Borough adopts land-use permits

4-3 vote changes existing rules from voluntary to mandatory

March 25, 2007

By Russell Stigall/Frontiersman

MAT-SU - Good fences make good neighbors. Or so poet Robert Frost once wrote. The Mat-Su Borough, however, is turning to land-use permits to keep Valley neighbors content.

The ordinance, sponsored by Sev Jones, borough planning manager, changes from voluntary to mandatory the borough's land-use permitting process. This change, according to borough documentation, will improve compliance and reduce the number and cost of variances.

Implementation of the ordinance will take place one year from the date it is adopted. This will give borough staff time to educate residents and property owners about the implications and requirements of the ordinance.

Murph O'Brien, borough planning and land-use director, said the permits would give the borough insight into the patterns of development around the Valley.

&#8220It is very hard to plan without knowing what is going on out there,” O'Brien said.

The change would allow the borough to plan infrastructure upgrades accordingly. O'Brien said the ordinance is a preventative and reactive measure.

Speaking during the public comment period, Randy Owens said he thinks the Valley has developed fine without mandatory permits.

&#8220We've built a marvelous civilization here,” Owens said.

Owens also said he thinks cooperation will get the job done better than legislation.

&#8220We need to get along better as neighbors,” Owens said.

Owens was joined by more than a dozen other Valley residents in voicing their opinions Tuesday night. Many who commented were against the ordinance and said they had only heard of it recently.

Some said they disliked that the committee that helped craft the ordinance late last year and early this year was populated by building contractors, surveyors, lenders and local agency representatives - the people who would profit from land-use restrictions.

Pio Cottini, a local developer, told the assembly &#8220pass it and you'll guarantee my retirement.”

Some instances when a landowner would need to obtain a permit are: the construction or placement of any building whose gross floor area is 480 square feet or greater; any addition exceeding 10 percent of a building's gross floor area and that results in a total gross floor area of 480 square feet or greater; and an increase in the number of dwelling units within those areas of the borough with land-use regulations addressing the number of dwelling units.

Assembly member Robert Wells, who voted no on the ordinance, said he believes taxpayers should not be burdened with the borough's permit requirement.

&#8220In a general sense, I think that people with private property who are paying taxes should be able to identify their boundaries and setbacks and construct a cabin or an outbuilding or a house without having to go through a permitting process with the borough,” Wells said.

However, he said his feelings were mixed about the ordinance.

&#8220It has some good facets, and I don't think it is as onerous as some think,” Wells said.

Wells recommended that residents decide for themselves by reading the 13-page ordinance.

&#8220I do feel there are some misconceptions out there,” he said.

The assembly passed the ordinance at their meeting in early March. Assembly member Bill Allen brought it back for reconsideration Tuesday.

The assembly passed the ordinance a second time after hearing more than a dozen public comments. Assembly members Wells, Lynn Woods and Cindy Bettine voted against it, while Allen, Tom Kluberton, Michelle Church and Mary Kvalheim voted in favor.

Kvalheim said she voted for the ordinance because of experiences she had while on the borough planning commission.

&#8220It is an issue people feel very strongly about,” she said. &#8220We are all a product of our experiences. From being on the planning commission, I believe most people don't go out and try to build something incorrectly.”

The ordinance is a working model and open to adjustment.

&#8220People have to realize that if it is not working, we'll take it out,” Kvalheim said.

Cindy Bettine said she does not believe the borough will be able to inform the public well enough about the ordinance's implications.

&#8220I don't see where the work has been done to implement this properly,” Bettine said.

However, she said she believes the borough has given residents the wrong view of their freedom in the Valley.

&#8220People came here because there are no rules. But, in fact, there are rules,” Bettine said.

Kluberton said he has often heard the same &#8220no rules” sentiment from his constituents in Talkeetna.

&#8220Until this is mandatory, residents will say ‘this is Alaska, we can do whatever we want,'” Kluberton said. &#8220I feel this is the responsible thing for the borough to do.”

The borough assembly still needs to set a fee for the permits.

Marcus Barbey commented Tuesday night that the permit fee should cover only costs and not constitute an income to the borough. He also recommended a flat fee, regardless of land size.

The assembly will address fees on April 17.

To spare landowners a trip to borough offices, over the year-long preparation period the borough plans to put the permitting process on its Web site, www.matsugov.us. Landowners may also be able to submit permit paperwork and fees to local institutions, like libraries.

Contact Russell Stigall at

352-22267 or russell.stigall@ frontiersman.com.