The Haines Borough Assembly will rehear a planning commission decision that granted Roger Schnabel a conditional use permit for gravel extraction work near the Skyline Subdivision and Young Road.
Schnabel, through company Southeast Roadbuilders, was granted a conditional use permit in early February to extract about 7,500 cubic yards of material from a 65-acre parcel for use in the harbor expansion project and for storage.
Two appellants, Lenise Henderson-Fontenot and Ella Bredthauer, separately made their cases to the assembly Tuesday for reconsideration the commission’s decision.
“I was really surprised at how quickly the (commission’s) decision was made, and the fact that it was made unanimously, because I think it’s a very big deal for our neighborhood,” Henderson-Fontenot said.
Henderson-Fontenot walked the group through her decision to file the appeal, saying that although she was able to ask a few questions about Schnabel’s proposed work at the planning commission meeting this month, she came away with more questions.
Henderson-Fontenot met with Schnabel and interim borough manager Brad Ryan and said she understood from the meeting that Schnabel might use more trucks than what is allowed by the permit.
She also contacted people familiar with Southeast Roadbuilders’ work and talked to neighbors to gauge awareness about the project.
“The majority of the neighbors I talked to had no idea that this conditional use permit was being put in front of them,” Henderson-Fontenot said. “After doing my research, I felt stronger about my appeal than when I had even initially put it in.”
Henderson-Fontenot cited seven reasons in her appeal and reiterated several at the meeting, saying that five of the eight requirements in code for approving a conditional use permit were not met. She said the commission disregarded most of the recommendations from borough staff about granting the permit.
She also said the project would have a negative impact on safety, quality of life and property values.
Young Road resident Jim Shook also testified, reiterating Henderson-Fontenot’s safety concerns. He said the assembly should not trust the permit holder to uphold public safety.
“Public safety, after all, is the responsibility of the borough government,” Shook said.
Kay Clements and Elizabeth Lyons also commented in support of the appeal.
With very little discussion, the assembly unanimously decided to rehear the planning commission decision in its entirety.
Bredthauer shared many of the same concerms as Henderson-Fontenot. Testifying by phone, she worked through her written appeal over the phone, backing up three main claims citing borough code. She said that although her property backs up to the truck route and is in eyesight of Schnabel’s project area, neither her or her husband were notified of the permit request.
According to code, borough staff are required to notify residents within 200 feet of a proposed development.
She said Schnabel’s original application for the permit “lacked depth,” and the public needs more time to comment.
Henderson-Fontenot, Lyons and resident Kit Brown spoke in support of Bredthauer’s appeal.
The assembly again voted unanimously to rehear the permit request. Both hearings will take place at the March 14 assembly meeting.