HomeMy WebLinkAboutWALLACE BROTHERS MOUNTAIN S-6555
DATE:
SUBDIVISION CASE REVIEW
STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION
November 9, 1982
SITE: 320 acres
CASE: S-6555 UPPER CHUGIAK SUBDIVISION
(revised plat)
Unsubdivided land and subdivided
land into 46 lots and 2 tracts
LAND USE: Undeveloped
SOILS: 63 test holes attached
TOPO:
Varies with an average
~lope of 37%.
VEGETATION: Alpine
ZONING: Unrestricted DENSITY BEFORE:
AFTER:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CLASSIFICATION: Alpine INTENSITY:
slope affected
SURROUNDING AREAS:
NORTH EAST SOUTH WEST
LAND USE:
Chugach
State Park
---Undeveloped .....
Ch ug a ch
State Park
ZONING:
................. Unrestricted .................
FINDINGS:
Staff has reviewed the revised plat and the submittal
appears, in general, to meet the R-10 zoning requirements
should they be applied to this property. The revised pla%
was submitted to staff at staff's request for conformance to
the R-10 'zoning requirements in relation to the alpine and
slope affected classification of the Comprehensive Plan for
Eagle River.
The plat generally conforms to the R-10 zoning requirements
with the exception of Lots 10, 11, 21, 22, 23, 40, and 43,
and it appears these lots can meet the strictest application
of the acreage and slope requirements with minor modifica-
tions or lot combinations. Therefore, staff is making a
favorable recommendation for the subdivision application
with conditions.
RECOMMENDATION: Vacation
Approval of the vacation subject to Assembly concurrence and
filing a suitable replat within 18 months.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation
Case No. S-6555
.Page 2
RECOMMENDATION: 'Variances
The major variance request is from the requirement for
public street dedications. The major concern staff had with
this proposal is the continued public access into ~ugach
State Park. However, with the redesign as proposed, it
grants a public use easement into traditionally used walking
trail that would allow the continued use for access into
Chugach State Park.
Staff would recommend granting approval of the variances to
the following sections of the Municipal Code:
21.80.015 - Dedication of Streets
21.80.045 - Cul-de-sacs exceeding 600 feet
21.80.080 - Providing two tiers of lots
21.80.085 - Residential blocks longer than 1320 feet
21.80.100 - Lot width to depth ratio of 3 to 1
21.80.115 - Ail lots fronting a publicly dedicated street
Because of the alpine environment o'f this particular piece
of property, the conventional subdivision requir~nents are
difficult to apply to a property of this nature and staff
would recommend that these variances be granted as they
would not nullify the intent of the Comprehensive Plan or
zoning ordinance. (Sec. 21.80.120
RECOMMENDATION: Plat
Staff would recommend approval of the subdivision subject to:
/
1. Resolving utility easements. J
2. Resolving drainage and drainage easements with Public
Works Engineering.
3. ResOlving al~ avalanche conditions that may affect these
lots and placing a note on the plat: "Prohibiting
buildings to be erected in any areas that may be
affected by avalanche/slide conditions."
4. Entering into a subdivision agreement to construct all
interior streets and the access street to rural stan-
dards from Eagle Vista Subdivision to the Upper Chugiak
Subdivision.
5. Providing creek maintenance easements where required.
6. Providing a soil sedimentation and erosion control plan.
7. Providing the Community Planning Department the ~b-p~'s~~
copy of the homeowners convenance and restrictions that
would address road maintenance, structure location
on the lots, septic system locations, and other standard
convenant and/or restrictions for subdivision development.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation
Case No. S-6555
· Page 3
8. Providing acceptable soils test for each lot to the
Department of Health which will meet their criteria for
septic system approval.
9. Resolving the use of the access road from this sub-
division back to Eagle Vista Subdivision. This
should specifically address the public's ability to use
this private easement to gain access into Chugach State
Park.
10. Resolving the switchback grade on Cornice Circle and the
street grade on Majestic Circle with Public Works
Engineering.
11. Resolving the road construction over the existing lake
with Public Works Engineering.
12. Resolving the lot size o~ the following lots: 1~, 11,
21, 22, 23, 40, and 43.~.~e lots will be required to
meet the R~10 zoning requirements.~_
This plat is the best designed plat for this property that -
has ever been before the Platting Board. The plat, with
conditions, will comply with the R-10 zoning requirement,
and the plat will be in general conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan for the Eagle River area. There have
been considerable concerns in the past by adjacent property
owners, the state, and the developer, and this plat appears
to address the majority of those concerns.
Carol Creek is protected by the tracting of the property
adjacent to that c~eek until further review can take place
on that land to ensure the protection of the water quality
for Carol Creek. Staff believes that with the tracting of
Tracts A and B, the water quality of Carol Creek will not be
appreciably affected by the development of this subdivision.
In general, it would be extremely desirable for the Platting
Board to make findings of fact for the granting of the
variances and findings of fact for the subdivision approval
and address all issues brought forth at the public hearing.
jtw3/npsa2
Chapter 21.15
PROCEDURES FOR OBTAINING VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USES,
SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND OTHER SPECIAL LAND USE PERMITS
Sections:
21.15.010
21.15.020
21.15.030
21.15.040
21.15,050
21.15,060
21.15.070
21.15.080
21.15,090
21.15.100
21.15.110
21.15.115
21,15,120
21.15.125
21.15.130
21.15,133
21.15.134
21.15.135
Procedures for Obtaining Variances.
Procedures for Obtaining a Special Flood Hazard
Permit.
Procedures for Obtaining a Conditional Use --
Appeal, Conditions Enforcement
Sign Permits.
Land Use Permits Required.
[.and Use Permit -- Application.
Mobile Home Parks -- Annual Permit Required.
Mobile Home Parks -- Annual Permit Application.
Mobil Home Park Permit ~ Continuation of Prior Law.
Procedure for Obtaining Subdivision Plat'Approval --
Vacations.
Preliminary Plat -- Application and Submission
Requirements.
Preliminary Plat -- Action.
Final Plat -- Filing Procedures, Submission
Requirements and Conditions.
Abbreviated Plat Procedure.
Vacations.
Street Name Alterations.
Commercial Tract Application and Submission Requir.ements
Fees.
21.15.010 Procedures For Obtaining Variances
A. Authorization. A variance from the provisions of
the zoning Or floodplain regulations (Chapters
21.35 through 21.50) may be granted by the Zon-
ing Board of Examiners and Appeals. A variance
from the provisions of the subdivision regula-
tions (Chapters 21.80 and 21.85) may be granted
by the Platting Board. Any variance g~;.anted
shall be the minimum variance that will make
possible a reasonable use of the land. building,
or structure equivalent to, but not exceeding,
the use of similar land or structures permitted
generally in the same zoning districts. A var-
iance from the floodplain regulations must be in '
accordance with Section 21.50.
B. Application. An application for a variance shall
be submitted on a form prepared by the Munici-
pality. A request for variance may be initiated
only by the property owner or his authorized
representative. The applicatio'n must state with
particularity the relief sought and must specify
the facts or circumstances that are aiieged to
show that the application meets the following
standards:
21-29
with respect to variances from the zoning
regulations:
a. special conditions exist which are pre-
culiar to the land, structure or building
involved.and which are not applicable to
other land, buildings or structures in the
same district; and
b. strict interpretation of the provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance would deprive the
applicant of rights commonly enjoyed
by other properties in the same district
under the terms of the Zoning Ordi-
nance; and
c. special conditions and circumstances
do not result from the actions of the
applicant and such conditions and cir-
cumstances'do not merely constitute
pecuniary hardship or inconvenience;
and
granting the variance would be in har-
mony witt~ the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance and not injurious to the neigtl-
borhood or otherwise detrimental to the
public welfare: and
e. granting the variance wilt not permit a
use that is not otherwise permitted in the
district in which the property lies: and
f. the variance granted is the rninimum var-
iance that will make possible a reason-
able use of the land, building or struc-
ture,
with resbect to variances to the subdivision
regulations:
a. there are special circumstances or con-
ditions affecting the property such that
the strict application of the provisions of
the subdivision regulations would clear-
ly be impractical, unreasonable or un-
desirable to the general public: and
b. the granting of the specific variance will
not be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to other property in the area
in which such property ia situated: and
c. Such variance will not have the effect of
nullifying the intent and purpose of the
subdivision regulations or the Compreo
hensive Plan of the Municipality; and
d, undue hardship would result from strict
compliance with specific provisions or
reduirementa of the subdivision regula-
tions. The applicant may supplement
the form with supporting documents.
Public hearing° The date shall be set for public
hearing on trte variance after the application for
such is received. Not less than 14 days before
the hearing, notice shall be pulSliahed in a news-
paper cf general circulation. The property for
which the variance ia sought shall be posted,
and due notice shall be mailed to parties of
interest. "Parties of interest" shelf be construed
to be real property owners of record on the
Municipal Assessor's records within a 500picot
periphery of the property for which a varianceis
sought, or trte owners ot the nearest 50 parcels
of land, whichever is the g~eater number of par-
ties. When a parcel for which a variance ia
sought lies within the boundary of an officially
recognized community council, the council
shall be duly notified at least ~4 days before the
public hearing.
Standards. Unless otherwise specified by Ordi-
nance, the standards to be applied to the con-
sideration of a variance request shall be aa set
forth in subsection B hereof,
Approval. The Board empowered to hear the
request for the variance shall conduct an inquiry
designed to find whether the standards forissu-
ance cf the variance have been met. The Board
must make general findings of fact sufficient to
support its decision as specified in subsection B
h~reot. A concurring vote of a maiorfty of the
fully constituted membership of the Board shall
be required to grant a variance, in granting any
variance each Board may prescribe conditions
and safeguards to assure conformity with the
purpose and intent of all relevant planning and
land use ordinances. Violation of any such con-
dition or safeguard when made a part of the'
terms of the variance shall be deemed an unlaw-
ful act and shall act to suspend the effect cf the
variance. Any variance granted shall become
null and void if the variance is not, exercised
within one year of the date it is granted or if any
structure of character of uae permitted by var-
lance is moved, altered or discontinued, ~
Appeal. An appeal from a decision of the Plat-
ting Board shall be brought in accordance w th
Sections 2~.30.0'~0~.100. An a~peal from a
decision of the Zoning Board of Examiners shall
be brought in accordance with Section 21.30.-
180. (Adapted from GAAB 21.05.080F and 21.10.~
0~0).
31,15o020 Procedures for Obtaining a Special
Flood Hazard Permit.
A. Any use, structure or activity listed in the ftood~
plain regulations as requiring a special flood
hazard permit is prohibited until the issuance of
such permit. Applications for special flood
hazard permits may be made to the official
administering the floodplain regulations on
forms furnished by the Municipality.
B. Any application for a special flood hazard per-
mit rnuat contain the following material:
1. Elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the
lowest floor (including basement) cf all
structures;
2. Elevation in relation to mean sea ~evel to
which any structure has been ftoodprooted;
3. Certification by a registered professional
engineer or architect that the floodprooting
methods for any nonresidential structure
meet the floodproofing criteria in Section
21,60,065(A); and
4. Oescription of the extent to wi~ich any
watercourse will be altered or relocated as a
result of proposed de~/elopment.
C, Upon receipt of an ap~31ication for a special
flood hazard permit, the official shatl transmit
21-30
E. Pursuant to Chapter 3.40 of this code, the
municipa. I Oirector of Community Planning may
promulgate administrative regulations establish-
lng uniform street address numbering technol-
ogy and procedures. Regulations adopted shall
require all street addresses to conform to
approved numbering technology and proce-
dures unless unusual or exceptional circum-
stances warrant utilization of alternate technol-
ogy or procedures. (Ag 81-176).
21.80.070 Pedestrian Walkways.
Rights-of-way for pedestrian walkways shatl be
required where necessary to obtain convenient
pedestrian circulation or to prevent the exposure of
pedestrians to hazardous traffic conditions. The
right-of-way shall be at least 10 feet wide. (Adapted
from GAA6 21.10.0406).
21.80.075 Easemente.
A. Location. Easements shall be provided along'
rear lot lines and also along side lot lines when
necessary for utilities. The minimum width shall
be 10 feet along the rear lot line or 20 feet for
adjoining lots and a minimum of five feet along
the side lot line, or a total'of 10 feet for adjoining
lots. The need for easements must be definitely
substantiated by utility companies before being
required by the Platting Authority. Utilities shall
be in public rights-of-way whenever possible.
6. Drainageway. Where a subdivision is traversed
by or adjacent to a river, stream, creek, impor-
tant surface watercourse, or drainage course,
dedicated stream maintenance easements shall
be provided, conforming substantially with the
line of such stream, and in such width as it is
necessary for the purposes of providing access
for the purpose of widening, deepening, slop-
ing, improving, maintaining, and protecting the
stream. Ail easements along a river, stream or
creek shall be a minimum of 25 feet wide along
each bank as measured from the outside edge of
the bed of the stream. In the case of water or
drainage courses less than five feet wide at ordi-
nary high water, such easements shall be a mini-
mum of 25 feet in width, centered on the thread
of the stream. (Adapted from GAA6 21,10.-
040C).
21.80.080 6locks -- Arrangement.
6locks shall be designed to provide two tiers of lots,
except where lots back onto an arterial street, natu-
ral feature or subdivision boundary.. (GAAB 21.
10.040D).
21.80.085 Blocks -- Length.
Residential blocks should generally not be less than
300 feet wide nor more than 1,320 feet ~ong. (GAA~
21.10.040~)).
21.80,090 Blocks -- Design.
Blocks shall be designed to minimize the effect of
deve{opment on the environment. Environmental
factors may be considered as justification by the
Platting Authority for variation from any of the
standards in Section 21.80.080 and .085 above.
(GAA6 21.10.040D).
21.80.09B Lots -- Width, Depth and Area.
Lot width, depth and area shall conform to the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, provided,
however, that the following minimum lot dimen-
sions shall apply in all cases except for those subdi-
visions or portions of subdivisions which are part of
or result from a zoning Conditional Use or Planned
Unit Development or as covered in Sections 21.80.150--
.175.
A. Lot width (corner lots) -- 50 feet, except that
corner common wall lots shall have minimum
width of 40 feet.
B. Lot depth -- 100 feet. (Adapted from GAAB
21.10.040E),
21.80J398
A.
Lots ~ Common Wall Lots.
A lot allowed for use only as a common wall lot
shall be designated on the plat as a common
wall lot in conjunction with one adjoining lot.
Each pair of designated common wall lots rhay
be considered as a single lot for the lot width
requirements of the subdivision regulations,
except as otherwise noted.
No plat shall be approved which contains any
designated common wall lot not paired with a
second designated lot. Any development of
designated common wall lots shall include at
least all lots fronting a street between two inter-
secting streets or contigious frontage on the
street of at least 300 feet. No desiganted com-
mon wall lot may be resubdivided except in
junction with its paired tot.
21.80.100 Lots -- Width Related to Length.
The depth of a lot shell not exceed three times the
width as measured at the front building line except
21-169
by variance or unless specifically otherwise pro-
vialed for in the zoning Ordinance. (Adapted from
GAA~ 21.10.040E).
Reserve strips. On privately held reserve strips,
controlling access to streets shall be prohibited.
(GAAB 21.10.040F, am AC 78-50).
21.80.108 Lets ~ Lot Lines.
Side lot lines shal. I attempt to be essentially at right
angles to straight streets and radial to curved
streets. (GAAB 21.10.040E).
21.80.110. Lots ~ Adlaoent to
Nonresidential Features.
Residential lots shall not front onto such features as
limited access highways, arterial streets or face
.such uses as shopping centers er industrial proper-.
ties. (GAA~ 21.10.040E),
21.80.115 Lots -- Frontage.
All lots shall front a publicly dedicated street except
in those cases where the subdivision is part of a
Planned Unit Developement. (GAAI~ 2'1.10.040E).
21.80o130 Public Lands ~ Provisions For.
PrOvisions shall be made for the'allocation of lands
for schools, parka, playgrounds, trails, open space.
areas and wetlands designated "preservation"
where an officially adopted park, trail, wetland, or
school plan exists, and where the said plan depicts
the approximate desired location and size of spe-
cific school site, park, trail, open space or wetland.
(GAAB 21.10.040G, am AC) 78-50, AC 82-335).
21.80.135 Public Lands ~ Designation as
Reserve Tract,
If a proposed plat encompasses an area designated
in an officially adopted parks or school plan as a
school park, playground or Open space, the Plat-
ting Authority may and if a proposed plat encore-
poses a wetland designated for preservation in the
Anchorage Wetlands Management Plan. the plat-
ting authority shall require that such land be desig-
nated as a reserve tract in the proposed plat. A
~ reportfromtheDepartmentofCommuntiyPlanmngli
-"'----"~ff~,p containing a letter from the Municipal oepart
21.80.120 Lots -, Environmental Deeigm n~entreaponsiblefortheimplementationcfthespe.
......... _~ .,._ _. ..... cific p an mentioned in Section 21 80 130 shall be
..... ,~ ........ . required to aid the Platting Authority in reaching its
development on tne enwronmen~, ,-nvlronmental £~ .
factors may be considered as justification for varia~ decmmn, such letter ind caring an intent to attempt
tJon from any of the standards of the subdivision
regulations, Subdivision design in the R-10 (Resi-
dential Alpine/Slope) District shall take into consid-
eration known areas susceptible to land slide, mud
and earth flow, talus development, soil creep, soli-
fluctlon or rock glaciation, avalanche chutes, run-
outs or wind blast. Each lot or tract zoned R-10 shall
include a building site which is not within such a
known susceptible area. The specific factors set
forth in Section 21.40o 135 of this Title shall be taken
into consideration in any development in the
District. (GAAS 21,10.040E, am AC 81-97).
21JI0.125 Screening and Reserve Slripe.
A. Screening strip. Planted strips may be required
to be placed next to incompatible features such
as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial
uses to screen the view from or provide a noise
or glare buffer for residential properties. Such
screens shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide, and
may be dedicated as additional roadway right~
of-way or aa an easement on the lots. Such
strips shall be planted prior to approval of final
plat or shall be included in the subdivision
agreement. Maintenance of easements shall be
the responsibility of the owners of lots contain-
lng the screen.
to purchase the land within the 15~month period
established in Section 21.80.145. Trails designated
on adopted plans shall be dedicated as trail ease-
ments. The alignment, width arid scope of use Of
such trail easements may be modified from that
depicted in the plan aa necessary to integrate trail
and subdivision design. (GAAB 21.10.040G. am AC
78o50).
21.80.140 Public Lands -- Special Features.
Special,, natural or man-made features of historical
significance in a proposed subdivision which en-
hance or have unique value to the community may
be set aside in a reserve tract for acquisition or
voluntarily dedicated to the public, (GAAI~ 21.
IO,04OG).
21.80.14S Public Lands -- Time for Acquisition.
If a parcel of land is designated as a reserved tract
for schools, parks, playgrounds, open spaces or
preservation areas, as outlined in Section 2~.80.~35,
or as a special feature as described in Section
2'L80.140, the Municipality or any other ~.gency,
either pubtic or private, shall have 15 months from
the time the plat is filed in which to purchase or
otherwise acquire the land for the purpose of prOvid-
ing public schools, public parks or playgrounds,
public open space, or tot preserving the land as a
Municipality of Anchorage
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 12, 1982
Jerry Weaver, Platting Officer and
Platting Board Members
Sandra Wicks, Assistant Municipal Attorney
Upper Chugiak Subdivision
Jerry, you have asked for some legal
the Platting Board with regard to the
plat which will go to public hearing
on November 17, 1982.
guidance for yourself and
Upper Chugiak Subdivision
before the Platting Board
Since platting of this property has a complex history and since
the composition of the Platting Board has recently changed con-
siderably, let me first provide some background before giving
my legal opinion. On May 30, 1979 the Platting Board approved a
preliminary plat with conditions for Upper Chugiak Subdivision
in Case S-5133. This decision was appealed to the Board of
Adjustment by the State of Alaska, Skyline Homowner's
Association, Inc. and Thillman Wallace. The Board of
Adjustment denied all three appeals on February 19, 1980. A
Superior Court appeal followed.
On August 3, 1982 the Superior Court reversed the actions of
the Platting Board and the Board of Adjustment and remanded
the matter for further hearings to be held without the par-
ticipation of Duncan McLeod as a Platting Board member because
of his conflict of interest.
The Court order should not be interpreted to require
a new hearing on the plat submitted in Case S-5133 if the peti-
tioner is no longer interested in pursuing that plat.
Any hearing under the remand order, however, must be on the
same plat submitted in Case S-5133. If the petitioner is not
interested in pursuing that plat, then the court case should be
dismissed as moot.
I understand that Mr. Wallace, the petitioner in.Case S-5133,
has submitted to the Department of Community Planning a plat
for the same property as in Case S-5133 and with the same name
as the plat in that case, Upper Chugiak Subdivision. You have
informed me, however, that in your capacity as Platting
Officer, you have made the determination that the plat sub-
mitted September 9, 1982(and revised in November 1982) is not the
same plat that was submitted in 1979. Therefore, you have
91-010 (5/78)
Jerry Weaver and Platting Board Members
November 12, 1982
Page 2
assigned it a new case number, S-6555, and have made your review
under the currently applicable provisions of Title 21 of the
Anchorage Municipal Code.
That is the correct procedure. The other reviewing departments
and the Platting Board should apply ~he current law to the new
plat. AS the original plat from Case S-5133 is not being con-
sidered at the November 17, 1982 Platting Board meeting, it is
not necessary to decide which law would apply were that plat
being considered.
SJW:ld
Municipality of Anchorage
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
November 17, 1982
Planning Department -.Jerry Weaver
FROM:
Health and Environmental Protection
SUBJECT: S-6555: Upper Chugiak Subdivision - Revised
This department has ~eviewed the revisio~ of Upper Chugiak
Subdivision(received~ovember 1.5, 1982)~
It is noted the developer has platted tracts in areas with high
water table and with slope that will not support on-site sewer
systems. This department concurs.
However, the department also notes, the soils test were made at
the time the water table was at its lowest; November 11, 1973
on the first report and October 11 thru 18, 1982 on the second
report.
We will require the developer monitor water table levels for
a period of time adequate to support on-site systems prior to
issuance of an onmsite system permit.
The department did recommend, in previous memos, certain drainage
setbacks. This should include a 100 foot setback in an area just
south of the east-west of Block 1 Swiss Alps Subdivision. No
septic systems will be allowed in this 100 foot setback.
Also, the 75 foot setback for cutbanks six(6)
must be addressed as septic ptorected area.
with the increased 10t size.
feet or greater
This is now feasible
Also, as stated in our memo of October 29, 1982 addressing those
lots and blocks which did not have soils test or tests that
incidate poor soils, such lots will require a soils test in an
area delineating 10,000 square feet per lot that is less than
25% slope to show it will support an on-site sewer system.
'~John~.~nn
--Environmental Specialist
JWL/ljw
91-010 (5/78)
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Municipality of Anchorage
MEMORANDUM
November 16, 1982
Jerry T. Weaver, Platting and Zoning
Hichael Mills, Physical Planning ~[&z/
Comments on Revised Plats
S6555 Upper Chugiak
The developer has substantially increased the size of
the lots from the previous plat in an attempt to meet
the density of the R-10 zoning, The R-lO zoning is
consistant with the Comprehensive Plan designation of
Alpine and Slope Affected.
Physical Planning will support the subdivision when
the few remaining lots are brought into substantial
conformance with R-10 district requirements.
MM/da
61-010 (4/76)
~Iovember 15. i982
Pouch 6-650
T~e BOard of Directors of the Chugiak Community Council held a special
work~hop on the evening of ?~ov. 15, [982 to discuss Case S-6555 (Upper
Chu~iak Subdivision). P~ofessional input by the developer and his eng-
ineer given at th~ meeting has substantially altered our undez~tanding
of this proposed subdivision. Based upon this workshop, the Board
wishes to retract ou~ earlier letter on this case hated Nov. 9, 1982.
In this meeting, the Board w~s able to evaluate the proposed remanded
plat as presented by the developer and his engineer, The 46 lots now in
this subdivision were demonstrated to conform subs~antiall¥ with B-lO
zoning stanhards'. The development would now exclude the m~jor portion
of the Carol Creek drainage. Based upon this new information, the
Chu~iak Board of Directors submits the following comments;
!. Comments recieved from Chugiak Fire Chief Caston indicates that emer-
gency access to the subdivision will not be a problem b~ed upon road
characteristics provided by the developer at this meeting. Response times
to the area will be approximately 35 minutes from Chugiak.
2. Based upon new information recieved, it appears that the subdivision
as amended complies with the requirements of the R-lC zoning class.
3. Strict adherence and control must be main~.ned so as to insure that
each lot within the pz~osed subdivision meets ail soils requirements for
"on-site" septic systems.
4. Obse~nce'of minimum "set back" lines is important on all potential
surface and subsurface ~ter channels so ~s to avoid possible contamination
of Carroll and Plre Creeks.
the subdivl.son (lncludi~ 1 mile of the access road) a~e now known to
?. ~ased upon information presented at the Nov. 13 meeting, the need for
cohnector roads within %h~ subdivision to improve access for emergency
vehicles is not critical.
Assuming that the information that the Board ~ecieved is correct as
represented, and ~ssuming that the above comments are satisfactorily
~dressed, the Board recommends approval of Case 2-6555°
Bespect£ully submitted,
~obert ~, Bennett
~ecreta~y, Chugiak Community Council
MUNICIPALITY OF A..CHORAGE
POUCH 6-650
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650
(907) 264-4111
05 1-56 1-06
SAUg DGNALD 0 ~ ·
CARCLINE K
SRA BOX 1581D
ANCH AK q~SO7
CASE: S-6555 Upper Chugiak Subdivision, Blocks ~-13 with 6 variances and vacetion.
PETITIONER: Klondike Alaska. Inc.
REQUEST: Resubdivide 11 lots, 2 tracts and an unsubdiv[ded portion of land into 78 lots, vecate (eliminate)
eg public right-of-way and easements shown on plat #74-154 Swiss Atps Subdivision and
variances from 21.80.015 requirement to dedicate streets, 21.80.045 cul-de-sacs exceeding 600
feet, 21.80,080 providing two tiers of lots within a block, 21.80.085 residential blocks exceeding
1.320 feet, 21.80.100 lot width to length ratio exceeding 3-1, 21.80.115 all lots required ~o front
publicly dedicated street.
TOTAL AREA: 320 acres
LOCATION: East of Eagle River Loop Road and north of Skyline Drive.
CURRENT LEGAL: The (E',~ NW'A). (W'/~ NE'/,), Section Thirty-two (32). Township Filteen (15} North, Range One
(1) West, Sewerd Meridian, in the Anchorage Recording Oislrict, Third Judicial District. State Ct
Alaska, and Swiss Alp Subdivision. Block 1, Lots 1-4; Block 2, Lots 1-7 and Tracts A and B, all
located in Section Thirty-two (32), Township Fifteen (15) North. Range One (1) West, Seward
Meridian, in the Anchorage Recording Dislrict. Third Judicial District, State of Alaska.
CHUGIAK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AND EAGLE RIVER COMMUNITY COUNCIL
The Municipality of Anchorage Platting Board will ho'Id a public hearing concerning this
matter at 7:30 p.m. November17,1982 in the multi-purpose room at Chugiak High School,
Chugiek, Alaska.
There will be the only public hearing before the Platting Board on this petition and you are
invited to appear and voice your opinion.
If you would like to comment on the propo, sed petition, this form may be used for your
convenience. Mailing eddress: Munici'pal Plapning Department, Pouch 6-650, Anchorage,
Alaska 99502-0650.
Further information is available from the Planning Department, telephone 264-4267.
ADDRESS:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
ITS:
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
POUCH 6-660
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650
(907) 264-4111
EL [ZAS~TH
SR 387
~AGLE RiVE~ AK
~577
The Municipality of Anchorage Platting Soard will hold a public hearing concerning this
matter at 7:30 p.m. November17,1982 in the multi-purpose room at Chugiak High School,
Chugiak, Alaska.
There will be the only public hearing before the Platting Soard on this petition and you are
invited to appear and voice your opinion.
If you would like to comment on the proposed petition, this form may be used for your
convenience, Mailing address: Municipal Planning Department, Pouch 6-650, Anchorage,
Alaska 99602-0650.
Further information is available from the Planning Department, telephone 264-4267.
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
POUCH 6-650
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650
(907) 264-4111
O50-!.3l-7.2
PC COX 30~g
H~MER
DEPARTMENT OF
h' W 1 6 1982
COM~ ~'~Y PLANNING
CASE: S-6555 Upper Chugiak Subdivision, Slocks 1-13 with 5 variances and vacation.
PETITIONER: ' Klondike Alaska, Iht,
REQUEST: Resubdlvide 11 lots, 2 tracts and an unsubd[vided portion of land into 78 lois, vacate (eliminate)
all public right-of-way and easements shown on plat #74-154 Swiss Alps S~bdivision and
variances from 21.80,015 requirement to dedicate streets. 21.80.045 cul-de-sacs exceeding 600
feet, 21.80,080 groviding two tiers of lots within a block, 21.80.085 residential biocks exceeding
1.32g feet, 51.80.100 lot width to length ratio exceeding 3-I, 21.80.115 all lots required to front
publicly dedicated street.
TOTAL AREA: 320 acres
LOCATION: Easl of Eagle River LOOp Road and north of Skyline Orive.
CURRENT LEGAL: The (E~ NW%), (W',~ NE~/,), Section Thirty-~wo (32). Township F~fteen (15) North, Range One
( 1 ) west· Seward Meridian· in Ibc Anchorage Recording District, Third Judicial Oistrict~ State of
Alaska, and Swiss Alp Subdivision, SIock 1, Lots 1-4: Slook 2, Lots I-7 and Tracts A and S. all
located in Section Thirty-two (33). Townsbi[0 Filteen (15) North. Range One (1) West, Seward
Meridian. i~ the Anchorage Recording District, Third Judicial District, State of Alaska.
CHUGIAK COMMUNITY COUNCIL ANO F~GLE RIVER COMMUNITY COUNCIL
The Municipality of Anchorage Platting Board will hold a public hearing concerning this
matterat7:30p.m. November17,1982 inthemutti-purposeroomatChugia~(HighSchool,
Chugiak, Alaska.
There will be the only public hearing before the Platting Board on this petition and you are
invited to appear and voice your opinion.
If you would like to comment on the proposed petition, this form may be used for your
convenience. Mailing address: Municipal Planning Department, Pouch 6~650, Anchorage,
Alaska 99502-0650.
Further information is available from the Planning Department, telephone 264-4267,
ADDRESS:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
COMMENTS:
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
POUCH 6-650
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650
(907) 264-4111
CASE: S-6555 Upper ChugiaR SuPdlviaIon, Blocks 1-13 wiB1 6 variances and vacation.
PETITIONER: KIondlRe Alaska, Inc,
REQU EST: Resubdlvlde 11 rots, 2 Itacts and an unsu bdlvided per tloll of rend into 78 lots, vaca[e (eliml nale}
The Municipality of Anchorage Platting Board will hold a public hearing concerning this
matterat7:30p.m. November17,1982 [nthemulti-purposeroomatChugiakHigh$chool,
Chugiak, Alaska.
There will be the only public hearing before the Platting Board on this petition and you are
invited ~;o appear and voice your opinion.
If you would like to oomment on tho proposed petition, this form may be used for your
convenience. Mailing address: Municipal Planaing Department, Pouch 6-650, Anchorage,
Alaska 99502-g850,
Further information is available from the Planning Department, telephone 264-4267.
NAME:
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
POUCH 6-650
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650
(907) 264-4111
FAUST
HGHER
CABE: E-6555 Upper Chugiak Suririivision, Blocks 1-13 with 6 variances and vacation.
PETITIONER: KIonriike Alaska, Inc.
REQUEST: Resubdivide 11 lots, 2 tracts and an unsubdivided portion of lanriinto 78 lots. vacate (eliminate)
all public ~'ight-of-way and easernetlts show~l On ~31a{ ~74-154 Swiss Alps Subriivision and
TOTALAREA;
LOCATION:
CURRBNTLEGAL;
The Municipality of Anchorage Platting Board will hold a public hearing concerning this
matterat7:30p.m. November17,1982 inthemulti-purposeroomatChugiakHighSchool,
Chugiak, Alaska.
There will be the only public hearing before the Platting Board on this petition and you are
invited to appear and voice your opinion.
If you would like to comment on the proposed petition, this form may be used for your
convenience. Mailing address: Municipal Planning Department.Pouch 6-650, Anchorage,
Alaska 99502-0650.
Further information is available from tt~e Planning Department, telephone 264-4267.
NAME:
AODRESS:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
COMMENTS:
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
POUCH 6-650
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650
(907) 264-4111
JCHNSCN FC6T C
RCSEH~RY
EAGLE R[VE~ AK ~577
The Municipality of Anchorage Platting Board will hold a public hearing concerning this
matteratT:30p.m. November17,1982 inthemulti-purposeroomatChugiakHighSchool,
Chugiak, Alaska.
There will be the only public hearing before the Platting Board on this petition and you are
invited to appear and voice your opinion.
If you would like to comment on the proposed petition, this form may be used for your
convenience. Mailing address: Municipal p!anning Department, Pouch 6-650, Anchorage1
Alaska 99502-0650.
Further information is available from the Planning Department, telephone 264-4267.
NAME;
AOORE$$'.
LEGAl, DESCRIPTION:
COMMENTS:
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
POUCH 6-650
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650
(907) 264-4111
THE g-J CCRP
· -PO' 'EX 456
EAGLE RIVER
AK ~9577
CASE: E-6555 Upper Chugiak Suhdivision, Blocks 1-13 with 6 variances and vacation1.
PETITIONER: Klondike Alaska, thc,
REQUEST; Resubdivide 11 lois, 2 tracts and an un8ubdivided portion of lalld into 78 lots, vacate (eliminate)
alt public right-of-way and easements shown on plat #74-154 Swiss Alps Subdivision and
variances from 21.3g.015 requirement to dedicate streets, 21.80.043 cul-de-sacs exceeding 60g
feet. 21.80.080 providing two tiers of lots within a block, 21.30.085 residential blocks exceeding
1,320 feet, 21.80.100 lot width to length ratio exceeding 3-1.21.80.115 all lots required to front
publicly dedicated street.
320 acres
East of Eagle River Loop Road and nor[h of Skyline Drive,
The (E~/z NWV,), (W½ NE~). Section Thirty-two (32), Township Pif{~en (15) Norlh. Range One
{1) West, Seward Meridian, in the Anchorage Recording 13ist dct, Third Judicial I~lstrJct, State of
Alaska, and Swiss Alp Su bdlvision, Block 1. LOIS 1-4: Block 2, Lots 1-T and Tracts A and S, all
located in Section Thlr[y-lwo (32), Townehip Fifteen (15) North, Range One (1) West, Seward
Meridian, in the Anchorage Recording District, Third Judicial Bistrict. State of Alaska.
CHUGIAK COMMUNITY COUNCIL ANO EAGLE RIVER COMMUNITY COUNCIL
TOTAL AREA:
LOCATION:
CURRENT LEGAL;
The Municipality of Anchorage Platting Board will hold a public hearing concerning this
matterat7:30p.m. November17,1982 inthernutti-purposeroornatChugiakHighSchool,
Chugiak, Alaska.
There will be the only public hearing before the Platting Board on this petition and you are
invited to appear and voice your opinion.
If you would like to comment on' the propc ! petition, this form may be used for your
Convenience. Mailing address: Municipal PI~ ~ng Department, Pouch 6-650, Anchorage,
Alaska 99502-0650.
Further information is available from the Pis ,rog Department, telephone 264-4267.
NAME;
ADDRESS: ~.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
P. O. Box 2994
Homer, Alaska 99603
October 16, 1982
RECEIVED
Tony Knowles, Mayor
Municipality of Anchorage
Hill Building
Anchorage, Alaska 99501~
Dear Tony:
We regret having to bother you about a problem in Eaale River,
but since it involves a serious precedent concerning~hillside
development and since you are familiar with itjwe feel compelled
to call it to your attention with hopes that your guidance of
the planning staff and Platting Board will bring about a reasonable
resolution to a situation that has festered for 9 years.
Once again Till Wallace is attempting to g~in approval of the
Swiss Alp (now called Upper Chugiak) Subdivision, and again
most of the lots are entirely too small for the fragile area he
is planning to.develop. This subdivision was first presented
in 1973, and this is the fifth time it is being'considered. As
you know, the case involves considerable acrimony-and has spawned
four law suits, two of which involved our homeowner's association
and the ~tate against the Municipality. We prevailed in all cases
and just 2 months ago filed for attorney's fees for the latest
decision involving conflict of interest by a Platting Board
member.
As you remember, we took you up to the proposed subdivision when
you were on the Assembly to reveal why this steep 320-acre
parcel above timberline could not support the density envisioned._
In 1976 the Assembly overturned the Platting Board's approval
of Swiss Alp and directed that the minimum lot size be 5 acres,
which conforms to surrounding areas below this site which are
zoned R-8. Dave Rose also correctly stated that'the ~undamental
reason for the controversy was because the land had never been
zoned. Wallace ignored the minimum lot size and other
stipulations made by the Assembly and later resubmitted a similar
plat with a different name (Upper Chugiak). The legal staff
construed that since it was a "new" plat the former conditions
required by the Assembly no longer applied.
The current plat, wh~ch'i's the same as the last one we went to
court over, has 78 lots, most of .which range between 1 and 2
acres. Although the Eagle River Comprehensive Plan and the
Slope and Alpine Development Ordinance have been enacted since
submission of the first Upper Chugiak plat, this land is still
unzoned. Therefore, no reasonable minimum lot size exists, and
the p~nning staff may again recommend approval subject to con-
ditions. Minimum lot size is critical in this terrain, and
P~age 2
approval for a subdivision should be granted only after additional
soils test, protection of Carol Creek, and other conditions
have been met. Obviously this matter should be laid to rest, but
in the past Wallace has had considerable sympathy for his "heroic'~
(as Don Smith put it) efforts to get his way by repeatedly
bringing essentially the same plat back again. Sure~y a developer
should not be rewarded for such recalcitrance. ,Unfortunately
some individuals in the Municipality also have taken criticism
· and court rebukes regarding this ca'se personally, which has
caused animosity towards Skyline Homeowner's Association.
Upper Chugiak is. scheduled before the Platting Board on November
17, and if the staff recommends denial with specific minimum
lot sizes and other safeguards, the subdivider will finally be .
forced to accede to the conditions for an acceptable plat. From
the very onset of this dispute the issue has not been whether
Mr. Wallace .has a right to develop his land, but rather how
it is done.
We surely would appreciate your looking into this case and providing
direction to your staff. 'Chip Dennerlein was co-plaintiff for the
State with us and is thoroughly familiar with the matter. Hopefully
with proper unequivocal direction this serious dispute can come'to
an end.
We both still have a house and other proper~y in Eagle River and
remain much concerned with development in.Anchorage's sensitive
watershed areas. We certainly are heartened by the needed change
in style and substance of your administration. Hope to see you
in Homer sometime.
Very sincerely,
Edgar Bailey
Nina Faust
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
November 17, 1982
Planning Department - Jerry Weaver
FROM:
Health and Environmental Protection
SUBJECT: S-6555: Upper Chugiak Subdivision - Revised
This department has reviewed the revision of Upper Chugiak
Subdivision(received November 15, 1982).
It is noted the developer has platted tracts in areas with high
water table and with slope that will not support on-site sewer
systems. This department concurs.
However, the department also notes, the soils test were made at
the time the water table was at its lowest; November 11, 1973
on the first report and October 11 thru 18, 1982 on the second
report.
We will require the developer monitor water table levels for
a period of time adequate to support on-site systems prior to
issuance of an on-site system permit.
The department did recommend, in previous memos, certain drainage
setbacks. This should include a 100 foot setback in an area just
south of the east-west of Block 1 Swiss Alps Subdivision. No
septic systems will be allowed in this 100 foot setback.
Also, the 75 foot setback for cutbanks six(6) feet or graater
must be addressed as septic ptorected area. This is now feasible
with the increased lot size.
Also, as stated in our memo of October 29, 1982 addressing those
lots and blocks which did not have soils test or tests that
incidate poor soils, such lots will require a soils test in an
area delineating 10,000 square feet per lot that is less than
25% slope to show it will support an on-site sewer system.
John W. Lynn
Environmental Specialist
JWL/ljw
91-010 (5/78)
/ ' n clpallaty o[ Anchol age
MEMOHANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
October 29, 1982
Planning Department - Jerry Weaver
Health and Environmental Protection
S-6555: Upper Chugiak Subdivision
The department will address slopes along Carrel Creek as the first
concern. Lots in Block 11 have slopes that are not suitable for
on-site sewer systems. The lots bordering Carrel Creek range in
slope from 26% to 64% and this slope percentage will not support
on-site sewer systems and must be traced.
The department recommends Block 11 be tract in this manner;
incorporate Lots 4, 5, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 Block 11 into a tracted.
The next concern is the water table in Block 12. This block is
forming a subsurface basin and must be addressed as saturated soil.
With the saturated soils and slope conditions of 36% to 45% to
Carrel Creek, the department recommends all of Block 12 be a tract.
Also, the department understands that the artesian well, located in
the south portion of Block 12, is to be used for public water. This
will call for a water well protection radii of 200 feel and will
encumber a good portion of Lot 1 Block 12.
The department is aware of a drainage between Block 12 and the
Swiss Alp Block 1 containing four(4) lots. The natural drainage
flows directly to Carrol Creek an~ this drainlng must have the same
100 foot sewer protection setback as a creek.
Addressing Block 1 Lots 1 thru 8: Lot 1 has a water table at five(5)
feet. Lot 2 does not have a soils log. Lot 3 soils test shows a
percolation rate of 80 minutes/inch, which will not support an
on-site sewer system. Lots 4 and 5 do not have a soils test. Lot 6
soils test indicates a rating of GP/ GM percolation of 18 minutes/inch.
Lot 7 does not have a soils test. Lot 8 has a water table at
ten(10) feet.
The deparhnent reconm~ends Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 be tested and submit
additional soils test and delineate 10,000 square feet less than
25% slope that will support on-site sewer systems per lot and slope
setback for Lots 6, 7 and 8. The setback will use a good portion of
Lot 7, therefore, combining Lots 7 and 8 will be recommended.
Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 Block 2 will need to be tracted.
91 010(5/78)
Planning Department
October 29, 1982
Page Two
Ail other lots and blocks that do not have soils test will require
a soils test and an area delineating 10,000 square feet per lot
that is less than 25% slope that will support on-site sewer systems.
Also, any lot having a six{6) foot cutbank or greater must have
75 foot setback from the cutbank, if on-site sewer systems are proposed
for said lot.
John W. Lynn
Environmental Specialist
JWL/ljw
May 14, 1979
Don Alspach - Planning
John Lynn, Environmental Specialist,
Upper Chugach Subdivision (Proposed)
DHEP
This Department has reviewed opinions on Subject and finds no
information to intelligently analyze the possibility of subdividing
this area based on a normal process regarding the safety and
assurance of no possible contamination to Carroll Creek°
So, let's look at facts on hand. We know there are percable
materials widespread in the 127 acres. We are also aware of
outcroppings and shallow bedrock, with traces of high water table
with slopes greater than 25% which are not usable for on-site septic
systems.
The above facts suggest to the Department that on-site septic systems
are feasible, but each lot, regardless of its size - whether 10 Acres
or ~ Acre lot, must have a tailored sub-surface investigation on
each of these lots to determine the ability to support on-site
septic. Let us not forget, as we have discussed in the past, the
possibility of a treatment plant to handle domestic wastes in areas
that cannot support septic systems or any suspicion of same.
Obviously, con, unity water is an asset to this project and will
contribute greatly toward the efficiency of septic systems, without
threat of contamination of individual water wells.
Further, Density is a very important factor for this area.
At this time, the Department cannot support 8-Plex on lots with
this limited information. A Single Family dwelling is more in line
for any lot prior to additional engineering and subsequent re-design
of phases of this subdivision.
John w. Lynn
Environmental Specialist
JWL:lmp II~6
:~UNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE~
Department of .Health ~ Environmental rrotection
Environmental Health Division
Case Review Worksheet
S-6555 September 27, 1982 October' 29, 1982
Subdivision or Project Title:
Upper'Chugiak Subdivision - Revised Topography and Test Holes
( ) Public water available ( ) Public sewer available
( ) Community water available
Comments:
Note: See case ~S-5133