Valdez Housing: “A Vast and Complicated Process”

Afternoon light on the Duck Flats near Valdez. Photo by Allison Sayer.

By Keenan James Britt

Valdez City Council met Thursday, January 13 for a special Work Session on the issue of housing and downtown development in Valdez. With the full council in attendance, City Manager Mark Detter opened the conversation: “Just upfront, I’m going to say that we’re trying to take the Comprehensive Plan and guide us on developing housing. We already have some projects that are going on and some proposed developments that we’re working with.”

The Valdez Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted by the Valdez City Council in November 2021, is intended to be the ‘guiding document’ for the next twenty-years of development and land-use decisions for Valdez. “We’ll want to hear Council’s thoughts on how we move forward with this. Obviously, this is a vast and complicated process,” Detter stated, explaining that he and his staff were seeking additional guidance from the council on approaching the matter of housing development in Valdez.

Planning Director Kate Huber next addressed the council on a “phased approach” to addressing housing, developed by city administration staff along with the Planning and Economic Development departments:

1.     Support proposed/in progress private development projects.

2.     Seek development proposals or subdivide and sell city-owned residential land in the core of Valdez.

3.     Seek development proposals or subdivide and sell city-owned residential land in areas close to the core of Valdez.

4.     Seek development proposals or subdivide and sell city-owned residential land in areas farther from downtown.

The first phase in the approach consists of proposed city support for private development projects in Valdez that are already in progress or have been proposed. These Phase 1 projects include the Senior Housing Project (awaiting funding), the St. Patrick Subdivision (currently awaiting a conditional use permit from the Planning and Zoning Commission), the Blueberry Hill Road Project (in the preliminary process), and the Chugach Corporation Downtown Multi-Use Development (proposed by the Chugach Corporation to provide housing for corporation employees in Valdez). The proposed method for the city to support private development was through an incentive program, first presented by Detter at the August 26, 2021 Work Session, in which the city would pay developers $10,000 for each new dwelling unit built upon a permanent foundation.

After supporting private development projects, the proposed phased approach would seek residential land on land owned by the City of Valdez. “We want to seek development proposals to possibly subdivide and sell city-owned land,” Huber stated, “First we want to look at the core of Valdez, and what’s closest to our utilities and resources, and then we want to start looking out farther…for options for further developments or the sale of City property for residential uses.” The next three stages of the phased approach seek development in the city core and then move farther out.

“The Comp Plan is guiding us to first focus on the core area of Valdez, especially those areas that already have existing utility services,” Huber presented. The two areas identified as potential development projects for Phase 2 are the city’s properties on the Woodside Subdivision and on Egan Drive. The city had previously identified Woodside, which is zoned for residential use, as a potential area for housing development. A Request for Proposals for Woodside was published by the city in October 2019, though there has so far been no development on the property. The areas identified on Egan Drive were the two properties acquired by the city that formerly held the Pipeline Club and Landshark’s buildings which were demolished in October 2021.

Phases 3 and 4 would see housing developments farther out. Phase 3 would include areas that do not currently have city utilities, but in which it would be “relatively simple, and not a great distance, to extend our existing utilities”, according to Huber. The Comprehensive Plan identified expansions on either side of the existing Cottonwood Subdivision as potential sites for Phase 3 development. Huber explained that developing additional areas would be contingent on future studies: “As we move towards the mountains, it’s possible that housing development would be appropriate there, but we would need to study the avalanche and landslide hazard to know how close we should go and where we should move back.”

Phase 4 developments would be on lands away from city utility services, possibly requiring on-site wells and septic systems. These areas include expansions behind the Robe River and Corbin Creek subdivisions.

City Manager Detter emphasized the need for the city government to provide incentives for the development of new housing and utilities, stating, “The free market doesn’t appear to be filling in the gap on this…The developers who are working right now really need (the incentives) to get their per lot cost to a point where it’s something they can market.”

Councilmembers responded to the phased approach with some skepticism.

“You’re talking Phase 3 and Phase 4. To me, one of the easy, simple, things is to start opening up land for people to buy,” said Councilmember Dennis Fleming, “It looks like some of the phases could happen almost simultaneously.” Councilmember Alan Sorum responded to the proposed phases in the same vein: “I’m not too sure about the phasing. You mean you do 1 before you do 4? I wouldn’t support that…I’d rather see things get pursued as opportunities arise.”

However, Councilmember James Devens favored the phased approach, explaining, “I’m concerned if we put the emphasis too much on single-family houses we might lose the opportunities for density housing, and I think high-density should be an early focus…I think the phased approach addresses that, as the primary incentive is to develop in existing utility areas, which would more or less require density housing.”

Planning Director Huber took the opportunity to respond to Sorum’s concerns on the phased approach: “This is not proposed in phases to be an incredibly rigid plan we have to follow. It’s just to outline us in how we first prioritize our focus. While we’re seeing how these private developments play out in Phase 1, in the background it’s up to planning staff to look at the options for Phase 2 and 3…If we see what happens with the private developments that are ongoing right now, we can see how they’ve met the needs for housing in the community, but if there’s still demand there we want to be ready to act.”