peter Crimp • Tim Cross • Maria D’Agostino • Dael Devenport • Daniel Delfino • Jackie Danner • Ric Davidge • Jed Dixon • Mary Dougan • Katie Dougherty • Craig Driver • Forrest Dunbar • Josh Durand • Kevin Durling • Rebecca Duryea • Janie Dusel • Josh Edge • Trevor Edmondson • Jerald Eiden • Margaret Evans • Garrett Evridge • Ruth Fahl • John Faunce • Jim Ferguson • Evalu Filitaula • Kevin Fimon • Mark Fineman • Sue Fison • Rob Fitch • Tim Fosket • Rick Fox • Amy Fredeen • Bob French • Neal Fried • Katie Gage • Moira Gallagher • Jason Gamache • Augustin H. Gamez • Melinda Gant • Nikki Giordano • Cathy Gleason • Dan Gleason • Penelope Goforth • Carol Gore • Delenora Grey • Andrew Halcro • Jerry Hansen • Barnie Harris • Bonnie Harris • Guy Harris • Hugh Harris • Sharon Harris • Julie Harvey • Abul Hassan • Paul Hatcher • John Havelock • Roger Haxby • Patti Higgins • Cleo Hill • Mark Hill • Brian Holmes • Dianne Holmes • Karin Holser • Genevieve Holubik • Kirk Huff • Elaine Hulse • Amanda Hults • Don Hunter • Jennifer Hutchens • Dany Hutchings • Rick Irwin • Marni Isaacs • Jon Issacs • Brooke Ivy • David Jadhon • Stormy Jarvis • Susan Jensen • Joan Diamond • John Johansen • Mio Johnson • Brett Jokela • Gary Jones • Greg Jones • Nicole Jones-Vogel • Aaron Jongenelen • Jeff Judd • Jody Karcz • Karen Dechman • Rosemary Karish • Barbara Karl • Timothy Kavanagh • Devin Kelly • Allen Kemplen • Holly Kent • Travis Khachatorian • TinaMarie Kile • Mark Kimmerer • Patricia Kinnunen • S.J. Klein • Susan Klein • Denise Knapp • Bob Kniefel • Tom Korosei • Jacquelyn Korpi • David Kranish • Radhika Krishna • Gil Kruschwitz • Michael Thurber • Janie Thurber • James Kubitz • Carl Kuhn • Will Kyzer • Frank Lahr • Carol Lalone • Leonard Lamb • Doug Lamkin • Mary G. Langdon • Jean Lapp • Carol and Tom Lawando • Van Le • Denis LeBlanc • Sharon Leon • Ed Leonetti • Steven Lind • Brian Lindamood • Teri Lindseth • Ellen Lockyer • Brian Looney • Ann Lorber • Dan Loring • Sue Lukens • Lauren MacVay • Evelyn Mamaloff • Jeff Manfull • Gloria Manni • Lonnie Mansell • Megan E. Marie • Sally Marinucci • Starr Marsett • William Marsh • Jordan Marshall • Susan Marshall • Erika McConnell • John McCool • Dana McCue • Greg “Mac” McDonald • Andree McLeod • T. McPherson • Curtis McQueen • Phillip Means • Susan Means • Vivian Mendenhall • Dana Menendez • Lea Merritt • Ray Metcalf • Selina Metoyer • Brian Metras • Judy Michael • Steve Miko • Joe Miller • Al Milspaugh • Bob Mintz • Dave Mitchell • Michael Moeglein • Rachel Molina-Lodoen • Samuel Moore • Boyd Morgenthaler • Stephanie Mormilo • Melissa Morse • David Mushovic • Alan Musy • Carel Nagata • Kristin Natwick • Harry Need • Leslie R. Need • Nikole Nelson • Tom Nelson • Mike Nero • Amy Newman • Helen Nienhueser • Katie Nolan • Claire Noll • Beth Nordlund • Cherie Northon • Chad Nugent • Aaron O’Quinn • Taryn Oleson • John Opinsky • Patty Orazietti • Tony Orazietti • Susan Paine • John Parrott • Ellen Parry Tyler • Robert Pawlowski • Nancy Pease • David Pelto • Teri Penn • Liz Perry • Bill Peters • Elaine Phillips • Bill Popp • David Post • Tim Potter • Janie Powell • Rashmi Prasad • Mark Premo • Dennis Prendeville • April Rabuck • Kyle Raese • Steve Rafuse • Carolyn Ramsey • Sandra Ramsey • Ann Rappoport • Pat Redmond • Carma Reed • Chris Rice • Cheryl Richardson • Lisa Rieger • Diana Rigg • Michelle Ritter • Peggy Robinson • Tyler Robinson • Mark Romick • Ron Doshier • Roselyn Cacy • Roy Rountree • Bart Rudolph • Joe Sanks • Jean Sauget • Jim Sawhill • Caitlin Saxton • Lori Schanche • Stephen Schell • Rob Schmidt • Janine Schoellhorn • Terry Schoenthal • Terry Schomtha • Calvin Schrage • Ryan Schryver • Shaun Debenham • Roger Shaw • Brian Shelton-Kelly • Philip Shepard • Robert Shipley • Scott Siebert • Bryan Silva • Rick Sinnott • Jasmin Smith • Jed Smith • Patrick Solano-Walkinshaw • Christine Sondej • Sou Souvanny • Mark Spencer • Kevin Spillers • Andre Spinelli • Brandon Spoerhase • Jon Spring • John Springsteen • Paul Stang • Jay Stange • James Starzec • Scott Stewart • Phil Steyer • Larry Stokes • Gregory Strike • Ryan Strong • Mark Sture • Laurel Stutzer • Monica Sullivan • Barbara Svarny-Carlson • Ryann Swalling • Charlee Taft • Kassandra Taggart • Tamas Deak • Mike Thalhauser • Scott Thomas • Bob Thompson • Hans Thompson • John Thurber • Michael Thurber • Mao Tosi • Fred Traber • Anneleise Tremont • Deanne Tuckerman • Jacob Tuckerman • Brad Turkington • Chris Turletes • Christian Ullman • George Vakalis • Kathryn Veltre • Beth Verrelli • Jim Vignola • Eric Visser • Paul Wackrow • Claire Waddoup • Brandon Walker • Terrell Walker • Zack Walker • Janet Wallace • Todd Wallace • Sharen Walsh • Barbara Ward • Robin Ward • Randy Warren • Jerry Weaver • Seth Weaver • John Weddleton • Victoria Weindel • John Weir • Cynthia Wentworth • Kim Wetzel • Gregg White • John Whitlock • Hilary Wick • Lance Wilber • Michelle Wilber • J.R. Wilcox • Piper Wildner • Jerry Winchester • Victoria Windel • Kristi Wood • Mark Worcester • Bryan Yackel • Jacqui Yeagle • Violet Yeaton • Connie Yoshimura • Holly Zaf • John Ziv • Shanna Zuspan (blank page) Planning Department Long-Range Planning Division P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6650 www.muni.org/planning