Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Title5 Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates tightening Title 5 tour permits in Chilkoot Corridor; motion withdrawn for working‑group review
Summary
The board discussed whether to remove an exemption for multi‑day tours in HPC 5.18 and a motion to require permits for all tours in the Chilkoot Corridor was offered, debated over boundaries and small‑group exemptions, and withdrawn pending further work by the Chilkoot Corridor working group.
Board members discussed a possible amendment to Title 5 (HPC 5.18) that currently exempts multi‑day tours from the borough’s commercial tour permit requirement. Staff described recurring complaints about parking and impacts at Chilkoot and Battery Point trailhead and raised the question of whether the exemption should be narrowed or removed.
A board member moved that “all tours, regardless of duration, that operate in the Chilkoot are required to apply for a tour permit,” proposing a Chilkoot Corridor definition that would include the park entrance, the road through the campground and the lake. Members pressed for clarity about boundaries, who owns and manages lands in the corridor, and whether hunting guides or very small groups should be exempt. One member said the idea seemed premature until the working group of agencies clarifies ownership, permit responsibilities and the scale of tours in the corridor.
After extended discussion — including suggestions to set permit thresholds by group size (for example, exempting very small parties) and reminders that many activities are already regulated by state agencies such as Fish and Game and State Parks — the mover withdrew the motion and asked the Chilkoot Corridor working group to return recommendations. “If it's the will of the board, I would request to withdraw my motion pending additional information from Digital Group Working Group,” the member who had moved the change said.
The board did not vote on any amendment; staff said the working group and staff will continue to gather data on impacts, ownership and user‑group numbers before the assembly would be asked to consider code changes.
