An ordinance banning yurts as permanent residences within the townsite has been referred to the Haines Borough Assembly’s Government Affairs and Services (GAS) Committee for further discussion.
At a June 10 meeting, the planning commission unanimously recommended the assembly consider an ordinance classifying yurts, along with RVs and wall tents, as “temporary use dwellings,” limiting habitation of these structures to 18 months.
“I’m not sure that I like the ordinance, but I understand that there are people who might want to do something. Rather than just throwing it at the assembly, I think it’s more appropriate to send it to a committee for review,” assembly member Paul Rogers said at Tuesday’s meeting.
At the June 10 planning commission meeting, commissioners cited property value concerns as the main motivation for the ordinance.
Those who oppose the resolution dispute this claim and argue yurts are a way to lower startup costs for young families trying to buy homes.
“Younger individuals, adventurers and families who want to make Haines their home may not have the initial financial capital to purchase a home, but can afford a lot/land, and a yurt. This helps grow our town with a youthful presence that is necessary for sustainability,” Noble and Julie Anderson said in written comments submitted to the assembly.
Leah Wagner said this is exactly why her family opted to live in a yurt within the townsite.
“We are a young family here in town. We came here specifically to start a farm. We found it cost prohibitive to rent in Haines. We also found it cost prohibitive to purchase a home, so a yurt was a nice compromise,” she said.
Yurts likely haven’t impacted property values in Haines, according to real estate broker Pam Long.
“Textbook real estate is that (yurts) would have a (negative) impact,” she said. “But I don’t think we’ve experienced or seen that in Haines. I don’t think there’s been enough cases of yurts that it’s been an issue.”
Long said a possible compromise could involve restricting yurts as primary residences to specific areas within the townsite.
The ordinance, in its current form, still allows construction of yurts for guest houses, storage, and other accessory purposes. Existing primary residence yurts in the townsite would likely be grandfathered in if the ordinance passes, according to interim manager and clerk Alekka Fullerton.
The last time a yurt ban was seriously considered, in 2013, the planning commission at the time forwarded the ordinance to the assembly, which rejected the idea 5-1.
The GAS Committee meets next on July 6.
In other assembly news, an ordinance authorizing the lease of property behind Lutak Dock to Vertical Bridge LLC for construction of a communications tower passed unanimously Tuesday night. The project will improve cell coverage in the Lutak area. Construction is scheduled to begin within the next year.