|
|
3500 TUDOR ROAD MASTER PLAN
This plan deals with the land at the north end of the Park along Tudor. This land will be between Tudor and the Boniface/E. 48th Extension when that is completed. The land this plan addresses looks like Park land now, but it is zoned "PLI" for a variety of public uses. The Park master plan put strict criteria on what can be done there. It looks like those are being ignored. This plan is in draft form and open for your comments. You can read it at: http://www.muni.org/planning/Tudor_Road_Plan.cfm
Dan Rosenberg provided this analysis of the Draft of the Tudor Road Master Plan
Comments on the
The
land covered by the 3500 Tudor Road Master Plan (Tudor Plan) is
governed by the Provisions for Public and Institutional Lands
(PLI) in the Generalized Land Use Plan of the 1974 Far North
Bicentennial Park (FNBP) Master Plan and the 1985 Updated Master
Plan for FNBP (1985 FNBP Plan).
The use of PLI lands is limited by the terms of the federal transfer legislation which requires that tracts be used for public parks and recreational purposes and other compatible public purposes. The Provisions PLI lands in the Generalized Land Use Plan of the 1974 FNBP Master Plan were integrated into Federal Law and were made part of the conveyance documents from Federal to State to the Municipality. This was incorporated into the 1974 and the 1985 Updated Master Plan for FNBP. Both plans were adopted by the Anchorage Assembly.
The 1985 FNBP Plan goes to length to discuss compatible land uses for the PLI lands included in the Tudor Road Plan. The following is from the 1985 FNB Plan:
“Public facilities developed on PLI lands should be compatible with the and if at all possible should be dependent upon (or should derive significant benefit from being located in proximity to) the adjacent natural parklands and its environmental resources”.
“Consistent with this, uses on pre-existing inholdings should not be permitted to expand unless they meet the compatibility test and if not should be phased out”.
For
example: The 1974 FNBP Plan recommended that the National Guard
facility (now a DOTPF facility) be phased out and
other inholdings which are of an industrial nature, such
as equipment storage, repair facilities, and material stockpiling
should not be expanded and should be transferred to other more
suitable locations. Similarly the communications site located
within the greenbelt adjacent to the
Allocating Types of Institutional Use
The 1985 FNBP Plan recognized the increasing pressure to construct facilities on these PLI lands simply because it’s Municipal land (i.e. free land) and also recognized that these tracts can only support a finite number of facilities. The concept of compatibility is central to considering any appropriate municipal facility development.
Criteria
The
1985 Updated Master Plan lists 3 criteria for assessing
compatibility of any particular use (from most to least
suitable):
1) Contribute to or derive
significant benefit from being located in proximity to the park
and its environmental and open space resources
2) Uses that have no negative
effect to the Park and its users
3) Uses that are physically
or functionally incompatible
The
1985 Plan states “The clearest examples of compatibility
would be educational and cultural facilities. Incompatible PLI
uses would include public facilities which have no need to be
located adjacent to the Park and are located there as a matter of
expediency and may include equipment and material storage and
maintenance which are industrial in nature…” In this
later instance it is recommended that such uses be disqualified
as being incompatible, not withstanding any attempt to disguise
the incompatibility by means of visual devices such as screening,
vegetation, and building coloration.”
Further,
the 1985 FNBP Plan includes a “Compatibility Test” that
asks 3 basic questions:
The
above criteria should be used in decision making for siting
facilities in these PLI lands. However, The Tudor Plan fails to
fully address these criteria when recommending compatible land
uses for this site.
The
Tudor Plan includes recommended uses for the Anchorage Police
Department including: an evidence storage and lab, vehicle
storage, light duty vehicle service shop, MOA communication shop,
and APD related outdoor storage. Most, if not all of these
facilities are industrial in nature and the only reason to site
these facilities here is expediency. Outdoor storage, a vehicle
service shop, and vehicle storage are not compatible with the
Park and its recreational nature. The 3500 Tudor Plan includes
similar industrial-like uses for the Anchorage Fire Department,
but it is my understanding they have withdrawn their request for
using this site. (So why does the Tudor Plan still contain plans
for Fire Department use?)
Even
if a vehicle storage facility could be designed to fit the
natural landscape, The 1985 FNBP Plan specifically states
“such uses be disqualified as being incompatible, not
withstanding any attempt to disguise the incompatibility by means
of visual devices such as screening, vegetation, and building
coloration.”
Chapter
3.0 Recommended Plan and Chapter 6 (Appendix B of the Tudor Plan,
Compatibility Analysis) presents some imaginative arguments for
compatibility but they fail to consider the full scope of the
compatibility discussion presented in the 1985 plan. They give a
selective, self-serving, interpretation of the criteria and the 3
questions presented in the 1985 Park Plan and ignore any
statements in the 1985 Plan’s discussion of compatibility
that do not serve the Tudor Plans intent of using this site for
APD and AFD expansion.
There
are plenty of uses for this site that would legitimately meet the
compatibility test. The Tudor Plan fails to consider these
adequately as it tries to use the Plan to justify the APD and AFD
expansion, and not find the most suitable uses among the many
competing interests. Meanwhile the Tudor Plan defers all
decisions to the Planning and Zoning Commission, so why recommend
specific uses at this time? This plan needs some major
revisions before Assembly approval.
This website is
maintained by Friends of Bicentennial Park to provide
information on Anchorage's Far North Bicentennial Park.