Gate comes down at Byers Creek

DENALI STATE PARK — The Matanuska-Susitna Borough ended the controversy surrounding a gate blocking a public access road to Denali State Park after the local homeowner’s association refused to clear the encroachment from the public right-of-way.

The gate stood over Byers Creek Landing, a road accessing a 34-lot subdivision of the same name at Mile 144 of the Parks Highway.

To connect the road to the Parks Highway, the developer had to secure permission to run the road across a small portion of park land. An agreement reached in 1990 between the engineer and the state Department of Natural Resources granted this permission, provided that the road became a public access point into the park.

Before Byers Creek Landing ends in a cul-de-sac, Chulitna Trail branches off west to the boundary of the subdivision and the park. At that point, a semi-maintained state trail runs down to Byers Creek allowing anglers to access the small stream.

In a past interview, Paul Nangle, the developer of the subdivision, said the gate was installed to prevent people from trashing the private property.

“We have decided to lock the gate to keep non-owners out of the south side of the subdivision,” Nangle said in a letter sent out to the members of the homeowners’ association.

However, the road was dedicated to the borough on the plat map, said Roy Robertson, a civil engineer with the borough’s Public Works Department. Blocking the road qualifies as an encroachment into the public right-of-way, and encroachments are only allowed by permits, he said in a previous interview.

Because the homeowners’ association had no permit, the borough sent a letter requiring it to take the barrier down. The letter was sent on Aug. 12 and gave a deadline of two weeks before the borough would take it down itself.

The two weeks came and went, and the gate still stood, said Bill Klebesadel, a division manager with public works. He said after the letter was sent, it appeared the gate was actually reinforced.

“That indicated a pretty clear case of non-compliance to us. Per the letter, the borough exercised its authority to remove obstruction,” Klebesadel said.

The gate was removed on Sept. 21.

Nangle refused comment.

Klebesadel said the borough understands the homeowners were trying to protect their property, but blocking a public access cannot be condoned.

“To allow the obstruction (gate) to remain would establish a precedence and possibly encourage more illegal encroachments to occur,” Klebesadel said.

Contact Todd L. Disher at todd.disher@frontiersman.com or 352-2252.