Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Adus topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents, officials split over boroughwide ADU ordinance; commission will advise assembly
Summary
Dozens of residents and officials told the Haines Borough Planning Commission on April 16 that accessory dwelling units (ADUs) could add housing but should not be imposed across all residential zones; commissioners heard both support for ADUs as a flexible tool and strong opposition from Mudbay and Lutak residents.
The Haines Borough Planning Commission spent the opening hour of its April 16 meeting hearing more than a dozen public comments on a draft accessory dwelling unit ordinance that would allow ADUs across many residential zones.
Tom Morfitt, a longtime local resident, urged the commission to present the assembly with a "suite of options" rather than a single ordinance, offering examples from an Alaska Municipal League pamphlet and a permit-based approach for some locations. "I think we can learn from other communities," Morfitt said, and suggested the commission hand the assembly several tailored paths rather than a single mandatory change.
Evan Sargent, who identified himself as the commerce committee chair, argued the planning commission and staff are well equipped to manage implementation details and that ADUs can produce "a diversified range of housing options" with relatively modest investment. "What we're looking for is things that we can do, with minimum action and financial input and maximum benefit," Sargent said.
But the largest block of testimony came from residents of Mudbay and Lutak and single-family areas who urged keeping those zones exempt. Patty Kremoyan told the commission, "This is poor planning," and warned that adding ADUs in Mudbay could "double our population density" without water and sewer infrastructure. Katie Palmer, Laurie Smith and others raised traffic, water-pressure and neighborhood-character concerns and asked that any ADU pilot be limited to areas with sewer and water service.
Planner Chen Wu told the panel later that the draft ordinance would allow ADUs by right on lots of 10,000 square feet or more and require conditional-use permits on smaller lots. He also noted that the assembly has asked staff to compile public comments and perform a legal review before moving the ordinance forward.
Why it matters: ADUs are a common municipal tool to increase small-scale rental housing. Supporters say ADUs can add lower-cost options quickly; opponents say boroughwide allowances can undercut locally tailored codes, especially in rural districts that rely on larger lots and private utilities.
What’s next: The commission will prepare a recommendation to the assembly; Cheryl Stickler, the assembly liaison, said staff is compiling comments and expects a legal review back in May. Commissioners discussed starting with multiple-residential zones as a pilot and preserving explicit exemptions where ADUs would conflict with long-standing local codes.
The meeting transcript shows broad disagreement about scope and local control; commissioners were asked to document the rationale they use so the assembly can consider both engineering and community values when deciding whether to adopt the draft ordinance.
