CityView Portal
| We are sorry but no more comments are being taken for this case |
| Return to CityView Portal |
| Submitted comments will appear below after staff approval. | |
|---|---|
| Kyle Kelley | 5/8/2023 10:14:03 AM |
| From a public safety perspective, I'm concerned with the loss of parking that will occur with the subdividing of this track and the future development of staff housing. During ski season and with significant events like Forest Fair, the parking lots will become full and overflow into the residential streets: particularly Loveland, Alyeska View, and Garmisch. The roads get narrowed down to one lane making it difficult for vehicles, the school bus, and emergency to pass through the area unimpeded. This winter, we had an incident where the school bus took four maneuvers to turn left from Loveland to Alyeska View because the overflow parking restricted their ability to turn. The roads in the winter become narrow because of snow storage on the shoulders so it is common practice for residents to not park on the roads to avoid restricting traffic, emergency response, walkers, and snow removal operations. Pictures and video can be provided to show the issues related to the overflow parking. If this tract is approved to be subdivided and the staff housing is built then the Girdwood Service Area requests that Alyeska be required to build additional parking to accommodate the space lost by this development, plus even more spaces for future growth of users to the mountain. We currently have an open request with Alyeska to improve the current parking availability issues by directing traffic and parking space assignments during busy weekends and large events to maximize space efficiency. Similar to what the state fair does for parking with staff directing customers to their parking spot to maximize spacing. Currently, a portion of the third-tier parking area has become a boneyard of old equipment that is occupying valuable parking space. Removal of that equipment will instantly open up parking to customers. I believe Alyeska's ownership and management are motivated by a goal to increase the number of skiers/boarders visiting the mountain for the sustainability of their winter business. Taking away valuable customer parking will not help with that goal. Removing parking only increases the burden on the resident taxpayers and restricts essential vital services like emergency response and street maintenance. Good planning and efficient resort operations will avoid and resolve these parking problems. | |
| Randall Packard | 5/5/2023 4:50:30 PM |
| I live at 126 Megeve Road year round. I face the middle and upper parking lots. It should be noted and considered in any proposal or plan how to address the parking situation. The lots are full during the ski season (Fri, Sat and Sun) and during special events. The overflow parking ends up on the narrowly plowed streets of surrounding neighborhoods, making driving around difficult and a concern for emergency vehicles. Is parking on both sides of Alyeska hoghway being considered to alleviate the parking shortage the will result? Also of note is the avalanche zones the proposed structures will be in. I know this was a concern when I purchased my home (which ended up being just feet outside of the avalanche zone). I am hoping these considerations and others will be addressed in an open and interactive forum in the future. Thank you. | |
| Emily Lewis | 5/5/2023 8:01:23 AM |
| I'm very concerned by the idea of building permanent structures in an area known to be prone to significant avalanches. While I laud Alyeska's focus on developing housing to meet the needs of their staff, this is clearly not an appropriate place to put it. Alyeska has a responsibility to not knowingly put people on their property in harm's way. Choosing to develop land within an avalanche path goes against that interest. An additional risk to public safety lies in the loss of Alyeska's already limited parking space. The existing lots quickly fill to capacity every weekend throughout ski season. Vehicles then start to line our residential streets, at times making it difficult, if not impossible, for emergency response vehicles to pass. I encourage Alyeska to continue to pursue the development of employee housing, but to do so in a place that won't risk the safety of those who live and work in our community. | |
| Roger Holmes | 5/4/2023 8:00:30 PM |
| I bought the lot at the corner of Alyeska View and Megeve as well as the adjacent cabin (126 Megeve) in 1989. These properties are directly across the street from the planned development. My wife and I have owned both lots continuously since then (although the cabin is now owned by our son, Randall Packard.) As such I have been in residence across the street from the planned development weekly for almost 34 years. The location of the proposed development is two over flow parking lots for the resort. On weekends and holidays during the ski season both lots are full and skiers park along Alyeska View, Megeve and Loveland, often two abreast. Often there is little or no room for a fire truck to navigate these areas. None of these roads were designed for this type of parking in the summer with full lane widths. The roadways are reduced even further in the winter. Should this development be approved, the MOA should retain the right in perpetuity to restrict the # of skier daily passes issued by the resort to eliminate the on street parking and mitigate this potential fire and personal safety hazard. Or the resort should be required to provide additional off site parking and transportation to the hill; and the MOA should ban this street parking by the skiers. Further, the development is in the avalanche zone directly below Maxes Mountain. Having been on the lift when an avalanche came down that mountain, I watched it pick up a D9 Cat like a pin ball and surf it down the mountain. Building multi units directly in the path of an avalanche seemingly makes little planning sense. If this development is being built, and is being marketed to the public, the development must come with a clear warning to potential buyers of the avalanche hazard they face. | |
| Bob Kaufman | 5/4/2023 6:52:19 PM |
| We live immediately across the street from this proposed development. Several years ago, our son had a bad accident. We called an ambulance. Fortunately, the ambulance was able to make it to our house quickly. Ever since, we have looked at the parking situation in our neighborhood through a lens of public safety. Currently, on busy days, parked cars spill out of the parking lot, lining both sides of Loveland and other side streets. The congestion chokes traffic flow in our whole area, sometimes for extended periods. Given that the resort’s existing parking lot is insufficient, I can only imagine the problems we will face if the resort removes dozens of spots while adding new residential density. Unsafe situations will be more frequent and concerning. I’m generally in favor of private property rights. But, as a business owner myself, I’m also in favor of the idea that we have a responsibility to others in the communities in which we operate and which support us. A minimum condition that should be met prior to granting this subdivision is a plan to replace parking that is lost to the development, to add on top of that new parking for the development itself, and to ensure there is also adequate parking for new markets the resort is pursuing, such as Ikon passholders. I believe the Resort’s intention is to be a good neighbor. However, Alaska’s history shows that out-of-state business owners may not always fully grasp the local concerns and the potential impact of their decisions on the community. Locals have a right to voice their concerns, and the Muni has a responsibility not just to advocate for those concerns but to insist upon long-term solutions that meet the needs of both the local community and the Resort. | |
| Will Brennan | 5/3/2023 6:12:14 AM |
| I want to express my concern for this proposed housing development. The proposed housing would be placed within an area that the Municipality has recognized as lying within an avalanche hazard zone with a return interval as frequently as every 30 years. This would be the closest housing in Girdwood to the Municipality’s loosely defined “red zone” for avalanche hazard. This would put the residents of the proposed housing at risk and would significantly complicate Alyeska’s avalanche mitigation efforts. When the avalanche hazard above this proposed development reaches extreme levels the resort’s own snow safety program takes great care to clear the area of any personnel and ensure that the few remaining employees are accounted for safely indoors. In the future this type of site control during extreme avalanche conditions would be exceedingly difficult to achieve with dozens of residents living within the premises typically cleared. Alyeska would ultimately be working against its own interest in providing public and guest safety by pursuing its other (admirable) interest in providing expanded employee housing in this location. I certainly hope that Alyeska management does not give short shrift to the avalanche hazard problem that they’ve been entrusted with in any of its development or operational decisions. Of equal concern to me is the Alyeska guest parking that this proposed development would displace. While as presented at the recent Girdwood Land Use Committee hearing it is unclear the total development footprint, it appears likely that dozens of parking spaces would be sacrificed if the development proceeds. These parking spaces are consistently filled every weekend, and it is not uncommon for all resort parking to be spoken for and for overflow parking to reach into the neighborhood. Cars of resort guests parking along narrow neighborhood streets hampers the Municipality’s snow removal efforts, presents emergency services complications, and negatively impacts the affected residents. The resort has seen record skier visits in recent years, a trend that I imagine resort management hopes continues. In light of the current parking capacity and projected future need, Alyeska cannot reasonably remove any of its current parking if it hopes to be a respectful neighbor to the residents of Girdwood. I am supportive of Alyeska developing more housing units, particularly if targeted for resident employees. However I firmly believe that there are other resort lands more suitable for this purpose, and I hope that the municipality denies this short plat request. | |
| Larry Daniels | 4/25/2023 8:38:39 PM |
| Developing overnight accommodations in a moderate avalanche zone is a dangerous practice as residents, even when warned of high hazardous conditions, will not necessarily evacuate. This was the case in the Eagle River avalanche just over one year ago. The municipality of Anchorage spent substantial public funds on mitigating that disaster. It is not good public policy to create similar situation for the public when alternatives exist. If the plat is approved, a note to the plat, similar to Plat 2005-101 which is a nearby parcel. The note is to notice the public of the Avalanche Mapping. | |
| John Gallup | 4/18/2023 8:19:18 PM |
| I am stunned to discover that anyone would seek to develop residences and endanger the lives of their residents by building in a known avalanche runout zone. There is a really good reason there are no other permanent structures here - safety. Another flaw in this plan is the loss of parking for skiers. Alyeska is not a destination resort: it is Anchorage’s day ski area. With no mass transit available, customers must drive and park. Subdivision roads are already blocked by overflow parking on peak days, and the loss of parking will exacerbate this, making fire and ambulance access difficult during those times. Pomeroy has a lot of raw land which is not in avalanche zones and not currently needed for parking. Many phases of development can occur in these areas in total safety. | |
| Eeva Latosuo | 4/18/2023 11:37:40 AM |
| Building permanent structures in areas exposed to avalanche terrain involves tradeoffs between avalanche risk and development. Pressure to build more housing in the growing population centers pushes the development further into the mountainous areas in Alaska. The lack of zoning gives room to expand the market into areas with elevated avalanche hazard potential. Without clear regulations in place, real estate developers and their clients can ignore the poorly understood risk of large avalanches. However, projects in avalanche prone areas can lead to increased liability for developers since Mother Nature does not care about projects when avalanche conditions become hazardous. Furthermore, large avalanche events can have return periods of 50-100 years, and this time scale challenges people’s perceptions and motivation to engage in any kind of prevention measures. The Municipality of Anchorage, including Girdwood, does not have avalanche zoning; avalanche zoning is not a widespread practice in the United States. Avalanche hazard zoning can classify parcels into low, moderate, and severe hazard zones. Zoning is based on avalanche mapping and analysis of historical avalanche events in the area. Land development should be restricted or prohibited in areas that have moderate or severe avalanche risk to minimize unwanted and preventable outcomes. The avalanche paths above Alyeska Daylodge parking areas have been mapped to be in blue or red zones according to Municipality's avalanche hazard mapping. A "Blue" or moderate hazard zone is defined as an area where avalanches are less frequent (more than 30 year average return period) yet occupied structures are recommended in blue zones only if the structures are designed to withstand the anticipated avalanche loads. Critical structures such as hospitals, schools and emergency response facilities should not be built within blue zones. Developing in blue zones could proceed with certain restrictions and risk mitigation techniques. These include careful location planning, reinforcement and design of structures, and use of engineered avalanche path modifications. These practices can increase building costs by 60%. Operational measures also require developing risk assessment procedures and evacuation plans to support the response in case of an avalanche incident. Two questions remain: 1. Is the Municipality of Anchorage ready to discuss avalanche hazard zoning within its boundaries to clarify the best practices for all? 2. Is Pomeroy willing to address sound development requirements when planning for the necessary staff housing? Eeva Latosuo Associate Professor of Outdoor Studies, Alaska Pacific University | |
| Brooke Edwards | 4/18/2023 9:15:05 AM |
| The snow safety director informed management of the historical avalanches that have hit this exact spot and he refused to sign off on the project as it will endanger people’s lives. He was then fired. As an avalanche professional and a Concerned Girdwood citizen, building domestic structures in an avalanche path is gross negligence and will ultimately cause the loss of lives. | |
| Dylan | 4/18/2023 8:50:53 AM |
| Management at Alyeska has been on a roll with poor decisions, specifically around PR and safety. Building in an avalanche path and firing those who speak out against it demonstrates serious negligence. | |
| Brooke Lavender | 4/18/2023 8:34:42 AM |
| To whom it may concern: Building in an avalanche zone is irresponsible and negligent. I see and honor what the pomeroys are trying to do-provide more housing. What they lack is oversight. If they knew the community well, they’d know the many people who were in the day lodge when there was an avalanche that hit the day lodge. Given the fact girdwood is pretty much all existing in the 100 year flood plan zone, I think it’s probably time to re-examine the land here for developments and housing before we build in unsafe places like this. I know the exhausted options, and hate to provide negative comment on what I see as a good effort toward multi-use housing… but this misses the mark. I hope Alyeska and the Pomeroy’s continue to work hard to put housing in a safe and responsible area. Kindly, Brooke Lavender | |
| Brian Dodd | 4/17/2023 9:04:34 PM |
| I do not think that building housing or permanent structures in general is a good idea in an avalanche path. Gravity and mother nature have had there way with every building and lift that has been built in a slide path in this area. Numerous chairlifts, and building have been hit. Alyeska does need more housing but breaking up this parcel for any permanent structure is a bad idea. | |
| Annika Meehleis | 4/17/2023 6:33:52 PM |
| The proposed building site is a known avalanche area which right away should discourage this proposal. It is a known fact that the snow safety director, Adam Smith was fired after speaking out against the proposal. As a resident of Girdwood for over 20 years, who lives next to the day lodge back exit out to Alyeska View, I can tell you that there already is not enough parking. On busy resort days vehicles are parked up and down the streets which is unsafe for the residents and visitors in the community. Another concerning factor in this proposal is that the condos will only be available to executive Pomeroy employees or visiting staff from outside of Alaska. Girdwood already is in a housing crisis and building these condos will only add to the problem and show the community of Girdwood that once again the owners of the resort have little intention of working with the people in this small community. | |
| Nick D'Alessio | 4/17/2023 4:36:34 PM |
| This proposal is within a large avalanche path and should not be used for structures, especially housing. Parking for the ski resort is already maxed out on busy days. They are moving forward with this proposal without authorization from the snow-safety director.. who was then fired after they announced plans to build housing in this area. Huh? | |
| Jay Swartley | 4/16/2023 3:20:57 PM |
| I have many concerns regarding the idea of giving up already limited parking to build in or on the cusp of a historic avalanche path. The idea of sacrificing already limited parking after the resort boasts being on track for the most skier visits ever in one season is concerning. Double and triple parked vehicles already have been a hindrance if not a complete barrier to emergency medical vehicles responding to skiers and riders at the resort. We do need additional housing options in the valley but this is only another example of the lack of communication between pomeroy and the community. | |
| Derek Brewer | 4/12/2023 12:45:50 PM |
| We are sympathetic to the needs of Alyeska Resort and the need for additional housing for their hotel/resort employees. However, locating residential housing at the base of a parking lot that resides in a potential avalanche zone is a questionable solution. The parking lot frequently does not meet the needs of the resort during peak demand, i.e. weekends, events, and holidays. Thus the overspill of vehicles into the neighborhood is something we have tolerated for years. Reducing the footprint of the parking lot in order to build housing is not going to fix that problem or the other valid issues presented by the other commenters on this thread. | |
| Cynthia Shake | 4/12/2023 9:21:33 AM |
| Our neighborhood has questions regarding an Application for Preliminary Plat Case # S12721 meeting date on May 15, 2023 Petitioner is Mt. Alyeska SKi Resort Limited Partnership, 9820 100th Avenue, Grand Prarie, Alberta T8V 08T Parcel 13 of Limited Warranty Deed SN 2018-046806-0, Tract A and Tract B, Alyeska Daylodge Subdivision, Property Tax ID# 076-015-35-000 I learned of this application for subdivision from the 4/11/23 Land Use Committee meeting in Girdwood. I have concerns with the proposed use of converting this land from parking area to employee (or other) housing. On busy days at Alyeska resort, the day lodge parking lot is already overflowing into neighborhood roads. These roads get narrower due to snow piles and when overflow parking from the resort parks up and down the neighborhood roads, this can limit access for emergency vehicles in the area. This parking area is also in high use during the summer months with RVs and overnight camping that the resort offers. To further develop this land without additional parking being created will impact the surrounding residential neighborhood. I also am surprised that there was no public engagement by Pomeroy or Alyeska Resort about this development that will significantly impact the community. Thank you for consideration before approving this request. | |
| Eryn Boone | 4/10/2023 10:59:18 PM |
| I learned of this application for subdivision at the 4/10/23 Land Use Committee meeting in Girdwood. I have serious concerns with the proposed use of converting this land from parking area to employee (or other) housing. On busy days at Alyeska resort, the day lodge parking lot is already overflowing into neighborhood roads. These roads get narrower due to snow piles and when overflow parking from the resort parks up and down the neighborhood roads, this can limit access for emergency vehicles in the area. Additionally, the avalanche hazard in this area is high (it is difficult to tell exactly where the proposed housing is compared to the hazardous avalanche area). Building housing in or adjacent to a hazardous avalanche area is a public safety concern. Over the years living in Girdwood, I have witnessed avalanche debris covering parts of the existing day lodge parking areas. In the past, the resort has closed the parking areas at night due to avalanche concerns. The avalanche danger and risk in this area needs to be studied very closely as part of this review. | |