Opinion ID: 1191743
Heading Depth: 6
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Anchorage district CMP

Text: The Municipality of Anchorage did not expressly concur in DNR's CCD for Sale 78. Therefore, 6 AAC 80.010(b) required DNR to apply the Anchorage DCMP standards to the Sale tracts within the Municipality of Anchorage to be consistent with the ACMP. NTC argues that DNR failed to comply with the Anchorage DCMP because it failed to prefer development of tracts in areas already developed. According to NTC, DNR failed to comply with this goal because, instead of looking at the specific areas in question, it considered the entire Cook Inlet as one developed area. The State responds that this approach is appropriate, as the tracts within the Municipality of Anchorage are designated by the DCMP as Class IV waters. Class IV waters are classified under utilization environment, which comprises areas recognized as being potentially suitable for future growth and development. The State argues that the preference for `development within already developed areas' is embodied in the classification of Class IV waters. Based on the Anchorage DCMP, the designation of an area as Class IV waters does not appear to mean that all parts of that area are in fact already developed; it means that they are subject to development. DNR discussed the Anchorage DCMP briefly, but nowhere considered the DCMP's goal that [e]mphasis should be given to development within already developed areas. Consequently, DNR did not comply with the Anchorage DCMP. We remand to DNR with instructions to consider the Anchorage DCMP's goal of emphasi[zing] ... development within already developed areas.