Developer of proposed Butte subdivision gets continuance

KATE GOLDEN/Frontiersman reporter

BUTTE - More than 200 Butte residents are calling for more study before the Mat-Su Borough allows development of a new subdivision between Maud Road and Back Acres.

People on both sides spilled out of the Assembly chambers for the third public hearing on the issue Feb. 17, despite the Mat-Su Borough Platting Board's 8:30 meeting time.

The proposed subdivision, between Maud Road and Back Acres, consists of 293 lots spanning 580 acres.

At the time of the meeting, developer Judd Walker lacked the permits necessary to start digging. All of them, he said, are in progress. The board gave him six months' continuance to get them.

Vicki Geronimi, a local resident, brought a petition signed by 263 local residents who wanted the platting case denied.

"The undersigned oppose granting any subdivision approval prior to obtaining all permits as required by [code]," they wrote.

They were concerned that Walker was "ignoring the impact on salmon in the affected McRoberts and Bodenburg Creeks and the wildlife in their wetlands."

They pointed to a lack of provisions for greenbelt setbacks, insufficient designation of salmon streams - particularly McRoberts Creek and Bodenberg Creek - and inadequate study of traffic, soil engineering and storm-water pollution.

One corner of the developer's property is federally designated floodplain area, under special requirements in borough code. The rest of it is not so designated.

But petitioners noted that it has not been studied. Geronimi said Walker's initial application to the borough falsely checked "no" on the question of whether floodplain was present, and that she had it revised.

"We're not saying in the petition we don't want this neighborhood around here. We're saying you need to take a closer look at this," Geronimi said.

At the meeting, these environmental issues and others arose as speaker after speaker rose to comment.

Assembly Member Lynne Woods read a letter from Steve Rowland, an independent engineer who has spearheaded much of the opposition.

Brian Tannenbaum, another developer, said, "I don't have a problem with Mr. Walker's subdivision. I have a problem with the way he's going about it."

Kathy Wells, executive director of Friends of Mat-Su, said although the project had the "potential to be a role-model development," the board should not approve the plat.

"No permits is unacceptable," she said.

A mix of views

Not everyone who spoke was as adamantly opposed, notably some people who own property immediately adjacent to the proposed subdivision.

Doug Glenn was one of these. "Mr. Walker's been very reasonable," he said. He said he thought Walker's private property was his own business, and the plat should be approved.

Ken Sandy, whose family originally owned much of the land in question, said streams and trails should be protected, but conservationists had gone "overboard" trying to protect them.

Walker himself provided a defense to the onslaught.

He said he didn't think the area was wetland because he'd hit gravel three feet down in preliminary samples.

He also said it was a "mistake" not to get the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits, and he said he was working with the COE and every other relevant agency on addressing the environmental issues.

But the developer also said he thought critics were motivated by their own desire to use his land as their "personal playground." He said, echoing Glenn and others, that he should be able to do what he likes with his private property.

Clean Water Act violation

Before hearing public comment, board staff had already recommended a continuation of the public hearing, because of Walker's Clean Water Act violation.

Back in November, the COE had determined that his property "may contain wetlands," and sent a preliminary delineation of where they were. The agency said a permit might be required before any work began, but it didn't have enough information to decide yet.

Apparently, he did some digging anyway. In early December, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers informed Walker in early December that he was in violation of the Clean Water Act for "alleged discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands."

Section 309 of the Clean Water Act says the Corps can fine willful violators up to $50,000 a day or imprison them for up to three years, the letter warned. Enforcement would be withheld for 10 days, to give Walker a chance to provide more information.

But Walker didn't notify the platting board of his problem until Feb. 10, a week before the third public hearing.

Landowners claimed he had been clearing land, but Walker declared at last week's meeting that he was merely burning trash stumps.

Board response

Platting board vice chair William Bruu was adamant about the seriousness of Walker's failure to notify the board of his Clean Water Act violation.

"This petitioner has come before this board with dirty hands," he said. He was tempted, he said, to move that no further continuance be granted.

Board member Steven Heinrich denied Walker's assertion that private property is his own business.

"It's not [private]. It's wetlands under the COE jurisdiction," Heinrich said.

Heinrich said he was frustrated that Walker had not produced the requested data on wetlands, despite having had plenty of time.

"If we give a continuance, it has to be the last one," he said.

Bruu's insistence that all permits must be in place - and annoyance at not having been notified promptly of the COE violation - was not shared equally by all board members. Most of the board members were amenable to granting more time to Walker to address the problems.

The board voted to grant Walker six months' continuance. If he gets all the necessary permits before then and satisfies the COE, he can request an earlier public hearing three weeks in advance.

Contact Kate Golden at kate.golden@frontiersman.com.