Skagway committee weighs changes to setback rules to legalize some preexisting structures

Assemblymember Potter, chair of the Civic Affairs Committee, led a review on December 10 of proposed amendments to Ordinance 24-09 that would relax setback requirements and create a process for legalizing preexisting nonconforming structures.

The proposed red-line changes, Potter said, largely borrow language from the Municipality of Juneau and the Municipality of Anchorage and would allow an existing nonconforming structure to be ‘‘grandfathered in’’ if it is determined not to be a life-safety hazard by a building official or a delegated authority. Potter said Anchorage’s approach uses as-built surveys and, when needed, a fire-department site inspection to make that determination.

Why it matters: Committee members framed the draft as a way to give owners of older structures a lawful path to repair or maintain buildings without requiring demolition, while also raising questions about who should make safety determinations and who bears liability.

Resident James Higgins, who said his garage (built in 1979) sits about 33 inches from the alley, urged the committee ‘‘there be a process for developing my property in a lawful manner,’’ saying he has ‘‘no options for improving my garage except for tearing it down under current building code.’’ Orion Hansen, a resident, property owner and contractor, told the committee he generally supports the draft language brought forward from Juneau and Anchorage ‘‘maybe with a few tweaks.’’

Several members urged caution before adopting language from larger cities. Assemblymember Henry highlighted liability concerns and argued that the state fire marshal should set the outer bounds for safety decisions, saying the marshal ‘‘is going to ultimately be challenged’’ should a liability claim arise. Potter and others noted Skagway’s much smaller staff—Potter referenced Juneau’s and Anchorage’s larger planning offices—and warned that a heavy, staff-dependent process could be impractical locally.

Members discussed specific edits: striking an item labeled B5 because it relies on cross-references in Juneau code that do not apply in Skagway and rewording B3 to make clear it covers ‘‘renovations that do not require a building permit within an existing structure.’’ The committee also discussed whether life-safety determinations should be handled by the local permitting/building official, referred to the local fire chief, or require input from the state fire marshal.

The committee did not take a final vote. Members agreed to clean up the draft, request review by attorney Blasco (or his office), and return with a more polished recommendation to the assembly; Potter indicated a tentative goal of revisiting the matter in January. No final policy change or grandfathering action was approved at the meeting.

What’s next: The committee directed staff to refine the language and to obtain legal and fire-marshal guidance on how to define and assign responsibility for life-safety determinations before recommending any ordinance changes to the full assembly.

(Reporting note: Direct quotations and attributions are drawn from the Civic Affairs meeting transcript.)